A new pundit on WorldNetDaily reveals the shocking truth about Obama’s Muslim “fealty” – step forward one Pieder Beeli:
Often we can tell the truth about what someone believes by performing an inferential or forensic analysis. We analyze what is implied rather than what is explicitly stated…
Of course, “performing an inferential or forensic analysis” is just a pompous and vacuous way of asserting special analytical acumen – and to me, it “infers” that Beeli in fact is lacking in just this attribute (cf Ellis Washington). And indeed, this proves to be the case: he picks a few comments by Obama he doesn’t like the sound of (probably brought to his attention by conservative websites), and ranks these in terms of pluses and minuses in relation to Christianity and Islam. He laughably calls this “forensic linguistics”:
When speaking of the origins of Islam, why does Obama use the word “revealed”? In his Cairo speech, Obama said, “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed [emphasis added].” One does not expect a Christian to suggest that God revealed Islam to Muhammad for the simple reason that if God did such, then Christianity is wrong… Why would not Obama instead choose to say, “when Islam was invented” or “fabricated” – or at least use the more equipoise “when Islam began…”?
…Similarly, when referring to the foundational book of Islam, why does Obama regularly and forcefully append the word “holy”?
…Concerning the foundational texts of Islam and Christianity, then, forensic linguistics tell us that the score is Islam +1, Christianity -1 (that’s minus 1).
…Obama shows a deference to align public policy with Islam. However, he shows a strong refusal to align public policy with Christian principles. When the context is Christianity, Obama warns against “sectarianism” and supports “secularism” (really, atheism).
Beeli also sees the hand of Obama behind Mosab Hassan Yousef’s immigration problems, even though it’s unlikely that the case has even crossed his desk:
While all historic schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence affirm the death penalty for apostasy, Obama has not allowed this fact to entertain hesitancy in sending Mosab to certain death.
He concludes:
While Obama may not be a Muslim, his fealty toward Islam and multiculturalism far exceed his fealty toward Christianity… our cumulative Obama score is Islam +4, Christianity -3.
Beeli has a PhD in physics from Notre Dame, and he also battles the theory of evolution; he is a signatory to the self-proclaimed “Growing list of eminent Scientists who are sceptical about the Claims of Darwinism“. This blog notes a contribution to the student newspaper
In the middle of the Observer are the editorial pages, called “Viewpoint.” The most interesting letter to the editor is from Pieder Beeli, a graduate student in physics. On the topic of biological evolution, he takes umbrage with the neo-Darwinian “fish to man theory that is dogmatically taught” at Notre Dame.
Beeli challenges the professors in the anthropology department to respond with proof of one instance where “an organism gains beneficial genetic information… from random mutational events” as it “develops to a state of greater complexity.” In his last paragraph, Beeli goads them a bit: “After 136 years of Darwinism, they certainly should be able to produce one example.”
(The blogger later triumphantly notes that “While I eat, I page through The Observer, looking to see if a prof from the anthropology department answered Pieder Beeli’s challenge. Nothing.”).
In 2000, Beeli corresponded with David Markowitz of the physics department at the University of Connecticut. Markowitz wrote that:
I received an email from a reader named Pieder Beeli bearing on questions of science, religion and evidence. He wrote in part, “May I suggest that you read Warrant and Proper Function by Alvin Plantinga. I especially had the chapter Is Naturalism Rational? in mind after finishing your editorial. There are multiple usages of the word “science.” One of the senses in which you used it is more appropriately called “naturalism.” Of course science is bigger than naturalism and should be able to bear on it. E.g. “Is naturalism rational?” etc…” So I dutifully bought the book by Plantinga, who is a philosopher at Notre Dame. Reading it is a punishment for a crime I did not commit.
Pieder also recommends books in other areas; he is a fan of Gold: The Once and Future Money by Nathan Lewis, and he complains that
Ironically a single unwitting Jew, Bernake, is committing terrorism on the US comparable to all the rest of the 1.2 B Muslims combined.
Ticking another of the usual boxes seen with his sort of character, he also here references the Roman Empire:
The “dark ages” and the fall of the Roman Empire was largely due to monetary policy.
But Pieder isn’t just a keyboard warrior; we read from March that he had an encounter with Rifqa Bary, the teenage ex-Muslim:
17-year-old Rifqa Bary stood outside courtroom 63 at the Franklin County Courthouse. The frail girl wore a lavender sweater and a huge smile while she greeted supporters. One of those was Pieder Beeli, who drove his wife and five children over from Dayton to meet the teen for the first time.
“She needs to be protected by some adults who will stand up and defend the American notion of equality under God,” Beeli said.
Filed under: Uncategorized | 20 Comments »
