Reader Post: Subpoena Duces Tecum (Show Me the Fatwa)

Barack-ObamaOn Monday 9 February in a joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Barack Hussein Obama stated to the effect that Iran having nuclear weapons would be “contrary to” the Muslim faith.

“And if, in fact, what they claim in true — which is they have no aspiration to get a nuclear weapon, that, in fact, according to their Supreme Leader, it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon — if that is true, there should be the possibility of getting a deal.  They should be able to get to yes.  But we don’t know if that’s going to happen.  They have their hardliners; they have their politics.”

It is difficult, from the video, to determine whether President Obama actually believes the statement “It would be contrary to their faith to obtain nuclear weapons” or if he is establishing a test of the Iranian assurance that it is so. Failure to come to an agreement would demonstrate that it is not so.

However, relying on a belief that it is so, as a guarantee of Iranian compliance with any agreement, even if one is reached, and even if it is so full of loopholes as to be without value (like the letter from Hitler that Chamberlain waved about) is breathtakingly foolhardy. Delusional. Craven. A rationale for a policy of appeasement, when moral clarity and a clear principled stand against tyranny is called for.

The assertion that “It would be contrary to their faith to obtain nuclear weapons” is the centerpiece of Iranian assurances that their nuclear program is solely for “peaceful purposes”. It relies on a supposed “fatwa” (a ‘responsa’; a religious ruling issued by a competent authority in response to a question) that ‘the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam.’

However, the existence of this supposed fatwa, its scope and even if Khamenei has the religious authority to make it, is in serious doubt.

There are other issues as well.

Pakistan, (officially the Islamic Republic of Pakistan) has nuclear weapons. Why has no one previously suggested that Pakistan has been violating Islam by having nuclear weapons?

“Taqiyya” is used to describe dishonesty to deceive unbelievers.  The following is a brief excerpt from Warner MacKenzie’s commentary on Taqiyya,

“Falsehoods told to prevent the denigration of Islam, to protect oneself, or to promote the cause of Islam are sanctioned in the Qur’an and Sunna, including lying under oath in testimony before a court. A Muslim is even permitted to deny or denounce his faith if, in so doing, he protects or furthers the interests of Islam, so long as he remains faithful to Islam in his heart.”

See also here.

In this context it is also important to remember the Islamic attitude towards treaties and agreements with “infidels”.

By the reasoning of this universe of discourse, whereby the end of bringing the entire world under the “peace” of Islam justifies any means. “If a nuclear weapon is needed to advance Islam and destroy the kufar (infidel), then it is not haram (forbidden.)”

THEREFORE: I demand that my president, for whom I voted twice, because his domestic policies are in accord with the highest principles of my religious tradition (as well as the “highest” principles of Christianity and Islam – discounting the supersessionist tendencies of both), while his foreign policies give me the heeby-jeebies.

I DEMAND: that he answer this “subpoena duces tecum”

Show us, the American people, the evidence for your assertion. Show us that you are a principled leader of the Free World and not a rube, a dupe, a gull, a mark in an international flim-flam scam, that will see a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region on the planet, with a better than even money chance to set the whole world on fire. Or worse, a cynical abettor of this scheme. Should either of these prove true, your legacy will be judged by history to be even worse than that of Chamberlain and Daladier.

18 thoughts on “Reader Post: Subpoena Duces Tecum (Show Me the Fatwa)”

  1. You voted for Obama… and you voted for him twice.

    The mind boggles – I am not sure if it’s expletives you deserve – but you certainly deserve shame. What an absolute fool you are. This is exactly what you voted for… and as such you should take your demands to Obama, and shove them where the sun doesn’t shine.

    1. Blame the Republicans for fielding candidates who the American people rejected. A lot of us didn’t so much vote for Obama as we voted against the party that gave us the Iraq War and the economic crisis of 2008. If you’re a Republican, the shame is on you, not the American electorate.

      1. I think it would be naive for someone to have voted for Obama the first time, but Ok – the democratic party is certainly more liberal in it’s social policies. But the second time? No excuse.

        I know that Americans have this strange political divide, and you have assumed that I may be a Republican in your defensive response. I’m not American, and I find the strange political party affiliation in the United States to be disturbing. People should vote on policy.

  2. Care to explain what you mean by “his domestic policies are in accord with the highest principles of my religious tradition”? As far as I can tell from your earlier posting, your religious principles are not based on a tradition.

    (Don’t you think your use of the name is a bit arrogant? Acher had a complete understanding of Jewish tradition; your problems with same seem to be at least partially based on a lack of understanding. I apologize for any offense.)

    1. You are familiar with the concept of Tzedakah; and its importance in the tradition? For my edification (and that of the other readers here), would you care to contrast the relative adherence to those principles of the Democratic and Republican agendas?
      (How odd. You seem to recognize that your remarks are offensive; yet you say them publicly; anyway. Instead of engaging with my assertions; you attack me personally. Please, correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t that lashon hara?)
      The name under which I write is perfectly apt. I never tire of singing Greek songs (both Yiddish Theater and Broadway show tunes); and I have seen the young and innocent cut down in the very act of performing mitzvot for which the promised reward is long life. While I have never been a procurer (or patron) of prostitutes I did spend most of my working life arranging their “raiment” and cleaning up in the theater. Nevertheless I do not pray for rain. By any literalist measure I am certainly an apikores; but for me the idea that by praying or reciting tehilim I can change what the Transcendent One has determined; or that other people cannot find a legitimate connection to that Infinitness without the benefit of our tradition is a chillul Ha’Shem. If we say that God is ours, and ours alone; how is that different from Baal worship? When did you stop “wrestling” and lapse into a lazy certainty?
      The sinat hinam in which we’re presently engaged (counting each other’s tzitzis) has always been the source of our destruction; so let us refrain. Let us, rather emulate the angels “each giving leave to the other”. If it will help you to make peace with who and what I am, then consider: If the Torah is a tree of life; then I’m your squirrel; HI!

      1. You have an interesting religion. It isn’t Judaism. Pointing this out is not hatred; Judaism has a definition, like other legal systems.

        And while I could be wrong, you really don’t seem to have the knowledge base to be an apikores. That was my original point.

        PS – I did not attack you for voting for Obama. My wife did, twice. (I voted for Clinton once, but I have apologized for that.)

        1. You don’t get this kind of dialogue watching “The Big Bang Theory” that’s for sure. I’m not able to follow each one of your points, but I take it you are engaged in some kind of disagreement.

  3. Islam also appears to condemn terrorism; it’s just that killing Jews is not. (No, really, read what they write.) For that matter, Jewish law technically prohibits selling weapons to Gentiles (same place it prohibits selling lions to Romans, for example) but the Rabbis today appear to feel that Israel’s arms industry is necessary and permitted under the circumstances.

    1. Perhaps today’s Jews believe anything is fair when you’re fighting to survive genocide. Can’t say I blame them. It’s not like their good friend and ally the US is doing bupkis for them.

            1. Gottcha. imo Israel has been very patient in their self defense. That said, I don’t expect they will allow an existential threat such as Iran going nuclear. I expect they will confront that as they did in Iraq, Syria, and Egypt.

  4. Have you considered the possibility your religion doesn’t inform your politics, but your politics require you only consider certain aspects of your religious identity? My impression of many of my Progressive Reform Jewish co-religionists is their politics are really more important than their religion. The evidence in 2008 was abundant. It was not hard to see if you were looking for it. Mr. Obama was simply a closet anti-Zionist and anti-Israel as well. We all wish to have a nice diet of confirmation bias, but it behooves us to ask the simple question: “What if I’m wrong?”

    I’m glad you now see the reality. I wish you, and many others, had seen it earlier.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top