This is a pretty good debate between Ben Shapiro and a CAIR guy who is defending the nutty Linda Sarsour saying that Muslims need to begin a “jihad” against Trump.
Watch below:
'Shame on You:' Activist Who Called For 'Jihad' Against Trump Sparks Clash With @benshapiro and CAIR Rep https://t.co/flECcCdPvD pic.twitter.com/rLhKI5lhSw
— Fox News (@FoxNews) July 8, 2017
The lovely and brilliant Dana Perino loses control over the debate for a little bit, but it’s mostly because Hassan Shibly just starts screaming irrationally, which is never a good sign in a debate.
I especially like how Shapiro starts talking about Linda Sarsour’s extremist past, Shibly screams that he shouldn’t talk about her behind her back. So when Shapiro instead starts talking about CAIR’s extremist past, Shibly starts screaming that he’s changing the subject!! LOL!! YOU TOLD HIM TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT, DUDE.
CAIR guy loses this debate pretty badly because he yells irrationally and makes his position appear emotional and unhinged.
So here’s what I think. It’s just as irrational to pretend “jihad” ONLY means religious violence as it is to pretend that it NEVER means religious violence. That’s kind of the problem with the word. Yes, Sarsour could mean “jihad” in the peaceful, inner struggle definition of the word. But when she puts it out there, it can also signal to some to take it in the “religious violence” definition of the word. And that’s a problem.
A very clever person on twitter responded that “Mein Kampf” also just means “personal struggle,” but we all know the connotations that come along with “Mein Kampf,” and it’s intellectually dishonest to act like they don’t exist. Same thing with jihad.