By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - The MYTH of American Islamophobia

Coca-Cola on 27 August 2010
superchunk said:
mhsillen said:
Rath said:
nobodyspecial said:
Mr Khan said:
badgenome said:
PizzaFaceGamer said:

When Muslim fanatics kill Americans (after, say, the Fort Hood slaughter) a reflexive response from the Obama administration is to fret over anti-Islamic backlash.

Obama and Co. automatically proclaim that such orchestrated terrorist attacks are “isolated” events. But when it comes to mainstream Americans, veterans, ObamaCare opponents or (shudder) tea partiers, there’s no generalization too broad or too insulting for the left.

This x1000.

That's the second time today you've made this implication that the left is guilty of something that the right isn't. I'm certainly not fabricating the people walking around with signs saying "Islam Kills."


But Islam does kill, the Koran instructs muslims to kill:

"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush." (Sura  9:5)

Sura 2:187-189 “And kill them wherever ye shall find them, and eject them from whatever place they have ejected you; for civil discord is worse than carnage: yet attack them not at the sacred Mosque, unless they attack you therein; but if they attack you, slay them. Such the reward of the infidels."

But they shouldn't kill one of their own who has killed a "kafir":

“No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”(Hadith vol. 9:50)


However if a muslim stops being a muslim then they're fair game:

“Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.”  (Hadith 9:45; 84.2.57.)


And the Bible instructs Christians to stone disobedient children. Moderates of both religions know what rules not to follow.


Actually after Jesus the mosaic law was not used any more which is what you are refering to. Now it is all about following the 10 commandments.  So the kill children is taken out of context and not applicible in our day for christians.

Reread your 'new testament', there are not so nice things said in there about nonChristians. Why do you think the Crusades, Inquisition, as well as numerous other Roman Catholic attacks on other Crhistian faiths as well as nonChristians were allowed in the name of Jesus? (btw, I'm not refering to killing of children)

N.T. says not nice things about non-Christians?  I better reread my bible cause I didn't get that.

Crusades were not all religious war.  I believe they used religion to get more recruits but it wasn't just about religion.

Inquisition on the other hand was cruel.  But I don't know what part of the n.t. they used.  I can't find any.  Inquisition was just about men with power who wanted more power.  Probably the darkest part of Christian history.  I'm thankful that we've done with all that.



Around the Network
superchunk on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:

"Chunk" Parker and Stone received veiled death threats for just a picture of Mohammed. Not a picture of him in the toilet.  Just a facsimile  Threats from within the USA

I  understand  bending over backwards to show solidarity for the Muslims in the USA

I don't understand the hate and insults hurled at people who question where this Mosque is located.

A whole zipcode was destroyed or damaged.  I live in Rochester,Ny and I along with 20 others in building 135 at Harris Interactive  watched in horror as the second plane crashed into the tower. Everyones breath caught all at once then a few girls cried. We looked at each other  like WTF just happened

Then then when the buildings started to collapse they were crying and going no no

Am i being dramatic Yea thats how it was it put every one in a state of shock

If you can't understand why people think it is insensitive or if you think it is some phobia FU

I don't understand why you don't bend a little backwards for people who understandably don't want it there. They get insults instead


Those threats were after the picture uproar in Europe. i.e. once everyone was over sensitive and it was media crazy. Before that their original super friends aired without incident.

I think this controversy is absurd because it is. A mosque is not some shrine to terrorism or the terrorists that commited this crime! It is place of worship to God and this particular Imam is 100% for peaceful future of Islam without the idiocy that is the Middle East right now.

By condeming this Mosque you are equating all of Islam to terrorism and all Mosques as shrines for murder and terror. Its a wholly stupid point of view and those of you who are disturbed by it being behind two other buildings away from ground zero are being childish and displaying clearly irrational beliefs about an entire faith.

What really needs to happen is further education on what Islam is and the diffrences between Muslims and variants of Islam, especially what will be taught in that Islamic Center by this particular Imam. It is the best spot for this as obviously this controversy proves that education is absolutely needed for mainstream America.



superchunk on 27 August 2010
Coca-Cola said:
superchunk said:
mhsillen said:
Rath said:
nobodyspecial said:
Mr Khan said:
badgenome said:
PizzaFaceGamer said:

When Muslim fanatics kill Americans (after, say, the Fort Hood slaughter) a reflexive response from the Obama administration is to fret over anti-Islamic backlash.

Obama and Co. automatically proclaim that such orchestrated terrorist attacks are “isolated” events. But when it comes to mainstream Americans, veterans, ObamaCare opponents or (shudder) tea partiers, there’s no generalization too broad or too insulting for the left.

This x1000.

That's the second time today you've made this implication that the left is guilty of something that the right isn't. I'm certainly not fabricating the people walking around with signs saying "Islam Kills."


But Islam does kill, the Koran instructs muslims to kill:

"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush." (Sura  9:5)

Sura 2:187-189 “And kill them wherever ye shall find them, and eject them from whatever place they have ejected you; for civil discord is worse than carnage: yet attack them not at the sacred Mosque, unless they attack you therein; but if they attack you, slay them. Such the reward of the infidels."

But they shouldn't kill one of their own who has killed a "kafir":

“No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”(Hadith vol. 9:50)


However if a muslim stops being a muslim then they're fair game:

“Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.”  (Hadith 9:45; 84.2.57.)


And the Bible instructs Christians to stone disobedient children. Moderates of both religions know what rules not to follow.


Actually after Jesus the mosaic law was not used any more which is what you are refering to. Now it is all about following the 10 commandments.  So the kill children is taken out of context and not applicible in our day for christians.

Reread your 'new testament', there are not so nice things said in there about nonChristians. Why do you think the Crusades, Inquisition, as well as numerous other Roman Catholic attacks on other Crhistian faiths as well as nonChristians were allowed in the name of Jesus? (btw, I'm not refering to killing of children)

N.T. says not nice things about non-Christians?  I better reread my bible cause I didn't get that.

Crusades were not all religious war.  I believe they used religion to get more recruits but it wasn't just about religion.

Inquisition on the other hand was cruel.  But I don't know what part of the n.t. they used.  I can't find any.  Inquisition was just about men with power who wanted more power.  Probably the darkest part of Christian history.  I'm thankful that we've done with all that.

As this thread is not the place and I am not at my home computer, I will try to remember to come back to you in a personal message with appropriate links. Sorry, I normally hate to leave out sources, but this I cannot avoid right now.



Nomad Blue on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:

I don't understand the hate and insults hurled at people who question where this Mosque is located.

....

If you can't understand why people think it is insensitive or if you think it is some phobia FU

I don't understand why you don't bend a little backwards for people who understandably don't want it there. They get insults instead

The problem is, that people are labelling all muslims as terrorists.  Otherwise, why would the building of a community centre(which contains a mosque), be an insult or offend families of victims/survivors of 9/11?



mhsillen on 27 August 2010
Nomad Blue said:
mhsillen said:

I don't understand the hate and insults hurled at people who question where this Mosque is located.

....

If you can't understand why people think it is insensitive or if you think it is some phobia FU

I don't understand why you don't bend a little backwards for people who understandably don't want it there. They get insults instead

The problem is, that people are labelling all muslims as terrorists.  Otherwise, why would the building of a community centre(which contains a mosque), be an insult or offend families of victims/survivors of 9/11?


really? 

The part of my post you edited out

the shock people felt when those towers fell,are you a robot?

Muslim extremists blew them up 

We all know they they are a small group the bad guys

But for the sake of the survivors it is INSENSITIVE for them to build the mosque in the blown up zip code where the towers once stood. You really don't understand that? I know you do

The MSM insults these people like they are cavemen. What do you think liberal professor?

Oh they are all racist islamophopists, oh says liberal pundit yes I concur.  Yeah maybe we are all just stupid and the 30 percent are just so fucking smart



Around the Network
Nomad Blue on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:


really? shit


Yes really, otherwise why does the location of a new community centre that contains a mosque have any sort of relationship to the 9/11 attacks/location?



mhsillen on 27 August 2010
Nomad Blue said:
mhsillen said:

I don't understand the hate and insults hurled at people who question where this Mosque is located.

....

If you can't understand why people think it is insensitive or if you think it is some phobia FU

I don't understand why you don't bend a little backwards for people who understandably don't want it there. They get insults instead

The problem is, that people are labelling all muslims as terrorists.  Otherwise, why would the building of a community centre(which contains a mosque), be an insult or offend families of victims/survivors of 9/11?


NO   they are not, see you refuse to see the other side

You are just so sensitive but only one way.you can't see the other side of the issue



mhsillen on 27 August 2010
Nomad Blue said:
mhsillen said:


really? shit


Yes really, otherwise why does the location of a new community centre that contains a mosque have any sort of relationship to the 9/11 attacks/location?


It's a mosque

why do you want to hide the fact

Groups have bent over and offered to support the mosque monetarily and other wise  in a different location but not so close to ground zero but not that far away.  

But no

it has to be in this location. they are insensitive to those survivors

Those hurt by the location don't count, only so far as to mock them 



Kasz216 on 27 August 2010
Nomad Blue said:
mhsillen said:


really? shit


Yes really, otherwise why does the location of a new community centre that contains a mosque have any sort of relationship to the 9/11 attacks/location?

Because it still reminds people of the terrorists because they were muslims who blew things up because of their interpretation of Islam? 

Not all members of the confederacy owned slaves.   Still the Confederate flag reminds people of Slavery.  (And really for the love of god stop flying the confedereate flag... State in the south I can't remember.)

Heck, the Hindu sign that looks like a Swastika reminds people of Nazis.  I doubt you'd see them build a statue of it withing viewing distance of a holocaust mueseum/meeting centre and they aren't even related to the nazis at all.

 

If I was a proud German immigrant and I lived next to a jewish person who had family die in the holocaust... I wouldn't hang my flags outside of my home out of respect for them, even though it wasn't the same flag.



superchunk on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:
Nomad Blue said:
mhsillen said:


really? shit


Yes really, otherwise why does the location of a new community centre that contains a mosque have any sort of relationship to the 9/11 attacks/location?


It's a mosque

why do you want to hide the fact

Groups have bent over and offered to support the mosque monetarily and other wise  in a different location but not so close to ground zero but not that far away.  

But no

it has to be in this location. they are insensitive to those survivors

Those hurt by the location don't count, only so far as to mock them 


You are ignoring his point as well as the one I made to you a few posts up.

By saying the Mosque is offending the victims (which included Muslims) means you consider it a shrine to the terrorist and thus all Mosques / Muslims equate to murder and terror. Its blatant Islamaphobia and simply irrational.

What needs to happen is a strong push to diffuse the growing ignorance and intolerance by learning about what Islam really is as well as the vast differences between Muslim sects. Especially the Wahhabi of Saudi Arabia where nearly all extremism of Islam comes from and other far more liberal and peaceful sects.