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

Forums - General - The MYTH of American Islamophobia

Kasz216 on 27 August 2010
superchunk said:
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.


No... you don't say that.  You say it REMINDS people of the terrorists.  Who were muslims... and who used their own interpretations of the religion to do the act.

Which would be exactly the same if they were Christians who blew it up because they hate gay people... or if they were MCdonalds Employees who blew it up because BK stole the Egg Mc Muffin.


It's needlessly cruel to put a reminder withing eyeshot when there is so much available alternative land that would be just as good.

Religion is really insignificant in the matter.


If a McDonalds employee kills your wife.   Everytime you see a McDonalds it's going to bring back those memories.  THat doesn't mean you think all Mcdonalds employees are murderers.



Around the Network
mhsillen on 27 August 2010
superchunk said:
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 difuse the growning ingornance and intolerance by learning about what Islam really is as well as the vast differnces between Muslim sects. Especially the wahabi's of Saudi Arabia where nearly all extreamism of Islam comes from and other far more liberal and peaceful sects.


it's not irrational 

This Imams views on Sharia Law the funding for the mosque the location

its not irrational but you can frame it that way if you want

But again my doctors say I have a tinge of paranoia LOL



superchunk on 27 August 2010
Kasz216 said:


No... you don't say that.  You say it REMINDS people of the terrorists.  Who were muslims... and who used their own interpretations of the religion to do the act.

Which would be exactly the same if they were Christians who blew it up because they hate gay people... or if they were MCdonalds Employees who blew it up because BK stole the Egg Mc Muffin.


It's needlessly cruel to put a reminder withing eyeshot when there is so much available alternative land that would be just as good.

Its an irrational fear of Muslims and Mosques to be continuously angered by the sight of Islam because some douche who called himself a Muslim killed your family.

An irrational fear should be confronted and fixed not supported and strengthened.



mhsillen on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:
superchunk said:
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 difuse the growning ingornance and intolerance by learning about what Islam really is as well as the vast differnces between Muslim sects. Especially the wahabi's of Saudi Arabia where nearly all extreamism of Islam comes from and other far more liberal and peaceful sects.


it's not irrational 

This Imams views on Sharia Law the funding for the mosque the location

its not irrational but you can frame it that way if you want

But again my doctors say I have a tinge of paranoia LOL

Are you refering to the death camps of tolerance?

Because I don't want to go there, its all black and white and scary 



superchunk on 27 August 2010
mhsillen said:
mhsillen said:
superchunk said:
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 difuse the growning ingornance and intolerance by learning about what Islam really is as well as the vast differnces between Muslim sects. Especially the wahabi's of Saudi Arabia where nearly all extreamism of Islam comes from and other far more liberal and peaceful sects.


it's not irrational 

This Imams views on Sharia Law the funding for the mosque the location

its not irrational but you can frame it that way if you want

But again my doctors say I have a tinge of paranoia LOL

Are you refering to the death camps of tolerance?

Because I don't want to go there, its all black and white and scary 

LOL on your paranoia.

I think you agree with me a little on further education to prevent ignorance. Granted I would like this not only for general America for a whole load of topics, but especially a real force of education for the Middle East in relation to Islamic History and Hadith's specifically.



Around the Network
nobodyspecial on 27 August 2010
superchunk said:
nobodyspecial said:
 


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.)

I've read a few of your posts since I was gone and wow you are so ignorant in not only history of the middle east but also of Islam itself. I'm going to address this post as well as some comments you made in others.

1. Muhammad was not a pedofile. Of his wives only one was a virgin let alone would be considered underage by TODAY'S standards. Everyone else was previously married and generally widows from the wars of his time. The one girl he married that was young was around 13 or so when they married and that was not uncommon during 600's AD. Hell, some modern western nations have it at 13 today (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe).

2. Muhammad, as well as Islam, never ordered the murder of people who are not Muslim. The Quran forbades murder as the death of any human is like the death of all of humanity. The quotes you list above, you obviously pulled from a anti-islamic website, are taken out of context. Every quote about killing 'infidels' in the Quran relates war. Not just because they are not Muslim. On top of that the Quran has strict rules about war such as:

a) You cannot start a war unless it is in the defense of self or others. As God does not like the aggressor.
b) You must follow a list of humane treatment of prisoners of war (this list is essentially identical to today's geneva convention rules)
c) You cannot harm livestock, women, children, or farms/fields in any way; only other military combatants.

If you actually read the Quran, the verses right before your quotes are talking about current (then) wars with the Arab nonMuslims who continually kept attacking the Muslims living in Medinah at the time. On top of the the Kufr or infidels are not 'nonMuslims', but are anyone without belief which includes Christians and Jews. Who also has another special term call 'People of the Book' as they believed in the same God as Muhammad.

3. The Hadiths you quoted are bs. Hadiths are writings that various groups attribute to Muhammad. However, they are known to not have been written down until hundreds of years after the Prophet was dead because he forbade anyone from writing down anything he said/did that he did not proclaim as coming from God. These Hadiths are different depending on which sect of Islam you follow. They contradict each other and the Quran in soooo many different ways its crazy anyone follows their 'advice'. The Quran also states that Muslims are not allowed to take any book but the Quran as their guide, yet almost all Muslim sects have some version of Hadith literature that they use as a primary source above the Quran, especially those with the most extreamist views such as Taliban.

4. (This might not have been your argument) Crusades were horrible to everyone, including Christians. The crusaders murdered not only many Muslims, but Jews and Christians who didn't properly support them as they passed through thier towns. Crusades burned Mosques and Synagogues as well as turned the holy mount in Jerusalem into a trash heap and horse stable. It wasn't until Salah al-din threw out the last crusaders did the region turn to normalcy for ALL worshipers. In fact he forbade anyone from harming any Christian temple or non-military person, according to real Quranic rules of warfare. During nearly all of Arab controlled Islamic Empire (preOttoman) anyone of any faith lived far better in Islamic lands than they did in Christian Rome (Except Catholics of course).

Your continuous spouting merely proves Islamaphobia exists and continues strongly due to fictional ideas of what Islam is and has been as well as using the same tools to hate Muslims as the extreamists use to convert people to their ways. The only way to stop the Islamaphobia as well as extreamism within Islam is by focusing on truth and not allowing ignorance to prevail.

AT this time I am on my work computer and don't have access to my searchable Quranic links to give you all the direct full quotes to disprove you. But, if you wish I can come back with this at a later time, or you can simply search for a online Quran and read the verses surrounding what you quoted.


1. Aisha was 6 when Mohammed married her and 9 when he consumated the marriage. Consumating a marriage means having sex if you didn't know. That's a lot younger than 13 and does make him a paedophile, it doesn't matter how long ago it happened, marrying a 6 year old girl and having sex with her at 9 makes anyone a paedophile. (Who knows what he did with her between 6 and 9 too.)

2. Really? So he took over Mecca and eventually Arabia with peace and love then?

3. Oh, so those are just the extremist versions? LMAO!

4. Why am I not suprised that you support the PC "Crusaders where the bad guys" view? If it wasn't for the Crusaders we'd be living in Islamic hellholes so that alone makes them the good guys.

If Islam is so wonderful then why the hell are islamic countries so backwards and oppressive? Why are the vast majority of terrorists muslims? If you're in America you might not be so aware of the islamic problem since although there have been terrorist attacks your muslim population is, percentage wise at least, a lot smaller than in the UK and most likely spread out more since I haven't heard about any islamic American towns and I don't think I've heard about any muslim riots there either. If you have a small muslim population spread out and mostly integrated with the rest of the community then they're not likely to cause trouble as they're more likely to be influenced by the non-muslims around them. However when they become large muslim communities and get more power and things like sharia courts (which they have here in the UK) then the trouble starts and gets made worse by the government and police bowing down to the muslims and treating them as special and more worthy than others.



Kasz216 on 27 August 2010
superchunk said:
Kasz216 said:
 


No... you don't say that.  You say it REMINDS people of the terrorists.  Who were muslims... and who used their own interpretations of the religion to do the act.

Which would be exactly the same if they were Christians who blew it up because they hate gay people... or if they were MCdonalds Employees who blew it up because BK stole the Egg Mc Muffin.


It's needlessly cruel to put a reminder withing eyeshot when there is so much available alternative land that would be just as good.

Its an irrational fear of Muslims and Mosques to be continuously angered by the sight of Islam because some douche who called himself a Muslim killed your family.

An irrational fear should be confronted and fixed not supported and strengthened.

No it's called post traumatic stress disorder.   It's natural, and it's the kind of thing that will not go away.   Trying to confront it will do nothing but cause the victims heavy emotional damage with no benefit.

Heck you don't even need to know somebody who died to suffer PTSD.  16% of Ohlkhoma city children who weren't directly exposed to the bombing developed PTSD.

Studies have suggested something like 11% of New Yorkers developed PTSD.  Putting that building so close to the actual site is just a really cruel move.  Espiecally if you have other options.



mhsillen on 27 August 2010

Good Article written by a Muslim on the GZM on how emotions are shaping opinions of the opposer's  but the supporters as well

Interesting

 

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703632304575451433090488678.html?mod=rss_opinion_main



Kasz216 on 27 August 2010
nobodyspecial said:
superchunk said:
nobodyspecial said:
 


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.)

I've read a few of your posts since I was gone and wow you are so ignorant in not only history of the middle east but also of Islam itself. I'm going to address this post as well as some comments you made in others.

1. Muhammad was not a pedofile. Of his wives only one was a virgin let alone would be considered underage by TODAY'S standards. Everyone else was previously married and generally widows from the wars of his time. The one girl he married that was young was around 13 or so when they married and that was not uncommon during 600's AD. Hell, some modern western nations have it at 13 today (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe).

2. Muhammad, as well as Islam, never ordered the murder of people who are not Muslim. The Quran forbades murder as the death of any human is like the death of all of humanity. The quotes you list above, you obviously pulled from a anti-islamic website, are taken out of context. Every quote about killing 'infidels' in the Quran relates war. Not just because they are not Muslim. On top of that the Quran has strict rules about war such as:

a) You cannot start a war unless it is in the defense of self or others. As God does not like the aggressor.
b) You must follow a list of humane treatment of prisoners of war (this list is essentially identical to today's geneva convention rules)
c) You cannot harm livestock, women, children, or farms/fields in any way; only other military combatants.

If you actually read the Quran, the verses right before your quotes are talking about current (then) wars with the Arab nonMuslims who continually kept attacking the Muslims living in Medinah at the time. On top of the the Kufr or infidels are not 'nonMuslims', but are anyone without belief which includes Christians and Jews. Who also has another special term call 'People of the Book' as they believed in the same God as Muhammad.

3. The Hadiths you quoted are bs. Hadiths are writings that various groups attribute to Muhammad. However, they are known to not have been written down until hundreds of years after the Prophet was dead because he forbade anyone from writing down anything he said/did that he did not proclaim as coming from God. These Hadiths are different depending on which sect of Islam you follow. They contradict each other and the Quran in soooo many different ways its crazy anyone follows their 'advice'. The Quran also states that Muslims are not allowed to take any book but the Quran as their guide, yet almost all Muslim sects have some version of Hadith literature that they use as a primary source above the Quran, especially those with the most extreamist views such as Taliban.

4. (This might not have been your argument) Crusades were horrible to everyone, including Christians. The crusaders murdered not only many Muslims, but Jews and Christians who didn't properly support them as they passed through thier towns. Crusades burned Mosques and Synagogues as well as turned the holy mount in Jerusalem into a trash heap and horse stable. It wasn't until Salah al-din threw out the last crusaders did the region turn to normalcy for ALL worshipers. In fact he forbade anyone from harming any Christian temple or non-military person, according to real Quranic rules of warfare. During nearly all of Arab controlled Islamic Empire (preOttoman) anyone of any faith lived far better in Islamic lands than they did in Christian Rome (Except Catholics of course).

Your continuous spouting merely proves Islamaphobia exists and continues strongly due to fictional ideas of what Islam is and has been as well as using the same tools to hate Muslims as the extreamists use to convert people to their ways. The only way to stop the Islamaphobia as well as extreamism within Islam is by focusing on truth and not allowing ignorance to prevail.

AT this time I am on my work computer and don't have access to my searchable Quranic links to give you all the direct full quotes to disprove you. But, if you wish I can come back with this at a later time, or you can simply search for a online Quran and read the verses surrounding what you quoted.


1. Aisha was 6 when Mohammed married her and 9 when he consumated the marriage. Consumating a marriage means having sex if you didn't know. That's a lot younger than 13 and does make him a paedophile, it doesn't matter how long ago it happened, marrying a 6 year old girl and having sex with her at 9 makes anyone a paedophile. (Who knows what he did with her between 6 and 9 too.)

2. Really? So he took over Mecca and eventually Arabia with peace and love then?

3. Oh, so those are just the extremist versions? LMAO!

4. Why am I not suprised that you support the PC "Crusaders where the bad guys" view? If it wasn't for the Crusaders we'd be living in Islamic hellholes so that alone makes them the good guys.

If Islam is so wonderful then why the hell are islamic countries so backwards and oppressive? Why are the vast majority of terrorists muslims? If you're in America you might not be so aware of the islamic problem since although there have been terrorist attacks your muslim population is, percentage wise at least, a lot smaller than in the UK and most likely spread out more since I haven't heard about any islamic American towns and I don't think I've heard about any muslim riots there either. If you have a small muslim population spread out and mostly integrated with the rest of the community then they're not likely to cause trouble as they're more likely to be influenced by the non-muslims around them. However when they become large muslim communities and get more power and things like sharia courts (which they have here in the UK) then the trouble starts and gets made worse by the government and police bowing down to the muslims and treating them as special and more worthy than others.


I'm actually pretty sure the vast majority of terrorists aren't Muslim.  What with all the South American and Russian terrorists... and one has to assume there are a lot of chinese terrorists.



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


Islamic terrorism has been going strong for around 1500 years, I seriously doubt the acceptance of a mosque near ground zero will defeat it! The way to defeat it is to declare Islam what it is, an evil cult that's not a valid religion, and state in no uncertain terms that we won't tolerate it anymore. People can believe whatever the hell they like individually but the preaching of Islam should be treated like the preaching of Nazism or anything that's been declared a dangerous cult. Not only should the "ground zero" mosque not be built but all others should be knocked down. If muslims don't like it then they can go and live in an islamic country, that's what they ultimately want anyway isn't it? And if it isn't then why are they muslims?

How do you not get banned for saying stuff like that?

You really are a nasty piece of work.  If Islam should be decalred a cult, then so should all other religions.  No one religion has any more validity than another, and they all share the same origins, i.e. man.  Bizarrely, you make it sound like you think Nazism is a bad thing, and sound like one yourself.


So you don't think Nazism is a bad thing? Lol! If Nazism was declared a valid religion then I'm sure you wouldn't mind Nazi churches or temples or whatever they'd be called built alongside synagogues and war memorials then? You should look up the Nazis and Islam, they got along just great. I can hate Islam just as much as Nazism, they're both groups created by a psycho who wanted to take over the world by force and kill anyone who got in his way. They both want a totalitarian society with strict rules and draconian punishments for those who don't follow those rules. If Islam hadn't existed before and was just created today it would be instantly banned as a terrorist organisation!