PDA

View Full Version : Islamophobic Comments by Non-Muslims (Intermittent Compilation Started)



Search
09-29-2016, 07:30 PM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

So, I often hear from Islamophobic pundits that there is no such thing as "Islamophobia."

Well, then I'd like them to explain away comments that I'm reading on news articles daily. All welcome aboard to do so.

In this thread, I am going to document intermittently (depending on inclination and my availability) any Islamophobic comments I happen to find from herein out, today's date being September 29th, 2016.

Let's see how many I can get because if Islamophobia isn't "real", then I shouldn't actually be able to find any practical instances of people saying things that would be termed Islamophobic, should I? Rhetorical question.

However, before I proceed with that, let's define "Islamophobia" for all of us in the thread. Islamophobia is defined, according to Wikipedia, simply as "prejudice, hatred, or bigotry directed against Islam or Muslims." I'd say that's a fairly accurate and inclusive definition in terms of the everyday forms it takes, though of course we know it can also take the form of discrimination or political force.

For example, Islamophobia has been defined by University of California, Berkeley, for purposes of anchoring their research and research project as "a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure. It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic, political, social and cultural relations, while rationalizing the necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve 'civilizational rehab' of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise). Islamophobia reintroduces and reaffirms a global racial structure through which resource distribution disparities are maintained and extended."

Now that we know the definitions of Islamophobia, let's define what it is not. Georgetown University, for example, says something on this topic with which I agree: "Rational criticism of Islam or Muslims based on factual evidence is not intrinsically Islamophobia, just as criticism of the tenets or followers of other religions or ethnic groups does not necessarily indicate bigotry or prejudice."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, for example, in the story of the New Jersey train crash September 29th, 2016, some of the illuminating comments (which I only cursorily browsed) illustrative of Islamophobia are the following:

James
I just wonder if a Muslim was given an opportunity to become a train conductor. Honestly I hate flying in planes, don't need to fly on a plane when I can't see the pilot ,or know he is not descendants from Arab.

william
Train engineer was probably a Muslim Terrorist ----------Our Government brings all these third world people here and gives them all our good paying Government jobs that put public safety at risk ! Just look at all the bridge toll plaza workers ---Muslims ! How stupid is that !
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
M.I.A.
09-29-2016, 08:20 PM
i prefer not to succumb to the victimised mindset..

because as you know im an extremely rational and grounded individual "/

if the media reports only on muslim crime then maybe there should be less muslim crime.

its the black lives matter conspiracy..

yes black people in america have it hard.

yes they are supposedly less likely to succeed.

...and yes they are open to unfair discrimination by the law and at every point in life..

allegedly.

but you cant change society from the outside..

you cant want to be equal or better.. and turn away from society.

you cant change the law unless you are a part of it.

they need to be a whole lot better just to get anywhere..


i dont want a riot so i can get a new tv!

i want to buy my own damn tv!


...so i dont buy into islamaphobia.


and yes, if the whole place works against you..

and the prison wardens are tougher and smarter and faster..

then man the toll booths.


let you figure out everything you need to know about the man.

...and the slacker..

dont work against each other at least.


guaranteed..

most people like escape..

most people like sleep.


i suppose its about how much you let go or how good your answers are.

...humility is achieved by various paths.


just google it in the same sentence as quran..

quran on humility.

...but what if i am wronged or killed while trying to earn an honest buck?

...well maybe they will have to report that too.

http://news.trust.org/item/20160901173351-yw0nu/
Reply

czgibson
09-29-2016, 09:03 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by Search
Rational criticism of Islam or Muslims based on factual evidence is not intrinsically Islamophobia, just as criticism of the tenets or followers of other religions or ethnic groups does not necessarily indicate bigotry or prejudice.
I'm so glad you mentioned this point, as it is often forgotten. The reason many of us have a problem with the term 'Islamophobia' is that, while prejudice and hatred directed at Muslims is a genuine problem that should be deplored, the word is too often used to shut down conversations or to silence criticisms of Islam or Muslims that may well be reasonable and worthy of discussion.

BS, The same group that did 9/11 did this and it was a "FAIL" They (Secret Society) wanted way more death and destruction! You can bet on more big events from these satanic fools!
I could be wrong, but on the face of it I don't think this comment is necessarily about Muslims at all. This looks more like someone who believes in New World Order type conspiracy theories. I think that's the kind of "Secret Society" being referred to here.

Peace
Reply

M.I.A.
09-29-2016, 09:29 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



I'm so glad you mentioned this point, as it is often forgotten. The reason many of us have a problem with the term 'Islamophobia' is that, while prejudice and hatred directed at Muslims is a genuine problem that should be deplored, the word is too often used to shut down conversations or to silence criticisms of Islam or Muslims that may well be reasonable and worthy of discussion.



I could be wrong, but on the face of it I don't think this comment is necessarily about Muslims at all. This looks more like someone who believes in New World Order type conspiracy theories. I think that's the kind of "Secret Society" being referred to here.

Peace
thats the joke really.. im not even a black person o_0

pretty sure black people would not like me talking about a situation i cannot possibly relate too.

maybe it should have been about poor people.. alcoholics and gamblers and what not..

Unfortunately the word overtakes most of us.

..its a full time job trying not to get caught up and opinionated..

and type cast.

pushed and pulled until we are finally made into who we are.


...im not what i claim to be.. and im certainly not what most people claim me to be..

the struggle continues.

we are all things to all people.



....but yes.. i wouldnt mind if people said.

i hate whats going on in iraq, i hate whats going on in syria.. i hate whats going on in most parts of the world..

but personally..i mostly hate whats going on here..

they put me through hell here lol.


..dont ever blow up.


...and the man said to me.. if i see anything wrong im taking it down..

thats right, mirror me back... i thought.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
czgibson
09-29-2016, 09:48 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by M.I.A.
...im not what i claim to be.. and im certainly not what most people claim me to be..

the struggle continues.

we are all things to all people.
I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about much of the time.

Peace
Reply

M.I.A.
09-29-2016, 10:18 PM
it is the depths of despair people feel..

if you have not known it, count yourself lucky.

if you have returned from it, count yourself lucky.

if your willing to be absorbed and used by a situation..

then the role is set, the tole has to be paid.

better to be a stranger in the land.

i have no idea if you defend or condemn muslims when you talk about them in converstion..

i just want them to be the better versions of themselves.

...and whos to say they arnt?
Reply

Little_Lion
09-29-2016, 10:55 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about much of the time.

Peace
I like reading his posts. They're like going to a Pink Floyd concert without the sin.
Reply

Search
09-29-2016, 11:52 PM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

I'm so glad you mentioned this point, as it is often forgotten. The reason many of us have a problem with the term 'Islamophobia' is that, while prejudice and hatred directed at Muslims is a genuine problem that should be deplored, the word is too often used to shut down conversations or to silence criticisms of Islam or Muslims that may well be reasonable and worthy of discussion.
I do think we should be discussing some criticisms of Muslim and Islam openly because otherwise we leave a vacuum for those to have those conversations who may experience no qualms about leveraging the conversation in a direction that Muslims do not like and that which does not represent mainstream Islam.

I could be wrong, but on the face of it I don't think this comment is necessarily about Muslims at all. This looks more like someone who believes in New World Order type conspiracy theories. I think that's the kind of "Secret Society" being referred to here.

Peace
You're right - it could be interpreted that way; I'll edit my opening post.
Reply

M.I.A.
09-30-2016, 02:26 AM
Originally Posted by Little_Lion
I like reading his posts. They're like going to a Pink Floyd concert without the sin.
...i suppose i will never be mainstream.

but il take it "/ thank you.

https://youtu.be/FxcKNs8R9AE
Reply

kritikvernunft
09-30-2016, 02:44 AM
Originally Posted by Search
prejudice, hatred, or bigotry directed against Islam or Muslims.
We should embrace the opportunity to suffer for our allegiance to our Beloved Master, the singular God, and to prove our faith! What greater honour could there be than that? I desire to be prejudiced and hated for my obedience to the One God. The more they hate me, the more I feel vindicated that I am sitting on the truth. It only confirms that I am right and that they are wrong!
Reply

Search
09-30-2016, 02:53 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

:sl: (Peace be upon you)


You're a really nice brother.

I too admit to struggling to decipher your posts. Sometimes, your post makes sense; but many times, I am also unable to understand.

I know you're capable of writing in a way that all of us understand, and I've kind of always been curious then why you don't communicate in that way. You never have to be mainstream as we're all different and our uniqueness makes us all special and we're in that uniqueness reflecting divine perfection in our own way; you can still be unconventional though and see to your words being understood.

I just wonder what good is sharing of knowledge or wisdom if the other person to whom you've communicated cannot understand because of the manner of communication? Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said as part of a larger hadith (prophetic tradition): "Talk to people according to their level of understanding."

:)

Barkallahu feek (may God bless you).

Originally Posted by M.I.A.
...i suppose i will never be mainstream.

but il take it "/ thank you.

https://youtu.be/FxcKNs8R9AE
:wa: (And peace be upon you)
Reply

M.I.A.
09-30-2016, 03:07 AM
...have you considered being a traffic warden?

no?

being right is not always the way forward.

it would be great if we put some of these on the "about me" sections of c.v's..

a broken clock is right twice a day.. unless its digital.. then maybe only once per day..

although most of us just need some batteries to move on..

nobody holds a monopoly on truth..

OP wants to keep this thread for future news..

i feel the derail is strong in this one.

....aaaand on topic again.

Originally Posted by Search
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

:sl: (Peace be upon you)


You're a really nice brother.

I too admit to struggling to decipher your posts. Sometimes, your post makes sense; but many times, I am also unable to understand.

I know you're capable of writing in a way that all of us understand, and I've kind of always been curious then why you don't communicate in that way. You never have to be mainstream as we're all different and our uniqueness makes us all special and we're in that uniqueness reflecting divine perfection in our own way; you can still be unconventional though and see to your words being understood.

I just wonder what good is sharing of knowledge or wisdom if the other person to whom you've communicated cannot understand because of the manner of communication? Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said as part of a larger hadith (prophetic tradition): "Talk to people according to their level of understanding."

:)

Barkallahu feek (may God bless you).



:wa: (And peace be upon you)

...i am not nice o_o

id appreciate you not slandering me to such an extent.

mainly i just use li.. ib to vent... hence the attempts at humour.

take everything written with a pinch of salt.

feel free to correct as you see fit..

i apologise in advance.
Reply

Search
09-30-2016, 03:56 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

:sl: (Peace be upon you)


Originally Posted by kritikvernunft
We should embrace the opportunity to suffer for our allegiance to our Beloved Master, the singular God, and to prove our faith! What greater honour could there be than that? I desire to be prejudiced and hated for my obedience to the One God. The more they hate me, the more I feel vindicated that I am sitting on the truth. It only confirms that I am right and that they are wrong!
In spiritual understanding, I completely 100% agree with you because suffering is a means of raising our levels in paradise.

Next, I wanted to address the nature of divine truth: While it is true that divine truth is always is opposed, I wanted to add two commentative things: (1) We should reflect through our characters the perfection of Islam inasmuch as possible so that we attract others too to the divine truth, and (2) injustice should not be allowed to stand in two cases: (a) If a person suffers an injustice that he know others will suffer if he keeps quiet, then he should for a certainty not allow that injustice to stand because that injustice cannot be confined to him alone. (b) Also, a person should not keep quiet when he knows others are similarly already suffering to the best of his available knowledge.

However, if a person suffers a specific injustice (and is the type of injustice not likely to spread to others), in his heart, mind, and being, he can be completely content to let the injustice stand. Instead, what he can and should do is use that injustice as an opportunity and vehicle (keeping in mind that God has said there is no veil between the supplication of the oppressed) to God to ask forgiveness for that unjust person and also ask God for their guidance (and also if that person aspires to be truly saintly then never even complain of that injustice if possible even to his own heart) because that injustice is truly one of the greater spiritual honors from God if we're able to truly be patient and apply "The Law of the Garbage Truck."

God has said in the Quran (25:20): "And We make some of you a trial for others. Will you bear patiently? And your Lord is Ever-Seeing."

In principle, the "The Law of the Garbage Truck" is as follows:

One day I hopped in a taxi and we took off for the airport. We were driving in the right lane when suddenly a black car jumped out of a parking space right in front of us. My taxi driver slammed on his brakes, skidded, and missed the other car by just inches! The driver of the other car whipped his head around and started yelling at us!

My taxi driver just smiled and waved at the guy. And I mean, really friendly.

So I asked, “Why did you just do that? This guy almost ruined your car and sent us to the hospital!”

This is when my taxi driver taught me what I now call, “The Law of the Garbage Truck.”

He explained that many people are like garbage trucks. They run around full of garbage (frustration, fear, anger, disappointment, discontentment, etc.). As their garbage piles up, they need a place to dump it and sometimes they’ll dump it on you. Don’t take it personally. Just smile, wave, wish them well, and move on. Don’t take their garbage and spread it to other people at work, at home, or on the streets.

So, yes, if a person is able to carry such injustice of another alone without ill will and contentment, seeing in one's own suffering the hand of God, then that person should do that as that is a superior and saintly quality in spiritual terms; in carrying another's garbage, he's just become a jewel to God.

While, yes, in one sense you're seeing confirmation of the truth when others oppose Islam and Muslims, you're also in another sense seeing injustice of that which we would need to spread awareness and about which we would need to create an environment conducive to healthy discussions so as to avoid the phenomena of garbage contamination (as the injustice is not confined) for the sake of both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Remember Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one." People asked, "O Allah's Apostle! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" The Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "By preventing him from oppressing others."

In the cases of Islamophobia, non-Muslims are harming and oppressing us with their prejudice and ignorance but they are also harming and oppressing themselves with their own ignorance and arrogance; therefore, we should be swift in speaking out against such injustices whenever possible and never allow that prejudice to stand unchallenged. Suffering is valor and nobility when you suffer alone (on both sides), but suffering is an ignominy and ignobility when you know you don't (on both sides).

As a relevant tangential point, I'd add that even if we do not succeed in making a difference in perception, us trying is enough in God's eyes. And also, I note that there doesn't need to be a meeting of minds for there to a meeting of hearts or at the least for a respectful acknowledgement of one another's humanity to occur despite the differences. After all, one of the greatest paradoxes of life is that while we're all very different, we're all also much the same.

:wa: (And peace be upon you)
Reply

czgibson
09-30-2016, 04:06 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by Little_Lion
I like reading his posts. They're like going to a Pink Floyd concert without the sin.
How funny that you should mention Pink Floyd. I've been playing and teaching their music for most of the day.

They're one of my favourite bands, so you won't be surprised when I tell you I don't believe there's anything sinful about their music at all.

Peace
Reply

noraina
09-30-2016, 04:49 PM
When people come out with 'there is no such thing as Islamophobia' it's just so stupid and wilfully ignorant. I mean....what are they trying to prove by such an scientifically invalid statement like that?

There's a capacity in the human mind to have a phobia against anything. I mean, look at this link from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_phobias

Anthophobia? That's fear of flowers.

So honestly that kind of statement is just utter nonsense, not because Muslims are paranoid and think everyone is out to get them, but because a phobia of anything is possible. And particularly how Islam is so prominent and misunderstood these days, ignorant people are bound to develop a phobia of it.

Speaking of Islamophobia, I can't remember where I read it but the funniest one I read was '1.9 billion of the world's Muslims are radicalised'. And they kept on repeated it in their responses. Where do those figures come from?
Reply

Little_Lion
09-30-2016, 05:10 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



How funny that you should mention Pink Floyd. I've been playing and teaching their music for most of the day.

They're one of my favourite bands, so you won't be surprised when I tell you I don't believe there's anything sinful about their music at all.

Peace
Oh I can believe that. :) Up until literally a week ago I was an on-air personality for a classic rock station. Rather haram job for a Muslim, I know, but I got into broadcasting long before I converted. My favorite Pink Floyd song is "On The Turning Away".

To keep the thread on track, I used to hear a lot of Islamophobic comments at work, especially from my boss who is a HUGE Trump supporter. He had no idea I was Muslim, but the other DJ's and the salespeople knew and did not care. I don't think they even knew that I was not supposed to be listening to music.

Anyway, I always had a good internal chuckle when my boss would say things like "all the Muslims are going to be forced to the other side of the wall" (dang boss, that's going to be a long commute for me) or "they should all go back to their own countries" (um . . . Massachusetts?).
Reply

M.I.A.
09-30-2016, 06:15 PM
good ol racism..

https://youtu.be/69iSXks1bes
Reply

Huzaifah ibn Adam
09-30-2016, 06:32 PM
The Kuffaar who hate Islaam usually say that, yes. "They should get back to their own countries."

Oh, you mean, the ones you've bombed? Till there's nothing left but rubble? Those ones?

It was Britain who invaded India and tried to colonialise the country. Killed how many of the Muslims there.

America and Britain are the ones who involved themselves in countries which have nothing to do with them, and then complain when they now have to reap the consequences. Who asked them to invade Iraq? Who asked them to attack Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, etc? Who forced them to involve themselves in the affairs of those countries? Now, they bombed the countries up and some of the inhabitants of those countries escape to America and Britain. Now that very America and Britain complain and say, "They must get back to their own countries." Fools. There wouldn't have been refugees in America and elsewhere if America and its puppets hadn't involved themselves in the business of other countries in the first place.
Reply

Huzaifah ibn Adam
09-30-2016, 06:38 PM
It all started with the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" lie, invented by America.

The world knows Saddam had no "Weapons of Mass Destruction".

The only "Weapons of Mass Destruction" are the ones being used by America and its puppets, to destroy the countries of the Muslims.
Reply

M.I.A.
09-30-2016, 07:23 PM
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.ind...roid-orange-gb


...it happens, dont forget why you turned up in the first place.

anybody can dictate the direction of progress..

there is no obligation to follow.
Reply

Huzaifah ibn Adam
09-30-2016, 08:50 PM
Over 400 people (civilians, not fighters) have been killed in Halab (Aleppo) this past week through Russian bombing: bunker-busting bombs, phosphorus munitions and cluster bombs. When Russia was asked about it, all they said was, "If this happens, we are very sorry."

Sorry doesn't bring back the people you killed.

That is how low and insignificant these Kuffaar regard the Muslims. "Oh, we accidentally killed 400 innocent Muslim children, women, and men. 'Sorry'."

What a joke...

May Allaah Ta`aalaa destroy Russia and America.

آمين يا رب العالمين
Reply

cooterhein
09-30-2016, 09:44 PM
Originally Posted by Search
So, for example, in the story of the New Jersey train crash September 26th, 2016, some of the illuminating comments (which I only cursorily browsed) illustrative of Islamophobia are the following:

James
I just wonder if a Muslim was given an opportunity to become a train conductor. Honestly I hate flying in planes, don't need to fly on a plane when I can't see the pilot ,or know he is not descendants from Arab.

william
Train engineer was probably a Muslim Terrorist ----------Our Government brings all these third world people here and gives them all our good paying Government jobs that put public safety at risk ! Just look at all the bridge toll plaza workers ---Muslims ! How stupid is that !
I do acknowledge the existence of Islamophobia, and I'm glad that you acknowledge the existence of a real distinction between that and actual criticism. It mystifies me, however, that you have repeatedly stated that some of my past comments go in the same category as the ones you've quoted here.

Again, Islamophobia does exist, and it's a problem when people deny that it exists. I also think it's a rather similar problem when people deny that extremism exists, or that radicalism exists. These types of denials are just as false and probably, potentially, just as dangerous.
Reply

M.I.A.
09-30-2016, 10:30 PM
yeah i cant get this through my thick head..

does the spontaneous army win or the one that plans?

..

....

the joke is, if it were a fist fight..

they would introduce weight devisions sooner or later.


..i feel you believe that the ideal army should carry a sword too big to wield.

in its hands should be morality and good conduct for a long time..

before any sword is reached for.


that army does not exist..

it never has.


...probably.


what did you expect to happen?


...also "they" seem to be deliberately targeting hospitals for some reason.

i have no idea?


...was it a political war at one point?

or a civil war?

im ashamed to say im ignorant of it.
Reply

Little_Lion
09-30-2016, 11:22 PM
Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

May Allaah Ta`aalaa destroy Russia and America.

آمين يا رب العالمين
Just please, give those of us who wish to leave a chance to get out first. Leaving the US is not easy . . . especially if one is disabled and receiving government assistance. Not to mention no country is exactly begging Americans to come to their shores . . . :hmm:
Reply

Huzaifah ibn Adam
09-30-2016, 11:34 PM
What we mean is the government of America and the government of Russia. The culprits.
Reply

Search
10-01-2016, 01:03 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Originally Posted by cooterhein
I do acknowledge the existence of Islamophobia, and I'm glad that you acknowledge the existence of a real distinction between that and actual criticism. It mystifies me, however, that you have repeatedly stated that some of my past comments go in the same category as the ones you've quoted here.

Again, Islamophobia does exist, and it's a problem when people deny that it exists. I also think it's a rather similar problem when people deny that extremism exists, or that radicalism exists. These types of denials are just as false and probably, potentially, just as dangerous.
Are you really that unaware?

I'll answer your question. But before I do, I'll contextualize my words. So, I have observed that people who are very obviously intelligent or educated or both somehow have an inherent belief in their ability to rise above prejudice and therefore never see themselves as prejudiced even when they are.

Take, for example, the elective course in law school that I'd taken called something to the effect of "Race, Color, and Crime." In that class, we'd been asked by our professor to take a test on attitudes about race (in terms of white and black) that has been designed by Harvard known as Project Implicit specifically titled "RACE IAT." I believe we were some 22 students and only 2 students including me showed no negative bias and were neutral. We had also had to include our idea of what would be our results before and after. I'd not been sure if my test results would show bias or not because I had wondered if I might have picked up some unconscious cues and developed bias due to the news media and also because my father is in the habit of making racist remarks about African-Americans. However, what is noteworthy about the test is that almost all the other students had thought they wouldn't have any bias whereas I hadn't been sure and I'd been the one of the two to show no bias; I'm an extrovert in real life, but I have never shied away from spiritual introspection; and I believe that the results for all those other students had been askew probably because in the society we live introspection of any nature is not valued.

So, what am I trying to tell you? I'm trying to tell you that while you believe Islamophobia exists, you're probably from my understanding at the least (and of course I could be wrong and you certainly don't have to take my word for it) the kind of a person who has at least some Islamophobic attitudes. This is most prominent when you're dealing with us on the board as Muslims and also when I notice your throwaway remarks like this: "Now that I'm describing some of the specifics of the show, I'm realizing just how much violence it would precipitate if it were shown on TV in a Muslim-majority country." How do you know this? Why do you think this? Because you probably think Muslims are almost all violent outside of the West or generally likely to easily become violent persons probably whether in the West or East. Because you cannot imagine them as people like yourself who can handle a supernatural show. By the way, I already know of one instance in 2014 specific to a supernatural television show created by Muslims for Muslims that aired in Muslim-majority country wherein this hasn't been true; probably there are many more, only I'm unfamiliar with them because I live in the West and have very limited exposure to what type of shows and movies they might create or watch. And also, you fail to realize that Hollywood television shows and movies are globally imported and watched in Muslim-majority countries all the time. Take, for example, my graduate school Muslim female friend, that is, specifically a female geneticist from Saudi Arabia who'd come to do further research here in the U.S. on student visa and we'd met as she'd been my neighbor when I was in law school, who knew more about American television shows and movies that she'd watched in Saudi Arabia than I do because I do not myself like to waste time watching movies or television programs and also hadn't the time in law school to do so even if I hadn't been so inclined. Most Muslims that I know are big Harry Potter fans (books and movie franchise) whether they identify themselves as belonging to the East or the West.

Even if Muslims wanted to deny radicalism or extremism, the existence of Daesh in itself is enough to disprove it. However, the problem with Islamophobic pundits is that they're many times intelligent and educated; so, if they're spouting nonsense like Islamophobia isn't real, they're regarded to more than likely not be telling the wholesome truth, at least in their viewers'/listeners'/audience's minds because there is a pervasive myth that if you're educated and intelligent, you cannot possibly be prejudiced. For example, it is easy to dismiss for almost all of us probably any Islamophobic remarks that an uneducated and ignorant group like the Texans who practice to kill Muslims with bullets dipped in pigs' blood might make because they're so obvious about their prejudice and bigotry. However, the Islamophobic pundits of whom I'm thinking but won't be naming are subtle, sophisticated, and refined about how they present and articulate their bigotry and wrap their prejudice as rational and present denial of Islamophobia; and therefore, their words seem to carry a legitimacy and basis and presence that impress less discerning minds when the other group's remarks wouldn't whereas I note ironically that their entire rhetoric is one big example of Islamophobia and not really any better and probably more poisonous.

I trust that has sufficiently answered your question.
Reply

Scimitar
10-01-2016, 02:45 AM
Islamophobia, is just xenophobia directed at Muslims.... why do people have such a hard time understanding simple stuff?

Scimi
Reply

Search
10-01-2016, 04:06 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

:sl: (Peace be upon you)


Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

May Allaah Ta`aalaa destroy Russia and America.

آمين يا رب العالمين
I wish you'd instead pray for their guidance and uprightness.

:wa: (And peace be upon you)
Reply

Search
10-01-2016, 05:07 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

In a segment that I'd personally watched, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly on Thursday, September 29th, 2016 had taken issue with President Barack Obama's continued avoidance of the term "Islamic terrorism" to describe the attacks on the United States and Europe.

O'Reilly, however, enunciated, "Any rational Muslim is not going to take offense at the words 'Islamic terrorism.' Why? Because that would be irrational."

--------------------------------------
Personal Opinion: The word "Islamic" is an adjective that is defined in the dictionary as "relating to Islam," and I note that terrorism has no place in mainstream Islam by scholarly consensus. Therefore, "Islamic terrorism" is a misnomer because terrorism by definition in itself is not Islamic.

Also, I am offended by the words "Islamic terrorism" because it seems to be cojoining Islam and terrorism and I think it's long-range impact if used widely as it is now in public discourse will be that Islam and terrorism will be synonymous in the wider public's minds which I think is a disservice to mainstream Muslims as mainstream Islam doesn't advocate or promote terrorism in any way, shape, or form.

Also, as to whether my offense is rational or irrational, I'd rather not have be judged by a man who also regularly says anti-Islam and anti-Muslim stuff.

Also, I dislike it when anyone presumes to speak for me as a Muslim. I am a person. I have a voice. I'll be the one to judge whether I will or will not take offense at the words "Islamic terrorism."

Bill O'Reilly or anyone else without having talked to or surveyed Muslims about the term has no right to speak for us as if he has some kind of knowledge of or is an authority on the subject of what Muslims may think or feel.
----------------------------------------------------------
On the story that was covered by Newsmax titled, "Bill O'Reilly: No 'Rational Muslim' Offended at Words 'Islamic Terrorism', the following Islamophobic comments were made:

odinist
16 hours ago
whats that Bill
no rational Muslims. like the so called moderate Muslims?
when are these so called moderate Muslims going to start pointing out the radical ones? until they do I am not convinced of the so called moderate Muslim.
if not helping our side, you must be endorsing their side.
simple concept that I'm sure most liberals and DemoCRAPS will never understand. Even though they will claim to.

SecondAmendmentFirstRight16 hours ago
Typical libtard O'Reilly. Buying into the hype of the "rational Muslim". Every single Muslim wants to destroy this country. That is how they define being rational. Islamic terrorism IS rational to them!

desertcowboya day ago
Terrorist are terrorist regardless of country, religion, nationality, race etc. Many Muslims are terrorist, this much is obvious from what's happened and is happening but isn't it calling Islamic terrorist suggests that all Muslims are terrorist? I've never heard the term Christian terrorist even though we've had the crusades, protestant killing Catholic and vise versa.
SecondAmendmentFirstRightdesertcowboy16 hours ago
ALL Muslims are terrorists. Get RIGHT!
Reply

noraina
10-01-2016, 10:32 AM
Assalamu alaykum

Whatever is happening in Syria and other Muslin nations around the world is truly heart-breaking, and I think for all of us it is a duty to make dua, and also raise awareness of their plight, and help them in whatever way possible.

And to feel angry is easy, and maybe justifiable, but anger which is not controlled is only self-destructive. I think a glowing example from the seerah of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is when he went to do dawah in Ta'if and the way he was treated, he was actually chased through the streets by the people of the town, and they threw stones at him to the extent he was badly injured and bleeding so much his feet were covered in it.

And his response always gets to me whenever I read it:

“O Allah”, said the Prophet, “To Thee I complain of my weakness, resourcelessness and humiliation before the people. Thou art the Most Merciful, the Lord of the weak and my Master. To whom wilt thou confide me? To one estranged, bearing ill will, or, an enemy given power over me? If Thou art not worth on me, I care not, for Thy favor is abundant upon me. I seek refuge in the light of Thy countenance by which all darkness is dispelled and every affair of this world and the next is set right, lest Thy anger should descend upon me or Thy displeasure light upon me. I need only thy pleasure and satisfaction for only Thou enablest me to do good and evade the evil. There is no power and no might save in thee.”


The Lord then sent the angel of mountains who sought the Prophet’s (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) permission to join together the two hills between which Ta’if was located but the Messenger of God (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) replied, “No, I hope God will bring forth from their loins people who will worship God alone, associating nothing with Him.” (Muslim, Kitab-ul-Jihad)

SubhanAllah, he not only asked Allah swt for forgiveness for his own weakness, but he also prayed that from the descendants of the people of Ta'if will emerge true worshippers and Muslims. And in circumstances like those today, this is the best thing to make dua for. And Allah swt will give justice to those who are oppressed - that's His promise and is what I'm sure gives our brothers and sisters all over the world the strength they possess against all the odds.

Reply

Born_Believer
10-01-2016, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



I'm so glad you mentioned this point, as it is often forgotten. The reason many of us have a problem with the term 'Islamophobia' is that, while prejudice and hatred directed at Muslims is a genuine problem that should be deplored, the word is too often used to shut down conversations or to silence criticisms of Islam or Muslims that may well be reasonable and worthy of discussion.



I could be wrong, but on the face of it I don't think this comment is necessarily about Muslims at all. This looks more like someone who believes in New World Order type conspiracy theories. I think that's the kind of "Secret Society" being referred to here.

Peace
Can you give me examples where Muslims have complained about or labeled "Islamophobic" comments based on factual evidence? In western society, Islam is the most maligned and talked about religion in the media. Islam and Muslims, from the way we look, to the way we dress and talk is attacked on a constant basis. Every minute, via the tv media, via newspapers, heck even via social media. Just do a google search of news stories with regards to Islams and Muslims and find how many of them are positive or even well informed.

Yet we, the Muslims people, have the greatest patience I have seen in any single group. We don't rampage through western cities, destroying your landmarks and raising up armies, like the far right neo-nazis groups have down across europe. According to Europol in fact, such groups carry out the largest number of terror attacks across Europe. You don't see socialism, atheism or Christianity maligned in the same way.

What I do see, however, is that when Muslims decide to call it how it is, and label a spade a spade, they get called out for having a "victims mindset" or misusing the word "Islamophobia". These comments are usually made by those who wish to attack our way of life and expect us to take it quietly. In fact, in the UK, Islamophobic attacks weren't even recognised as hate crime statistics until last year. Let that sink in for a minute.

then you see the hypocrisy of western governments. A couple years back, after the Lee Rigby (a former soldier) killing in London, the government called a COBRA meeting. Yet, just a week earlier, similar religious and racial motivations were used to beat a Muslims grandfather to death in front of his 4 year old granddaughter. Where was the COBRA meeting for that?

In the days following the Rigby killing, three mosques were attacked with bombs, luckily none of them went off. It was found that a Ukrainian group was involved in producing and placing these bombs. Where was the COBRA meeting?

If I label this as Islamophobic or at the very least, a governmental bias against Muslims, am I simply whinging or is there basis in fact?
Reply

czgibson
10-01-2016, 05:15 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by Born_Believer
Can you give me examples where Muslims have complained about or labeled "Islamophobic" comments based on factual evidence?
I could give you plenty of examples, but I won't bother because they'll just be deleted by the forum staff. If you think this forum is a good place to have an open and free discussion about Islam, you are sadly mistaken.

Peace
Reply

Scimitar
10-01-2016, 05:22 PM
Originally Posted by Born_Believer
Can you give me examples where Muslims have complained about or labeled "Islamophobic" comments based on factual evidence?
As a Muslim, I can... in fact, there have been numerous petitions posted right here on this very board.

Change.org has a plethora of petitions against Islamophobic narratives pushed by the government and media right here in the UK... and I, myself, have signed hese on occasion.

See Mr Gibzon? wasn't that difficult.

Anyhow - what does it matter that Muslims complain? Or don't?

Some will, some won't - this is not a decision we all make simply because we are Muslim, nope - it is an highly subjective decision for one to lodge a complaint - what may offend one may simply be brushed off as ignorance by another.

Scimi
Reply

noraina
10-01-2016, 06:21 PM
I was once called a dustbin bag because of the way I dressed, more than once actually.

Was I offended? Not particularly. Was it even Islamophobia? I'm not sure. For me it was just his ignorance that he couldn't recognise a custom-designed couture abayah staring him in the face :D.

My friend, on the other hand, was outraged and fuming at the blatant Islamophobia.

It's very subjective based on the individual.
Reply

Al Sultan
10-01-2016, 08:24 PM
"The Singular God" your religion is "Other" did you convert to Islam or what? cuz I'm confused..The only religions that I know of that are from god,to worship him are Judaism,Christianty,Islam (Sikhism doesn't really count since its not sent down by god,even though they do believe in one god)
Reply

cooterhein
10-02-2016, 01:31 AM
Originally Posted by Search
Are you really that unaware?
I'm aware of many things in the abstract, but when it comes to the specific rationale residing in your own mind, I find it best to defer to you in order to properly find out about that.

I'll answer your question. But before I do, I'll contextualize my words. So, I have observed that people who are very obviously intelligent or educated or both somehow have an inherent belief in their ability to rise above prejudice and therefore never see themselves as prejudiced even when they are.
I think you are on to something here, but I might choose to put in in a different way, while reaching a very similar conclusion. My one quibble point with the way you've presented this, is that you appear to be implying that obviously intelligent and educated people ask that others presume the best of them vis a vis prejudice, look at me I'm smart and educated so I don't have to work hard, or I shouldn't have to work hard in order to defend myself from such aspersions. If this is an unfair description of what you meant to convey, please let me know.

Moving on from that starting point- admittedly a tenuous one as I wait to see if that's what you meant to imply- I would suggest that obviously well educated and highly intelligent people actually put a tremendous amount of time and effort into whatever they produce, and they do so with the end goal of making large numbers of people believe their conclusions are reasonable and well defended. They also do so with the explicit goal of avoiding aspersions that would cause their efforts to be cast aside and treated as worthless. Granted, to your point, well educated and highly intelligent people can be and quite often are prejudiced and/or bigoted. I do think they're more likely to at least succeed in being subtle about it, which I think is a point that you've also implied and perhaps stated pretty clearly within your initial response, but in some form or fashion intelligence and education is probably not particularly good at eliminating prejudice.

Now, I will agree with you that highly educated people with well thought out arguments do not like being told they are prejudiced. But I don't think it comes from a sense of laziness, as you seem to have implied. I think that these types of people work very hard at what they do, one part of why they work hard is specifically in order to avoid being labeled thusly, and they want a certain type of reward for the work they've done. This type of person may also have more to lose, especially if we're talking about an actual academic for whom accusations of prejudice- if they land- could have career threatening implications. Your street-level loudmouthed bigot typically doesn't have anything of the sort that could be lost, and quite frankly they don't work as hard in order to form a proper argument.

So, as far as I can tell, I believe I'm making this sort of distinction. On one hand, you have a highly educated person who points to a diploma on the wall and says "I am an expert, I have like 52 advanced degrees or whatever." A Reza Aslan type of argument from authority, if I may make the comparison. There are some people like that, but I would argue it's not that many. On the other hand, you have someone who has these degrees and this expertise, but then with every argument they make and everything they write, they really work hard at what they're doing and they legitimately put forth the effort, and then they feel a bit slighted if someone discards their work for reasons that they specifically worked to avoid giving them. It's subtle and insidious prejudice, it's not heavy handed but it's problematic all the same. That sort of conclusion. Now, by my understanding of smart people- including the prejudiced ones- pointing to a set of diplomas is not the usual course of action. As far as I'm able to tell, the usual course of action is to point to the work they put in, the quality of the work, and then perhaps to the critique of others that might vaguely resemble peer review.

Take, for example, the elective course in law school that I'd taken called something to the effect of "Race, Color, and Crime." In that class, we'd been asked by our professor to take a test on attitudes about race (in terms of white and black) that has been designed by Harvard known as Project Implicit specifically titled "RACE IAT." I believe we were some 22 students and only 2 students including me showed no negative bias and were neutral. We had also had to include our idea of what would be our results before and after. I'd not been sure if my test results would show bias or not because I had wondered if I might have picked up some unconscious cues and developed bias due to the news media and also because my father is in the habit of making racist remarks about African-Americans. However, what is noteworthy about the test is that almost all the other students had thought they wouldn't have any bias whereas I hadn't been sure and I'd been the one of the two to show no bias; I'm an extrovert in real life, but I have never shied away from spiritual introspection; and I believe that the results for all those other students had been askew probably because in the society we live introspection of any nature is not valued.
I've taken that test, and I failed it. I felt bad about it for a little while, until I found out that almost everyone fails it and that it's not a big deal if you do fail it.

So, what am I trying to tell you? I'm trying to tell you that while you believe Islamophobia exists, you're probably from my understanding at the least (and of course I could be wrong and you certainly don't have to take my word for it) the kind of a person who has at least some Islamophobic attitudes.
Well, that might depend on how you define "Islamophobic attitudes." If that means anything about Islam that is negative, I would say it depends on whether the negative thing is accurate or not. If it's an obviously false or unfounded statement, then fine, that's unfair treatment. But I do think there are some negative things that can be said about Islam that are completely fair, truthful, and accurate.

Do you disagree?

This is most prominent when you're dealing with us on the board as Muslims and also when I notice your throwaway remarks like this: "Now that I'm describing some of the specifics of the show, I'm realizing just how much violence it would precipitate if it were shown on TV in a Muslim-majority country." How do you know this? Why do you think this?
Well, it's rather undeniable that Muslim mobs have turned out with violent intentions on several occasions within recent memory. It's quite well known that certain things are offensive to Islam, and that these things can trigger much violence. There was a thread a couple months back on which both of us participated, it had to do with the Charlie Hebdo thing. You were awfully critical of the Danish cartoonists, do you remember that? I was a bit more critical of the people who chose to be violent, I was also fairly critical of Egyptian newspapers for widely disseminating the cartoons and I had some praise for the US, Canada, and the UK for choosing to censor them in their newspapers and in their TV news cycle. You could also look at the half-dozen countries in which violence erupted as a result of a really rubbish trailer for a super-offensive movie that never got properly made, this led to the ayatollah of Iran increasing the bounty on the head of Salman Rushdie even though he had nothing to do with the movie and he was actually quite critical of it. This actually leads us quite naturally into the Satanic Verses and everything that came with that.

In addition to these more-well-known events, here's a story about violence between Syrian and Afghan refugees over a girl who refused to wear a headscarf. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti..._source=akdart

And here's a story about 90 Iraqi students being killed because of their "strange hair and tight clothes" (otherwise known as the "emo" look). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-clothes.html
Now, full disclosure, I'm not a particular fan of the emo look myself. I never quite understood it. Just a personal taste thing, I guess. But really, killing people because of it? Come on, people.

I could go on and on with the examples, but the point is this. There are certain issues, especially ones that pertain to blasphemy, or insults to Allah or Mohammed or his wives- that are predictable triggers for violence. Not for all Muslims everywhere, but in very conservative countries where a rather large majority of Muslims are residing, there are certain things that will trigger violence if these people- not all Muslims, but these people- become offended by it.

Now, in the specific example you're citing, I believe I identified such a trigger. For the record, I believe the show in question would have been well tolerated almost anywhere up to a certain point. But there was a certain chain of events in the last part of the most recent season that seems like it would have been especially offensive. God- as he's called on the show, although Muslims would naturally read his identity as Allah- had been mysteriously absent for almost the entire series. Then when he finally shows up, his general character is revealed to be rather capricious, morally ambivalent, and he says he did not care about humanity at all for most of the time it's existed. He could just barely be bothered to care about it when he was called upon to save it from total destruction. He was actually reluctant to do so. Additionally, with this portrayal of God he very much enjoys playing the guitar (and does so in a couple of memorable scenes). Even with just this so far, I would surmise a couple of things already: One- the visible, on-screen portrayal of God (or let's say Allah) would be deeply offensive by itself, and Two- the portrayals of God very much enjoying life as a singer songwriter and performer would be just as deeply offensive to a certain subset of Muslims.

But that isn't even the worst part. Prior to God revealing his identity in this show, he pretended to be a prophet. And actual prophet of the Lord, like Jesus like Mohammed like Lot (I think he's a prophet for Muslims? Not for Christians though). God, or Allah, is portrayed as a character who hides in plain sight while pretending to be a prophet. Again, an actual prophet.

Now, until I described just a bit of this on a Muslim forum, I hadn't really thought one bit about what Muslims would think of this show. It's not really marketed toward any sort of Muslim audience, so why would I think a lot about that? As I started to think about it though, I began to realize there are certain communities of Muslims in this world that would have at least four different reasons to be deeply, I mean truly mortally offended by the most recent events portrayed in this show. Not all Muslims everywhere of course, but there are certain Muslim communities where people would truly lose their minds if the back end of the most recent season was made widely available for their public consumption.

So to summarize, we're looking at a situation where God (Allah) is portrayed visibly, without any hint of self-censorship, on screen. He's not very likable in the sum total of his attitude toward humanity, he doesn't have a solid moral compass, he enjoys songwriting and performing on guitar, and for a decent chunk of the show he impersonated an actual prophet. When I consider all of these things within the context of a very Muslim country, I can easily imagine there being some very angry Muslims. Now, you tell me if that is a completely implausible assessment.

Because you probably think Muslims are almost all violent outside of the West or generally likely to easily become violent persons probably whether in the West or East.
Actually, I think that Muslims have triggers that non-Muslims in the West only partially understand. I still don't get why the number 39 is deemed offensive. Where did that come from? No, never mind, this could get discursive rather quickly. The point is, Muslims have triggers. I believe I identified a few of them within a show that I enjoy.

Because you cannot imagine them as people like yourself who can handle a supernatural show.
I think that all, or nearly all, Muslims could have handled this supernatural show (which is called Supernatural) right up until the point where Allah is portrayed on screen. In a less than completely flattering light. And then does some things that some Muslims would consider deeply haram. And then we also realize that the prophet of the Lord character that we'd gotten to know over the last few seasons, was actually Allah pretending to be a prophet. An actual prophet. At that point, I think we've got some triggers.

Again I ask, do you disagree? If so, do you simply think that it's impossible to offend Muslims to a point where you're predictably going to trigger violence within the right kind of Islamic community? And how would you try to help me reach that conclusion, if that's the direction you want to go?

By the way, I already know of one instance in 2014 specific to a supernatural television show created by Muslims for Muslims that aired in Muslim-majority country wherein this hasn't been true; probably there are many more, only I'm unfamiliar with them because I live in the West and have very limited exposure to what type of shows and movies they might create or watch. And also, you fail to realize that Hollywood television shows and movies are globally imported and watched in Muslim-majority countries all the time. Take, for example, my graduate school Muslim female friend, that is, specifically a female geneticist from Saudi Arabia who'd come to do further research here in the U.S. on student visa and we'd met as she'd been my neighbor when I was in law school, who knew more about American television shows and movies that she'd watched in Saudi Arabia than I do because I do not myself like to waste time watching movies or television programs and also hadn't the time in law school to do so even if I hadn't been so inclined. Most Muslims that I know are big Harry Potter fans (books and movie franchise) whether they identify themselves as belonging to the East or the West.
I can't help but wonder, are you aware of any specific examples of Allah being portrayed on screen as a character in any of these shows? And I would like a straight and direct answer to this question, please.

The reason I ask is simple. You accuse me of thinking that Muslims can't handle supernatural shows or magic/supernatural related fiction, in the abstract. I disagree with this assessment, I actually believe there's a lot that Muslims can and do handle. What I am saying, and this is what led to my comment, is that Muslims by and large will be quite offended by an on-screen portrayal of Allah, especially when he's portrayed in some negative manner, especially when he does things that are haram, and I would imagine that any storyline in which Allah pretends to be an actual prophet would be a particular sensitive issue. I think that most Muslims would be offended by this, and if it were seen on a wide scale in the right sort of Muslim community, there is a non-zero chance of triggering a violent reaction.

So again I ask you, within your comprehensive knowledge of entertainment widely consumed by Muslims, are you familiar with any specific examples of God (or Allah) being portrayed on screen, by an actor, in a manner that does not make God's character look particularly good?

Even if Muslims wanted to deny radicalism or extremism, the existence of Daesh in itself is enough to disprove it.
I've been told by some moderators of this forum that these Daesh guys are emphatically not Muslims, and Daesh has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. I acknowledged that they pervert Islam, while also saying they have something to do with Islam. And they told me good job for saying they pervert Islam, now let's all agree that they are not Muslims and they have nothing to do with Islam.

So....it depends who you talk to.

However, the problem with Islamophobic pundits is that they're many times intelligent and educated; so, if they're spouting nonsense like Islamophobia isn't real, they're regarded to more than likely not be telling the wholesome truth, at least in their viewers'/listeners'/audience's minds because there is a pervasive myth that if you're educated and intelligent, you cannot possibly be prejudiced.
I've spent a good bit of time looking into various figures who say things about Islam- and really, it's been fairly targeted since I begin by looking at formal debates and that's how I typically discover people- so in my personal experience, the intelligent and educated people who can go on TV and have a proper debate, just don't spout this sort of nonsense. Now that I've poked around YouTube with specific search terms like "Islamophobia isn't real" and other similar search terms, I can see that some people do say such things. Most of them don't have very many followers. From what I can tell, the typical YouTuber who posts videos saying these sorts of things is in the habit of saying "Mahs-lim" every time the word comes up, and has about 15 followers and 75 views of their videos.

For example, it is easy to dismiss for almost all of us probably any Islamophobic remarks that an uneducated and ignorant group like the Texans who practice to kill Muslims with bullets dipped in pigs' blood might make because they're so obvious about their prejudice and bigotry. However, the Islamophobic pundits of whom I'm thinking but won't be naming are subtle, sophisticated, and refined about how they present and articulate their bigotry and wrap their prejudice as rational and present denial of Islamophobia; and therefore, their words seem to carry a legitimacy and basis and presence that impress less discerning minds when the other group's remarks wouldn't whereas I note ironically that their entire rhetoric is one big example of Islamophobia and not really any better and probably more poisonous.
Oh boo, I wish you would say what their names are. If their words seem to carry a legitimacy, I may have actually heard of these people and then I could comment on whether I think they are bigoted or Islamophobic. Maybe I wind up thinking they do a good job of making valid criticisms, and then we could parse out what you think is unfair or inaccurate. Sadly, I may never know.

I trust that has sufficiently answered your question.
Well, there is a bit of a follow-up that you didn't exactly cover, and it speaks more specifically to the actual point you brought up.

For the sake of again-clarifying this point, there is this show called Supernatural. I honestly believe that the vast majority of this show would be well tolerated and perhaps mostly enjoyed by basically all Muslims. I do believe, however, that certain things in this world offend Muslims very much, sometimes to the point where they can trigger violence under the right circumstances.

Feel free to jump in there and tell me what you think about that assessment.

Furthermore, there is a particular point in the most recent season of this show where God (Allah) is portrayed on screen, in the flesh. He is not portrayed in the most flattering light, and he does things that some Muslims (not all) would consider very haram, and he does them in such a way that he obviously enjoys himself very much and we are supposed to enjoy his musical performance as an audience. Additionally, he spent a good chunk of the show pretending to be a prophet, yes an actual prophet.

I didn't think of it in these terms immediately as I was watching it, I was actually texting a friend of mine about how awesome the episode was and he's going to enjoy it when he sees it. That was my reaction. Upon further consideration of how this would go over with Muslims though, I think there are some Muslim communities- and they're not too hard to identify- where this exact thing could quite plausibly trigger some violence. And if we change just one thing about the scenario- for example, if we imagine this sort of storyline were created within an Islamic country and widely disseminated there- I don't believe the actor who portrays God in this manner would want to be in the country a the time of its airing, anyone involved in the project would be expelled from the country if they hadn't got themselves out already, and anyone still present who could be held accountable in any way would most likely become the victim of a violent attack.

Now you tell me, is that a truly unfair portrayal of how life works in an actual Islamic state, or is that just a common sense assessment of something that might trigger violence in certain Islamic societies?

Ah, just one more question. As a matter of personal judgment, should I even consider posting any videos of the sequences that I am talking about? You are arguing, after all, that pretty much all Muslims can pretty well handle any sort of supernatural TV show. (Which I mostly agree with, except when Allah is visually portrayed on screen with all these other caveats about the situation). So if I were to link you to videos that I've specifically selected because God is portrayed in them in all the ways that I've described, would this be something that you'd advise? Or should I just assume that I'm right in assessing this sort of thing as being deeply offensive to Islam?

I believe I've correctly identified something that is offensive to Muslims. You just go ahead and tell me if that's wrong.
Reply

Born_Believer
10-02-2016, 03:21 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



I could give you plenty of examples, but I won't bother because they'll just be deleted by the forum staff. If you think this forum is a good place to have an open and free discussion about Islam, you are sadly mistaken.

Peace
are you serious?

Ok, so PM privately so no one else here gets offended.
Remember, I wana see comments by people labeling something as Islamophobic without any factual evidence.

Thanks.
Reply

Born_Believer
10-02-2016, 03:25 PM
Originally Posted by noraina
I was once called a dustbin bag because of the way I dressed, more than once actually.

Was I offended? Not particularly. Was it even Islamophobia? I'm not sure. For me it was just his ignorance that he couldn't recognise a custom-designed couture abayah staring him in the face :D.

My friend, on the other hand, was outraged and fuming at the blatant Islamophobia.

It's very subjective based on the individual.
Offense is never objective. Islamophobia is always Islamophobia and someone telling you that you were wearing a dustbin bag certainly counts, however, how one deals with such offense is certainly objective. The way you dealt with it was fine (showing off about your abaya design eh? lol :p)

There are certain day to day derogatory comments that a lot of people from ethnic minority backgrounds and various religious backgrounds just ignore. I remember post 7/7 bombing in London, there were a number of times when I would get on a bus or London underground tube and get told to "go back to my country"...which was difficult cos I was born in London lol but I just brushed it off or I'd say something back to the perosn but never report it.

Having said that, my reaction to it did not mean what was said was not prejudiced or racist, because it clearly was. That's not subjective. Our reaction however, can be.

Anyway, that was a bit of a ramble. My bad.
Reply

Scimitar
10-02-2016, 07:44 PM
When I see goths... I keep my mouth shut, look down and giggle.... really quietly I don't go around shouting remarks about how they look so and so - not nice, you know.

Scimi
Reply

Search
10-03-2016, 12:00 AM
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Originally Posted by cooterhein
I'm aware of many things in the abstract, but when it comes to the specific rationale residing in your own mind, I find it best to defer to you in order to properly find out about that.
Okay.

I think you are on to something here, but I might choose to put in in a different way, while reaching a very similar conclusion. My one quibble point with the way you've presented this, is that you appear to be implying that obviously intelligent and educated people ask that others presume the best of them vis a vis prejudice, look at me I'm smart and educated so I don't have to work hard, or I shouldn't have to work hard in order to defend myself from such aspersions. If this is an unfair description of what you meant to convey, please let me know.
I don't know that intelligent and educated people necessarily ask that; what clearly happens, however, is that intelligent or educated people believe themselves above prejudice and that generally is also something that is clearly reflected in the perception and attitudes people hold about them generally whether that is true or not because there is a myth that education or intelligence works to inoculate you against prejudice. And I also don't think that people who are prejudiced but intelligent or educated need to even ask for that perception because that perception already exists; for example, beautiful people, studies show, are given advantages that other people do not have in our society. I don't think they necessarily beautiful people need to ask for those advantages because those advantages in terms of individuals' perceptions of them already exist, whether deserved or not.

Moving on from that starting point- admittedly a tenuous one as I wait to see if that's what you meant to imply- I would suggest that obviously well educated and highly intelligent people actually put a tremendous amount of time and effort into whatever they produce, and they do so with the end goal of making large numbers of people believe their conclusions are reasonable and well defended. They also do so with the explicit goal of avoiding aspersions that would cause their efforts to be cast aside and treated as worthless. Granted, to your point, well educated and highly intelligent people can be and quite often are prejudiced and/or bigoted. I do think they're more likely to at least succeed in being subtle about it, which I think is a point that you've also implied and perhaps stated pretty clearly within your initial response, but in some form or fashion intelligence and education is probably not particularly good at eliminating prejudice.
Putting tremendous time and effort into whatever a person produces does not mean that it is a worthy product. For example, right now, one of my female friends knows a man in Silicon Valley who quit his job to work on a startup that will include being able to play hide and seek geographically within an area. I don't think that's a worthy product, but I'm sure it will have buyers. There's a buyer for everything. I'd also, for example, read a story about a man in California whose restaurant offers different types of water that have been collected from over the world and have different tastes, and that water is expensive in his restaurant; he'd done a lot of his research and spent much time actually investing and developing this type of availability for water in his restaurant; however, I still don't think it's a worthy product. I'm fine with the water that comes out of the filter in my fridge. In that same way, I think that facts and research in the end must be interpreted; and therefore, a person is well able to disagree with the interpretations that people place on those facts and research. For example, Islamophobic pundits whom I've been cataloging and reading and hearing on news media outlets, are really great at giving interpretation of those facts and research with which I completely disagree. In fact, one of the books which we had to read in law school was called Color of Crime, and it cites the same statistics and facts and research that you would perhaps see a white supremacist give or a Fox News anchor or watcher give but it has clearly has a very different narrative that goes along with those facts and research because it's being interpreted through a different lens; and I agree with the interpretations and conclusions of the book Color of Crime.

Now, I will agree with you that highly educated people with well thought out arguments do not like being told they are prejudiced. But I don't think it comes from a sense of laziness, as you seem to have implied. I think that these types of people work very hard at what they do, one part of why they work hard is specifically in order to avoid being labeled thusly, and they want a certain type of reward for the work they've done. This type of person may also have more to lose, especially if we're talking about an actual academic for whom accusations of prejudice- if they land- could have career threatening implications. Your street-level loudmouthed bigot typically doesn't have anything of the sort that could be lost, and quite frankly they don't work as hard in order to form a proper argument.
I'm sure no one likes being told they are prejudiced; however, prejudice is prejudice, and I can't say I believe the calling out of a person who is prejudiced as prejudiced is something that should be avoided; in fact, I believe the quite opposite.

So, as far as I can tell, I believe I'm making this sort of distinction. On one hand, you have a highly educated person who points to a diploma on the wall and says "I am an expert, I have like 52 advanced degrees or whatever." A Reza Aslan type of argument from authority, if I may make the comparison. There are some people like that, but I would argue it's not that many. On the other hand, you have someone who has these degrees and this expertise, but then with every argument they make and everything they write, they really work hard at what they're doing and they legitimately put forth the effort, and then they feel a bit slighted if someone discards their work for reasons that they specifically worked to avoid giving them. It's subtle and insidious prejudice, it's not heavy handed but it's problematic all the same. That sort of conclusion. Now, by my understanding of smart people- including the prejudiced ones- pointing to a set of diplomas is not the usual course of action. As far as I'm able to tell, the usual course of action is to point to the work they put in, the quality of the work, and then perhaps to the critique of others that might vaguely resemble peer review.
I think you've clearly missed the point of what I've been trying to say; so, I won't even bother parsing this paragraph out because I think I've been clear about what I mean already in the above paragraphs.

I've taken that test, and I failed it. I felt bad about it for a little while, until I found out that almost everyone fails it and that it's not a big deal if you do fail it.
Yes, you do strike me as unaware person. You should read the article "Implicit Association Test: Are You Secretly Racist? (Hint: You Are)."

Well, that might depend on how you define "Islamophobic attitudes." If that means anything about Islam that is negative, I would say it depends on whether the negative thing is accurate or not. If it's an obviously false or unfounded statement, then fine, that's unfair treatment. But I do think there are some negative things that can be said about Islam that are completely fair, truthful, and accurate.

Do you disagree?
To be honest, I was trying to be diplomatic. If you really want me to be honest and frank, I would tell you that I do in my mind characterize you often as an Islamophobic person; what I'd hoped when I'd pointed to you that you might have some Islamophobic attitudes is that you'd take some time to reflect on what I'd said instead on what those Islamophobic attitudes might be. However, you seem to eschew any type of introspection. For example, you said you'd failed that Implicit Bias Race IAT test and you felt bad and then got over it - well, I'm not surprised that that's what happened. By the way, the point of such tests I think is not to make you feel bad about yourself but to challenge you on discovering your unconscious biases that you might have developed and to change them if possible or at least become conscious in regards to these biases. Clearly, that's probably an unwise and probably impractical expectation in regards to some persons.

For the purposes of why I in mind often characterize you as an Islamophobic person, let me refer to some characteristics of Islamophobia that were presented in a Runnymede Trust Report in 1991:
  • Islam is monolithic and cannot adapt to new realities
  • Islam does not share common values with other major faiths
  • Islam as a religion is inferior to the West.
  • It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational.
  • Islam is a religion of violence and supports terrorism.
  • Islam is a violent political ideology.


So, an atheist when I'd become interested in Islam, I actually used to spend hours researching anti-Muslim sites and Islamophobic sites all the time while I was also learning about Islam from proper sources. So, what I found is that much of what is said about Islam is definitely never representative of either the religion or its adherents as whole, but the broadbrush and stereotypes and cherry-picking and quoting of various scholars whom most Muslims would probably never have even have heard has been useful to Islamophobic pundits to paint the picture that would develop an appetite and negative obsession with Islam and is embodied in attitudes as described above in the 1991 Report.

So, yes, I'd say I obviously disagree with you and probably will keep on disagreeing with you.

Also, I don't know what Islamophobic pundits you personally like or to whom you listen except the ones that you'd already mentioned in some threads; however, I'd say that I'm familiar with a great majority of them. Therefore, it doesn't surprise me you have at least some of the same negative biases which you've displayed in the threads you've created and the attitudes with which you come at Muslims when you're speaking with them.

Well, it's rather undeniable that Muslim mobs have turned out with violent intentions on several occasions within recent memory. It's quite well known that certain things are offensive to Islam, and that these things can trigger much violence. There was a thread a couple months back on which both of us participated, it had to do with the Charlie Hebdo thing. You were awfully critical of the Danish cartoonists, do you remember that?
No, I don't remember that. And I would ask you to quote me the post in which I'd said such things because frankly I either think you're mixing me up with another person or attributing things to me which I've clearly never said for reasons on which I do not wish to speculate. Please note IB is not the first Muslim forum of which I've been part; there was a Muslim forum of which I'd been part and I've always maintained that extrajudicial violence is not the answer and also that Muslims should not use any said offense to create havoc. This has probably been a sticking point between and some Muslims whom I personally would be inclined to term either extremist or literalist that have consistently disagreed with me on this subject.

While I don't think that the Danish cartoonists or any other cartoonists were right and I would never say they were right, I believe that two wrongs can never equal a right. So, yes, quote me the post or man up and apologize for falsely attributing things to me and I'm open and willing to do the same if I'm incorrect.

I could go on and on with the examples, but the point is this.
Yes, I do note your examples and I fail to see why they are representative of Islam or Muslims to you and how that justifies your throwaway remarks of only one example I'd given you; however, I am sure I could find more if I browsed your previous posts.

There are certain issues, especially ones that pertain to blasphemy, or insults to Allah or Mohammed or his wives- that are predictable triggers for violence. Not for all Muslims everywhere, but in very conservative countries where a rather large majority of Muslims are residing, there are certain things that will trigger violence if these people- not all Muslims, but these people- become offended by it.
You're missing the point. The reason I'd pointed out a particular instance of what I felt was an example of an Islamophobic remark is not that you could justify to me why you think some Muslims somewhere have "triggers" but so you could see you have a bias in regards to how you think about Muslims outside of America.

Tangentially, however, I'd like to mention that many Muslim countries whom you're pointing fingers at are actually third world countries and violence is a hub at any place of illiteracy; the fact that you think that violence is definitely from Islam and not from factors that have been consistently shown to contribute to criminal activity no matter what religion shows how much you have a bias against Islam. And conservatism is the consequence of illiteracy in those countries. For example, I notice that in Pakistan when Innocence of Muslims had been released there had been vandalism and other things that are not from any teachings of mainstream Islam. Not only that, these countries have consistently had a negative view of the West because of the things that the West does such as invasion, puppet government setups, drone strikes, proxy wars, and behind-the-scenes intervention, and also because the media in their countries demonizes the West; so, if these things as you term "triggers" are indeed triggers, they do not exist any vacuum and are not simply a response to a movie or a cartoon but the perceived continuation of injustices that are topped with a deliberate insult to Muslim sentiments, all of which inspires unfiltered media coverage in the non-West.


Now, in the specific example you're citing, I believe I identified such a trigger.
I have already explained very clearly to you that you are justifying your attitude or beliefs about Muslim violence and your remark was Islamophobic whether you like to see the words as such or not. I'm sorry, but that's just how I perceive the words still; and I really don't think you've managed to acquit yourself by explaining to me why you think as you think.

Now, until I described just a bit of this on a Muslim forum, I hadn't really thought one bit about what Muslims would think of this show. It's not really marketed toward any sort of Muslim audience, so why would I think a lot about that? As I started to think about it though, I began to realize there are certain communities of Muslims in this world that would have at least four different reasons to be deeply, I mean truly mortally offended by the most recent events portrayed in this show. Not all Muslims everywhere of course, but there are certain Muslim communities where people would truly lose their minds if the back end of the most recent season was made widely available for their public consumption.
I disagree with that; and the reason is because you're again assuming that such material is not known or material to which Muslims in other countries are not exposed. This is of course not true. You have to realize that the intent as a matter of perception matters a lot. The supernatural show I'm sure you're talking about is probably somewhere on a satellite in Pakistan being broadcasted and there is no reaction because the Muslims would not probably perceive it as a slight against Islam, not to mention that the show being in English already narrows the audience who'll be able to watch and understand the show. For example, the show Sex and the City is aired on satellite and that's clearly a show against Muslim values.

So to summarize, we're looking at a situation where God (Allah) is portrayed visibly, without any hint of self-censorship, on screen. He's not very likable in the sum total of his attitude toward humanity, he doesn't have a solid moral compass, he enjoys songwriting and performing on guitar, and for a decent chunk of the show he impersonated an actual prophet. When I consider all of these things within the context of a very Muslim country, I can easily imagine there being some very angry Muslims. Now, you tell me if that is a completely implausible assessment.
See above.

Actually, I think that Muslims have triggers that non-Muslims in the West only partially understand. I still don't get why the number 39 is deemed offensive. Where did that come from? No, never mind, this could get discursive rather quickly. The point is, Muslims have triggers. I believe I identified a few of them within a show that I enjoy.
No, actually, let's talk about the number 39 being supposedly offensive to Muslims. I have no idea where you are reading such rubbish. This seems like some cultural superstition to me and has absolutely zero scriptural basis in either the Quran or the Sunnah (prophetic tradition). Anyway, the point is that if Muslims have certain triggers, then you do too, and your trigger is Muslim violence. Am I right?

I think that all, or nearly all, Muslims could have handled this supernatural show (which is called Supernatural) right up until the point where Allah is portrayed on screen. In a less than completely flattering light. And then does some things that some Muslims would consider deeply haram. And then we also realize that the prophet of the Lord character that we'd gotten to know over the last few seasons, was actually Allah pretending to be a prophet. An actual prophet. At that point, I think we've got some triggers.[

Again I ask, do you disagree? If so, do you simply think that it's impossible to offend Muslims to a point where you're predictably going to trigger violence within the right kind of Islamic community? And how would you try to help me reach that conclusion, if that's the direction you want to go?
Yes, I disagree and I've already explained above WHY.

I can't help but wonder, are you aware of any specific examples of Allah being portrayed on screen as a character in any of these shows? And I would like a straight and direct answer to this question, please.
You do know that in Pakistan there is a craze for Indian television shows and movies, right? Sanjay Khan is an Indian Muslim producer of many Hindu religion-based shows about Hindu gods and goddesses like Jai Hanuman and Mahabharat. These shows were aired in Pakistan because Indian mainstream channels like Zee TV and Sony TV were watched there as well. Muslims, however, believe that God is One, not gods or goddesses, and there wasn't any kind of violence because these shows were just seen as representation of the Hindu paganism and not about Allah.

The reason I ask is simple. You accuse me of thinking that Muslims can't handle supernatural shows or magic/supernatural related fiction, in the abstract. I disagree with this assessment, I actually believe there's a lot that Muslims can and do handle. What I am saying, and this is what led to my comment, is that Muslims by and large will be quite offended by an on-screen portrayal of Allah, especially when he's portrayed in some negative manner, especially when he does things that are haram, and I would imagine that any storyline in which Allah pretends to be an actual prophet would be a particular sensitive issue. I think that most Muslims would be offended by this, and if it were seen on a wide scale in the right sort of Muslim community, there is a non-zero chance of triggering a violent reaction.
You do know that Muslims, for example, in Pakistan have also watched the Hollywood movies, things like the The Devil's Advocate in which Keanu Reeves and Al Pacino had starred which had some clearly blasphemous content. So, no, I don't think you're right.

So again I ask you, within your comprehensive knowledge of entertainment widely consumed by Muslims, are you familiar with any specific examples of God (or Allah) being portrayed on screen, by an actor, in a manner that does not make God's character look particularly good?
See above.

I've been told by some moderators of this forum that these Daesh guys are emphatically not Muslims, and Daesh has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. I acknowledged that they pervert Islam, while also saying they have something to do with Islam. And they told me good job for saying they pervert Islam, now let's all agree that they are not Muslims and they have nothing to do with Islam.

So....it depends who you talk to.
Well, Daesh in my opinion are Khawarij. While Muslims scholars are agreed by a consensus that Daesh are not a Caliphate and wrong to perpetrate terrorism in the name of Islam and are an enemy to Muslims, they have differed on whether Daesh are Muslims or not. Some have said that Daesh are kaffirs; others have said that they are Khwaraij while some others have said they are deviants. But I think that's a separate thread.

I've spent a good bit of time looking into various figures who say things about Islam- and really, it's been fairly targeted since I begin by looking at formal debates and that's how I typically discover people- so in my personal experience, the intelligent and educated people who can go on TV and have a proper debate, just don't spout this sort of nonsense. Now that I've poked around YouTube with specific search terms like "Islamophobia isn't real" and other similar search terms, I can see that some people do say such things. Most of them don't have very many followers. From what I can tell, the typical YouTuber who posts videos saying these sorts of things is in the habit of saying "Mahs-lim" every time the word comes up, and has about 15 followers and 75 views of their videos.
That's because you're making the wrong searches. However, I'm not going to here talk about the kinds of searches which would yield you the results about what is said about Islamophobia being not real. By the way, a number of famous figures in both liberal and right-wing circles have maintained this denial and they're not hard to find on Google if you know for whom and what you're looking.

Oh boo, I wish you would say what their names are.
Your wish is not my command.

If their words seem to carry a legitimacy, I may have actually heard of these people and then I could comment on whether I think they are bigoted or Islamophobic. Maybe I wind up thinking they do a good job of making valid criticisms, and then we could parse out what you think is unfair or inaccurate. Sadly, I may never know.
There are many things to lament in the world but this is not one of them.

For the sake of again-clarifying this point, there is this show called Supernatural. I honestly believe that the vast majority of this show would be well tolerated and perhaps mostly enjoyed by basically all Muslims. I do believe, however, that certain things in this world offend Muslims very much, sometimes to the point where they can trigger violence under the right circumstances.

Feel free to jump in there and tell me what you think about that assessment.
I think you have a lot of negative assumptions about Muslims and Islam, and I think it may take us up to eternity to go through all of them and even then I don't know if we'll ever reach some kind of agreement.

I didn't think of it in these terms immediately as I was watching it, I was actually texting a friend of mine about how awesome the episode was and he's going to enjoy it when he sees it. That was my reaction. Upon further consideration of how this would go over with Muslims though, I think there are some Muslim communities- and they're not too hard to identify- where this exact thing could quite plausibly trigger some violence. And if we change just one thing about the scenario- for example, if we imagine this sort of storyline were created within an Islamic country and widely disseminated there- I don't believe the actor who portrays God in this manner would want to be in the country a the time of its airing, anyone involved in the project would be expelled from the country if they hadn't got themselves out already, and anyone still present who could be held accountable in any way would most likely become the victim of a violent attack.

Now you tell me, is that a truly unfair portrayal of how life works in an actual Islamic state, or is that just a common sense assessment of something that might trigger violence in certain Islamic societies?
I have no idea what you're talking about here. There is no "Islamic state" as I actually or other Muslims understand it. And Daesh is the only one who's claiming to be have an "Islamic State" and they have been rejected wholesale by Muslims all over the world.

Besides, I've already explained violence in Islamic societies above in terms of the triggers you felt existed.

Ah, just one more question. As a matter of personal judgment, should I even consider posting any videos of the sequences that I am talking about? You are arguing, after all, that pretty much all Muslims can pretty well handle any sort of supernatural TV show. (Which I mostly agree with, except when Allah is visually portrayed on screen with all these other caveats about the situation). So if I were to link you to videos that I've specifically selected because God is portrayed in them in all the ways that I've described, would this be something that you'd advise? Or should I just assume that I'm right in assessing this sort of thing as being deeply offensive to Islam?

I believe I've correctly identified something that is offensive to Muslims. You just go ahead and tell me if that's wrong.
IB is a moderate forum; you're not going to have these triggers here from I understand of the members here. However, if you want to do a social experiment here to identify whether that is true or not, you're free to be my guest and do so as I couldn't care less to be honest one way or another.

By the way, you've utterly failed to prove that you don't have some Islamophobic attitudes, and I don't think it would be fruitful to converse further on this subject. Frankly, you're not going to convince me unless you have some change in your attitude or behavior towards Muslims, which I'm not really sure you even want to change. So, I guess this is really what is known as an impasse in the English language.
Reply

cooterhein
10-03-2016, 11:08 AM
Originally Posted by Search
I don't know that intelligent and educated people necessarily ask that; what clearly happens, however, is that intelligent or educated people believe themselves above prejudice and that generally is also something that is clearly reflected in the perception and attitudes people hold about them generally whether that is true or not because there is a myth that education or intelligence works to inoculate you against prejudice.
And I also don't think that people who are prejudiced but intelligent or educated need to even ask for that perception because that perception already exists; for example, beautiful people, studies show, are given advantages that other people do not have in our society. I don't think they necessarily beautiful people need to ask for those advantages because those advantages in terms of individuals' perceptions of them already exist, whether deserved or not.
There's two things going on here, in this portion of your response. One is that people in general hold highly intelligent people in high regard and give them the benefit of the doubt when they don't necessarily deserve it, and they don't have to be asked to do so. I'll buy that, I can agree with that without any reservation. The other thing though, is that highly intelligent and well-educated people generally believe themselves to be automatically exempt from any suspicion of prejudice. I do acknowledge that some of this exists, but I think it depends on the person and the situation. For one thing, it depends rather a lot on whether the person in question has gone through any meaningful interaction with the topic in a way that challenges them at all. From some of what I've seen personally and from a few things I've heard, there are quite a lot of people who go through life without being challenged or tested on this sort of topic in any meaningful way, so they think of themselves a pretty much okay even though they haven't put in any real work. For those who have been challenged and who have put in some work though, I think they're generally aware of what really matters, and this particular kind of person usually- although not always- try to produce something useful that is of value, and then argue for its value based on some real rationale instead of thinking that praise is going to be handed to them.

Putting tremendous time and effort into whatever a person produces does not mean that it is a worthy product.
This might not exactly relate to what I'm actually talking about. Maybe a little bit, like a tiny piece from the edge of your examples will just barely be relevant, but what's coming up here is not your strongest performance.

For example, right now, one of my female friends knows a man in Silicon Valley who quit his job to work on a startup that will include being able to play hide and seek geographically within an area. I don't think that's a worthy product, but I'm sure it will have buyers. There's a buyer for everything.
There isn't really a moral component to this, it's more of a good idea/bad idea scenario in the sense of what the free market will reward. I don't think I'm getting anything out of this example, but it's okay, one throwaway example is all right.

I'd also, for example, read a story about a man in California whose restaurant offers different types of water that have been collected from over the world and have different tastes, and that water is expensive in his restaurant; he'd done a lot of his research and spent much time actually investing and developing this type of availability for water in his restaurant; however, I still don't think it's a worthy product. I'm fine with the water that comes out of the filter in my fridge.
This is kind of the same thing. There's very little about either of these examples that really tracks at all. Hard work doesn't necessarily lead to success, okay that's fine. But do you know what happens when a guy with a startup, or a man in California with a business idea, try to get something going and then they fail? They will generally take advantage of some part of US bankruptcy law and start again. And on average, anyone in this line of work will not be able to achieve long-term financial success with one of these ideas until their third attempt or so. Everyone who goes through these sorts of things says they learn as much, or more, from their failures than they do from their successes. So let's say both of the men in these examples fail spectacularly; that's to be expected sometimes. It happens quite a lot, actually. Something about the idea, or the business model, or its execution. There's a lot of ways this can go wrong. But most people who are serious about this sort of thing will learn from their mistakes, start again and do better.

If there's any way in which this can relate to highly intelligent people who talk about sensitive yet important subject matter (including a wide range of people that you will call Islamophobes with or without good reason to do so), it is this. If they do screw up, they'll take some heat for it, they'll usually have something they can learn from it, and then they'll come back to the topic in a way that's different and better. If you are looking carefully at what someone's doing and they truly are not able to evolve in any discernible way, that might be a good reason to question if this person is truly a highly intelligent person.

I'm sure no one likes being told they are prejudiced; however, prejudice is prejudice, and I can't say I believe the calling out of a person who is prejudiced as prejudiced is something that should be avoided; in fact, I believe the quite opposite.
Ah, prejudice is prejudice. I just love tautologies. Prejudice, as far as I can tell, is defined as a preconceived notion that is not based on reason or actual experience. Of course it's valuable to point out Actual prejudice....if I may though, it's possible that you may have a bit of prejudice yourself. Specifically, against any non-Muslim who says something the least bit critical about Islam. I can tell you really enjoy throwing the Islamophobe term around, but your enjoyment is not a valid reason to bring it out. I'm not sure how much you agree with this sentiment, but I believe most intelligent people are willing to evolve their arguments if there is criticism that can be used in any sort of constructive way. From your end, you should focus on providing criticism that is actually of some value. I'm not sure if you're up to the task, but that is what you should be focused on.

Do keep in mind what the actual definition of prejudice is. Preconceived notion. Not based on reason or actual experience.

Yes, you do strike me as unaware person. You should read the article "Implicit Association Test: Are You Secretly Racist? (Hint: You Are)."
I have. I'm familiar with this.

To be honest, I was trying to be diplomatic. If you really want me to be honest and frank, I would tell you that I do in my mind characterize you often as an Islamophobic person; what I'd hoped when I'd pointed to you that you might have some Islamophobic attitudes is that you'd take some time to reflect on what I'd said instead on what those Islamophobic attitudes might be. However, you seem to eschew any type of introspection.
I think I'm okay with the introspection. I don't think you're very good at it though, and I don't think you're the best judge of how valuable your criticism is. On this particular topic, I think we could have reached a point of clarity, but I don't believe you've properly acknowledged the key points in what's come back to you in the course of this discussion.

Here, let me explain it to you. You brought up an example of something I said once, which you felt was Islamophobic. I'm assuming it was either the best example you could come up with, or the best of the readily available examples that you had on hand. In the course of explaining yourself, it became clear that you felt I was implying that Muslims can't handle TV shows that have supernatural themes.

Then I explained to you that I don't believe any such thing, I didn't say that and I didn't mean to imply it. This is something that you could stand to acknowledge at some point- you attempted to summarize and extrapolate on what I had said, you got it all wrong, and now you can get it right. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I can't be very sure that you want to get this right. I then explained what I actually meant. There was a particular series of things that were portrayed only in the last couple of episodes, at the back end of the 11th season of this show, which seem like they could trigger violence under the right circumstances. Based on plenty of evidence, and on the actual experience that people sometimes have with this sort of backlash, I reasoned that this could fit in with an established pattern. This line of reasoning has absolutely nothing to do with the initially wrong interpretation that you took away from this, but despite all this you're basically saying Nah, you're still an Islamophobe. You just feel as if I am. This appears to be, quite literally, the only basis for your reasoning.

So take this opportunity to reason through this properly, or that is the type of conclusion that I'll be left with in the end.

For example, you said you'd failed that Implicit Bias Race IAT test and you felt bad and then got over it - well, I'm not surprised that that's what happened. By the way, the point of such tests I think is not to make you feel bad about yourself but to challenge you on discovering your unconscious biases that you might have developed and to change them if possible or at least become conscious in regards to these biases. Clearly, that's probably an unwise and probably impractical expectation in regards to some persons.
Unconscious bias isn't the same thing as prejudice or racism, this is something that's been widely acknowledged in academic material related to the study. The test is good for something- it allows me and just about everyone else to acknowledge and begin to explore some of the unconscious biases that do exist, then we know they're there and we're in a better position to check ourselves in the event that they might have some real world impact. I don't plan to retake the test on any kind of regular basis, but I might get back to it every once in awhile. I don't really expect to do all that much better with it though; for most people it seems to be fairly impossible.

For the purposes of why I in mind often characterize you as an Islamophobic person, let me refer to some characteristics of Islamophobia that were presented in a Runnymede Trust Report in 1991:
  • Islam is monolithic and cannot adapt to new realities
  • Islam does not share common values with other major faiths
  • Islam as a religion is inferior to the West.
  • It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational.
  • Islam is a religion of violence and supports terrorism.
  • Islam is a violent political ideology.
That's interesting. Good source.

So, an atheist when I'd become interested in Islam, I actually used to spend hours researching anti-Muslim sites and Islamophobic sites all the time while I was also learning about Islam from proper sources. So, what I found is that much of what is said about Islam is definitely never representative of either the religion or its adherents as whole, but the broadbrush and stereotypes and cherry-picking and quoting of various scholars whom most Muslims would probably never have even have heard has been useful to Islamophobic pundits to paint the picture that would develop an appetite and negative obsession with Islam and is embodied in attitudes as described above in the 1991 Report.
Hm. And after all this, you decided to become a Muslim. That's not usually how it goes.

So, yes, I'd say I obviously disagree with you and probably will keep on disagreeing with you.
You need some better reasons for doing so. And you also need to do a better job of assessing exactly what it is I'm saying, then make the appropriate adjustments in the event that you're completely wrong. Which, in this particular example, you spectacularly were. But no, don't acknowledge that, you're just going to keep on disagreeing.

No, I don't remember that. And I would ask you to quote me the post in which I'd said such things because frankly I either think you're mixing me up with another person or attributing things to me which I've clearly never said for reasons on which I do not wish to speculate.
I did look for it, but I haven't been able to find the thread so far. It seems to have been a discursive tangent in the middle of a thread that didn't start out on that topic. I might find it later, but no luck so far. I have a feeling you may be right though, I probably mixed you up with another person.

Please note IB is not the first Muslim forum of which I've been part; there was a Muslim forum of which I'd been part and I've always maintained that extrajudicial violence is not the answer and also that Muslims should not use any said offense to create havoc. This has probably been a sticking point between and some Muslims whom I personally would be inclined to term either extremist or literalist that have consistently disagreed with me on this subject.
That is one of the nice things about you.

Yes, I do note your examples and I fail to see why they are representative of Islam or Muslims to you and how that justifies your throwaway remarks of only one example I'd given you; however, I am sure I could find more if I browsed your previous posts.
I didn't say it was representative of Islam or Muslims. I neither stated nor implied that Islam can be held responsible for this, and as I'm sure you've noticed, I have been known to say it very clearly when I think that's appropriate. All I said was that certain specific material in a couple of episodes, which I have described, seems like the sort of material that could trigger violence in certain Muslim communities. Is that true? Yes it is. Moving on.

Oh, no wait, I don't think we can move on yet. First we need to clarify whether this is representative of Islam. No it's not, it just happens to be something that can quite plausibly happen within some Islamic communities. Does that make the original assertion any less accurate? No it does not.

You're missing the point. The reason I'd pointed out a particular instance of what I felt was an example of an Islamophobic remark is not that you could justify to me why you think some Muslims somewhere have "triggers" but so you could see you have a bias in regards to how you think about Muslims outside of America.
Wow, this is just unbelievable. You pointed out an example and gave an explanation, but not in order to invite a dialogue, or a back and forth of any kind, you just wanted to show me my bias and accept my apology. You simply wanted to show me my prejudice and get me to admit that my opinions of Islam are preconceived and not based on reason or actual experience.

But then I show you exactly where your conclusions and extrapolations of what I said were wrong, and you've got nothing for me. You didn't want to hear that. Well, you'd better change you mind, because that's not how this works and that's not what is happening. I'm showing you that in this particular example, it's an accurate assessment that is fairly well reasoned, and now it's time for you to start being more reasonable than you had originally planned. If you can't do that, maybe you don't need to reply to this at all.

Tangentially, however, I'd like to mention that many Muslim countries whom you're pointing fingers at are actually third world countries and violence is a hub at any place of illiteracy;
That's a fair point, I don't usually see illiteracy placed at the center of focus but I suppose that could be well supported. That makes sense.

the fact that you think that violence is definitely from Islam
I did not say that. Understand this. Learn.

When I do hold Islam accountable, I make it pretty clear. I say things like "Islam, qua Islam" (you know exactly what that means). I use phrases like "held accountable" where Islam is concerned. I didn't do any of that with this particular thing. The only thing I said was that a certain outcome could plausibly happen in such a place, and that is true. The reasons you're giving are perfectly good, but you're not refuting anything that I have explicitly stated or obviously implied.

And conservatism is the consequence of illiteracy in those countries. For example, I notice that in Pakistan when Innocence of Muslims had been released there had been vandalism and other things that are not from any teachings of mainstream Islam.
Okay, not a consequence of mainstream Islam....but getting back to the thing I said which you originally brought up, all I said was there are certain places where this sort of thing can happen. And that is true.

Not only that, these countries have consistently had a negative view of the West because of the things that the West does such as invasion, puppet government setups, drone strikes, proxy wars, and behind-the-scenes intervention, and also because the media in their countries demonizes the West;
This is a really wonderful example of "last but not least" in action.

I have already explained very clearly to you that you are justifying your attitude or beliefs about Muslim violence
Not exactly. I'm clarifying what I was saying in the first place, and telling you which things you are very clearly wrong in attributing to me. What we are left with is this: I identified a particular thing that seems like it could trigger violence. I also stated that there are some Muslim communities in which the conditions would be just about right in order for this thing to plausibly trigger a violent reaction. This is an accurate assessment of something real.

The potential trigger in question was not supernatural-themed TV shows in general. It was a particular series of potentially-offensive things that I have described repeatedly, in detail, so now you know.

Also, I neither stated nor implied that this is characteristic of mainstream Islam or a result of Islam qua Islam. I merely stated that there are places in this world where this is a thing. You've brought up illiteracy as a potential cause of ultra-conservatism and this type of violence, and that sounds good to me. Good call. I neither stated nor implied anything that would suggest a different conclusion.

and your remark was Islamophobic whether you like to see the words as such or not.
Your inability to properly engage with me does not have any real bearing on whether the remark is Islamophobic or not. You've brought up some very good points, but in other ways you're quite useless.

I'm sorry, but that's just how I perceive the words still;
I sincerely doubt that you feel any contrition in the slightest.

and I really don't think you've managed to acquit yourself by explaining to me why you think as you think.
I think I explained myself quite well. And you didn't really do anything with the follow-up that I gave you.

I disagree with that; and the reason is because you're again assuming that such material is not known or material to which Muslims in other countries are not exposed. This is of course not true. You have to realize that the intent as a matter of perception matters a lot. The supernatural show I'm sure you're talking about is probably somewhere on a satellite in Pakistan being broadcasted and there is no reaction because the Muslims would not probably perceive it as a slight against Islam, not to mention that the show being in English already narrows the audience who'll be able to watch and understand the show.
Think about this for a second. The average audience for this show within the US and Canada has averaged between 2.5 and 4 million viewers, depending on the season. Adjusting for DVR viewing and people who catch up within the next few weeks via the Internet (the CW has been making each episode available on their website after it airs, with ads of course), you can inflate those numbers by 30% or so. Which puts us at something like 5, maybe 6 million people in the Western Hemisphere that we can reasonably expect to be following this show from season to season. Now keep in mind, I've already told you that I really think just about any Muslim (outside of Iran and Saudi Arabia) could be expected to enjoy nearly 11 seasons of this show without any problems, but then right toward the end of season 11 we have this enormous development in the plot.

How many people in the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia do you honestly think are following this show like that? How many do you think are even following the show in a cursory manner, to a point where they would be at all aware of what happened in the story and understand the general implications for the show as a whole? I'm going to guess a rather small number. Less than six figures, for sure. Less than five figures? Probably. Four figures? That's looking more likely.

Here's something that I think of as an appropriate analogy. Soccer (or as the rest of the world calls it, football) is not the most popular sport in North America. Yes there is some appetite for the sport, but it's rather selective. Viewership for soccer that's played in the US ranks behind two leagues from other countries that are higher quality. But if you really look at it just in terms of how much soccer is available to be watched, it's quite a lot. Especially if you have beIN Sports, along with the family of ESPN channels, FS1 and FS2....you can cover a lot of ground just with those, from England to Spain, Germany and Italy and France, Mexico too of course. Granted, there's one or two games on a good weekend where your viewership is going to crack a million (unless there's a really important tournament), but if you really put together a whole list, you might be looking at 35 to 40 different games that are televised on some tier of a satellite package. And almost all of those games are drawing less than 100,000 viewers, most of them way less than that.

When it comes to this show and the particular episodes in question, I would estimate that it's roughly analogous to an Empoli vs. Palermo football match being broadcast on beIN Sports. If you're not familiar with those teams or with the number of viewers that could be expected, neither are a lot of Americans, and that number's going to be somewhere between 5 and 10 thousand people. So, while acknowledging that it airs in such a way that it's available to way more people than that, this is going to be my estimate. Where this specific show and this specific episode is concerned, I'd estimate that among Muslims outside the Anglosphere, something like 5 to 10 thousand people saw this and were in a position to contextualize it in a way that made sense for what the show is. And I'd probably lean more in the direction of 5 thousand, I might even be willing to go lower than that.

Does that mean this material is relatively unknown, and that the vast majority of Muslims outside the Anglosphere don't know the first thing about it? Yes, that's what it means. Let me put it to you this way- right as Season 5 was about to start, there was a buildup to a major plot point that involved Lucifer. One of the stars of the show went on Twitter and, with the help of his Twitter followers and other fans of the show, was briefly able to get a Lucifer Is Coming type of hashtag to trend on Twitter. A handful of Supernatural fans saw this and were pleased. But the vast majority of people on Twitter had no idea what that was about, and some of them hit back with a God Is Already Here hashtag, enough for that to also trend. One of the people behind that, incidentally, was P Diddy. Because of that, the actor who put the Lucifer thing out there in the first place tried to get something else to trend, specifically #PDiddyIsAfraidOfHisTV. But by that point, Twitter shut the whole thing down and wasn't allowing any of these things to trend anymore.

That's how it happened in the Anglosphere. Even under the most favorable circumstances, and despite the fact that it's quite a good show and it's enjoyed the longest run for any show of this genre, it's got a niche following and it hasn't ever made big waves in the broader spectrum of pop culture. You look at shows like Friends, Seinfeld, Big Bang Theory, these are shows that can make the actual news, they can draw an audience over 20 million if something huge is happening, the characters and the people who play them are in the public's awareness in a bigger way than just the show. None of that is true of this show. I think it's pretty good, and I'm a part of the niche following, but this is what it is. Empoli vs. Palermo. Maybe 5,000 Muslims, outside the Anglosphere, will ever see this. Out of literally a billion and then some. That is the type of market penetration I am putting out there as my estimate.

You say quite a lot of people have seen this and are not bothered by it. I disagree. I think hardly anyone has seen this (within the parameters we're talking about), and I think that's the exact reason why no one has become upset.

No, actually, let's talk about the number 39 being supposedly offensive to Muslims. I have no idea where you are reading such rubbish.
Heh, that actually comes from Pakistan, if I'm remembering correctly. It seems to be a rather recent thing too, I remember seeing this story where a cab driver happened to have Cab 39, and now no one wants to ride in his cap. Random kids are even making fun of him.

Oh, okay, I finally found something about the origins of that. It originates in Afghanistan, although it seems to have spread more recently to Pakistan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_39
How about that, illiteracy and its role in the spread of rumors is mentioned here.

This seems like some cultural superstition to me and has absolutely zero scriptural basis in either the Quran or the Sunnah (prophetic tradition).
Yeah, you're absolutely correct. It also happens to be a cultural superstition that exists in just a couple of very-nearly exclusively Muslim communities. That's a fair description of the people who are going on about this, and it's a rather odd thing that some Muslims are doing. Not all Muslims, and not because of their religion, but it does happen to be just a certain group of Muslims and no one else.

I didn't know what it was that these South Asian Muslims were doing (and no, South Asia did not make them do it either, and I don't think it was written in their DNA). I said I didn't know what it was from the outset, but now I do. It's good to learn something new, and it's even more fun to do so while doubly and triply reassuring you that I am not implying something that I had very obviously not set out to imply to begin with.

Anyway, the point is that if Muslims have certain triggers, then you do too, and your trigger is Muslim violence. Am I right?
If Muslims have certain triggers, then that does not automatically mean I have triggers. I only have triggers if I actually have triggers. I think you're Search-ing for an opportunity to make a prejudicial statement, one which is not based on reason or actual experience.

Yes, I disagree and I've already explained above WHY.
Hm. Interesting. For the sake of full context, I posited that triggers predictably exist and can be identified as they pertain to certain Islamic societies. I asked if you disagree. You say Yes you disagree. And your idea of a thoughtful response is "Well if we have triggers, so do you."

Sigh.

What am I implying there? See, right there, I actually am implying something. This would be an acceptable place for you to draw some conclusions as to what I might be implying.

You do know that in Pakistan there is a craze for Indian television shows and movies, right? Sanjay Khan is an Indian Muslim producer of many Hindu religion-based shows about Hindu gods and goddesses like Jai Hanuman and Mahabharat.
Mm-Hmm. Okay. What about Allah? Any depictions of Allah going on there? How about Mohammed, is he a popular depiction? This is the sort of thing we're actually talking about, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by talking about things that are fundamentally different.

You do know that in the TV show Supernatural, a wide variety of Hindu gods and goddesses make an appearance or two in some episodes. Right? Just about every type of religion and/or mythology makes an appearance of some sort, we are talking about 11 seasons of material after all. And each season is generally 23 or 24 episodes, with 42 minutes of air time to fill. And yet it wasn't until God, the creator of the universe, made an on-camera appearance as God that I eventually started to think this particular portrayal might be deeply offensive to Muslims.

These shows were aired in Pakistan because Indian mainstream channels like Zee TV and Sony TV were watched there as well. Muslims, however, believe that God is One, not gods or goddesses, and there wasn't any kind of violence because these shows were just seen as representation of the Hindu paganism and not about Allah.
Very good, you've identified some things that are not triggers, and no one really thought they would be. At some point, would you be interested in returning to the topic of things that might, could, actually, be, triggers of violence? Maybe we could talk about some of the deeply offensive things that have, actually, in reality, been the very obvious triggers of Islamic violence. Do you want to select a few of those examples for me? Then maybe you'll be able to show me why this other thing I picked out does Not fall in that category. What makes it Different from the things that obviously Do trigger Islamic violence, or is it really quite similar to those things after all?

Go ahead, find some examples that you'd like to show me.

Well, Daesh in my opinion are Khawarij. While Muslims scholars are agreed by a consensus that Daesh are not a Caliphate and wrong to perpetrate terrorism in the name of Islam and are an enemy to Muslims, they have differed on whether Daesh are Muslims or not. Some have said that Daesh are kaffirs; others have said that they are Khwaraij while some others have said they are deviants. But I think that's a separate thread.
Good call.

That's because you're making the wrong searches. However, I'm not going to here talk about the kinds of searches which would yield you the results about what is said about Islamophobia being not real. By the way, a number of famous figures in both liberal and right-wing circles have maintained this denial and they're not hard to find on Google if you know for whom and what you're looking.
I find it rather odd that I was able to find a couple of people who are very fringe, people that no one's ever heard of, but you're familiar with famous people who maintain this denial. Did they actually deny it, or do you believe they implied it? This is an important distinction, because I already know you're not very good at discerning what someone is truly implying once you've labeled them an Islamophobe. For all practical intents and purposes, when you (personally, just you) label someone that way, it seems like you give yourself permission to make up whatever you want about them and put words in their mouth as you see fit. It's quite dishonest, and if you were a bit closer to the deen, you'd see fit to exercise a bit more honesty.

I think you have a lot of negative assumptions about Muslims and Islam, and I think it may take us up to eternity to go through all of them and even then I don't know if we'll ever reach some kind of agreement.
It really would take forever, because when the words "Islamophobe" and "implication" get anywhere near each other in your mind, you just start making things up.

See, right there, I'm implying that my "negative assumptions" are a product of your imagination, and even as I'm telling you this you're refusing to listen because you still think of me as an Islamophobe. The part of your brain that handles critical thinking, and really should be taking my actual words into consideration right now, is scrubbing my actual contributions clean and then you replace it with whatever you want. Oh look, he said that visually depicting Allah in a negative way would be especially offensive to Muslims....he must be saying Muslims can't handle any kind of TV show in general. That's what you do.

So stop it and pay attention.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. There is no "Islamic state" as I actually or other Muslims understand it. And Daesh is the only one who's claiming to be have an "Islamic State" and they have been rejected wholesale by Muslims all over the world.
"An Islamic state" is a term that's been in use since before the existence of Daesh, and it will continue to be in use once they're gone. It refers to any state in which the government is primarily based on the application of Sharia, so it might be an Islamic republic like with Pakistan or Afghanistan, or an Islamic kingdom, or....well, here's a map. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islami...slam_World.svg
For the more specific term referencing the apocalyptic hate group in the Levant, find your way to the disambiguation link.

Besides, I've already explained violence in Islamic societies above in terms of the triggers you felt existed.
Okay, let me get this straight. Certain groups of people become predictably enraged and violent due to real or perceived offenses to their religious beliefs. But the main reason that they lose control is because they're mostly illiterate, and they also have legitimate grievances that have to do with US foreign policy, after all these things don't happen in a vacuum. And that means....triggers leading to violence don't exist?

When you form these ideas, do you ever say them out loud before you put them out there on the Internet? You have actually done exactly nothing that would demonstrate the non-existence of these triggers, which very obviously do exist. I have conceded the point that Islam is not the root cause of what happens, please notice that and also acknowledge that this thing does happen.

IB is a moderate forum; you're not going to have these triggers here from I understand of the members here. However, if you want to do a social experiment here to identify whether that is true or not, you're free to be my guest and do so as I couldn't care less to be honest one way or another.
Okay, I'll think about it.

By the way, you've utterly failed to prove that you don't have some Islamophobic attitudes, and I don't think it would be fruitful to converse further on this subject.
That's too bad. I could have done a lot better if you would have actually listened to me instead of inventing things that you think I've implied, and insisted on putting out fires that aren't there to begin with.

Frankly, you're not going to convince me unless you have some change in your attitude or behavior towards Muslims, which I'm not really sure you even want to change. So, I guess this is really what is known as an impasse in the English language.
I did more than enough to adequately explain myself, and you've been almost completely unreasonable. Not entirely, but it's been fairly consistent.

So now that you've given up and decided no more good can come of this, I suppose that means you'll reply back five or six more times before you're through. I'll be looking forward to that.
Reply

Kiro
10-03-2016, 04:39 PM
Originally Posted by noraina
I was once called a dustbin bag
Atleast someone is taking care of the trash

We need to appreciate dustbin bags because they are beautiful... might I even I say glorious?

What would my life be without a saviour known as dustbin bags? They help bring the clean.

It is an honour to have this privilege to be able to have a dustbin bag, which the people of the past did not and those unfornate that do not posses such things. We must appreciate dustbin bags.
Reply

noraina
10-03-2016, 06:13 PM
Originally Posted by Kiro
Atleast someone is taking care of the trash

We need to appreciate dustbin bags because they are beautiful... might I even I say glorious?

What would my life be without a saviour known as dustbin bags? They help bring the clean.

It is an honour to have this privilege to be able to have a dustbin bag, which the people of the past did not and those unfornate that do not posses such things. We must appreciate dustbin bags.
So I should be privileged to be called a dustbin bag? :D

That aside, yes they are very useful things. Life would be much more difficult without them.
Reply

Huzaifah ibn Adam
10-04-2016, 10:23 AM
Our Muslim women get hurt and abused and we (men) do nothing about it? How disappointed Sahaabah-e-Kiraam must be in us. Remember that whatever happens in the Dunyaa gets conveyed to Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Sahaabah. They are fully aware of what is going on and what has been going on since they left this Dunyaa.

Can you imagine Hadhrat `Umar ibn al-Khattaab رضي الله عنه tolerating things like that?
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-31-2016, 05:13 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-15-2016, 09:01 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-07-2013, 02:11 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2007, 02:41 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-21-2006, 07:03 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!