Hatred for Muslims/Islam on ATS - where does it come from?

reply to post by Nephi1337

You asked me for proof of my convictions on Islam?

Sure!

You mean, the part where I suggested that he made it up as he went along? "Allah's Apostle said, 'Gabriel recited the Qur'an to me one way. Then I requested him and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it several ways until he ultimately recited it seven different ways.'" Bukhari: V6B61N513

(That's the problem with making it up as you go along, you have to come up with reasons for your own discrepancies. Also, if Muhammed himself says there were seven different ways to recite the same thing, how do you know you got the right one today?)

One problem that no other prophet had - this was the only one in known history that was illiterate. Thus his emphasis on reciting - a very poor means of maintaining record.

"The Prophet said, 'It is a bad thing that some of you say, 'I have forgotten such and such verse of the Qur'an.' For indeed, I have been caused to forget it. So you must keep on reciting the Qur'an because it escapes from the hearts of men faster than a runaway camel." Bukhari V6B61N513

If anyone thinks Muhammed was really, really bad at recalling his own verses, read kBukhari: V6B61N561. Here, Umar bin Kattah (the second Caliph) said he heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hisam reciting Surat Al-Furqan (25th Surah) and noted it was recited different than what Muhammed had personally taught him. He seized him by the collar and accused him of reciting it wrong, and then when he was told that Muhammed himself recited it this way, called him a liar and took him directly to Muhammed.

Note that because of this rather infuriated, energetic action, this wasn't a matter of a word here, or phrase there. This was vastly different in wording and context.

When taken before Muhammed and the problem was explained, the Prophet said, "Hisham, recite!" And he did. Muhammed said, 'it was revealed to be recited in this way.'

When finished, the Prophet said, "Recite, Umar!" He did, and Muhammed said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way too."

Smooth move. Which one of the really, really different versions was correct? And how do you know?''

But this isn't the only reference to different Qur'ans.

"Ibn Abbas asked, 'Which of the two readings of the Qur'an do you prefer?' The Prophet answered, 'The reading of Abdallah ibn Mas'ud.' Then Abdallah came to him and he learned what was altered and abrogated. Bukhari.

You don't really want to to pursue this one topic, do you? And I certainly don't have the time to provide all the verses of both the Qur'an to substantiate the description that Muhammed was a murderer, pillager, looter, raper, or incestuous pedophile.

Secular history documents these claims very clearly.

reply to post by FarArcher


Your description of the hadith is distorted, just like most of you bigots who distort the history of Islam and the Prophet.

There are 7 levels of understanding in the Quran not seven ways to read it.

I absolutely agree with the original poster... I rarely post on this board but I visit it every day for the past 3 years. I have never seem such anti Islamic nonsense in all my time on this board since the past 6 months. To be honest 2/3rd of the stuff now posted here is utter nonsense.

When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to ‘the reasonable’ Muslim demands for their ‘religious rights,’ they also get the other components under the table. Here’s how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States — Muslim 1.0%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1%-2%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris –car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam – Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace — there’s (supposed) to be peace because everybody is a Muslim: we know however that this isnt true is it...?

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 99.9%
Of course, that’s not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing.

reply to post by inforeal

No, that's not what it says. That's not what's described. He clearly said he heard it seven different ways.

And what about the two different versions?

And what about the 'both' different versions?

I guess these are different levels too, right?

Keep in mind, the Satanic verses were there, and now are not. Lots of editing.

Lots of editing.

Originally posted by chuckMFd
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Woman barely get to contribute other than being slaves.

Forgive my cynicism, and I admit I have chosen your post of the many to comment on - but so many I see on this thread are deeply concerned about women.
However, do you and all these other (presumably men) actually give a tinkers' about the rights of women in your own society?
Here in New Zealand, 80% of our television comes from the USA. We see endless cop shows and films of the genre a feminist writer called the "kill the woman" type.
Then there's a sick little comedy called 'Two and a Half Men'. From the trailers I have unwillingly seen, it's about Charlie Sheen, a fat kid and a skinny guy ridiculing women over 30, and ill-treating and exploiting women of between 18-25, who all look like Penthouse centre-folds. Huge blouse, no brain.
The new Stargate series SGU features an Asian woman, a busty (now pregnant blonde) and a weepy teen girl none of whom appear to have a brain cell between them. (The Asian woman is clever enough but uses her brain for what would once have been called 'Un-American activities.)
So do you really care about women?
Seeing women as sexual assets or dried up hyserical has-beens is in itself a form of slavery. Like it or not guys, we're people not things.
Vicky

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by chuckMFd
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Woman barely get to contribute other than being slaves.

Forgive my cynicism, and I admit I have chosen your post of the many to comment on - but so many I see on this thread are deeply concerned about women.
However, do you and all these other (presumably men) actually give a tinkers' about the rights of women in your own society?
Here in New Zealand, 80% of our television comes from the USA. We see endless cop shows and films of the genre a feminist writer called the "kill the woman" type.
Then there's a sick little comedy called 'Two and a Half Men'. From the trailers I have unwillingly seen, it's about Charlie Sheen, a fat kid and a skinny guy ridiculing women over 30, and ill-treating and exploiting women of between 18-25, who all look like Penthouse centre-folds. Huge blouse, no brain.
The new Stargate series SGU features an Asian woman, a busty (now pregnant blonde) and a weepy teen girl none of whom appear to have a brain cell between them. (The Asian woman is clever enough but uses her brain for what would once have been called 'Un-American activities.)
So do you really care about women?
Seeing women as sexual assets or dried up hyserical has-beens is in itself a form of slavery. Like it or not guys, we're people not things.
Vicky

Can you possibly do any more than answer an argument with an argument? How about addressing the comment:

Woman barely get to contribute other than being slaves.

Is this true or not true? Who cares about a television show that ACTUALLY has an equal amount of ill treatment by both sexes . . . it just depends on the episode you happen to watch. Did you watch more than one episode? I have watched many and know that your summation of the series is inaccurate. That's the beauty of ones who discuss/debate the way you do . . . you rarely address the argument at hand . . . and just re-spout the same rhetoric over-and-over.


Oh and I just had to add, yes many American men do truly care about women and their rights . . . we have mothers, grandmothers, daughters, sisters, nieces, etc. that we do not want to see beaten if they do not perform their wifely duties or in a moment of infidelity get sentenced to be repeatedly bashed in the head with stones until they finally succumb to the bludgeoning of their skull . . . so civilized and caring.

Originally posted by nonnez

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by chuckMFd
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Woman barely get to contribute other than being slaves.

Forgive my cynicism, and I admit I have chosen your post of the many to comment on - but so many I see on this thread are deeply concerned about women.
However, do you and all these other (presumably men) actually give a tinkers' about the rights of women in your own society?
Here in New Zealand, 80% of our television comes from the USA. We see endless cop shows and films of the genre a feminist writer called the "kill the woman" type.
Then there's a sick little comedy called 'Two and a Half Men'. From the trailers I have unwillingly seen, it's about Charlie Sheen, a fat kid and a skinny guy ridiculing women over 30, and ill-treating and exploiting women of between 18-25, who all look like Penthouse centre-folds. Huge blouse, no brain.
The new Stargate series SGU features an Asian woman, a busty (now pregnant blonde) and a weepy teen girl none of whom appear to have a brain cell between them. (The Asian woman is clever enough but uses her brain for what would once have been called 'Un-American activities.)
So do you really care about women?
Seeing women as sexual assets or dried up hyserical has-beens is in itself a form of slavery. Like it or not guys, we're people not things.
Vicky

Can you possibly do any more than answer an argument with an argument? How about addressing the comment:

Woman barely get to contribute other than being slaves.

Is this true or not true?

Ah, no. It depends which Muslim country you're talking about! Pakistan is a Muslim country (and from what I've heard the next Neocon target.) Women there are educated and intelligent - we have many Pakistani women here working as nurses, doctors and teachers.
That statement about women as slaves is just a generalisation and it's wrong.
Vicky

reply to post by Vicky32


Funny how they like to focus on the negative.

They even say the same about Afghanistan, my birth place, but from what I know, education plummet when conflict started, but DUUH, in any war thorn country, education would fall dramatically.

They don't want to talk about Afghanistan before the conflict and war. Both my mom and my dad is Educated. My dad is a civil Engineer, and my mom studied sciences, than became a science teacher for highschool. Both studied in Kabul University.

Originally posted by Vicky32

Ah, no. It depends which Muslim country you're talking about! Pakistan is a Muslim country (and from what I've heard the next Neocon target.) Women there are educated and intelligent - we have many Pakistani women here working as nurses, doctors and teachers.
That statement about women as slaves is just a generalisation and it's wrong.
Vicky

Ok . . . thank you. I do realize that not all Muslims are adhering to the customs-of-old that repress and teach intolerance toward outsiders/infidels but as far as your answer to that statement . . . is this "generalization" about Islams' treatment and view of women more commonplace than not in the Muslim world overall? Do we not see some of the most modern Muslim nations allowing the marriage of very young (Eight years old in Saudia Arabia) girls against their will and for older men to do with as they please? Do they not believe also in the rape and beating of ones wife to be a duty if the wife is not meeting expectations and her duties. Do not many, if not most, Muslim nations also forbid women from learning certain subjects that are thought to be the exclusive domain of men. I believe you should check the facts on your beloved Pakistan . . . you may find it interesting to know that certain education is taboo for women as well as MANY, MANY simple pleasantries that are strictly forbidden for women to perform. While Pakistani women do have more freedom they are still mainly subordinate to men, under threat of punishment, especially outside of the most modern cities.

That being said, this alone has an effect on peoples' views of Islam . . . let alone the other points made in this thread. Call it hate or what have you, but I truly do not see it as that. I have no problem (I am sure others do not either) with people that have tolerance and respect for EVERYONE . . . be they man, woman, child, atheist, homosexual, Christian, Jew, or what have you; I have no respect for people or ideologies that teach anything different than this but I do not hate them.

reply to post by Vicky32


Thanks ma'am. Many, many of us here share a desire and need for honesty and expressionist freedoms. Just be aware that there are many as well who deride, chastise, contradict, disbelieve, doubt and otherwise disagree with things.

And thats ok...because it takes all of us...positive....negative....pro-con, black-white and red....pro-government, anti-government, grays and reptilians...really. You name it and its here.

Its because...this is one place where people are passionate about their dreams, ideals and beliefs...and thats fine.

Happy posting! Peace, Love and Light!

reply to post by dragonseeker


Nice post. are you seriously trying to equate the prejudice that some white people have experienced via affirmative action with the discrimination that african-americans have experienced in america? are you really saying they're equivocal? because, if you are, I'm afraid you haven't looked at our history close enough, all due respect. They're not equivocal. white privilege is still alive and well, current economic situation(which affects us all) notwithstanding. I won't go into a long litany of things, but, sir, there's a saying: "you can't explain water to a fish". It means, you can't see the environment you live in clearly, because you're too close to it. hard to be objective about white privilege when you've always had it. It may not feel like it to you, depending on your economic and life circumstances, but you do have it. Now, as far as muslims go, they are the designated bogeymen. been that way for decades, a situation helped along by the israel lobby, because it serves their purposes to keep us at muslims' throats. the muslims that want to kill us are such a small number compared to peaceful muslims. they obviously have had an effect, but I refuse to hate a group of people simply because TPTB wants me to. the fact that they want us to at all is a clue that maybe these people aren't what they're made out to be.
Our worst enemies are right here at home, not afghanistan
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
"hard to be objective about white privilege when you've always had it".. It may not feel like it to you, depending on your economic and life circumstances, but you do have it. These are your words.

That is an assumption on your part. There is another "old" saying; "never judge a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes". Prejudice is not limited to religion, or race. It also is based on economics. Some rich guy, whether he is black, white, brown or "green with red polka dots", determines that I am not worthy of his daughters hand in marriage due to the fact that I do not earn 75 million a year. "Money makes strange bed fellows as well as politics". You are prejudice. By your statement, you have concluded that "I have it". That being the case, my social standing in the "community and that of my bank balance would indicate that I am not a "privileged white guy". Those two parameters in fact do not indicate as you have stated. Prejudice is based on many factors. IE "I hate all Germans because they captured my Grandfather and sent him to a concentration camp in WWII. Which they did, however, he escaped. To "pre - judge" "all Germans as being bad because the NAZI'S did this would wrong. Case in point; Over 250 thousand Germans gave Hitler "the finger" and went up the same smoke stacks as the Jews as well as 8 million other "non jews" did. The fact that Hitler was prejudice against Jews, homosexuals(even though he committed homosexual acts at one time), Gypsies, and any one that disagreed with him, shows that "White" privilege as you say, did not exist for those people and most were in fact "white". The muslims that you are defending are the same people that Hitler was doing business with in trying to secure oil deposits for his "Wermacht" (war makers). The same muslim was selling oil to the Allied Forces as well as to the Germans. The muslim took no side except that of making a profit from the "infidels" that were killing each other. There is a picture of Hitler shaking the hand of a muslim oil broker on line if you care to look it up.
You said:" . It may not feel like it to you, depending on your economic and life circumstances, but you do have it.
It does not "feel" like it to me due to the fact that I grew up poor and white and in the country. You said you are a black man. Are you "accepted" into every facet and aspect of every black person you meet? Try visiting with Louis Farrakhan some time if you have not already. Tell us what you experienced. He's black, you are black, but if you aren't a known muslim and proceed to try and knock on his door, the chances of you being shot in the head have grown exponentially. What were you saying about prejudice and muslims? Are you aware who it was that shot and killed Malcom X? It happened to be three "Black muslims".

en.wikipedia.org...


It wasn't until 1964 that Malcom X disavowed his own "racism".

As far as the Israeli lobby, They do not determine what I do or how I act. As previously stated in others posts, anyone or anything that supports, endorses, gives financial aid to, collaborates with in any way fashion or form with any segment or any subsidiary of the NWO is my enemy. "+" Whether they are white, black, brown, yellow, grey, green or blue is of no consequence. It does not matter if they are called Wermacht(War makers), Schutzstaffel (SS), Luftwaffe(German Air Force), Gestapo(secret police), Japanese Imperial Navy(Destroyed Pearl Harbor). They are all still "the enemy". The muslim book defines what they the muslim is supposed to believe and practice. This "flies in the face" of our freedoms here in the USA. I for one shall not live under Sharia law. Sharia law lines up perfectly with the mandates of the NWO. I do not need the Israelis or any one else to influence what I choose to believe in. I stick with the facts as we all should. If you are aware of prejudice then read that book of theirs and you shall get a first hand look at "real prejudice" as was written by their so called prophet(sic). He actually did not write the book as he was illiterate. Some one else actually wrote it.

"there's a saying: "you can't explain water to a fish". (your words) There is another old saying," If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and flies like a duck, it is probably a duck". Followed by " Don't pee down my back and tell me it is raining". Anyone that believes in Sharia law, which lines up to the NWO philosophy of how things should be as "they" see it....is my sworn enemy.

In the event that a civil war ensues here in the USA due to the obtuse practices of the NWO using the muslim and anyone or anything else to persue their godless agenda, it shall be everyone's choice as to what side of the line they shall be standing on. The hatred of the muslim is due to what the muslim preaches, practices and tries to enforce on others. I have "Spartan Blood" coursing through my veins. (Greek) " θάνατο πριν από ντροπή" This is the Creed of the Spartan.

Your comment about the worst enemies being here in the USA is true: Read what J. Edgar Hoover said:
As J. Edgar Hoover said,: " We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst".

He said this also: "The Communist threat from without must not blind us to the Communist threat from within. The latter is reaching into the very heart of America through its espionage agents and a cunning, defiant, and lawless communist party, which is fanatically dedicated to the Marxist cause of world enslavement and destruction of the foundations of our republic.
Marxism and muslim practice are the same.
Sound familiar? Look at what is happening here in the USA as we make our posts. You know what he said is the truth.

Thank you for your time

Scoutsniper

reply to post by Vicky32

Forgive my cynicism, and I admit I have chosen your post of the many to comment on - but so many I see on this thread are deeply concerned about women. However, do you and all these other (presumably men) actually give a tinkers' about the rights of women in your own society? ...

As a female I really do not care. I am part Arab and thank goodness I am in the USA.

I am also old enough to have been denied the right to take Shop instead of Home Ec, Denied the right to compete in track although I was my school's fastest long distance runner (the track coach practically cried ) denied the right to become a Chem Engineer because my College guidance counselor thought women should not be in Engineering. As a Chemist I routinely had my work published with a man's name not mine attached and was therefore passed over for promotion in favor of the thief on several occasions.

No one said the world was fair but at least in the USA I can walk free, climb, hike, and shop without having my eight year old son babysit me as my lab tech had to when she was in Saudi Arabia.

reply to post by phatpackage


well then i must tell you i am very sorry , i will indeed admit that i was being a bit over the top ,however i must tell you that my wife and children are both Russian ,my wife is full Russian and my children are half ,and if you would like more info on what is going on in Chechnya i would be more then happy to provide it ,and yes their are alot of killings going on their ,alot of the stuff we do not hear about ,also their are landmines every where left over from the first chechen war , i can also provide proof of that ,

the only thing that matters to me in this life , is giving my life to god and to man , thank you for your time

Nephi

reply to post by oozyism


So, Oozy, do you or your parents, educated and all, still live in Afghanistan?

It's a fine, Islamic state, I was just wondering if you and your parents still live there.

reply to post by FarArcher

Errr...sorry, but it is talking about ways of reciting the Quran, not the actual text itself. For example, Bilal, an Abyssinian companion of the prophet was unable to pronounce the "sh" sound, but Muhammad said it was okay how he pronounced it as "s". Another example being Salman, a persian companion of the Prophet, also had difficulty pronouncing words, but Muhammad gave him permission to pronounce it however it came easier to him.

Potato Potato (doesn't work so well in text, but you know what I mean ).

PS: You misnumbered one of your hadith, and didn't properly reference another.

reply to post by babloyi

No.

What was described was NOT an inability or difficulty to pronounce an "s."

It was such a radical difference that the guy was thinking of assaulting him right there in the mosque.

It was such a radical difference that the guy was actually hauled to Muhammed.

It was such a radical difference that Muhammed listened to both, and said they were recited to him in both ways.

No mention of a mispronounced 's."

It's funny. When things uncomplimentary are thusly described by the very companions of Muhammed, that the latter day apologists have come up with all kinds of excuses and "explanations."

Any sane, rational, prudent man reading those texts would laugh.

All other prophets had to prove themselves by performing miracles, miracles of such splendor that there could be no question that they came of God.

Except this one. Muhammed couldn't part his hair.

reply to post by FarArcher

No mention of the texts being different either. Odd that you would automatically assume that is the case.

Also odd that you seem to require "miracles of splendour" to prove prophethood. Are you christian? You know that your bible warns against those who do fancy magic tricks as proof of being from God?

Muhammad DID perform miracles, but they certainly weren't the sole (or even the most important) proof.

reply to post by Soldier of God


This post is so chatastrophically funny..

Here is a story for you: www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Soldier of God


Christianity= Massacre to other religions= Crusades, Massacre to own people= most evil forms of tortures to Christians, which hunt, anyway, look at yourself= www.captaincynic.com...

United States: %99 Christian= Massacre of native indians, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, uncountable crimes all around the world,
Germany= %99 Christian, should i repeat what they have done?

Bah, I am alreay bored. Anyway, the problem is not one religion "better" than others. Humanity and its religions sucks, thats the problem. You have to look into the mirror, before the monster inside the mirror eats your soul.