Free Gay Sex Photos, Movies, Reviews and Forums at JustUsBoys
Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Thank you, Dahling! NotHardUp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Location
    Rocket City
    Posts
    9,480


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Culture Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    The deaths from the terrorist attack on 9/11 were across the board. Americans died in ratios that looked a lot like America's population: http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/595756.html

    Those in the towers, on the planes, in the rescue forces, and simply casualties in the way, were a diverse population. They have been memorialized repeatedly, and their faces seen.

    The religious fanaticism that launched the attacks was correctly seen for what it is, a dangerous extremism very much akin to the white supremacist sect of Christianity, or the Neo-Nazis in Europe and elsewhere.

    Much is made of the association of terrorism with Islam in the popular mind in both the US and Europe. To be sure, there were reactionary hate crimes immediately afterward, with even murders of Sikhs and others as a horrible consequence of ignorance and bigotry. Yet, they were one-offs, like murders of gay men. They were not the rule. They were not pandemic. They did not represent the majority of the citizenry.

    Were Americans more afraid of Arabs and the Mid-East inferno? Certainly, but that doesn't constitute irrational fear across the board, nor has it been some plague that has taken the country afterward. It remains a lingering apprehension as follow-on acts happen in the US, France, Belgium, England, and elsewhere.

    Most Americans accurately perceive the attack as a radical opposition to American culture -- financial, social, educational, religious, and so on. The terrorists hoped to ignite a war, and they succeeded marvelously, if unsurprisingly.

    And, it is often popular to depict the heartland as some bucktoothed inbred lot of folks with no acceptance of diversity while the coasts are portrayed as a relative haven of multicultural diversity. Whereas it is true that large cities do offer more pluralism by their very nature, it is not true that the center of the country is void of acceptance.

    I live in Huntsville, Alabama. It is a conservative, military base town, with little radicalism in any direction. Yet, here in North Alabama, at the foot of the Appalachians, and only a quick hour's drive from the infamous Scottsboro, the area is not hostile to Islam. There are FIVE mosques, an Islamic academy and several restaurants and markets that serve their community.

    https://www.salatomatic.com/sub/Unit...lle/7BTOOQGLZr

    Is there a total absence of bigotry or ignorance? Hardly. But the last time I checked, that population seems to inhabit all corners of this country, with violent opposition in NYC to building a mosque there.

    You can use the salatomatic website to search for mosques in any community. It will quickly inform you that they have not been driven out or anything like that. Do they face an uphill fight for social understanding due to the terrorists ongoing actions? Yes, but people who live around them are generally smart enough to recognize their neighbors and the validity of freedom of religion as a tenet.

    Don't buy the hype. Look up facts for yourself. Be a good citizen by being informed, being inclusive and accepting, and by working to unify our country rather than ignite the fires.
    Last edited by NotHardUp1; September 15th, 2018 at 05:37 PM.

  2. #2
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    I'm confused, has anybody said it was a racial attack? You seem to be answering a question nobody asked.

  3. #3
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Status
    Partnered
    Location
    Jawja
    Posts
    28,107
    Blog Entries
    9


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1
    (paraphrased from thread title)

    9/11 wasn’t a racial attack.
    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    Much is made of the association of terrorism with Islam in the popular mind in both the US and Europe.
    What most Americans get wrong about Islamophobia (Vox; April 2018)

  4. #4
    JUB Addict Telstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    40,074


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    I see the 9.11 attack as
    an extreme religious cultural & political attack against the United States.
    Victim of PC police. Some of the PC police are good at making untrue things up about other jub members.

  5. #5
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    The religious fanaticism that launched the attacks was correctly seen for what it is, a dangerous extremism very much akin to the white supremacist sect of Christianity, or the Neo-Nazis in Europe and elsewhere.
    This couldn't be more false. It was not seen as extremism but as par the course for Islam hence travel bans, fears of Sharia law taking over, media hyping up videos of Islam crowds chanting death to infidels. Comparing it to white supremacy and neo-nazism is vastly dishonest since both groups enjoy freedom of expression in America that would never be afforded to radical Islam, even regular peaceful Muslims could barely worship in peace for some time, meanwhile the Klan and Nazis march through American streets with nary a protest from Americans en masse despite a longstanding and well-documented history of terrorist behavior.... that has not once [that I've ever seen] actually been called terrorism. We are discussing this on the anniversary of a church bombing that left four girls dead. No vigils, no "Never forget." We're only a few months away from the anniversary of an entire black town being demolished. No remembrance. No "Never forget." I wonder what the difference could be.

    The thread is confusing, you concede a heightened fear of Islam in America but insist that it was strictly rational, but contradict that by admitting there were attacks on Muslims to the extent that even someone who looked Muslim but wasn't was vulnerable. I'm not sure what to make of this topic.

  6. #6
    Thank you, Dahling! NotHardUp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Location
    Rocket City
    Posts
    9,480


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    The linked article didn't really characterize the perception of the 9/11 attack to be racial, did it? It also cited Bill Maher as some sort of representative of the Left when his overt bigotry about all religion makes him the equal of any extremists on the Right. He's not model of inclusion, regardless of the religion in question. He's a hate monger.

    I would like to see how the Southern Poverty Law Center works the math.

    The linked article contained a link to their article, which was pretty thin on substantiation or detail. Your linked article just made broad generalizations, so I clicked through to see the data that was being referred to as "studies."

    The SPLC claims 250,000 incidents occurred in the last year. The definition would need to be examined at that rate. When even a graffiti incident happens on a university campus, or a person is literally attacked, it makes headline news on every channel out there. So, how in the hell are there 250,000 incidents happenning in one year in a country?

    Either the numbers are so grossly exaggerated by inflated claims and petty insults amplified, or there is a titanic conspiracy among the media outlets, on that puts all other conspiracy theories to shame. And this would have to happen by the same Leftist media that the Right is always accusing of bias.

    Do I believe hate crimes, against Muslims, immigrants, and minorities are up globally and in the US? Most likely. Do I believe the incidence is anywhere near the outrages that were loosed just after 9/11? Absolutely not.

    The fear of Islamic extremism is legitimate, but I don't buy it that the average American believes his neighbor is plotting his government's downfall. The drumbeat by the talk radio monsters has been more xenophobic than merely Islamophobic.

    And multi-racial community continues to grow in America, with plenty of racial intermarriages and multicultural institutions and communities. It's true in backwoods Alabama, and it's true in more urban areas most certainly.
    Last edited by NotHardUp1; September 16th, 2018 at 02:34 AM.

  7. #7
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Status
    Partnered
    Location
    Jawja
    Posts
    28,107
    Blog Entries
    9


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    The linked article didn't really characterize the perception of the 9/11 attack to be racial, did it?
    The linked article consists primarily of an interview between the article’s author, Alexia Underwood and Critical Race Theorist, Khaled Beydoun. The interview did not seek to characterize public perception at the time of the 9/11 Attack; however, the introductory section of the article reports that contemporary incidents of hate crimes have increased since Donald Trump assumed the presidency.

    Professor Beydoun suggests that the US “War on Terror” exploits misinformation provided to citizens regarding Islam and thereby effectively establishes a system of state-sponsored Islamophobia. Similar government “tools” or programs are also tied to its protection of Americans from other groups of people that are “different” and arguably threatening. In that respect, the government demonstrates another example of de facto support of white supremacy. The professor notes that Black Lives Matter seeks to dismantle such white supremacist structures and policies from the state. Eliminating elements of structural Islamophobia is part of a change that could help diminish hate crimes against Muslims and other groups of people that are perceived to be different.

    With respect to the surge of Islamophobic “reactionary hate crimes immediately [post-9/11 – that ostensibly] did not represent the majority of the citizenry,” the article notes “assaults on Muslims [reported to the FBI] have “easily surpassed” post-9/11 levels.” That finding is supported by the Pew Research Center.


    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    The SPLC claims 250,000 incidents occurred in the last year.
    The SPLC objectively demonstrates how “government studies show that the actual number of hate crimes may be as high as 250,000.”

    On average, U.S. residents experienced approximately 250,000 hate crime victimizations each year between 2004 and 2015, of which about 230,000 were violent hate victimizations.

    Hate Crime Victimization, 2004-2015 (US Department of Justice; June 2017)

  8. #8
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    The linked article consists primarily of an interview between the article’s author, Alexia Underwood and Critical Race Theorist, Khaled Beydoun. The interview did not seek to characterize public perception at the time of the 9/11 Attack; however, the introductory section of the article reports that contemporary incidents of hate crimes have increased since Donald Trump assumed the presidency.

    Professor Beydoun suggests that the US “War on Terror” exploits misinformation provided to citizens regarding Islam and thereby effectively establishes a system of state-sponsored Islamophobia. Similar government “tools” or programs are also tied to its protection of Americans from other groups of people that are “different” and arguably threatening. In that respect, the government demonstrates another example of de facto support of white supremacy. The professor notes that Black Lives Matter seeks to dismantle such white supremacist structures and policies from the state. Eliminating elements of structural Islamophobia is part of a change that could help diminish hate crimes against Muslims and other groups of people that are perceived to be different.
    To parallel, Black Lives Matter, without a single incident of violence or hate-based attacks, whose sole mission was ending police violence against people of color, was immediately met with backlash from the American populous. It was immediately labeled as a hate group. Meanwhile white nationalist groups, the Klan and neo-nazis are defended as "free speech" and despite a longstanding history of acts of terrorism against people of color, are often casually dismissed as "a difference of opinion." The same demonization has happened to Islam, as you said, under the umbrella of this "War on Terror," a war that has never been declared on white domestic terrorists. Strangely, despite the obvious differences being clearly related to color, people find infinite ways to explain this all away as not being a matter of anti-brown bias.

  9. #9
    Thank you, Dahling! NotHardUp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Location
    Rocket City
    Posts
    9,480


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    The SPLC objectively demonstrates how “government studies show that the actual number of hate crimes may be as high as 250,000.”
    No, that's not demonstrating it. That's alluding to it being claimed or possible. "May be as high as" is a swag of vagueness.

    And I stand by my assertion. If 250,000 cases exist, then someone's including some ridiculously insignificant items that swell the number. I don't believe we only hear about the events on "slow news days." There are too many news outlets -- local radio, print, magazines, television, and internet.

    Notionally spread across the states, we'd be incurring 5,000 incidents per year per state. That's complete bullshit. You couldn't hide that many incidents short of a state-controlled media like North Korea has. You couldn't hide 10% of that. If there are 500 hate crimes per year in each state, they'd be in the news.

    As for state sponsored Islamophobia, professors and think tankers and pundits and pollsters can opine away, but it doesn't negate the point I made about Islam doing just fine, even here in the hinterland. The self-annointed elite love to speak for how the everyman thinks without even looking at evidence to the contrary.
    Last edited by NotHardUp1; September 18th, 2018 at 05:22 PM.

  10. #10
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    The self-annointed elite love to speak for how the everyman thinks without even looking at evidence to the contrary.
    This is an ironic statement to make after dismissing a statistic on the grounds that "If it were true we'd hear about it," as if the media is suddenly some fair, equal and impartial source of information. And to insist that hate crime numbers are being inflated when, in fact, we've seen numerous examples of how difficult they are to indict/try/convict is contradictory.

  11. #11
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Status
    Partnered
    Location
    Jawja
    Posts
    28,107
    Blog Entries
    9


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    I stand by my assertion. If 250,000 cases exist, then someone's including some ridiculously insignificant items that swell the number.
    250,000 ÷ 360 = 694 hate crimes per day

    300,000,000 ÷ 694 = 1 hate crime per 432,276 people


    Quote Originally Posted by NotHardUp1 View Post
    The self-annointed elite love to speak for how the everyman thinks without even looking at evidence to the contrary.
    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    On average, U.S. residents experienced approximately 250,000 hate crime victimizations each year between 2004 and 2015, of which about 230,000 were violent hate victimizations.

    Hate Crime Victimization, 2004-2015 (US Department of Justice; June 2017)
    Findings are primarily from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which has collected data on crimes motivated by hate since 2003. The NCVS and the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Hate Crime Statistics Program are the principal sources of annual information on hate crime in the United States. BJS and the FBI use the hate crime definition established by the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. § 534): “crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, gender or gender identity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.”

  12. #12
    JUB Addict Mariatenebre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Orientation
    Straight
    Posts
    1,514


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    First of all 9/11 was not a racial attack it was a religious attack. Next if the whole point of this article is the pay no attention to the man behind the curtain regressive leftist apologia of Islam then that is nonsense. The fact is Islam does call Muslims to wage jihad terror against disbelievers, Islam does call for the death of gays and trans people, Islam is violently misogynist towards women and further more Arab Islam has every bit a colonialist, imperialist and racist history to it's expansions as European Christianity.

    Once more when people mention race Islam has a violently racist history towards African peoples. Arab Muslim nations still own African people as slaves and Arab Islam occupies over half of Africa and has more power and infrastructure there then Europeans or Africans combined. Once more the Arab Islamic slavery conditions of Black people makes even the European one seem like five star accommodations by comparison and that was one of the worst atrocities on the planet. Arab Islamic nations are like the Confederate South on steroids when it comes to racism.

  13. #13
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    First of all 9/11 was not a racial attack it was a religious attack.
    This is common knowledge, I think the title was written in a haste, nobody on the planet thinks 9/11 was a racist attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    The fact is Islam does call Muslims to wage jihad terror against disbelievers, Islam does call for the death of gays and trans people, Islam is violently misogynist towards women and further more Arab Islam has every bit a colonialist, imperialist and racist history to it's expansions as European Christianity.
    You might wanna tell that to the millions of peaceful, non-violent practicing Muslims who seem to have missed that part.

    I've never really bought into the half-honest "Yeah, white people treat brown people like shit but brown people treat other brown people even worse." Sounds like, what's the word you used, apologia?

  14. #14
    JUB Addict Mariatenebre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Orientation
    Straight
    Posts
    1,514


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by fabulouslyghetto View Post
    This is common knowledge, I think the title was written in a haste, nobody on the planet thinks 9/11 was a racist attack.



    You might wanna tell that to the millions of peaceful, non-violent practicing Muslims who seem to have missed that part.

    I've never really bought into the half-honest "Yeah, white people treat brown people like shit but brown people treat other brown people even worse." Sounds like, what's the word you used, apologia?
    Again just because there are peaceful non violent Muslims means nothing. What Muslims do or believe means nothing what matters is the core texts and doctrines of Islam. Many Muslims like Christians and other Abrahamics act and believe alot better then what their religion asks them to. I can easily show you the sexist, religiously intolerant, anti gay verses in the Quran and Sunnah it isn't hard.

    Next that is because you live in the West and are privileged I am friends with Africans from the Arab Islamic world and Arab colonized African nations and the picture is very Grimm. Let me tell you how slavery works in the Arab Islamic world and this comes from a friend of mine Kola Boof a Sudanese Womanist activist from Omdurman Sudan. They don't have plantations there but instead keep Black men and boys chained outside of the house like dogs and feed them with a doggie bowl. When it is time to work they are taken off the leash. Black girls and women are kept inside the house, as sex slaves and with their tongues cut out so they can not talk and tell all of the horrible rapey stuff done to them. Not to mention it was only some years ago that forty Dinka people were massacred in a public park in Egypt for just being in the park at night by Arab Muslims. Hell Arab Muslims call Black people abeed which means nigger and slave in Arabic openly and freely. You can watch Arab TV and they will be talking about a basket ball game and say things like "the abeed Michael Jordan won the basket ball game today." They have Black people in zoos in places like Libya and sell them in slave markets with Black men, women and children tied upside down and in cages. Hell a silly Black American woman went to Palestine to defend the supposed poor Arabs and they called her in Arabic things like "nice monkey lady." Not to mention that many Arab Muslims in Palestine also own slaves. This also comes from people like Simon Deng, Francis Bok and Mende Nazer all former slaves. If you think that things are bad in the West you couldn't imagine how it is in Arab Islamic nations with Black people.

  15. #15
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Again just because there are peaceful non violent Muslims means nothing.
    To the anti-Muslim brigade it's an inconvenient truth. A truth nonetheless. As an American man of color extremist Islam ranks very low on my list of threats. If I'm gonna be killed, it's most likely at the hands of another person of color. After that, it's more likely to be a MAGA hat wearing, confederate flag waving "go back to Africa" racist. The likelihood of a Jihadist crashing a plane into my house is down at the bottom near tropical flesh eating bacteria that somehow found its way to the states, and being swallowed by a whale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    What Muslims do or believe means nothing what matters is the core texts and doctrines of Islam.
    Core texts? That's wrong beyond the telling of it. Islam and the Quran teach love and compassion, this idea that "Death to the infidels" comes from their holy book is not rooted in fact but manipulative Bill O'Reilly talking points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Many Muslims like Christians and other Abrahamics act and believe alot better then what their religion asks them to. I can easily show you the sexist, religiously intolerant, anti gay verses in the Quran and Sunnah it isn't hard.
    Then surely you're aware that the Quran scolds those who cherrypick its text-- in the exact manner you're doing. It teaches peace and forgiveness even in the face of persecution, which is not just in its text but its history. Muhammad's response to years of brutal persecution and the murder of his own children was.... blanket forgiveness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Next that is because you live in the West and are privileged
    That privelege must've escaped Trayvon Martin. And Sean Bell. And Philando Castile. And.......

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    I am friends with Africans from the Arab Islamic world and Arab colonized African nations and the picture is very Grimm. Let me tell you how slavery works in the Arab Islamic world and this comes from a friend of mine Kola Boof a Sudanese Womanist activist from Omdurman Sudan. They don't have plantations there but instead keep Black men and boys chained outside of the house like dogs and feed them with a doggie bowl. When it is time to work they are taken off the leash. Black girls and women are kept inside the house, as sex slaves and with their tongues cut out so they can not talk and tell all of the horrible rapey stuff done to them. Not to mention it was only some years ago that forty Dinka people were massacred in a public park in Egypt for just being in the park at night by Arab Muslims. Hell Arab Muslims call Black people abeed which means nigger and slave in Arabic openly and freely. You can watch Arab TV and they will be talking about a basket ball game and say things like "the abeed Michael Jordan won the basket ball game today." They have Black people in zoos in places like Libya and sell them in slave markets with Black men, women and children tied upside down and in cages. Hell a silly Black American woman went to Palestine to defend the supposed poor Arabs and they called her in Arabic things like "nice monkey lady." Not to mention that many Arab Muslims in Palestine also own slaves. This also comes from people like Simon Deng, Francis Bok and Mende Nazer all former slaves. If you think that things are bad in the West you couldn't imagine how it is in Arab Islamic nations with Black people.
    Hunty chile boo, the US wrote the book on torturing and enslaving brown people. It dug us until a deep hole we've yet to emerge from and now actively suppresses our ascension from said hole under the guise of, get this, fairness. Slavery and anti-African racism in the middle east is not news to me, I'd appreciate you giving my intelligence the benefit of the doubt, as i do yours inspite of your lopsided and inaccurate depiction of the teachings of Islam which, for the record, forbid indoctrination by force or coercion as in direct violation of free conscience.

    In the spirit of "Text > practice" the Christian bible has a mountain of verses that condone violence, torture of slaves, misogyny and even commands, in Deut, rape victims to marry their rapists. But nobody talks about that because, obviously Christians en masse don't practice that. Trust me, you do NOT want to get into a tit-for-tat about the texts if you're going to hail Islam as the violent, extremist text.

  16. #16
    JUB Addict Mariatenebre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Orientation
    Straight
    Posts
    1,514


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by fabulouslyghetto View Post
    To the anti-Muslim brigade it's an inconvenient truth. A truth nonetheless. As an American man of color extremist Islam ranks very low on my list of threats. If I'm gonna be killed, it's most likely at the hands of another person of color. After that, it's more likely to be a MAGA hat wearing, confederate flag waving "go back to Africa" racist. The likelihood of a Jihadist crashing a plane into my house is down at the bottom near tropical flesh eating bacteria that somehow found its way to the states, and being swallowed by a whale.



    Core texts? That's wrong beyond the telling of it. Islam and the Quran teach love and compassion, this idea that "Death to the infidels" comes from their holy book is not rooted in fact but manipulative Bill O'Reilly talking points.



    Then surely you're aware that the Quran scolds those who cherrypick its text-- in the exact manner you're doing. It teaches peace and forgiveness even in the face of persecution, which is not just in its text but its history. Muhammad's response to years of brutal persecution and the murder of his own children was.... blanket forgiveness.



    That privelege must've escaped Trayvon Martin. And Sean Bell. And Philando Castile. And.......



    Hunty chile boo, the US wrote the book on torturing and enslaving brown people. It dug us until a deep hole we've yet to emerge from and now actively suppresses our ascension from said hole under the guise of, get this, fairness. Slavery and anti-African racism in the middle east is not news to me, I'd appreciate you giving my intelligence the benefit of the doubt, as i do yours inspite of your lopsided and inaccurate depiction of the teachings of Islam which, for the record, forbid indoctrination by force or coercion as in direct violation of free conscience.

    In the spirit of "Text > practice" the Christian bible has a mountain of verses that condone violence, torture of slaves, misogyny and even commands, in Deut, rape victims to marry their rapists. But nobody talks about that because, obviously Christians en masse don't practice that. Trust me, you do NOT want to get into a tit-for-tat about the texts if you're going to hail Islam as the violent, extremist text.
    Again the fact that you think the Quran teaches love and compassion shows you haven't at all bothered to study the text. I will show you what the Quran teaches.


    Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (8:12) - "(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels... "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle, given that it both followed and preceded confrontations in which non-Muslims were killed by Muslims. The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as those who "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people. (See also: Response to Apologists)


    Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during the pilgrimage. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - but not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, as it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has instructed them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths. (See also: Response to Apologists)


    Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It explains why today's devout Muslims generally have little regard for those outside the faith. The inclusion of "hypocrites" (non-practicing) within the verse also contradicts the apologist's defense that the targets of hate and hostility are wartime foes, since there was never an opposing army made up of non-religious Muslims in Muhammad's time. (See also Games Muslims Play: Terrorists Can't Be Muslim Because They Kill Muslims for the role this verse plays in Islam's perpetual internal conflicts). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (v.74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. [Note: This parable along with verse 58:22 is a major reason that honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.12).] (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression are not used instead of fitna. Fitna can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. A strict translation is 'sedition,' meaning rebellion against authority (the authority being Allah). This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief. [Editor's note: these notes have been modified slightly after a critic misinterpreted our language. Verse 193 plainly says that 'fighting' is sanctioned even if the fitna 'ceases'. This is about religious order, not real persecution.] (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Sahih Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."


    What Does Islam Teach About...

    Violence
    Does the Quran really contain over a hundred verses that sanction violence?

    The Quran contains at least 109 verses that speak of war with nonbelievers, usually on the basis of their status as non-Muslims. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
    Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

    The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Islam's apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.

    Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out those calling for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable emphasis on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
    Quran
    Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

    Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (4:101) - "And when you (Muslims) travel in the land, there is no sin on you if you shorten your Salat (prayer) if you fear that the disbelievers may attack you, verily, the disbelievers are ever unto you open enemies." Mere disbelief makes one an "open" enemy of Muslims.

    Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense? (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement" (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (8:12) - "(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels... "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle, given that it both followed and preceded confrontations in which non-Muslims were killed by Muslims. The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as those who "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

    Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during the pilgrimage. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - but not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, as it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

    Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

    Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy." As Ibn Kathir puts it in his tafsir on this passage, "Allah commands Muslims to prepare for war against disbelievers, as much as possible, according to affordability and availability." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

    Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    [Note: The verse says to fight unbelievers "wherever you find them". Even if the context is a time of battle (which it was not) the reading appears to sanction attacks against those "unbelievers" who are not on the battlefield. In 2016, the Islamic State referred to this verse in urging the faithful to commit terror attacks: Allah did not only command the 'fighting' of disbelievers, as if to say He only wants us to conduct frontline operations against them. Rather, He has also ordered that they be slain wherever they may be – on or off the battlefield. (source)]

    Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "heals" the hearts of Muslims.

    Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

    Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has instructed them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!" (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell. The verse also links physical fighting to the "cause of Allah" (or "way of Allah"). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and - in this case - on Christian soil, according to the historians). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It explains why today's devout Muslims generally have little regard for those outside the faith. The inclusion of "hypocrites" (non-practicing) within the verse also contradicts the apologist's defense that the targets of hate and hostility are wartime foes, since there was never an opposing army made up of non-religious Muslims in Muhammad's time. (See also Games Muslims Play: Terrorists Can't Be Muslim Because They Kill Muslims for the role this verse plays in Islam's perpetual internal conflicts). (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer? (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

    Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (v.74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. [Note: This parable along with verse 58:22 is a major reason that honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.12).] (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (21:44) - "...See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

    Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness with it." - The root for Jihad is used twice in this verse - although it may not have been referring to Holy War when narrated, since it was prior to the hijra at Mecca. The "it" at the end is thought to mean the Quran. Thus the verse may have originally meant a non-violent resistance to the 'unbelievers.' Obviously, this changed with the hijra. 'Jihad' after this is almost exclusively within a violent context. The enemy is always defined as people, rather than ideas.

    Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease (evil desire for adultery, etc.), and those who spread false news among the people in Al-Madinah, cease not, We shall certainly let you overpower them, then they will not be able to stay in it as your neighbors but a little while Accursed, wherever found, they shall be seized and killed with a (terrible) slaughter." This passage sanctions slaughter (rendered as "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators - those who speak out against Islam. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out, which is what today's terrorists do.

    Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Holy war is to be pursued against those who reject Allah. The unbelievers are to be killed and wounded. Survivors are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. (See also: 47:4 for more context) (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you," (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' If so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

    Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. This verse tells Muslims that two very distinct standards are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' to describe Hell in over 25 other verses including 65:10, 40:46 and 50:26..

    Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His cause" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "rows" or "battle array," meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9), which defines the "cause": "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of'Adn- Eternity ['Adn(Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle waged to make Islam victorious over other religions (see verse 9). It uses the Arabic root for the word Jihad.

    Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such. (See also: Response to Apologists)

    Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression are not used instead of fitna. Fitna can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. A strict translation is 'sedition,' meaning rebellion against authority (the authority being Allah). This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief. [Editor's note: these notes have been modified slightly after a critic misinterpreted our language. Verse 193 plainly says that 'fighting' is sanctioned even if the fitna 'ceases'. This is about religious order, not real persecution.] (See also: Response to Apologists)


    Other verses calling Muslims to Jihad can be found here at AnsweringIslam.org
    Hadith and Sira
    Sahih Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

    Sahih Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.


    Sahih Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

    Sahih Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

    So again spare me the notion that Islam teaches love and compassion. Before Islam Mecca was a religiously tolerant Pagan Arab state that anyone of any faith could go and practice their faith freely. After Islam if you showed up with as much as a cross, a Star of David or image of a Pagan Deity you risk your life. Islam was spread by the sword and the history of Islam even in Mohammad's time is full of Muslims conquering Pagan cities and destroying Pagan temples. The women of Taif cried as Muslim terrorists destroyed their Temple of Allat the Supreme Goddess of the pre Islamic Arabs. Again a cursory look at what Mohammad did to disbelievers like Umm Qirfa, Asma Bint Marwan etc shows how brutal this religion is.

    Hell Islam views women as inferior as well. Not only does Islam see women as walking sexual shame that must be covered or they are asking to get raped Islam states that women are intellectually and spiritually deficient to men and that the vast majority of hell's inhabitants are female. Islam also gives permission for husbands to beat their wives and says that nations which appoint women in charge of their affairs will have no success.

    As for gays Islam says that the reason the people of Lut were killed was due to men preferring other men over women. The hadith even states that if you see someone doing as the people of Lut do, kill the one who is doing it aka the top and the one who it is being done to aka the bottom.

    https://thereligionofpeace.com/pages...mad/index.aspx


    https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,...Scholars:Women

    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/p...sexuality.aspx

    Again if you think Islam is a religion of peace and compassion that is because you haven't studied the core religion's texts or the life of Mohammad and need to do so instead of reading some regressive left apologia article on Islam. Also I don't know why you are mentioning Christianity as I personally hate all of the Abrahamic religions and see them as male, misogynist, murder cults. Pointing at Christanity's depravity dosen't justify Islam's depravity. Also with regards to good Muslims again I have stated that many Muslims like many Christians act and believe better then what their religion actually teaches but this still dosen't change what these religion's actively teach.

    Also again Mohammad did not respond to the Pagan Meccans with forgiveness he basically killed anyone who criticized him. Just look at what happened to Abu Afaik or Asma Bint Marwan or the poetess Sarah. Mohammad actively said that anyone who did not accept him as a prophet must be killed.
    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/p...iving-man.aspx


    Also as for writing the book on torturing and enslaving brown people you do realize that Arab Muslims were enslaving Africans long before the US and after European nations made slavery illegal slavery in Arab Muslim nations thrives. If you so much as say the word nigger on TV and in your business practice your career is over yet Arab Muslims call Black people abeed all of the time in their media and with their leaders and nothing happens to them.

  17. #17
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Again if you think Islam is a religion of peace and compassion that is because you haven't studied the core religion's texts
    Or it's because a staggering majority of Muslims are peaceful. Whichev.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Also as for writing the book on torturing and enslaving brown people you do realize that Arab Muslims were enslaving Africans long before the US and after European nations made slavery illegal slavery in Arab Muslim nations thrives. If you so much as say the word nigger on TV and in your business practice your career is over
    Tell that to all the racist republican talking heads who peddle racism daily on Fox and on radio shows, and enjoy a wide and far audience.

    But I get it, it's not breaking news that a white guy doesn't see the racism in the response to 9/11, that's par the course for white supremacist culture. "I don't see the problem. If I do see it, it's not THAT BIG of a problem."

  18. #18
    JUB Addict Mariatenebre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Orientation
    Straight
    Posts
    1,514


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by fabulouslyghetto View Post
    Or it's because a staggering majority of Muslims are peaceful. Whichev.



    Tell that to all the racist republican talking heads who peddle racism daily on Fox and on radio shows, and enjoy a wide and far audience.

    But I get it, it's not breaking news that a white guy doesn't see the racism in the response to 9/11, that's par the course for white supremacist culture. "I don't see the problem. If I do see it, it's not THAT BIG of a problem."
    Again as I have said before what Muslims do is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Again most Muslims like Christians act better then how their religion demands of them. However it is the texts that determine what a religion is not what the individual people do.

    Again if you think that Fox is bad when it comes to racism you wouldn't believe how it is in Arab nations. They use the word abeed openly and freely on Arab TV shows and in general practice,

    As for racism in response to 9/11 yes there has been some but what has been equally insidious is leftist refusal to criticize Islam and the apologia to defend Islam that they would never do for Christianity. Hell ex Muslims including ex Muslims gays, feminists etc have been bashed by regressive leftists for their criticism of Islam.

  19. #19
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    However it is the texts that determine what a religion is not what the individual people do.
    Says you? That's not how this works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    Again if you think that Fox is bad when it comes to racism you wouldn't believe how it is in Arab nations.
    Why wouldn't I believe it? Because I'm an ignorant American that doesn't know what's going on outside my borders? Some might take such a presumption about a man of color to be... well you get the point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    As for racism in response to 9/11 yes there has been some but
    No discussion on race would be complete without the disingenuous "Yeah.... BUT"

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    what has been equally insidious is leftist refusal to criticize Islam and the apologia to defend Islam that they would never do for Christianity. Hell ex Muslims including ex Muslims gays, feminists etc have been bashed by regressive leftists for their criticism of Islam.
    Small fish. There are many threats in America, extremist Islam is not the greatest, it's not the second greatest. The amount of attacks is immeasurably disproportionate to the hype and hysteria. And there's no greater proof that a large part of the obsession with 9/11 being bias than America's soft approach to the KKK. A domestic terrorist group that has not once been calle a terrorist group. As a black American I'm far more concerned about them, yet for some strange, odd, inconceivable reason Americans aren't really bothered by the Klan. There's no "Never forget" the terrible things they've done. I can't imagine what the difference might be.... Christopher Columbus. Genocidal maniac. Do we remember the trail of tears or say "never forget" the island of indigenous people he slaughtered? no, we honor him with a national holiday.

    the obvious conclusion being when white people kill, conquer, enslave, get over it, it's the past, in fact they're heroes, when brown people do it they're proof that the entire group is inherently evil. funny, that's how it works with black people too. the only group that isn't demonized for their sins is, surprise, white people. White supremacist culture has many faces and one of them is this obnoxious BS about Islamic extremism threat to America being blown way out of proportion. Then again, nobody's ever gone broke in America selling a story about violent, evil, barbaric brown villains.

  20. #20
    JUB Addict Mariatenebre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Orientation
    Straight
    Posts
    1,514


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by fabulouslyghetto View Post
    Says you? That's not how this works.



    Why wouldn't I believe it? Because I'm an ignorant American that doesn't know what's going on outside my borders? Some might take such a presumption about a man of color to be... well you get the point.



    No discussion on race would be complete without the disingenuous "Yeah.... BUT"



    Small fish. There are many threats in America, extremist Islam is not the greatest, it's not the second greatest. The amount of attacks is immeasurably disproportionate to the hype and hysteria. And there's no greater proof that a large part of the obsession with 9/11 being bias than America's soft approach to the KKK. A domestic terrorist group that has not once been calle a terrorist group. As a black American I'm far more concerned about them, yet for some strange, odd, inconceivable reason Americans aren't really bothered by the Klan. There's no "Never forget" the terrible things they've done. I can't imagine what the difference might be.... Christopher Columbus. Genocidal maniac. Do we remember the trail of tears or say "never forget" the island of indigenous people he slaughtered? no, we honor him with a national holiday.

    the obvious conclusion being when white people kill, conquer, enslave, get over it, it's the past, in fact they're heroes, when brown people do it they're proof that the entire group is inherently evil. funny, that's how it works with black people too. the only group that isn't demonized for their sins is, surprise, white people. White supremacist culture has many faces and one of them is this obnoxious BS about Islamic extremism threat to America being blown way out of proportion. Then again, nobody's ever gone broke in America selling a story about violent, evil, barbaric brown villains.
    Again what determines what a religion is are a religion's teachings and doctrines not what an individual person does. For instance if a Jain person eats meat does that make Jainism pro meat eating? Obviously not as the religion is against the killing of humans or animals and vegetarianism is a major part of their teachings. Likewise if a Muslim drinks or say is accepting of gay people or dosen't support jihad against infidels this dosen't change the fact that Islam's core texts and teachings are against alcohol, anti gay and violently intolerant of other religions. A meat eating Jain no more is considered a good Jain by the religion then a pro gay, feminist, religiously tolerant Muslim is considered a good Muslim by Islam's standards.

    First of all I am not making this assumption because you are a "man of color" but because you are a typical leftist American who is privileged and dosen't know how good he has it. Most Americans think that the world revolves around them and many Western Leftists see the West and America as uniquely evil and are utterly blind to the evil done by non Westerners and non Whites. Conservatives think that the West can do no evil and non Westerners no good where as Leftists think that the West can do no good and non Westerners or minorities can do no evil. The fact that you said that America wrote the book on oppressing brown people when Arab Muslims were enslaving African people and putting them in conditions that make the appalling conditions of the American slave trade seem like five star accommodations and these Arab Muslims were doing this long before America was even founded as a nation much less discovered shows you again don't know what you are talking about. You see most Muslims as being brown when the vast majority of Muslims are Arab and South Asian both races that are caucasian. Let me also be frank that I do not consider Arabs or South Asians to be "brown" people but white people. They are not Europeans but not all white people are Europeans. Jews and Arabs are both White but are not Europeans. Once more Arab Muslims typically only call themselves brown in the West to get oppression points but in their own countries and communities call themselves White. Linda Cockroach for instance said that without her hijab she would be indistinguishable from a white woman but yet calls herself a woman of color. When asked about this blatant contradiction she said that "I'm Palestinian it is self identification if I say I am Black then I am Black. Notice that she did not get nearly the same hate that say Rachel Dolezal did even though she basically said that you can just "identify" as Black. Once more this is especially offensive as Palestinian Muslims to this day own Black people as slaves as do Arab Muslims all across the Middle East and Arab colonized African nations. However because she is an Arab Muslim even though she is just as White as Rachel Dolezal she gets a pass because she is seen as a victim even though my stepdad who is Iberian Spanish looks darker then she does.

    Next I personally do consider the KKK a terrorist group and most people aside from certain racist conservatives do not view the KKK in a positive light. In American schools we are taught about the genocide of the Native Americans and the European slave trade of the Africans. We are taught about the evils that Christianity has done such as the Inquisition, witch burnings persecutions etc. However we are not taught about the Arab Islamic slave trade of Africans which came before the European one and unlike the European one that was ended the Arab Islamic slave trade of Africans is still on going. We are not taught about how Mohammad forced the Arab Pagans to accept Islam, destroyed their holy shrines and statues and killed all those that would not convert. We are taught about the imperialism and colonialism of the West and America but the same colonialism and imperialism done by Arab Muslims like Mohammad and his contemporaries or the Ottomans for instance is all but ignored.

    If you take an African studies class in college they will tell you the horrors of the European slave trade but they may or may not touch on the Arab Islamic slave trade of Africans or the fact that in many cases these European slave traders bought these slaves from Arab Muslims who had conquered and taken over these African nations. These Europeans may have been the ones that bought you but in reality it was Arab Muslims and the corrupt African Kings like King Adanzu II and the various Adanggaman that put your ancestors in their custody. If you take a Women's studies class they will all talk about how Christianity has historically oppressed women however not one mention will be given to Islam's oppression of women. Likewise many studies on gay history will talk about Christianity's role in bringing homophobia to Europe and instituting sodomy laws there but not one mention will be made of the fact that Mohammad brought homophobia to Arabia and insituted sodomy laws there.

    Next yeah the Klan, White Racism is a threat but so is Islam. Once more Arab Islam is an even bigger threat to Africans in Africa as they still own Europeans and slaves and not only that but colonize and have control of over half of Africa and have more power and infrastructure then Europeans or Africans combined. The person most likely to own a Black person as a slave now is an Arab Muslim not a European.
    Last edited by Mariatenebre; September 23rd, 2018 at 12:27 AM.

  21. #21
    ***** queen fabulouslyghetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,790


    Posts must follow the:
    Code of Conduct

    Re: Why Americans do not see 9/11 as a racial attack -- because it wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariatenebre View Post
    White Racism is a threat but
    I swear to God I'm going to copyright this phrase, "Yeah racism BUT..." I'll be a millionaire within minutes.

    Anywho are you going to keep telling me things I already know about slavery in the Muslim world or are you going to swing this back to the actual [on] topic of 9/11 and Islamaphobia? By numbers, Islam extremism is not nearly as big a threat to Americans as domestic terror groups or angry white teenagers who at one point were in the news almost weekly for walking into schools with high-powered weaponry, of course they're not called terrorists though in spite of the set-your-watch-to-it-consistency of fetishizing white supremacy and Nazism, no, they're not terrorists they're lost souls or they had mental problems, that the narrative surrounding white domestic terrorists [who, again, are not even called terrorists] and Islamic terrorists are so vastly different is proof enough that a large motivator in America's disproportionate obsession with Muslim terrorists is skin color.

    Neo nazis march. free speech.

    Klan marches. free speech.

    Would you care to wager a bet how many "color-blind" white Americans would defend Jihadists chanting "Death to the infidels" on American soil as "Leave them alone and let them march cuz free speech."?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •