What's new

Islamophobia [Dedicated Thread]

Have you ever heard or read Anwar sheikh. If you have, try refuting him first as far as I know no scholar has till date dared to debate him till he was alive.

Well I have never heard about him but this refuting becomes a repetitive exercise when the allegations are completely baseless. I'm just guessing here, but he is probably one of those "Ex-muslims" listed on the websites who have now "found the truth".

The theme is always the same. Muslims's faith forces them to kill innocent people, that they want to establish their political Islamic superiority and Islam itself is to blame. Not the poor muslims who are of course forced to act violently because of the inherent violent nature of Islam they say.

Of course the fact that a political Islamic ideology is unIslamic does not matter to them. The fact is that muslims as a whole are not perfect just like any other religious group who have equally bad people among them. The Quran tells us to not lie, kill innocent e.t.c. but there are still muslims who indulge in that. But to grab on these as examples this is what Islam teaches. Like grabbing on say OBL and say he is a true muslim and see how violent they are is gross injustice to the truth.

I suggest if you want to get to the source, grab a authentic copy of the translation of the Quran itself. Leave the prejudiced annotations and "Explanations" aside. And read the translations yourself and decide for yourself. The point is that any allegation should be matched with the proof that the Quran advocates such. If it doesn't then it should be rejected.

In journalism and research when a author repeated misquotes or falsely attributes information, all his works are considered suspect and not credible. The same applies with this website. If you have been going through faithfreedom.com then you would have seen that so I'm glad about that.

Gandhiji himself has read the Quran and discussed Islam in many of his works. The Sikh Gurus had close relationship with the sufis and even consulted with them on various theological aspects. Look at what they have to say. We don't need to even go outside India to understand Islam. These non-muslim people were far more intelligent and had a beter understanding of Islam that than these "Ex-muslim" people who run websites.
 
Last edited:
.
Help me understand one thing here - are we talking about the Muslims who migrate to Europe and USA or are we talking about Muslims in general?

If we are talking about just the Muslims who migrate to Europe and USA, then one interim solution should be to boycott the countries that have no respect for Islam.
Just don't go there.

In general though it does not matter much. Muslims in their respective countries are free to practice their Religion in any way they want.
Between 30-40% muslims live as minorities in various parts of the world. Its this section that is most vulnerable. They are local converted muslim as well as those who have been living in these countries for generations.

Its not just about respect for Islam, its about respect the right of a person to follow their religion. For example, there was the case in Germany recently where a women wearing hijab was stabbed to death in a courtroom in front of her son and her husband when trying to defend her was shot at by the courtroom guars in a case of mistaken identity. Because they thought that the threat is from the bearded muslim, and not the white man with a knife. Wasn't there something inherently wrong in the psyche of the guards here?
I'm sure the major majority of Germans were horrified at this but this is what we should work to prevent. But we need to convert that sense of outrage and express that so it doesn't happen again
Murder in German court sparks Egyptian fury at west's 'Islamophobia' | World news | The Guardian

A hatred so strong that even women are targeted just for wearing a head covering which across all societies was something quite normal until only about a 100 years ago. Even now the President of India Pratibha Patil does not go anywhere without covering her head.
 
.
What do you think is the origins of such hate and what are your solutions?

Ejaz - I respect you and know your intellectual level - so don't answer me on the lines that they hate because we are Muslims.

Between 30-40% muslims live as minorities in various parts of the world. Its this section that is most vulnerable. They are local converted muslim as well as those who have been living in these countries for generations.

Its not just about respect for Islam, its about respect the right of a person to follow their religion. For example, there was the case in Germany recently where a women wearing hijab was stabbed to death in a courtroom in front of her son and her husband when trying to defend her was shot at by the courtroom guars in a case of mistaken identity. Because they thought that the threat is from the bearded muslim, and not the white man with a knife. Wasn't there something inherently wrong in the psyche of the guards here?
I'm sure the major majority of Germans were horrified at this but this is what we should work to prevent. But we need to convert that sense of outrage and express that so it doesn't happen again
Murder in German court sparks Egyptian fury at west's 'Islamophobia' | World news | The Guardian

A hatred so strong that even women are targeted just for wearing a head covering which across all societies was something quite normal until only about a 100 years ago. Even now the President of India Pratibha Patil does not go anywhere without covering her head.
 
.
Gentlemen, Europeans couldn't care less whether you are adopting to secular principles or not in your country, which is entirely your call. But Secularism, liberalism and certain tolerance limitations are expected from people who migrate to Western countries and not just Europe; even American countries, since we don't have the rigid principles you have. The migrants have all the freedom to be what they are but not at the cost of others. That's all. While there are some people who are stricken by the loss of their loved ones in terrorist attacks and become hardline anti-Islamic, there are also a lot of people on the opposite end of spectrum from the immigrant Muslim population in Europe who behave as if we are living in their country instead of they living in ours.

This obviously will be resisted by the local population. For once, let us forget the racist radicals and just talk about common people. There are thousands of British Muslims today who live in Britain, get the benefits of being a British and EU citizen and curse and threaten the very nation they live in. Why is that? This is the very thing that European countries want to oppose. Those who are not interested in adopting to European systems, then why stay and create friction? Its a fair game isn't it? Europeans don't come and impose their laws in Middle East or West Asia, do we?

While from the comments that I have heard from numerous members here, the concept of nationalism is perhaps absent in most of your dictionary as Pakistani members here seem to support other countries' citizens as well who share similar faith. This is not the trend in Europe. Each European country is proud of its traditions and as the mainstay of that particular country, people have to respect it and adopt it. Most of the principles of national laws are favourable to people migrants or not and only those who are not favourable, the people in question have to accept and change according to that. A country cannot be changed for the sake of a foreign community deciding to come and reside with Europeans.

This is sheer bullying and unfair. As I said, the cartoons in the beginning of the thread are wrong and I accept. But cultural and demographic bullying is more of a case. Some members have taken their time to post YouTube videos showing how "Islamophobia" is in European continent and how they are the victims. However, these members can find an equal and perhaps greater amount of videos on the exact opposite and how cultural imposition is being done across Europe to accommodate Muslims.

As a fellow member of this forum, I request all the members here to fairly investigate the other side of this coin as well and see this situation in a neutral manner. No phobia is good and discrimination is wrong; but this equally applies to Muslim communities in Europe as well.

This is my humble appeal to those who are moved by these YouTube videos taken by people at will, to look at the other side of the coin before blatantly blaming European systems.
 
.
all western propaganda, they are just afraid because of non Muslims converting to Islam

only in US 20,000 people convert to Islam every year, and 70% them are females (fox news said once)
 
.
all western propaganda, they are just afraid because of non Muslims converting to Islam

only in US 20,000 people convert to Islam every year, and 70% them are females (fox news said once)
Funny you call everything else as Western propaganda while you trust the same sources when it favours you. Have you taken a personal survey of US population? Or European population? Now this is what I call propaganda about "half the world converting to Islam". I have traveled a lot and nothing of the nature of what you describe has happened. Are you willing to accept a Western source then?

The issue is not about conversion as there are a lot of Westerners who are also embracing Eastern ancient faiths. It is about demographic imposition that happens because of excessive migration and migration of fundamentalists instead of good and liberal people.

You don't see such stereotypes being attached to other communities, do you? What interest would they serve us if we favour them and discriminate you? Nothing. Therefore, it is better to once introspect oneself too. Perhaps if your community leaders round up these radicals and intolerants and re-teach them moderate and liberal way of a good life, things would be a bit more different.

Racists and radicals are sternly taken action against in Europe. When a similar action is done to a fundamentalist Muslim, he evokes false emotions in the name of common faith and fools you people to support him. Don't be misled.
 
.
Islamophobia sounds a negative word for a religion hence I will not use the same... but in my opinion, the only religion which is vastly seen as negative mostly by other religion is its vast bloodsheded history and that is through its disciple. Few points, I noticed in general:-

1) There is always a sense of Islamic superiority felt by its disciple and whomsoever tried to contradict few guidelines they get a hard knock by other hardliners (Jamaat, Maulvi etc)

2) Islam, I strongly believe, is religion of peace but when I see history and discipiles even today.. sorry to say but mostly are not peaceful..

3) Interesting part is that most of other religion believe in brotherhood of whole humanity while Islamic disciples keep it limited till "Ummah" only.. why not others are brothers to Islamic Humans?
 
.
Well I have never heard about him but this refuting becomes a repetitive exercise when the allegations are completely baseless. I'm just guessing here, but he is probably one of those "Ex-muslims" listed on the websites who have now "found the truth".

The theme is always the same. Muslims's faith forces them to kill innocent people, that they want to establish their political Islamic superiority and Islam itself is to blame. Not the poor muslims who are of course forced to act violently because of the inherent violent nature of Islam they say.

Of course the fact that a political Islamic ideology is unIslamic does not matter to them. The fact is that muslims as a whole are not perfect just like any other religious group who have equally bad people among them. The Quran tells us to not lie, kill innocent e.t.c. but there are still muslims who indulge in that. But to grab on these as examples this is what Islam teaches. Like grabbing on say OBL and say he is a true muslim and see how violent they are is gross injustice to the truth.

I suggest if you want to get to the source, grab a authentic copy of the translation of the Quran itself. Leave the prejudiced annotations and "Explanations" aside. And read the translations yourself and decide for yourself. The point is that any allegation should be matched with the proof that the Quran advocates such. If it doesn't then it should be rejected.

As I said debating religion is futile, but yes I have read the Holy book Quran dont remember the translation Authors name though.

I very well know what it says and the allegation should be matched with proof as you said, this part you all do not belive I can go on giving proofs from the quran itself but no point in doing this exercise since this is a defense forum and I wouldnt want to debate on religion.

If you want to test my debating capacities pm me and we can continue this debate via pms

Gandhiji himself has read the Quran and discussed Islam in many of his works. The Sikh Gurus had close relationship with the sufis and even consulted with them on various theological aspects. Look at what they have to say. We don't need to even go outside India to understand Islam. These non-muslim people were far more intelligent and had a beter understanding of Islam that than these "Ex-muslim" people who run websites.


Doesnt matter who & what xyz has read and who hasnt, but I have read the lives and works of
Hazrat babajan
Sarmad
Baba tajuddin
Swami Samarth
Shirdi Sai baba etc etc etc.....

and belive me after studying their lives and work no body will need any holy books or rituals (of all religion).
 
.
What do you think is the origins of such hate and what are your solutions?

Ejaz - I respect you and know your intellectual level - so don't answer me on the lines that they hate because we are Muslims.

Well, there are majority people who are willing to go and find out the truth without a prejudiced mind even if they have apprehensions. These people are willing to give the silent muslim majority a chance. They know that what the see on the TV is not what they experience one-to-one with muslims and want to know the reality. And it is with these people that the inter-faith dialogue, promote tolerance and have open house mosques e.t.c. makes valuable contributions where faith can be discussed freely.

Let me give you an anecdotal example of Hindu friend of mine who never talked about religion with me but one day finally getting the courage did ask why muslims praise Mughal kings like Akbar every day and what about non-muslim Kings who were equally as great as Akbar.
I was surprised of course cause that wasn't true but then he pointed out the azan (the muslim call to prayer) where Allahu Akbar is said. When I explained that it basically means Bhagwan sabse bada hai and Akbar in Arabic means great he appreciated it much better and understood that our call to prayer is strictly that with no political overtones.


Now compare this to the fanatic who stabbed the Egyptian pharmacist just wearing hijab 18 times. What dialogue can we have with him? Ofcourse these things don't happen overnight. That person might get life imprisonment or similar punishment, but this fanaticism and hatred created against a hijab wearing women was imbibed in him over years.

Why do some people abhor the jews or demean the blacks so much? Some people might come up with some legitimate excuse of jews being rich or blacks being criminals but the more murky picture is that this prejudices are set in mind over years and the current environment.

In the pre1990s era, muslims and mujahideen were the great allies against the war against communists. It was described as the great Christian-Muslim civilizations against the evil Communists. Historical precedents were quoted to show the solidarity and portray how evil Communists were. The mujahideen were portrayed as heroes and Rambo movies fighting Russians with a turban were shown. Infact, even Hindus were shown in unsavory light during this era usually as part of the 70s drugged crowd for being soft commie supporters.

In another era in Europe and Germany in particular, jews were living in ghettos, and despite being hardworking they were treated with extreme prejudice. People justified that they don't live with us and dress a certain way kept beards and hence were rightly forced to live as such. Historical precedents were quoted to show how jews killed Jesus and were involved in unsavory money lending practices e.t.c.

Our era is defined by 9/11 like it or not. It doesn't matter how bad whose history was. It doesn't matter the WWI and WWII were the most devastating wars in the history of mankind that killed and unprecedented amount of civilians that no muslim kingdom or state had indulged in. But obscure historical precedents are quoted of how "Blood thirsty" muslims are. For example despite the fact that Mongols were non-muslims when then invaded Afghanistan and NW parts of India and then later Persia and Baghdad were large numbers of Hindus and then later Muslims were massacred, this is portrayed as some sort of muslim invasion. When in fact it was a case of the victors taking the religion of the vanquished. Ofcourse we could keep refuting through logic and Quranic quotes that what is right and what is wrong, and that even if a muslim is killing innocents, lying, indulging in honor killings or "slicing head of babies*" that it is wrong. But this is just unending. Hence my emphasis on the greater responsibility being on Muslims to reform themselves first and return to true Quranic values.

I think that the experiences of other groups who have suffered from xenophobia like Jews would be helpful for the muslim community to draw lessons and create a better understanding among the wider community. But at the same time, I would abhor some self-righteous groups of muslims becoming like AIPAC e.t.c. where any criticism or discussion of Islam or muslims is labeled as Islamaphobia. That would be demeaning the sufferings of those genuinely suffering from this. Just like the suffering of the Hijab martyr's family.


(*I remember seeing a picture on some website claiming this is what muslims do to commemorate Ibrahim sacrificing his son after Hajj every year with a man holding knife next to bleeding head of a crying baby. Ofcourse it could be a fake picture as muslims are never required or even known to do anything like this. And according to the story Ibrahim's son is not sacrificed. But ofcourse who cares for the truth when your aim is to promote hatred.
Its just similar to the allied propaganda that Germans ate baby brains or that Saddam's guards bashed babies heads on walls. The aim is the same, dehumanise the target-if they can do such things to a baby, then obviously they are no humans)
 
.
Islamophobia sounds a negative word for a religion hence I will not use the same... but in my opinion, the only religion which is vastly seen as negative mostly by other religion is its vast bloodsheded history and that is through its disciple. Few points, I noticed in general:-

1) There is always a sense of Islamic superiority felt by its disciple and whomsoever tried to contradict few guidelines they get a hard knock by other hardliners (Jamaat, Maulvi etc)

2) Islam, I strongly believe, is religion of peace but when I see history and discipiles even today.. sorry to say but mostly are not peaceful..

3) Interesting part is that most of other religion believe in brotherhood of whole humanity while Islamic disciples keep it limited till "Ummah" only.. why not others are brothers to Islamic Humans?

1) You will have to be more specific. Like I said there definitely exists a vocal minority that advocate a political Islamic ideology. For example SIMI in India use to promote this. But the vast array of traditional Islamic school of thoughts denounce this and is against Quranic teachings. Islam did not come to establish a politcal dominance of any community or ethnicity over everyone. It is a universal value system that is suppose to be practiced personally.

2) There are example of peaceful as well as violent just like any other religion. Its matter of weather you have had the opportunity to read up or meet them. Like I said, peaceful, calm and composed muslim scholars do not make for as good TRP ratings as a crazy venom spitting OBL or Anjum Choudary. But how many sane speaking muslims can you name? What about Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who followed the path of non-violence much before Ghandhiji came to meet him and he derived this from his following the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammed.

3) This is quite interesting because most compartive religion writers write about Islam as coming up with the idea of universal brotherhood regardless of caste, class or ethnicity. Regarding the word Ummah, it is true that many muslims think that it refers to only muslims. But in the Quran and sayings of the prophet it refers to the entire humanity from the time of the Prophet till the last day. In other words the entire race of mankind till the last day is considered Ummat-e-Muhammed under Islam. But ofcourse to be Muslim you have to belive in the one-ness of God and finality of Prophet Muhammed.

But that doesn't mean that muslims then have the right to demean all other religions. The relevant ayat in the Quran is
“Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance. Thus unto every nation have We made their deed seem fair. Then unto their Lord is their return, and He will tell them what they used to do.” [Quran, Verse 006:108]

Our local mulla in India translated it in Urdu simply as : “Tum doosro ke khudaao ko bura na kaho, nehin to wo tumare khuda ko burah kahenge.”
 
.
1) You will have to be more specific. Like I said there definitely exists a vocal minority that advocate a political Islamic ideology. For example SIMI in India use to promote this. But the vast array of traditional Islamic school of thoughts denounce this and is against Quranic teachings. Islam did not come to establish a politcal dominance of any community or ethnicity over everyone. It is a universal value system that is suppose to be practiced personally.

Very wisely said EjazR. But theory is much different than practise. I don't know about your situation but in Europe it is mostly not followed and any reaction is pointed to as Islamophobia.

2) There are example of peaceful as well as violent just like any other religion. Its matter of weather you have had the opportunity to read up or meet them. Like I said, peaceful, calm and composed muslim scholars do not make for as good TRP ratings as a crazy venom spitting OBL or Anjum Choudary. But how many sane speaking muslims can you name? What about Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan who followed the path of non-violence much before Ghandhiji came to meet him and he derived this from his following the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammed.

Affirmative. Violence is in human nature and has nothing to do with faith. But when faith is used as a motivation towards committing violence, the community should come forward and check this in order to avoid friction especially in a multi-cultural environment like Europe with it's vast Muslim community migrants.

3) This is quite interesting because most compartive religion writers write about Islam as coming up with the idea of universal brotherhood regardless of caste, class or ethnicity. Regarding the word Ummah, it is true that many muslims think that it refers to only muslims. But in the Quran and sayings of the prophet it refers to the entire humanity from the time of the Prophet till the last day. In other words the entire race of mankind till the last day is considered Ummat-e-Muhammed under Islam. But ofcourse to be Muslim you have to belive in the one-ness of God and finality of Prophet Muhammed.

Again its good in theory but not followed. Human nature tends to show oneself superior to the other and this causes disputes. If you ask a lot of fellow Muslim members here, they will tend to disagree with you. They are really fast at pointing that religious scripts distinguish between Christians, Jews, Muslims and other faiths, although I am sure this is not the case.

The words of virtue that you have mentioned here are not followed, which is why friction is caused. Otherwise, there would be no reason for any friction between two communities to co-exist like families together.

But that doesn't mean that muslims then have the right to demean all other religions. The relevant ayat in the Quran is “Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance. Thus unto every nation have We made their deed seem fair. Then unto their Lord is their return, and He will tell them what they used to do.” [Quran, Verse 006:108]

Very nicely put. :-)
 
.
WOW I am truly amazed by this person's level of ignorance! 99% muslims in Palestine? what about our 15-20% christian community?
Indeed. But you can't condemn a whole article or book on the basis of one incorrect statistic for that might just be a typo. I've seen perfect galley proofs yet when the stuff was published the numbers and math symbols got messed up.

These kind of typos are difficult to catch, even in scientific journals. Probably worth contacting the author and asking for an explanation.
 
.
Just an example why the problem exists. Bad PR , and the western media has been really harsh, in reinforcing stereotypes about people. Demand for Sharia in European countries, many such issues. Watch the video!!
Eg watch at 3:09... The protestors and media equally to be blamed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
Just an example why the problem exists. Bad PR , and the western media has been really harsh, in reinforcing stereotypes about people. Demand for Sharia in European countries, many such issues. Watch the video!!
Eg watch at 3:09... The protestors and media equally to be blamed
YouTube - Muslim Protests in Europe

You'll find people like that everywhere. Even in America.

NUKE+IT+-+And+nothing+of+value+was+lost.jpg


Funny how most of the posters were written by one person.



Here is the photoshop.

And the original.


And nuke denmark? With what? Stop being so easily convinced. You're acting like a conspiracy theory believer.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom