Islamophobia

[Raymann]

www.merriam-webster.com
Definition of Islamophobia
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam
Muslims "Apologists" seem to add to that definition, everyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims no matter if the reasons are based on facts and on reliable sources.
Under the Apologists consensus, people like Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer, David Wood, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders, and many others fall under the category of "Islamophobes".
The problem is that nothing that they say is actually irrational nor discriminatory against Muslims.
The fears against Islam are entirely based on facts and reliable sources.
These problems affect not only Muslims but most countries around the world are now affected by the Islamic turmoil.
What the "Apologists" accomplish by claiming these people are "Islamophobes" is to deter them from denouncing the problems that the religion faces.
Many of them are already facing death threats and are not able to live normal lives.
They live in hiding and under 24/7 security protection.
Who is to blame for this?
Muslims extremists?
Muslims in general?
Islam?
Islamic rules? (blasphemy and freedom of speech)
The UK has banned many of these people from entering the country.
Isn't that crazy?
A western country is afraid of freedom of speech.
A few years ago two female journalists (Lauren Southern and Brittany Pettibone) were not allowed to enter the UK for some similar reasons, fear they would speak badly against Islam.
What do we accomplish by silencing the ones making us aware of what is coming?
Is it better to walk blindly towards the danger zone without any warning?
We'll see.

 

[Cooky]

www.merriam-webster.com
Definition of Islamophobia
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam
Muslims "Apologists" seem to add to that definition, everyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims no matter if the reasons are based on facts and on reliable sources.
Under the Apologists consensus, people like Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer, David Wood, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders, and many others fall under the category of "Islamophobes".
The problem is that nothing that they say is actually irrational nor discriminatory against Muslims.
The fears against Islam are entirely based on facts and reliable sources.
These problems affect not only Muslims but most countries around the world are now affected by the Islamic turmoil.
What the "Apologists" accomplish by claiming these people are "Islamophobes" is to deter them from denouncing the problems that the religion faces.
Many of them are already facing death threats and are not able to live normal lives.
They live in hiding and under 24/7 security protection.
Who is to blame for this?
Muslims extremists?
Muslims in general?
Islam?
Islamic rules? (blasphemy and freedom of speech)
The UK has banned many of these people from entering the country.
Isn't that crazy?
A western country is afraid of freedom of speech.
A few years ago two female journalists (Lauren Southern and Brittany Pettibone) were not allowed to enter the UK for some similar reasons, fear they would speak badly against Islam.
What do we accomplish by silencing the ones making us aware of what is coming?
Is it better to walk blindly towards the danger zone without any warning?
We'll see.

People call other people "Islamophobes" only because there are a bunch of Muslims in the world, so they figure it must be legit somehow, or else how in the world would so many people become Muslim.

...What they reject to comprehend, is that Islam WON'T LET YOU LEAVE..! Like an everlasting nightmare come to life.

 

[Cooky]

Traditionally, anyone who tries to leave gets hurt... Physically.

 

[Cooky]

To make matters even worse, any land owned by Muslims is to be considered eternally "Muslim land".

...So as anyone with any sense can see, Islam exceeds being a mere religion. It actually combines fascism, totalitarianism, a god who can choke your jugular vain in an instance, and every other bad idea imaginable into one single system of total obedience that any non-Muslim should naturally be repulsed by.

It's

And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than his jugular vein.
Quran 50:16

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Muslims "Apologists" seem to add to that definition, everyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims no matter if the reasons are based on facts and on reliable sources.

Wrong. There is a significant different between a healthy critique, and mimicking bigoted rhetoric that portrays itself as based on facts. Most online discussions "criticizing" Islam tend to ballet dance in the realm of bigotry and confirmation bias not discourse.

Under the Apologists consensus, people like Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer, David Wood, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders, and many others fall under the category of "Islamophobes".

Let's see here Pamala Gellar is a political activist known for her anti-Muslim views. Most notably she reprinted the cartoon of the prophet Muhammad. She stirs controversy by also buying anti-Muslim ads for public transit.

Robert Spencer, also referred to himself as the "good kind of Islamaphobe," is also self-described anti-Muslim and despite his lack of academic knowledge on Islam, continues to blog using anti-Muslim rhetoric. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

"A career anti-Muslim figure, Spencer has devoted much of his life to writing books, countless articles, and producing other content all with the goal of vilifying and maligning Muslims and the Islamic faith,"

See:Robert Spencer

David Sharpe Wood (oh the irony of the middle and last name) is an evangelist that is an avid speaker against Islam and atheism. Ironically he was atheist himself who also stated that he was psychotic.

Marine Le Pen is a far-right French politician known for her anti-Islamic rhetoric was also investigated by the French government for her inflammatory tweets as well as ordered to take a psychiatric exam.

Geert Wilders a far-right Dutch politician known for his inflammatory anti-Muslim rhetoric whose rhetoric was so inflammatory even Twitter blocked him.

The problem is that nothing that they say is actually irrational nor discriminatory against Muslims.

See above because from what little I posted, their behavior is quite illogical and irrational.

The fears against Islam are entirely based on facts and reliable sources.

No. In the United States more terrorism is domestic as opposed to international.

These problems affect not only Muslims but most countries around the world are now affected by the Islamic turmoil.

Terrorism affects everyone, nothing religious about it.

What the "Apologists" accomplish by claiming these people are "Islamophobes" is to deter them from denouncing the problems that the religion faces.

What's problematic is you have a baseless argument thus far which is rather sad cause I was looking for a challenge.

Many of them are already facing death threats and are not able to live normal lives.

Yes because they decided to throw rocks at a hornets nest.

They live in hiding and under 24/7 security protection.

Not all of them....

Who is to blame for this?

Blame is all around. Some from them, some from the terrorist.

Muslims extremists?

Of course.

Muslims in general?

Nope.

Islam?

Nope.

Islamic rules? (blasphemy and freedom of speech)

WTH is "Islamic rules?" you mean Islamic law? That only applies to countries that enforce them.

A western country is afraid of freedom of speech.

Actually some of the people you listed are facing issues because their speech was inflammatory which incites violence (See Marine Le Pen).

What do we accomplish by silencing the ones making us aware of what is coming?

Many of the espoused rhetoric goes beyond "free speech" a lot of what they say is sensationalism which is meant to stoke anger which most undoubtedly leads to violence.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

To make matters even worse, any land owned by Muslims is to be considered eternally "Muslim land".

Proof from an Islamic source please

 

[Estro Felino]

Proof from an Islamic source please

Is our Giorgia an Islamophobe?

 

[Raymann]

There is a significant different between a healthy critique, and mimicking bigoted rhetoric that portrays itself as based on facts. Most online discussions "criticizing" Islam tend to ballet dance in the realm of bigotry and confirmation bias not discourse.

Thanks for your attempt to answer some of the questions but I think you're falling under the same umbrella most Muslims "Apologists" end up under.
You are saying you accept healthy critique but reject bigotry and bias views, that's fine with me.
The problem is that then you follow the nice beginning by doing "EXACTLY" what every single "MUSLIM APOLOGIST" does. That is to discredit every single person known to have criticized Islam.
Let's see, Pamela Geller's point for showing the drawing of the prophet Muhammed was to expose the fact that the Muslim community has a problem with freedom of speech. The drawings were shown in a western country where most of the people to see them were westerners and the Muslims could simply ignore them.
She won. She proved the Muslim community (a part of it) is unable to coexist with other civilizations that behave with a different set of values. Do you understand?

Robert Spencer, also referred to himself as the "good kind of Islamaphobe," is also self-described anti-Muslim and despite his lack of academic knowledge on Islam, continues to blog using anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Stop being an "Apologist" and quote something that Robert Spencer said and you don't agree with so we can have a "HEALTHY DISCUSSION".
I don't care what the "Southern Poverty Law Center" has to say about Robert Spencer based on cheap assumptions.

David Sharpe Wood (oh the irony of the middle and last name) is an evangelist that is an avid speaker against Islam and atheism. Ironically he was atheist himself who also stated that he was psychotic.

I don't see anything wrong with him becoming an Evangelist after being an atheist or the fact that he is sick.
Is it a sin or a crime being psychotic or bipolar or diabetic?
Again, show me what exactly is wrong with what he says.

Marine Le Pen is a far-right French politician known for her anti-Islamic rhetoric"
Geert Wilders a far-right Dutch politician known for his inflammatory anti-Muslim rhetoric whose rhetoric was so inflammatory even Twitter blocked him.

Again, use your own brain.
I don't care about their assumed political inclinations,
I do care about the "inflammatory anti-Muslim rhetoric".
Can you quote some of them?
You'll be surprised when after reading them or listening to what they have to say there is nothing they say is illogical
, bias or "islamophobic".

No. In the United States more terrorism is domestic as opposed to international.

Wrong again, I showed on another post (I'll find it later) that of the last 30 terrorist attacks in the US at least 4 were committed by Muslims.
That is 13.3% of the attacks were committed by Muslims but here is the real problem, Muslims represent only 1% of the total population in the US.
What do you think?

What's problematic is you have a baseless argument thus far which is rather sad cause I was looking for a challenge.

I believe is totally the other way around.
You speak based on what others think and you have failed to show at least one single quote from the people you are criticizing. You simply have no arguments.
It is not too late to have a "healthy discussion" but you need to do a lot better than that.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Is our Giorgia an Islamophobe?

Yes. Without even looking at the video the subtitles "who funds these cultural centers and mosques?" Really? People ought to build in worship in their spaces of meditation and prayer without having to deal with scrutiny.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes. Without even looking at the video the subtitles "who funds these cultural centers and mosques?" Really? People ought to build in worship in their spaces of meditation and prayer without having to deal with scrutiny.

If you haven't watched the video, you are misjudging it.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

You are saying you accept healthy critique but reject bigotry and bias views, that's fine with me.

Yes because it's not discourse it's akin to listening to a schizophrenic rant about a hallucination.

Let's see, Pamela Geller's point for showing the drawing of the prophet Muhammed was to expose the fact that the Muslim community has a problem with freedom of speech.

No. What she wanted to do is stir the pot. Grant it, I'm sure the Muslim community wouldn't appreciate the depiction of their prophet and I'm sure a section of those with extremist views wouldn't like it even more, but the fact is, is that its an intentional way of "poking the bear" all under the guise of free speech. All their effort amounts to simply demonstrating their belief that they have a right to be a****holes.

The problem is that then you follow the nice beginning by doing "EXACTLY" what every single "MUSLIM APOLOGIST" does. That is to discredit every single person known to have criticized Islam.

You have not said nothing specific in Islam to critique about. You wrote a dissertation tantamount to an adolescent child writing to his mother on why they want cookies before bed. All I've basically read was whine whine whine whine, "why is the Muslim community against me chastising their beliefs" whine, whine, whine. There is nothing remotely academic that warrants a serious look at any criticism of Islam.

The drawings were shown in a western country where most of the people to see them were westerners and the Muslims could simply ignore them.

Hard to ignore if political figures intentionally try to lambaste their religious figure in public places like Marine who wanted to place anti-Muslim ads in transit areas.

She proved the Muslim community (a part of it) is unable to coexist with other civilizations that behave with a different set of values.

She proved nothing, even Marine's government thinks she is a quack hence the order for a psychiatric evaluation. My friend, those names you wrote were poor choices to use as examples for your position as they themselves had issues of their own.

Stop being an "Apologist" and quote something that Robert Spencer said and you don't agree with so we can have a "HEALTHY DISCUSSION".

"I have long contended that Islam is unique among the major world religions in having a developed doctrine, theology, and legal system mandating warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. There is no orthodox sect or school of Islam that teaches that Muslims must coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis. I use the term “radical Islam” merely to distinguish those Muslims who are actively working to advance this subjugation from the many millions who are not, as well as to emphasize that the stealth jihad program is truly radical: it aims at nothing less than the transformation of American society and the imposition of Islamic law here, subjugating women and non-Muslims to the status of legal inferiors."

Source: Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without guns or bombs

Is it a sin or a crime being psychotic or bipolar or diabetic?

No, but one must beg to question whether their sensationalized critique comes from a place of sanity or mental deficiency.

I do care about the "inflammatory anti-Muslim rhetoric".

I already gave minor examples. You want specifics, you ought to know what they stand for.

Can you quote some of them?

How do you create a thread in hopes to argue your point on how these people aren't Islamophobic, but want me to do the work for you? So far, you haven't argued anything but want me to list what they have said.

Wrong again, I showed on another post (I'll find it later) that of the last 30 terrorist attacks in the US at least 4 were committed by Muslims.

More Americans have been killed by domestic terrorists than by international terrorists since 9/11

Again this is boring

 

[Epic Beard Man]

If you haven't watched the video, you are misjudging it.

What for its a baseless video?

 

[Estro Felino]

What for its a baseless video?

It is not an Islamophobic video then...given that you did not watch it.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes. Without even looking at the video the subtitles "who funds these cultural centers and mosques?" Really? People ought to build in worship in their spaces of meditation and prayer without having to deal with scrutiny.

And btw scrutiny is essential in a secular country. We are not as liberal as the US, when it comes to associations.

 

[Raymann]

No. What she wanted to do is stir the pot. Grant it, I'm sure the Muslim community wouldn't appreciate the depiction of their prophet and I'm sure a section of those with extremist views wouldn't like it even more, but the fact is, is that its an intentional way of "poking the bear"

The fact remains that she did nothing wrong under our law.
Muslims are supposed to obey the local laws even under their own scriptures. They killed people (Charlie Hebdo) and reacted violently on similar occasions (Swedish movie) and others

Hard to ignore if political figures intentionally try to lambaste their religious figure in public places like Marine who wanted to place anti-Muslim ads in transit areas.

I know nothing about those ads, care to place a
link to them?

She proved nothing, even Marine's government thinks she is a quack hence the order for a psychiatric evaluation.

You're confusing facts. Pamela Geller was the one trying to post ads on the trains, not Marine Le Pen, according to what I know.

Quote from Richard Spencer if I'm correct "I have long contended that Islam is unique among the major world religions in having a developed doctrine, theology, and legal system mandating warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. There is no orthodox sect or school of Islam that teaches that Muslims must coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis. I use the term “radical Islam” merely to distinguish those Muslims who are actively working to advance this subjugation from the many millions who are not, as well as to emphasize that the stealth jihad program is truly radical: it aims at nothing less than the transformation of American society and the imposition of Islamic law here, subjugating women and non-Muslims to the status of legal inferiors."

I have heard much worst from Muslims preaching on the streets of London.
Are you saying what he wrote is not based on the Islamic doctrine itself?
I don't see anything outrageous about that. It all sounds true to me.

On David Wood being sick: No, but one must beg to question whether their sensationalized critique comes from a place of sanity or mental deficiency.

That is pure cheap speculation on your part.

How do you create a thread in hopes to argue your point on how these people aren't Islamophobic, but want me to do the work for you?

Those are the rules of the game.
You want to prove they are Islamophobic?
Bring some facts to prove your point.
Innocent until proven guilty.

More Americans have been killed by domestic terrorists than by international terrorists since 9/11

Well, what do you expect?
There are 300 million people living in the US.
Most attacks are committed by Americans but still, the small percentage of Muslims commit a much larger percentage of attacks as shown in my last post.

.

 

[danieldemol]

www.merriam-webster.com
Definition of Islamophobia
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam
Muslims "Apologists" seem to add to that definition, everyone who criticizes Islam or Muslims no matter if the reasons are based on facts and on reliable sources.
Under the Apologists consensus, people like Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer, David Wood, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders, and many others fall under the category of "Islamophobes".
The problem is that nothing that they say is actually irrational nor discriminatory against Muslims.
The fears against Islam are entirely based on facts and reliable sources.
These problems affect not only Muslims but most countries around the world are now affected by the Islamic turmoil.
What the "Apologists" accomplish by claiming these people are "Islamophobes" is to deter them from denouncing the problems that the religion faces.
Many of them are already facing death threats and are not able to live normal lives.
They live in hiding and under 24/7 security protection.
Who is to blame for this?
Muslims extremists?
Muslims in general?
Islam?
Islamic rules? (blasphemy and freedom of speech)
The UK has banned many of these people from entering the country.
Isn't that crazy?
A western country is afraid of freedom of speech.
A few years ago two female journalists (Lauren Southern and Brittany Pettibone) were not allowed to enter the UK for some similar reasons, fear they would speak badly against Islam.
What do we accomplish by silencing the ones making us aware of what is coming?
Is it better to walk blindly towards the danger zone without any warning?
We'll see.

I think Islamophobia is a poorly defined word which is certainly used to shut down constructive critique.

That’s the problem I have with legislating against Islamophobia, laws should be restricted to cull hate speech, not to keep Islam from receiving reasonable critique, nor to shield the criminal element which exists in all religions including Islam from the operation of justice.

 

[Shad]

More Americans have been killed by domestic terrorists than by international terrorists since 9/11

Again this is boring

ISIS attacks on US soil are not considered domestic terrorism by law. Also you removed (source) the one event that tips the balance. After all 3k dead says it all. So your source must remove 9/11 as it has no point if it doesn't. Manufactured stats, nothing more.

Your source

"The FBI defines international terrorism as involving subjects who are members of, or receive support from, a foreign terrorist organization."

Your source

"For example, the FBI can immediately open an investigation if a person expresses support for al Qaeda online, but the same can not be done for someone who aligns themselves with a white nationalist group."

Ergo prevention. How many attacks were prevented?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

It is not an Islamophobic video then...given that you did not watch it.

Me not watching it does not mean its not Islamophobic...I just don't waste my time with a baseless video especially if its going to talk about anti-Islam stuff.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

We are not as liberal as the US

There ya go.

 

[Estro Felino]

There ya go.

Yes...but towards any religion.
The difference is that the other religions bow to the secular law.