Anti Islam rhetoric - on the rise ...

deravarra

Hi folks. Something I am very much aware of after reading comments in the Sky News website is the huge increase in anti - Islamic rhetoric. It's getting to a very nasty stage and I'm getting the feeling that it could go back to the 1930's and Germany.

Is it just the few, or do a lot of people have issues with normal, everyday muslims?

Echospace

It's not just muslims, there's a very anti-"any sort of organized religion" viewpoint these days as people start to realise 99% of it is bs.

AlmightyCushion

I hate all people equally.

Mr Benevolent

deravarra wrote: »

Hi folks. Something I am very much aware of after reading comments in the Sky News website is the huge increase in anti - Islamic rhetoric. It's getting to a very nasty stage and I'm getting the feeling that it could go back to the 1930's and Germany.

Is it just the few, or do a lot of people have issues with normal, everyday muslims?

Yes, the Sky News website - that should give you a clue that the Irish don't really care.

Teferi

Boards has travelled back in time to 2001.

TimeToShine

Ironic as there's an Islam convert website at the bottom right of the page

deravarra

Teferi wrote: »

Boards has travelled back in time to 2001.

Ahhh ... so you're saying that us Irish are about 10 years ahead of the brits?

deravarra

TimeToShine wrote: »

Ironic as there's an Islam convert website at the bottom right of the page

I dont see it ...

TimeToShine

It was there for me, I'm guessing they change every while.

knird evol

The islamics were treated very well in 1930s germany

deravarra

knird evol wrote: »

The islamics were treated very well in 1930s germany

Im talking about another ethnic group ..... **forehead smack**

Dudess

If you hate Islam the organised religion, and fanatical muslims, fair enough, but extending that hatred towards all who are muslims is ****ing horrible - and retarded.

deravarra

Dudess wrote: »

If you hate Islam the organised religion, and fanatical muslims, fair enough, but extending that hatred towards all who are muslims is ****ing horrible - and retarded.

i agree! I have seen people who do not support Israel in the middle east conflict being called "jihadists" and "terrorists", etc ...

Sharkey 10

Dudess wrote: »

If you hate Islam the organised religion, and fanatical muslims, fair enough, but extending that hatred towards all who are muslims is ****ing horrible - and retarded.

I have a big problem with islam and not just radical islam. I cant hate people i just dont like their parts of their philosophy.
This is a double edged sword and there is alot of hypocrisy involved remember the time that danish magazine published pictures of mohamed , the reaction to that was ridiculous also more recently the reaction to the koran burning was awful.
Radical islam has to be adressed and not the way it is being at the moment

deravarra

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

I have a big problem with islam and not just radical islam. I cant hate people i just dont like their parts of their philosophy.
This is a double edged sword and there is alot of hypocrisy involved remember the time that danish magazine published pictures of mohamed , the reaction to that was ridiculous also more recently the reaction to the koran burning was awful.
Radical islam has to be adressed and not the way it is being at the moment

What I dont understand is people who dont understand the reaction of muslims to things like pictures of mohammed and the koran burning.

It's like punching someone, and then complaining when you've been hit back.

What is sacred to the muslims? God, his word (the Qur'an) and his messenger (Mohammed). So why piss people off by burning what is held sacred to the muslims? Why try to draw a nasty little picture of Mohammed? Freedom of speach? That's laughable. Freedom of speach does not give you the right to piss on what someone else holds sacred to them. Seriously, try and do something like that to Judaism in the middle of Jerusalem and see how peaceful Jews would be ... or the Hindus if you started digging into a cheeseburger

wonton

deravarra wrote: »

Is it just the few, or do a lot of people have issues with normal, everyday muslims?

where exactly is islam normal to you?


how about you go and live in a "normal" muslim country and see how you get on..........................try saudi arabia or yemen, i believe the age of consent is 9! go get yourself a nice normal 9 year old wife.........like mohammed did.

Morlar

deravarra wrote: »

What I dont understand is people who dont understand the reaction of muslims to things like pictures of mohammed and the koran burning.

It's like punching someone, and then complaining when you've been hit back.

What is sacred to the muslims? God, his word (the Qur'an) and his messenger (Mohammed). So why piss people off by burning what is held sacred to the muslims? Why try to draw a nasty little picture of Mohammed? Freedom of speach? That's laughable. Freedom of speach does not give you the right to piss on what someone else holds sacred to them. Seriously, try and do something like that to Judaism in the middle of Jerusalem and see how peaceful Jews would be ... or the Hindus if you started digging into a cheeseburger

Well in addition to godwinning your own thread from the very first post this one above should also win a prize for stupid.

Social Disorder

I dont see how praying to a man who lives in the sky is considered normal?

That goes for all religions though.

And as for this "anti islamic" being recent...where have you been? Whatever about 2001... what about the crusades

Amalgam

deravarra wrote: »

What I dont understand is people who dont understand the reaction of muslims to things like pictures of mohammed and the koran burning.

Give over, the Muslim press go bananas over Jews and print cartoons that are as or more offensive than anything 'the West' has published.

Blowing up people and injuring them in various other ways is not a sensible response to 'pictures of Mohammed'.

The understanding should be mutual, mutual understanding. Not one sided, with a stick of dynamite under my jaw (as a non Muslim) or the threat of death, if I don't walk your fine religious line..

BlaasForRafa

deravarra wrote: »

What I dont understand is people who dont understand the reaction of muslims to things like pictures of mohammed and the koran burning.

It's like punching someone, and then complaining when you've been hit back.

What is sacred to the muslims? God, his word (the Qur'an) and his messenger (Mohammed). So why piss people off by burning what is held sacred to the muslims? Why try to draw a nasty little picture of Mohammed? Freedom of speach? That's laughable. Freedom of speach does not give you the right to piss on what someone else holds sacred to them. Seriously, try and do something like that to Judaism in the middle of Jerusalem and see how peaceful Jews would be ... or the Hindus if you started digging into a cheeseburger

I think people have a problem with some muslims trying to impose their cultural values on the west. Thus things like the Niqab and Burka get banned in various places and attacks on freedom of speech like the danish cartoon controversy cause a defensive reaction the part of people in western countries.

If someone says "hey if you say X about my god/religion/whatever I'm going to kill you", are you just going to back down to that kind of threat? The Mohammed cartoons were NOTHING compared to some of the slagging that christianity gets, yet you seem to think muslims should have a free card to do what they like. By that measure would you defend the right of catholics to beat up Graham Linehan and Arthur Mathews?

The point that you are proposing is extremely insidious and iniquitous to the way of life of people here. Muslims who are offended by a few cartoons need to grow the f**k up and cop the f**k on.

deravarra

Morlar wrote: »

Well in addition to godwinning your own thread from the very first post this one above should also win a prize for stupid.

eh ... stupid? care to elaborate?

i_love_toast

the guy who makes effigy's for a living in muslim countries makes some money i say!!!he's constantly busy

Amalgam

There's some interesting points about the friction between the two cultures and 'globalisation', information and technology etc..

Politics.ie member Kevin Parlon made the following post in the following thread:

http://www.politics.ie/political-humour/139645-hollow-islamic-call-tolerance-9.html

I don't think the west and the anglosphere are entirely analogous. Germany and France form a good part of what constitues the "soft power" element of "the west".

I think you're right in that globalization poses a threat to the long term good health of millenarist islam. Writers like Amis have suggested that this upward spike in islamist violence is the dying spasms of violent / fundamentalist islam. Amis posits that much of the rage eminating from the muslim world is borne of civilizational chagrin/humiliation.

How can it be that the infidels who lead a life so antithetical to the koran and hadiths are the ones with the technology, the advanced health care, knowledge, wealth, military power, the swagger whilst the pious ummah languish in poverty, violence, corruption and intellectual and physical squalor?

The realisation that Allah hasn't put the Ummah in a position of dominance reinforces two tendencies that I can see. Firslty, the nihilism of millenarist islam. See now, the contempt for the temporal, the rejection of rationialism. The lack of progressiveness in the Islamic milleu, the fatalism so endemic there. And two, the idea that this is a test by Allah to drive the ummah on towards ever more frenzied hatred of the infidel, the desperate Jihad to finally exert god's religion and will on the world (see reference to muslim brotherhood quote above).

Perhaps if we (the west) can hold our nerve during these violent death throes of Islamism, and at the same time remain unapologetic about the merits of our own culture whilst allowing for the faults inherent in that culture, we can some day look forward to a positive relationship with a reformed muslim world.

Multiculturalism where it leads to the kind of "Yes, perhaps you're right Imam, freedom of speech and the press is perhaps not such a good thing afterall. How arrogant of us to not realise your religion and cultural practices should be exempt from it." interactions with the cultures immigrating to the west is not healthy and only prolongs the problems associated with the long adjustment to reality that the muslim world is undergoing.

Going back to the OP, "tolerance" and "peace" and "innocent" in the Islamic dictionary don't mean the things we think them to mean in the west. Tolerance is the tolerance of non muslims in a subjugated existence. Peace means islamic peace; the peace that exists in dar-al-islam. Innocent, especially in the context of luke warm condemnations of terrorism often means "muslim". So we would be very wise indeed to treat calls for "tolerance" by muslims with care whilst at the same time attempting to extend every "tolerance" to muslims where their actions and goals do not actively undermine our way of life.

Social Disorder

deravarra wrote: »

What I dont understand is people who dont understand the reaction of muslims to things like pictures of mohammed and the koran burning.

It's like punching someone, and then complaining when you've been hit back.

What is sacred to the muslims? God, his word (the Qur'an) and his messenger (Mohammed). So why piss people off by burning what is held sacred to the muslims? Why try to draw a nasty little picture of Mohammed? Freedom of speach? That's laughable. Freedom of speach does not give you the right to piss on what someone else holds sacred to them. Seriously, try and do something like that to Judaism in the middle of Jerusalem and see how peaceful Jews would be ... or the Hindus if you started digging into a cheeseburger

Oh lord

Yes because other religions are never belittled. There has never been a movie or cartoon. Where do you live? Under a rock by the looks of it.

I was in a Hindu country recently and they were throwing cheeseburgers at me, even had a nice MacDonalds. Hindus are known as hot heads though...this guy in particular was a real trouble maker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi

knird evol

deravarra wrote: »

Im talking about another ethnic group ..... **forehead smack**

I think you mean **facepalm**.
You only mention germans and muslims in your original post. i don't you should pick on the germans, its racist, they had great economic and cultural achievements in the 1930s.

twinQuins

You know what I'm sick of? Radical Irish trying to impose their values upon the Northern Irish.

Damn Irish people, who do they think they are killing innocent people like that. We should bomb Ireland back to the stone age to teach those barbarians a lesson.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Muslims who are offended by a few cartoons need to grow the f**k up and cop the f**k on.

The irony, it is so very delicious.

deravarra

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I think people have a problem with some muslims trying to impose their cultural values on the west. Thus things like the Niqab and Burka get banned in various places and attacks on freedom of speech like the danish cartoon controversy cause a defensive reaction the part of people in western countries.

If someone says "hey if you say X about my god/religion/whatever I'm going to kill you", are you just going to back down to that kind of threat? The Mohammed cartoons were NOTHING compared to some of the slagging that christianity gets, yet you seem to think muslims should have a free card to do what they like. By that measure would you defend the right of catholics to beat up Graham Linehan and Arthur Mathews?

The point that you are proposing is extremely insidious and iniquitous to the way of life of people here. Muslims who are offended by a few cartoons need to grow the f**k up and cop the f**k on.

like I said ... freedom of speech is not the same as being able to piss on whatever you want "because you can". Respect. I respect.

Where did I say I think muslims should have a free card to do what they like? On the contrary, I think a more measured, calmer response would be more in line ... but I understand the anger felt when someone just decides to piss all over what I hold sacred.

Please, dont go down the silly side of any argument or debate re defending the rights of catholics to beat up anyone.

Im not proposing any point. Im just raising the anti-islamic rhetoric that I see ... which is more vicious than I have seen before and I think is just trying for a reaction which it hopes to get

Sharkey 10

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I think people have a problem with some muslims trying to impose their cultural values on the west. Thus things like the Niqab and Burka get banned in various places and attacks on freedom of speech like the danish cartoon controversy cause a defensive reaction the part of people in western countries.

If someone says "hey if you say X about my god/religion/whatever I'm going to kill you", are you just going to back down to that kind of threat? The Mohammed cartoons were NOTHING compared to some of the slagging that christianity gets, yet you seem to think muslims should have a free card to do what they like. By that measure would you defend the right of catholics to beat up Graham Linehan and Arthur Mathews?

The point that you are proposing is extremely insidious and iniquitous to the way of life of people here. Muslims who are offended by a few cartoons need to grow the f**k up and cop the f**k on.

I have to disagree about muslims imposing there culture in france and other places I think you are talking about, I just dont see how they are . I also dont think someone can tell someone what to wear
Great point about father ted.

deravarra

Social Disorder wrote: »

Oh lord

Yes because other religions are never belittled. There has never been a movie or cartoon. Where do you live? Under a rock by the looks of it.

I was in a Hindu country recently and they were throwing cheeseburgers at me, even had a nice MacDonalds. Hindus are known as hot heads though...this guy in particular was a real trouble maker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi

if you come out from under your rock then we can go for a coffee

perhaps your mahatma was a good guy. said some very nice things about Mohammed! (Im serious!!!)

maybe his buddies would be good enough to follow his example:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-10-01-504329397_x.htm

deravarra

wonton wrote: »

where exactly is islam normal to you?


how about you go and live in a "normal" muslim country and see how you get on..........................try saudi arabia or yemen, i believe the age of consent is 9! go get yourself a nice normal 9 year old wife.........like mohammed did.

oh here we go ... a contribution from someone who knows nothing but feels a need to say something

the nine year old wife thing is well trodden and a piece of old tosh from an islamophobe.

Perhaps when you're finished reading the usual rubbish seen on certain websites, you could read something more enlightening and believable about Mohammed, such as the fact that he wasnt marrying 9 year olds

the_syco

knird evol wrote: »

The islamics were treated very well in 1930s germany

I believe Hitler wanted them to join his cause?

deravarra

the_syco wrote: »

I believe Hitler wanted them to join his cause?

Did he? And why didnt they join up? Why no concentration camps in North Africa? Why only in Eastern Europe?

Social Disorder

deravarra wrote: »

if you come out from under your rock then we can go for a coffee

perhaps your mahatma was a good guy. said some very nice things about Mohammed! (Im serious!!!)

maybe his buddies would be good enough to follow his example:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-10-01-504329397_x.htm

2 Year old article. Small scale violence. You could also use the bombings in Kuta et el as an example but none the less they are rather small incidents in comparison. Especially considering the huuuuge scale or india.

In saying that, I believe all organised religion is wrong...Hinduism/Buddism just seems the better of the other other evils.

deravarra wrote: »

oh here we go ... a contribution from someone who knows nothing but feels a need to say something

the nine year old wife thing is well trodden and a piece of old tosh from an islamophobe.

Perhaps when you're finished reading the usual rubbish seen on certain websites, you could read something more enlightening and believable about Mohammed, such as the fact that he wasnt marrying 9 year olds

9 Year old wives is a law, as is stonings for being raped and other insane laws. You cant deny any of these...he was just making an example.

Saudi Arabia is light years behind the east for civil rights this is due to the islamic figureheads ruling with an iron fist. Example:

A Lebanese television psychic arrested and convicted of sorcery in Saudi Arabia apparently failed to foresee his own sentence to death by beheading, and now awaits the mercy of King Abdullah.


http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=190056

BlaasForRafa

deravarra wrote: »

Did he? And why didnt they join up? Why no concentration camps in North Africa? Why only in Eastern Europe?

Over 40k muslims joined the Waffen SS, mainly from Soviet republics. Most fought on the eastern front but some even ended up in Normandy defending it from the allied invasion on d-day.

Johro

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

I have a big problem with islam and not just radical islam. I cant hate people i just dont like their parts of their philosophy.
This is a double edged sword and there is alot of hypocrisy involved remember the time that danish magazine published pictures of mohamed , the reaction to that was ridiculous also more recently the reaction to the koran burning was awful.
Radical islam has to be adressed and not the way it is being at the moment

I would feel the same about the Christian Right. As for Islam, I have absolutely no problem with it. Fundamentalism, yes. But not just in Islam. We have our own fundamentalists. The issue of burning the Koran, it provoked such outrage because it was meant to do so. There are elements within Islam that I wouldn't feel comfortable with, but, again, I wouldn't be comfortable with all the Catholic church says and does.
Islam is being radicalised because it feels it is under threat. And it is.
Radical Islam won't be got rid of through wars, threat of war or anti-terrorist measures. It is most powerful in the poorest of countries. Give the people infrastructure, education, jobs and thus, money, and they will have no time for radicals, the Taliban, or Al Qaeda.
On the question of anti-Islam rhetoric rising, I'm not sure. In some quarters, yes, but they are predictable quarters. I think people are starting to see the other side of the coin, especially when talking about the Israeli/Palestine conflict. Here's hoping.

enfant terrible

I would think the Jews as usual are the most hated on boards.ie looking at the politics and conspiracy theory forums.

twinQuins

Look, if you're going to try and provoke a group of people you really don't have any business acting surprised when they actually react.

goose2005

deravarra wrote: »

oh here we go ... a contribution from someone who knows nothing but feels a need to say something

the nine year old wife thing is well trodden and a piece of old tosh from an islamophobe.

Perhaps when you're finished reading the usual rubbish seen on certain websites, you could read something more enlightening and believable about Mohammed, such as the fact that he wasnt marrying 9 year olds

But that's why Saudi Arabia has 9 as the age of marriage - if Mohammad did it, it's OK. He also owned, traded in and raped slaves.

deravarra

Social Disorder wrote: »

2 Year old article. Small scale violence.

It was a quick cursory search on google. I simply picked the first one there. You want me to go on? I can ....

Social Disorder wrote: »

In saying that, I believe all organised religion is wrong

Fair enough, your opinion. I wont piss on it

Social Disorder wrote: »

Hinduism/Buddism just seems the better of the other other evils.

Erm .... the "seems" would indicate blissfull ignorance, but hey, I wont condemn nor criticize!

Social Disorder wrote: »

9 Year old wives is a law, as is stonings for being raped and other insane laws. You cant deny any of these...he was just making an example.

In a few countries, yes it would seem to be so. Then tell me why, if the whole Mohammed marrying a nine year old is true, arent there more Islamic countries allowing this to happen? And dont even go down the route of them being more secular ...

Social Disorder wrote: »

Saudi Arabia is light years behind the east for civil rights this is due to the islamic figureheads ruling with an iron fist.

Agreed ... but instead of islamic substitute wahabi. Just like in the sentence:

Irish governments were greatly influenced by the christian churches catholic church.

deravarra

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Over 40k muslims joined the Waffen SS, mainly from Soviet republics. Most fought on the eastern front but some even ended up in Normandy defending it from the allied invasion on d-day.

Quite amusing that you post this in a thread about anti-islamic rhetoric. Unsurprising tho, given your history of comments in that vein

deravarra

goose2005 wrote: »

But that's why Saudi Arabia has 9 as the age of marriage - if Mohammad did it, it's OK.

Then why dont all the other Islamic countries have this as the norm? Are they not Islamic?

Johro

enfant terrible wrote: »

I would think the Jews as usual are the most hated on boards.ie looking at the politics and conspiracy theory forums.

For 'Jews', read the government of Israel. People who hate Jews won't be on these fora for long. They'll be banned, as they should be.

BlaasForRafa

deravarra wrote: »

Quite amusing that you post this in a thread about anti-islamic rhetoric. Unsurprising tho, given your history of comments in that vein

You asked a question. I gave a straight factual answer, whats your problem with that? I didn't pass any moral judgements on those men, most were Soviet prisoners recruited by the Waffen SS, some also fought for the Heer, this is history not opinion so don't go getting your knickers in a twist.

deravarra

Johro wrote: »

For 'Jews', read the government of Israel. People who hate Jews won't be on these fora for long. They'll be banned, as they should be.

Agreed!

deravarra

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

so don't go getting your knickers in a twist.

Y fronts actually

Doc

The Qur'an does not explicitly forbid images of Muhammad, there are a few supplemental teachings which have explicitly prohibited Muslims from creating the visual depictions of figures under any circumstances the key concern being that the use of images can encourage idolatry, where the image becomes more important than what it represents.

In Islamic art, some visual depictions only show Muhammad with his face veiled, or symbolically represent him as a flame however some other images, notably from Persia of the Ilkhanate, and those made under the Ottomans, show him fully.

As a non Muslim the Danish cartoonist is perfectly entitled to draw Muhammad although offensive to Muslims there was noting worse about it according to the Qur'an then me eating pork, in fact me eating pork is worse according to the Qur'an.

The response of the people to the cartoon that rioted destroyed totally unrelated western franchises and used it as justification for actions of violence was totally unjustified and against the teachings of Muhammad and the Qur’an.

deravarra

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You asked a question. I gave a straight factual answer, whats your problem with that? I didn't pass any moral judgements on those men, most were Soviet prisoners recruited by the Waffen SS, some also fought for the Heer, this is history not opinion so don't go getting your knickers in a twist.

would it be wrong for me then, to mention those Jews who joined the German Army? Or would that be seen as anti-semitic?

Dudess

enfant terrible wrote: »

I would think the Jews as usual are the most hated on boards.ie looking at the politics and conspiracy theory forums.

Anti Semitism is inexcusable, as is hatred of Israelis, and I'm not denying there are anti Semitic members on Boards, but criticism of the Israeli government's/military's treatment of Palestinians is not anti Semitism - even if some use it to further their anti Semitic agenda. Most criticism of Israel though is just based on an objection to bullying of a less powerful people (like objection to the nazis' treatment of Jews) - the fact that Judeaism is the predominant religion in Israel is only brought into it by those who cry "anti Semitism".

enfant terrible

deravarra wrote: »

would it be wrong for me then, to mention those Jews who joined the German Army? Or would that be seen as anti-semitic?

Are you worried about anti-semitism too or just anti islam feelings?

deravarra

enfant terrible wrote: »

Are you worried about anti-semitism too or just anti islam feelings?

Im worried about both to be honest ... and the whole secular extremism as Benedict referred to recently ...

I know I know ... a muslim referring to and agreeing with something the pope said ...:rolleyes:

scientific1982

deravarra wrote: »

Hi folks. Something I am very much aware of after reading comments in the Sky News website is the huge increase in anti - Islamic rhetoric. It's getting to a very nasty stage and I'm getting the feeling that it could go back to the 1930's and Germany.

Is it just the few, or do a lot of people have issues with normal, everyday muslims?

Strange. I would consider Islam a fascist ideology itself.