Since Muslims in Australia are growing at a fairly strong rate, and even cuts in immigration are very unlikely to curb this, due to conversion rates (we know deep down this is what the fear is based around). And also considering that it's only a matter of time before a Caliphate is eventually re-established in the world. Wouldn't it be wise not to engage in anti-Islamic rhetoric like the kind freediver et al. are engaged in on this forum?

It seems that all the hostility towards islam is like a self-fulfilling prophecy. We don't want peace with muslims, we don't want co-existence with them, and we're going to slander, abuse, criticise and niggle out every little negative aspect to it we can find and invent those we can't, until we've completely turned Muslims into the hating machines we reckon them to be..

It seems some people really want this conflict of 'civilisations' to occur, at all costs.

Just my thoughts on the way people on this forum seem to behave.

Love the almost absent-minded, oscar wilde-ish menace of " Wouldn't it be wise".

Well, to answer you briefly - it just goes to show ya, the vikings are even madder than the mohammedans.

Quote:

Wouldn't it be wise not to engage in anti-Islamic rhetoric like the kind freediver et al. are engaged in on this forum?

You mean like asking difficult questions?

Wouldn't it be wise to come up with a satisfactory answer to those difficult questions?

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:13pm:

Love the almost absent-minded, oscar wilde-ish menace of " Wouldn't it be wise". Well, to answer you briefly - it just goes to show ya, the vikings are even madder than the mohammedans.

Could you please not refer to us as 'Mohammadans'? It just shows your sheer lack of knowledge and credentials to speak on Islam in the first place. You said in another thread that it was reminiscent to how the Christians follow Christ, but there's a lil more too it than that. We are Muslims.
While we do follow Muhammad's [saws] example, he was chosen from all of mankind to relay the perfect way of life as a messenger from Allah [swt]. :)
We worship Allah [swt], and have great love and respect for Muhammad [saws].

Welcome to OzPolitic Daniel.

What's this about credentials? What does saws and swt mean?

Quote:

You mean like asking difficult questions?

No, I mean like asking questions that are aimed at discovering some kind of perceived hidden doctrine of Islam that is hiding, waiting for the Caliphate to be established, so it can spring forth and enslave all of humanity through deception...  blah blah blah.

And all the other nonsense you go on about and formulate your loaded questions around.

You're really becoming like some kind of "ambassador of ill will".

freediver wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:26pm:

Welcome to OzPolitic Daniel. What's this about credentials? What does saws and swt mean?

I've seen Soren on Muslim forums before. He seems to think he knows a lot more than he really does, to be honest.

swt and saws are abbreviations.

SWT [Subhana wa ta'ala] - Most high
SAWS [Sulallahu alayhi wa salam] - Peace be upon him

Thank you for the welcome.

Well I think you are paranoid and delusional.
It would be nice to get answers to everything asked for a change and drop the smokescreens and victim-hood crap.
It would be nice not to be threatened and censored and banned for dissent or asking what appears to be questions to difficult for you to face.

Abbreviations eh Daniel..  well who'd a thunk...   :o

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:23pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 9:13pm: Love the almost absent-minded, oscar wilde-ish menace of " Wouldn't it be wise". Well, to answer you briefly - it just goes to show ya, the vikings are even madder than the mohammedans. Could you please not refer to us as 'Mohammadans'? It just shows your sheer lack of knowledge and credentials to speak on Islam in the first place. You said in another thread that it was reminiscent to how the Christians follow Christ, but there's a lil more too it than that. We are Muslims. While we do follow Muhammad's [saws] example, he was chosen from all of mankind to relay the perfect way of life as a messenger from Allah [swt]. :) We worship Allah [swt], and have great love and respect for Muhammad [saws].

Well, put it down to my incorrigible ignorance.
Old dog and all that.

Grendel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:37pm:

Well I think you are paranoid and delusional. It would be nice to get answers to everything asked for a change and drop the smokescreens and victim-hood crap. It would be nice not to be threatened and censored and banned for dissent or asking what appears to be questions to difficult for you to face. Abbreviations eh Daniel..  well who'd a thunk...   :o

Well, I could have told him to go to google, but either way.
I haven't seen any questions to answer. So, I'm hardly running away from anything because it's 'difficult to face', nor am I playing the victim. I'm merely pointing out what I've noticed for Soren's patterns on other forums.
paranoid and delusional? Why? Cause you don't agree with me? Absurd stuff, ladies and gentlemen...

Quote:

Well, put it down to my incorrigible ignorance. Old dog and all that.

Prove me wrong, Soren.
You didn't even address why you shouldn't call us 'Mohammadans'...

Accidental double post: deleted.

Yawn.... anyone who has been here for even a short time knows there are tons of unanswered and avoided questions.

DWMT

Grendel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:43pm:

Yawn.... anyone who has been here for even a short time knows there are tons of unanswered and avoided questions. DWMT

Funny, you accuse me of running away from things [I haven't even read yet] and I've been here less than half an hour. You're really digging deep. ::)

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:41pm:

Grendel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 9:37pm: Well I think you are paranoid and delusional. It would be nice to get answers to everything asked for a change and drop the smokescreens and victim-hood crap. It would be nice not to be threatened and censored and banned for dissent or asking what appears to be questions to difficult for you to face. Abbreviations eh Daniel..  well who'd a thunk...   :o Well, I could have told him to go to google, but either way. I haven't seen any questions to answer. So, I'm hardly running away from anything because it's 'difficult to face', nor am I playing the victim. I'm merely pointing out what I've noticed for Soren's patterns on other forums. paranoid and delusional? Why? Cause you don't agree with me? Absurd stuff, ladies and gentlemen... Quote: Well, put it down to my incorrigible ignorance. Old dog and all that. Prove me wrong, Soren. You didn't even address why you shouldn't call us 'Mohammadans'...

Mohammedan points to the founder and the man followed. The term also paarallels 'Christian'.
It is a declension also used in other religious and non-religious group identifiers such as Methodist, Marxist, Anarchist and so forth.
It is no more insulting than any of these. Is there any insult in being  identified as a partisan, a follower of Mohammed?

It is certainly not as insulting as the terms used by Mohammedans to denote the 'out' groups (me among them) - infidel, kuffr and so on.

Language can reveal as well as conceal. I am concious of its unveiling power. Your squirming uncomfortably only confirms it.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:50pm:

Mohammedan points to the founder and the man followed. The term also paarallels 'Christian'. It is a declension also used in other religious and non-religious group identifiers such as Methodist, Marxist, Anarchist and so forth. It is no more insulting than any of these. Is there any insult in being  identified as a partisan, a follower of Mohammed? It is certainly not as insulting as the terms used by Mohammedans to denote the 'out' groups (me among them) - infidel, kuffr and so on. Language can reveal as well as conceal. I am concious of its unveiling power. Your squirming uncomfortably only confirms it.

I read this already. And you already used the line 'I am concious of its unveiling power. Your squirming uncomfortably only confirms it.' on someone else. In fact this is the post of yours I was referring to... ::)

Tell me - when have you been called an infidel or kufr to your face?

Quote:

No, I mean like asking questions that are aimed at discovering some kind of perceived hidden doctrine of Islam

Like what they do with Hindus? Why aren't you allowed to say?


Quote:

And all the other nonsense you go on about and formulate your loaded questions around.

Why is it loaded Abu? You say that about every question you cannot answer, as if I know beforehand which ones you will get upset over.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:50pm:

Mohammedan points to the founder and the man followed. The term also paarallels 'Christian'. It is a declension also used in other religious and non-religious group identifiers such as Methodist, Marxist, Anarchist and so forth. It is no more insulting than any of these. Is there any insult in being  identified as a partisan, a follower of Mohammed? It is certainly not as insulting as the terms used by Mohammedans to denote the 'out' groups (me among them) - infidel, kuffr and so on. Language can reveal as well as conceal. I am concious of its unveiling power. Your squirming uncomfortably only confirms it.

whilst I understand why you use the term, and that you don't think it's insulting...isn't what's insulting also defined by how the other person receives it?

I am sure some people will say that this is just PC crap and not to restrict freedom of speech etc etc- these aren't invalid points

but for me it comes down to two things 1) does it really affect me to change one word in my vocabulary 2) if I'm saying out of ignorance and then am educated, why keep saying it? 3) do I want to insult people? and 4) can I get my point across just as well using another word

I don't think that the word islam or muslims is any less associated with mohammed than mohammedans

I do agree about infidel and kuffar- I find these terms offensive and have argued with some people about it on MV before. I can link you the discussion if you like.

again it came down to the point where- the person said it didn't see it as offensive because it merely described someone as being an 'unbeliever' (in Islam)- but I found it offensive because of the context in which it had been used. when you hear those terms used by people who are talking about death and murder and justifying terrorism etc- the word itself takes on a nastier aspect.

I believe at the end of the discussion quite a few people saw where I was coming from

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 9:23pm:

It just shows your sheer lack of knowledge and credentials to speak on Islam in the first place.

The only credentials one needs is to be conciouss and verbal.
There is nothing special about islam that would exclude anyone from commenting on it. You do not need to speak arabic, you don't have to believe a word in the koran, you do not even need to respect it any more than you need to respect anything else. There is absolutely no ground for special treatment.

I am not your imam so the 'sheer lack of knlowldge and credentials' gambit is neither here nor there. You are not an imam, so you also lack enough knowledge and credentials to speak authortatively.

Gaybriel,


Quote:

I do agree about infidel and kuffar

Infidel is not an Islamic word at all, and I doubt you'd find too many Muslims using it. It's actually a Christian word, but since Christianity became largely abandoned during the secularisation, the churches ceased using it, because it didn't help to bring back the 'lost sheep of the flock'.

As for kafir, it simply means 'one who covers over', in this case, one who covers over the truth about their Creator. It's not a nasty word and should not be taken offensively, other than the fact that it denotes denial of the one who created you.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:04pm:

Daniel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 9:23pm: It just shows your sheer lack of knowledge and credentials to speak on Islam in the first place. The only credentials one needs is to be conciouss and verbal. There is nothing special about islam that would exclude anyone from commenting on it. You do not need to speak arabic, you don't have to believe a word in the koran, you do not even need to respect it any more than you need to respect anything else. There is absolutely no ground for special treatment. I am not your imam so the 'sheer lack of knlowldge and credentials' gambit is neither here nor there. You are not an imam, so you also lack enough knowledge and credentials to speak authortatively.

I agree with you. But the least you could do is go by what the Qur'an actually says and the source [Qur'an and Hadith] as opposed to playing on misconceptions and the link.
For this reason I am trying to avoid speaking authortatively.

Infidel...  is actually an English word...  but then it seems most Muslims divide the world up into; Christian, Jews, Muslims and the rest. With only one being given any real credibility.  

I'm sure if I could speak Arabic there would be lots of derogatory words and phrases used to describe non-Muslims...  pigs and apes seem to be some words used by Arabic speakers.  Teaching young Muslims no less.

I note even in English translations, speaking of which I recall us Kuffr/Infidels being described as sewage in comparison to the pure clear spring waters that are Muslims.  Well done guys. Courtesy of Keysar Trad et al.

Play with semantics all you like, be pedantic to the point of stupidity...  but don't think you have any credibility.

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:06pm:

Gaybriel, Quote: I do agree about infidel and kuffar As for kafir, it simply means 'one who covers over', in this case, one who covers over the truth about their Creator. It's not a nasty word and should not be taken offensively, other than the fact that it denotes denial of the one who created you.

As for Mohammedan, it simply means 'one who follows Mohammed', in this case, one who is the prophet of their (arabs') Creator. It's not a nasty word and should not be taken offensively, other than the fact that it denotes the one who is followed.

Quote:

Infidel...  is actually an English word

Actually it's Latin originally.


Quote:

I'm sure if I could speak Arabic there would be lots of derogatory words and phrases used to describe non-Muslims

Nope, there are none.


Quote:

pigs and apes seem to be some words used by Arabic speakers.  Teaching young Muslims no less.

Wrong. God does state that he transformed some Jews into Pigs and Apes, but that's about it. Pig might be used to refer to an individual who behaves in a dirty fashion like a pig, but it's certainly not used to refer to non-believers in general.


Quote:

I note even in English translations, speaking of which I recall us Kuffr/Infidels being described as sewage in comparison to the pure clear spring waters that are Muslims.  Well done guys. Courtesy of Keysar Trad et al.

There's nothing in Islam like that. Don't know what you're on about here, sorry.

soren, where have I taken offense to it?

Use it to your heart's content, if that's what makes you happy, no skin off my nose.

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:10pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:04pm: Daniel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 9:23pm: It just shows your sheer lack of knowledge and credentials to speak on Islam in the first place. The only credentials one needs is to be conciouss and verbal. There is nothing special about islam that would exclude anyone from commenting on it. You do not need to speak arabic, you don't have to believe a word in the koran, you do not even need to respect it any more than you need to respect anything else. There is absolutely no ground for special treatment. I am not your imam so the 'sheer lack of knlowldge and credentials' gambit is neither here nor there. You are not an imam, so you also lack enough knowledge and credentials to speak authortatively. I agree with you. But the least you could do is go by what the Qur'an actually says and the source [Qur'an and Hadith] as opposed to playing on misconceptions and the link. For this reason I am trying to avoid speaking authortatively.

I have absolutely no reason to submit to or go by what the Koran says. There is no more misconception in 'Mohammedan' than in believing Mohammed to be god's final prophet.

Everyone has to submit to God's will at some point. For you it will probably not be until the day of judgement :(

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:32pm:

I have absolutely no reason to submit to or go by what the Koran says. There is no more misconception in 'Mohammedan' than in believing Mohammed to be god's final prophet.

I never said you had to submit, that's your prerogative. I just think you should know what you're talking about before you speak of it. Then again, I guess that's logical...

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:30pm:

soren, where have I taken offense to it?

Did I say you did?


Quote:

Use it to your heart's content, if that's what makes you happy, no skin off my nose.

Thank you, that's what I thought. Tolerance. Ain't it beautiful?





Gaybriel, please file. And two coffees, please.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:38pm:

Gaybriel, please file.

What's this mean?

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:34pm:

Everyone has to submit to God's will at some point. For you it will probably not be until the day of judgement :(

I said Koran, did I not?
Not the same thing.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:40pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:34pm: Everyone has to submit to God's will at some point. For you it will probably not be until the day of judgement :( I said Koran, did I not? Not the same thing.

'I have absolutely no reason to submit to or go by what the Koran says.'
To submit to the Qur'an IS to submit to Allah [swt]. ;)

Lots of English words were latin or have latin roots and germanic etc, etc etc...  no need to build a strawman in order to try to make me seem wrong.

Just makes you look stupid.

Infidel...  English.

as for "Nope there are none"...  I'm sorry...  just how brainwashed are you?  Trad's translations prove there are as do the translations of various TV shows from the ME etc.  Calling someone an ape of a pig is not derogatory?  Calling a whole people sewage is not derogatory?  You need help.

You are in denial of the truth...  I don't make things up and I don't lie...  Sadly you prove often that you are either ignorant in denial or a liar.  take your pick.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:38pm:

Gaybriel, please file. And two coffees, please.

my days are a receptionist are over! over!!! I DON'T WANNA GO BACK!! NOOOOOOOO!

:P

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:39pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:38pm: Gaybriel, please file. What's this mean?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226564678/0#0





And a coffee for Daniel, too, please.

Quote:

as for "Nope there are none"...  I'm sorry...  just how brainwashed are you?  Trad's translations prove there are as do the translations of various TV shows from the ME etc.  Calling someone an ape of a pig is not derogatory?  Calling a whole people sewage is not derogatory?  You need help.

For those of us with no clue what you're talking about would you like to back up what you're saying with quotes or sources, or are you content in ambiguity?

Quote:

You are in denial of the truth...  I don't make things up and I don't lie...  Sadly you proove often that you are either ignorant in denial or a liar.  take your pick.

For those of us who know what you're refering to, but see it as being quite out of context would you like to back up what you're saying with quotes or sources, or are you content in ambiguity?

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:43pm:

Daniel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:39pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:38pm: Gaybriel, please file. What's this mean? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226564678/0#0 And a coffee for Daniel, too, please.

I'll go a green tea, actually, thanks. :)

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:06pm:

Gaybriel, Quote: I do agree about infidel and kuffar Infidel is not an Islamic word at all, and I doubt you'd find too many Muslims using it. It's actually a Christian word, but since Christianity became largely abandoned during the secularisation, the churches ceased using it, because it didn't help to bring back the 'lost sheep of the flock'. As for kafir, it simply means 'one who covers over', in this case, one who covers over the truth about their Creator. It's not a nasty word and should not be taken offensively, other than the fact that it denotes denial of the one who created you.

it may not be an islamic word- but it has been contextualised to the point where it is now heavily associated with islam and terrorism (more specifically)

as to kuffar- I understand the word, I have been lucky enough to hear an analysis of it at the Annual Islamic Council Conference (right name?) in Melbourne.

my point is- that the perception of this word, is that it is offensive. so if you know someone takes offense to it, why not just use something else when talking to that person.

similarly if soren knows that mohammedan is offensive to muslims- then why use it in the presence of muslims?

Well Daniel, not sure it exists on the Net anymore...  but Trad did lots of Translation and editorial stuff for the Islamic Youth Group...  
I'll have a look and see If I can find it again.  Been a few years since i bothered.

Oh and Daniel...  i was referring to his entire post...  in fact that could be in ref to just about all his posts.

Daniel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:41pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:40pm: abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:34pm: Everyone has to submit to God's will at some point. For you it will probably not be until the day of judgement :( I said Koran, did I not? Not the same thing. 'I have absolutely no reason to submit to or go by what the Koran says.' To submit to the Qur'an IS to submit to Allah [swt]. ;)

Well, you put your finger on all our difficulties, dear boy. We don't seem to get all the people to come around to your way of seeing  things. "What is to be done?", I hear you echo a famous man who was facing the same kind of difficulty. I guess your answer wouldn't be far from his.

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:43pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:38pm: Gaybriel, please file. And two coffees, please. my days are a receptionist are over! over!!! I DON'T WANNA GO BACK!! NOOOOOOOO! :P

You scaring the new customers.


Well, alright, and make one for yourself, too.

Quote:

my point is- that the perception of this word, is that it is offensive. so if you know someone takes offense to it, why not just use something else when talking to that person.

I generally don't use it when talking to non-Muslims anyway. I think you'd struggle to find me having used it on this forum.

Howeve,r it does exist as a concept in Islam, and I really can't see anything being wrong with it. It's not a misnomer like Mohammedan is. But I agree with your point on percetions and taking offence.

[quote author=soren2 link=1226574172/30#39 date=1226581133
You scaring the new customers.


Well, alright, and make one for yourself, too.
[/quote]

>:(

only if I get a biscuit *hmph*

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 10:46pm:

[quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims

When was this explained?
(I musta ducked out for a coffee)


If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement.

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:05pm:

[quote author=soren2 link=1226574172/30#39 date=1226581133 You scaring the new customers. Well, alright, and make one for yourself, too.

>:(

only if I get a biscuit *hmph*[/quote]


OK, but no cigar.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:10pm:

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:46pm: [quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims When was this explained? (I musta ducked out for a coffee) If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement.

We follow Muhammad [saws], in the sense that we follow the message he relayed for Allah [swt].
We do not worship Muhammad.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:10pm:

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:46pm: [quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims When was this explained? (I musta ducked out for a coffee) If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement.

well firstly I prefixed it with an 'if'- although I do believe muslims find it offensive

apart from that- daniel in another thread requested it not to be used

similarly the quotes I gave from edward said said it was offensive

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:49pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:10pm: Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:46pm: [quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims When was this explained? (I musta ducked out for a coffee) If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement. well firstly I prefixed it with an 'if'- although I do believe muslims find it offensive apart from that- daniel in another thread requested it not to be used similarly the quotes I gave from edward said said it was offensive

Why is it offensive to be identified as a follower of Mohammed, especially if  none of the other tenets are shared or accepted?
Follower of Mohammed (Mohammedan) is a common ground.



Edward Said was a charlatan.

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:49pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:10pm: Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:46pm: [quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims When was this explained? (I musta ducked out for a coffee) If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement. well firstly I prefixed it with an 'if'- although I do believe muslims find it offensive apart from that- daniel in another thread requested it not to be used similarly the quotes I gave from edward said said it was offensive

I find offensive when people say that there is only one god.
If they stop doing this we can have a trade off.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:56pm:

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:49pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:10pm: Gaybriel wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 10:46pm: [quote author=abu_rashid link=1226574172/15#18 date=1226577983] mohammedan is offensive to muslims When was this explained? (I musta ducked out for a coffee) If all claims to the divinity of the Koran and Islam as a whole are not acccepted, then the only thing left of it is that its partisans follow Mohammed. This is objective, non-judgemental and conveys precisely the extent of agreement. well firstly I prefixed it with an 'if'- although I do believe muslims find it offensive apart from that- daniel in another thread requested it not to be used similarly the quotes I gave from edward said said it was offensive Why is it offensive to be identified as a follower of Mohammed, especially if  none of the other tenets are shared or accepted? Follower of Mohammed (Mohammedan) is a common ground. Edward Said was a charlatan.

1stly its offensive because it infers that we worship a man not god.

and Edward Said was a recognized lecturer and scholar in the USA. When you get as much, then go and criticize him

Quote:

1stly its offensive because it infers that we worship a man not god.

It infers following, not worshipping.

Well I agree with Soren and you fd.  it was a term used to describe Muslims.

Christians Christianity...  same thing.  Jesuits anyone?

I'm happy to use the contemporary term.

As for Islamophobia...  it's created by the behaviour of Moslems or Muslims take your pick.  But the self fulfilling part is that brought about by Muslims and their adherence/preoccupation with victimhood.

If they think other lands are better and they would be treated better there then stop coming to the West and go live elsewhere.  If you were born here and think Islam is better and Islamic states are better then migrate.

Good luck to you and have a wonderful life.  :)

Grendel wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 12:17pm:

Good luck to you and have a wonderful life.  :)

This actually means mod: rearranging the letters in a curse word doesn't make it any less of a curse word , nicely.



Sorry, had a touch of the Gordon Ramseys.

Phillip wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 12:36am:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:56pm: 1stly its offensive because it infers that we worship a man not god. and Edward Said was a recognized lecturer and scholar in the USA. When you get as much, then go and criticize him Don't be ridiculous. We  (well, I) don't have to swallow everything any academic might say. Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling prophecy Post by Grendel on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:31pm No that's true academics are not necessarily too bright just academics...  and academic snobbery is rife. Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling prophecy Post by Daniel on Nov 14th, 2008 at 9:05pm Grendel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:31pm: No that's true academics are not necessarily too bright just academics...  and academic snobbery is rife. Take Dawkin's for example. He's an 'academic'... Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling prophecy Post by tallowood on Nov 14th, 2008 at 9:09pm Daniel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 9:05pm: Grendel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:31pm: No that's true academics are not necessarily too bright just academics...  and academic snobbery is rife. Take Dawkin's for example. He's an 'academic'... Just another Prophet. Has his own book too. Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling prophecy Post by soren on Nov 15th, 2008 at 3:48pm Daniel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 9:05pm: Grendel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:31pm: No that's true academics are not necessarily too bright just academics...  and academic snobbery is rife. Take Dawkin's for example. He's an 'academic'... Or take Hassan Diab,  the Lebanese academic in Canada who has been arrested for the Paris Synagogue bombing in 1980. Academics, eh? http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=b321a3ab-9713-45c7-a4e9-a57cfc608b24 Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling proph Post by Phillip on Nov 15th, 2008 at 6:33pm Soren wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 4:32pm: Phillip wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 12:36am: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2008 at 11:56pm: Don't be ridiculous. We  (well, I) don't have to swallow everything any academic might say. Its about credibility, in my book he has more of it than you do. Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling prophecy Post by Phillip on Nov 15th, 2008 at 6:34pm Grendel wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:31pm: No that's true academics are not necessarily too bright just academics...  and academic snobbery is rife. true but its more rife on internet forums from what i have seen. Title: Re: Islamophobic self-fulfilling proph Post by soren on Nov 15th, 2008 at 6:44pm Phillip wrote on Nov 15th, 2008 at 6:33pm: Its about credibility, in my book he has more of it than you do. Well, only you read your book. Said invented orientalism but remained in the west. Guess the money was too good... No 'oriental' university thought him good enough to invite him - or he didd not think them good enough, the orientalist swine. Only the americans would give him complete freedom to speak and write, even if he did so against the west. And then as an [mod: no need for that kind of potty talk] he goes back to israel for some publicity photos of himsslef throwing rocks at tanks. What a [mod: no need for that kind of potty talk] Not an unusual case, though. Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.