Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Solider Malik Hassan kills 12 marines in Texas

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam,

Please do not take this as a racist comment because it is not, but I would like to say few things.

In today's world the only people who call themselves "white" (rather than ethnicity nationality etc) are in fact the anglosaxons who also name africans as "black", and the rest by their continents. I don't want to get into this but you all know how these classifications came about in history. I live england and I see english people calling themselves "white" while referring to other european people by their nationality. Couple of years ago we had this english lecturer who came to introduce himself to the class, most students being english with exceptions of few europeans and I the only non european, he started his introduction by saying "I am a white british middle class etc etc".

Hence it is mentalities like this which have created this phenomenon that whatever goes on within these two "superpowers" it is either "white" or none.

And moreover unfortunately, it IS the political agendas of these anglosaxon governments who have the greatest shares in almost all modern tragedies of the world worldwide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Oh, don't worry, I'm not. I can't speak for Maryaam's experience, but if anything I've found a lot Muslims tend to be overly adoring of the white folks who convert.

Sure, this is true, and as I said I can't speak for the sister's experience. Gossipy women, family politics, the assumptions of "she only converted to get married", assumptions of having been a loose woman in her past prior to conversion, etc., I imagine if someone saw stuff like that happening to themselves or someone they deeply love, they could get a bad taste from it.

On the macro level though, I just haven't found it to be the case. What you're saying (about validation) makes good sense, and isn't entirely bad (though it is at least a little). The problem I find is when it goes a step further than that, and white converts are sometimes given positions (either real or in respect) in which you know their race was hardly an accident while the position they hold might not be entirely deserved.

Consider this, is it entirely coincidental that the one they chose for president of ISNA (one of the biggest, if not the biggest, Muslim orgs in North America) is a white woman (Ingrid Mattson), or that the public face of CAIR is a white man (Ibrahim Hooper), or that the darling shaykh of the states is Hamza Yusuf? I'd like to say it's only a Sunni problem, but experience tells otherwise. Like when the howza I was in started sending students to Qum, who would mainly have been African Americans, the question that was asked was "when are you going to send real Americans?" (That latter said, it isn't all bad news of course, some of the students from that howza are amongst the most respected and popular shuyukh in communities now, as well as being respected in Qum.) If anyone has to complain about having been the brunt of racism amongst Muslims hands down it'd be black converts (though they aren't all immune to racial/cultural prejudices themselves)

Have I never experienced anything negative because of my race amongst Muslims? Of course I have, but then, _who_ hasn't, regardless of their race? When people of different cultures, languages, races, etc., get together there's usually bound to be some collision somewhere. On the whole though, including the most important matters in life, I haven't found this at all. But again, my experience only speaks for myself, I can't say what Maryaam or others have found for themselves and their families.

White converts to Islam, since they are a rarity, are looked at with excitement and wonderment by almost entirely brown/black born Muslims. Such as, those folks are interesting objects, to be discussed enthusiastically, talked about cheerily and admired for finding the Truth. This is popular behaviour among non-white born Muslims. Now, the problem begins as soon as you try to create family relationships with white converts. It is not liked because non-white Muslims (hailing from the East), due to their small world dictated by culture and custom, are not as accepting of other races as much as whites are of them. Personal experiences make us what we are and some people have a reason to complain when they speak of racism, often tacit and sometimes casual, among brown/black (mostly brown) Muslims towards whites.

This was about white converts. We have people hiding their anti-white racism - unsuccessfully I might add - behind historic imperialism (and ideas of white racial superiority which were common then), behind hegemonic political powers who are mostly under white command, and behind their dislike of the ways how most (non-Muslim) white people choose to live their lives.

The issue is not that Brent (and others) made explicit or implicit anti-white comments. To him his own. The problem is the acceptance of this behaviour by so many Muslims.

When people of different cultures, languages, races, etc., get together there's usually bound to be some collision somewhere. On the whole though, including the most important matters in life, I haven't found this at all.

This makes perfect sense in theory. But I don't know what to make of racist diatribes and dislike of whites among Muslims. (When I say Muslims, I mean overwhelmingly brown/black Muslims). Casual racism among Muslims is a pretty acceptable phenomenon. It is hardly spoken against. This is more stronger against pitch blacks than whites. Maybe it is difficult for you to notice this phenomenon because people wouldn't speak ill of white race in front a white person - who is also a convert.

Edited by Marbles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Whether this dude's actions were halal or haram is NOT the question. The question is: how does the US military allow harrassment of Muslims in the first place? Why haven't the "harrassers" been charged and thrown in jail? If I'm not mistaken, a person can be thrown in the slammer for 5 yrs for denying the holocaust. So how do they allow a high-ranking officer to be put through such severe harrassment that he shoots ppl? This reflects on the US military far more than it reflects on this individual. It doesn't sound to me like this man was anywhere near mentally ill. I think he was just sick of the hypocrisyand the bull[Edited Out] called "US military." Also, the US military's harrassment of Muslim officers fits right in with ehtier policies of torture, raping children, etc. It really seems as tho the US military is one biiiiig SINKING SHIP! This whole story stinks of "Staged" to me. Sounds too much like their l'il conspiracy theory of "19 hijackers from the caves of Afghanistan attacked our twin towers." uh...okay. Also, having been on other forums (mainly Yahoo) I can tell you for a FACT there are certain indiviuduals who seem to be online 24/7, on those forums, just so they can harrass Muslims who come on the forum. Like, they are on there 24/7 and all they are doing is bashing Islam/harrassing Muslims/talking about hwo they are glad US soliders rape&kill Muslim children etc etc. Obviously, someone's paying them to spread this hatred. Obviously, this is not how the average American civilian is. In fact, I still have many fo the harrassment mssgs they sent me saved, along with their id's. These ppl are very similar to Nazis and like their predecessors they WILL be tried for war crimes 5-10 yrs. So anytime you come across ppl targetting you for being muslim, don't go on a shooting spree- just save their messages and report when the time is right!

P.S just btw- isn't it amusing how the views of 90% of the users on Muslim forums do NOT represent regular Muslims anwyhere in the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

to be honest, bro Kadhim- I've often wondered the SAME thing about YOU.

To be honest bro Kadhim, you're one of the few on here who just Like, EDITED N I don't even know what you were ranting about in your "moral simplicity" tirade (or to whom you were ranting) but I'll explain a very simple l'il concept - those who display what you term as "moral simplicity" (usually known as "sincerity" ) WIN. Even in their fialure lies victory. Ppl like you, however, always, always lose and manage to humilate and sigrace yourselves, too. Mainly because you don't know right from wrong!

My blue eyes have scanned a lot of nonsense, but ... wow.

I'm just speechless about this thread. Half the posts are just nauseating.

I have to question whether some of the posters here are even human.

Edited by Zareen
Warning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

[Lol, I TOTALLY just posted the SAME thing, sis! Then went back and read the other posts and saw "ohhhh a cute little beauty soap thinks like me!" (just btw- why Iman? why not Dove or Pears?) Also sis, you're right abt the blue-eyed ppl being the zalimun. It's in the Quran. Imam Hussain also insulted one of the lanati soliders of lanati's army by calling him "the son of a blue-eyed woman." In Asia&ME ppl often say "beware of those with blue ro green eyes." There's also what the West refers to as the Nephilim race etc etc...yeah, there's def a connection b/ween blue-eyes and inherent evil. Not saying eVERYONE with blue eyes is that way- just that maybe they have a higher propensity towards it? Also, dont' forget- they say Munqar and NAqir have blue eyes and that is another sign of "fallen angels" ...and if I'm not mistaken, the fallen angels are the ones who disobeyed God? SO yeah, you have a point! No, you have two points: instead of wondering whether thsi major did right ro wrong, wonder WHY and HOW they allowed his colleagues to harrass him to this point? What a sinking ship the US Military and their cohorts are. Anyoen who is friends with them si pretty much sunk, too.

quote name=imanbeautysoap' date='06 November 2009 - 08:39 AM' timestamp='1257514759' post='1982343]

(bismillah) (salam)

CIA dont put it past them to give him some best buddies who yapped on and on about injustice, and some mind altering stuff in his tea, then target him with outgroup hostility to get his alienated and oppressed juices going then voila! they have another reason to take away more liberties and more hate for muslims.

Its always a conspiricy! :unsure: ( it always is) :squeez: they probably had some agents talking day and night about how they are going to kill iraqis and undress and rape muslims etc.etc to push his mind into previously unthinkable acts.

funny how he studied for a degree in an institution then suddenly went awol in the military. The question is what did they do to him, that he became extreme?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has gone WAYYYYY off topic. I apologize since I almost certainly contributed to that.

However, let's leave the racial discussions for somewhere else - this thread originally had nothing to do with the things being discussed now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Lol, I TOTALLY just posted the SAME thing, sis! Then went back and read the other posts and saw "ohhhh a cute little beauty soap thinks like me!" (just btw- why Iman? why not Dove or Pears?) Also sis, you're right abt the blue-eyed ppl being the zalimun. It's in the Quran. Imam Hussain also insulted one of the lanati soliders of lanati's army by calling him "the son of a blue-eyed woman." In Asia&ME ppl often say "beware of those with blue ro green eyes." There's also what the West refers to as the Nephilim race etc etc...yeah, there's def a connection b/ween blue-eyes and inherent evil. Not saying eVERYONE with blue eyes is that way- just that maybe they have a higher propensity towards it? Also,

Enough about the blue eyes please. This superstition is not part of Shia madhhab.

dont' forget- they say Munqar and NAqir have blue eyes and that is another sign of "fallen angels" ...and if I'm not mistaken, the fallen angels are the ones who disobeyed God?

No, they are not fallen angels. Angels don't have human eyes either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

to be honest, bro Kadhim- I've often wondered the SAME thing about YOU.

To be honest bro Kadhim, you're one of the few on here who just Like, EDITED N I don't even know what you were ranting about in your "moral simplicity" tirade (or to whom you were ranting) but I'll explain a very simple l'il concept - those who display what you term as "moral simplicity" (usually known as "sincerity" ) WIN. Even in their fialure lies victory. Ppl like you, however, always, always lose and manage to humilate and sigrace yourselves, too. Mainly because you don't know right from wrong!

I usually prefer to greet the terminally ignorant with silence, but I touch on one point for the benefit of others. Do not dare to confuse moral simplicity with sincerity. They are as far apart as night and day. The sincere is the one who never stops looking for truth, who always challenges his assumptions by weighing them against the reality of the world, who acknowledges the shades of grey in this life instead of settling for the comfortable convenience of black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

This thread has gone WAYYYYY off topic. I apologize since I almost certainly contributed to that.

However, let's leave the racial discussions for somewhere else - this thread originally had nothing to do with the things being discussed now.

Sorry - just saw this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Well now you are just putting words into my mouth. I didn't say there was 'no shred of humanity left in them.' I said there was no shred of humanity in their worldview. If you are going to change the meaning of my statements like that, maybe you should work for MEMRI TV.

China and India won't do [Edited Out] because they are still dependent upon the US in large part. China needs a place to export its goods, and moreover if the US Dollar continues to dwindle it will be to their detriment (because the US is heavily indebted to China). Even Iran and Venezuela can operate with more freedom than China and India. There is one true counterbalance to Western power in the world and that is Russia.

Every country protects its own people before others, but Western governments brag about how great they are and how savage everyone else is (you can see this in how they refer to themselves as 'the free world' or 'the civilized world'). Through their self-promotion they have effectively given themselves a greater responsibility.

I don't understand. What is the difference between "there is no shred of humanity in them" and "there is no shred of humanity in their worldview."? Where does the worldview come if not from the people? But I wonder what exactly is "white worldview". Actually, baradaram, if I may say so with no offence, your ideas about racism and political/imperial manipulation of one people at the hands of another are rather messed up. You are confusing a few things here. The fact that hegemonic governments in the West are run by most whites doesn't mean that they are doing this because they are white. It is a matter of having the power to make an impact, either in a right or wrong way. This is why I gave the example of Chinese, who are going to be the new power if predictions stay true to the predictors, and they are not white. They will act as powerful people act - just like US, UK et al act now - because they will be reeking with arrogance that comes with power. Would you blame "Chinese race" (is there a such thing?) when that happens?

There is a diverse historical background to the nuanced concepts of "freedom" and "the civilised world". You will confuse them with attacks on non-Western nations if you look at them without taking into account the history which gave birth of these ideas. I can't believe this is coming from you. People with a superficial understanding of Western civilisation use these sort of arguments. It doesn't suit you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sister maryaam, why do you have to get the wrong side of the stick. It doesn’t make a slightest difference to me whether you call yourself white pink yellow ginger blonde whatever, you are free to say anything!

There are many millions of white people who do not have an Anglo-Saxon background.

Exactly. but there is only two nations that put emphasis on skin colour rather than race or nationality. Don’t be too quick to judge me again because I have two of my own cousins who are blonde with blue eyes. and one of them who is quite young nearly got kidnapped by US soldiers in my country Afghanistan :)

I believe most native Europeans are white. They perhaps wanted to give more detail on their cultural background in your class - but they would racially be categorized as white. Often classes do this to introduce members - when they do I sit there wondering what to say so that does not open more questions, nor offend anyone - like walking a tightrope. I will be sure not to mention any white parts now that I understand the stereotype better.

they all have same/similar background but since some live in hotter places and have got themselves “tanned”they seem to be have gone out of the circle of “white”?!

Would you have been upset with the lecturers mentality if he had described himself as a Black American of Kenyan ancestory? I dont understand what upset you there. He was describing himself. I once had a flamingly gay Black German Prof who grew up in Switzerland - and that is how he introduced himself - and with my vision of a tight lipped tall pale man in my mind as my prof - it was not what I expected for sure. But I found it interesting.

Are you out of your mind? Why would a black or any person, when you physically see him and his skin colour, say to a fellow black person that he is black?! Anyway the reason he had said that is probably because that is how you people expect him to describe himself and secondly you were not black yourself there. I am not against anyone referring to themselves by their skin colour or whatever. What I am actually saying is that these racially established movements have gone to such an extent that now their followers cannot distinguish between race and skin colour. Anyway, my core point is this: would you go to people to whom you introduce yourself say that you are “human”? Do you get the logic? Or would you still call me a racist?

I would think if your problem is with as specific government - you should make that clear. If it is British or American, then use that term. Superpowers populace and leaders come in many different colours and backgrounds.

I personally don’t have any problem with no one. But you guessed it so yes I am referring to those two, not the people of course, but the governments.

The person representing the country with the biggest threat to the world - is classifed as Black. Does that make it acceptable to be ranting about the evil Black devils now?

And the person representing the country with the biggest contribution to the world is classified as “white”?

I find the acceptance of this behaviour of generalized racial proflling as confusing, as Muslims (rightfully) scream with protest about the exact same stereotyping and treatment.

And my whole argument is that they should not be “profiled” by skin colour. Rather by their status and background, so innocent people like you don’t get trapped in between.

Wasalam

Edited by Ghorbat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Let me turn it around. What comic books are you reading. This revisionist history thing is a dishonest game and the motivees behind it are pretty clear. It's a rigged game, typically comparing the best snippets that can be scrounged up of the non-European group with the worst that can be scrounged up of the Europeans. It's painting caricature against caricature. If you want to compare culture to culture, you've got to systematically examine the wholes of each, good and bad. You can't talk about "atrocities" of European and European influenced culture without a full view that acknolwedges accomplishments in arts, sciences, technology, philosophy, etc. Similarly, you can't paint idyllic pictures of pre-Columbian American civilizations and whatever culture and technology they had without acknowledging such less pleasant phenomena as scalping, warlords, inter-tribal warfare, cannibalism, and human sacrifice.

As for these claims of pre-Columbian populations of stupendous numbers of 100 million or more, and claims of genocide, well, let me just say, in the interest of avoiding a fruitless, hysterical tangential debate, that such claims are considered ... questionable by professional historians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_American_indigenous_peoples

[/quoten= Nothing that i have said is revisionist history i am just pointing out the truth about my people and our history we indeed had a great and glorous history before the coming of the wicked and savage Euopeans invaders and as a matter of fact you are the one who is dishonest here if people would care to notice my posts on this topic i never threw any numbers around in regards to the numbers of Native People that were murderd by the white invaders from Europe becuse at the end of the day the numbers really do not count beause the point is what the white europeans did was was one of the greatest crimes in the history of the world robbing and stealing a whole continent that did and does not belong to them Kadhim i have a question for you are you a White Person of European decent by any chance

Historical reality, for the record:

There were not anywhere near 100 million people in the Americas when the Europeans arrived. Such estimates are pure fantasy fiction. Most aboriginal nations were living at hunter gatherer subsistence levels or simple villages with low population densities of a few persons per square kilometre and low usage of technology.

Even the most relatively civilized at the time, such as the civilization in Mexico, was well past its prime, and on a steady path of descent. That a civilization practices cutting the hearts out of young people in the psychotic belief that it will keep the sun in the sky is a clear sign of a culturally degraded and already doomed nation. Massive collapse and demongraphic decline were probably inevitable regardless of whether the Europeans had arrived or not.

The vast majority of deaths amongst the aboriginals in the Americas were due to lack of immunity to European diseases. The deaths due to illness did result from the Europeans' arrival, but this can hardly be called intentional. Science of the 16th-17th century had no clue about the immune system or about germs as a cause of disease.

As for conflicts and deaths through combat, this is a more complex history. There were variations depending on which European nation was doing the colonizing - French, English, Spanish, and levels of coexistence varied over time and from place to place. It is also fair to say that with regards to some of the native groups, that they shared part of the blame for instigating tensions and violence. It was an unfortunate history, and much of the bloodshed is more readily attributable to cultural misunderstandings than out of some sort of deliberate plan of genocide. Doubtless there were some racist individuals amongst leadership who felt this way, but it can hardly be plausibly claimed that this was the general attitude amongst the average New World colonists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Sister maryaam, why do you have to get the wrong side of the stick. It doesn’t make a slightest difference to me whether you call yourself white pink yellow ginger blonde whatever, you are free to say anything!

:huh: ....this is in reference to what?

Exactly. but there is only two nations that put emphasis on skin colour rather than race or nationality. Don’t be too quick to judge me again because I have two of my own cousins who are blonde with blue eyes. and one of them who is quite young nearly got kidnapped by US soldiers in my country Afghanistan

The US is huge into race – but I think that that is the only country. Don’t understand your “don’t judge me” comment. Didn’t judge you – just responded to your ideas. Is this a contest of blond relatives? You need to pick a different contest because this one I would win due to unfair advantage :P

they all have same/similar background but since some live in hotter places and have got themselves “tanned”they seem to be have gone out of the circle of “white”?!

Tanned or glow in the dark – they are still white. The sun does not change your race – well not in one generation anyway. :D

Are you out of your mind?

..speaking of judging..

Why would a black or any person, when you physically see him and his skin colour, say to a fellow black person that he is black?!

He said it because he was teaching German and was the opposite of what most people expected. He said: “I am a flamingly gay Black American with roots in Kenya” or something very close to that. He said it as an ice breaker to be funny. It worked. No need to froth at the mouth.

Anyway the reason he had said that is probably because that is how you people

...you people?? – what people??

expect him to describe himself and secondly you were not black yourself there. I am not against anyone referring to themselves by their skin colour or whatever. What I am actually saying is that these racially established movements have gone to such an extent that now their followers cannot distinguish between race and skin colour.

What? Most classes are 80 – 90% non-white. It really was not an issue.

Anyway, my core point is this: would you go to people to whom you introduce yourself say that you are “human”? Do you get the logic? Or would you still call me a racist?

I missed where I called you a racist – could you refresh my memory?

I personally don’t have any problem with no one. But you guessed it so yes I am referring to those two, not the people of course, but the governments.

Great.

And the person representing the country with the biggest contribution to the world is classified as “white”?

That depends on the country and the context. If they were referring to the biggest achievements in the Islamic world – I guess it would be Arab.

And my whole argument is that they should not be “profiled” by skin colour. Rather by their status and background, so innocent people like you don’t get trapped in between.

Skin colour is part of everyone’s profile – adding a characterization to it is where it falls apart.

If I had known your intent was to be nasty I would not have responded to the originial post.

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Bro, I think you missed my whole post. I wasn't saying that classification of people by skin colour is wrong, anyone can describe themselves however they want, but what I wanted to say is that these "classifications" need to be precise so that when we talk, say, about british(englis) it is not directed at other nations like america.

Anyway, I don't know about you. but in asia people refer to each other by race and tribe etc, but never by their skin colour even if they look the same or not. Even the concept of the "brown" is a western label. you would not see anyone in asian countries calling anyone brown, not from what I have seen anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sister maryaam, why do you have to get the wrong side of the stick. It doesn’t make a slightest difference to me whether you call yourself white pink yellow ginger blonde whatever, you are free to say anything!

Exactly. but there is only two nations that put emphasis on skin colour rather than race or nationality. Don’t be too quick to judge me again because I have two of my own cousins who are blonde with blue eyes. and one of them who is quite young nearly got kidnapped by US soldiers in my country Afghanistan :)

they all have same/similar background but since some live in hotter places and have got themselves “tanned”they seem to be have gone out of the circle of “white”?!

Are you out of your mind? Why would a black or any person, when you physically see him and his skin colour, say to a fellow black person that he is black?! Anyway the reason he had said that is probably because that is how you people expect him to describe himself and secondly you were not black yourself there. I am not against anyone referring to themselves by their skin colour or whatever. What I am actually saying is that these racially established movements have gone to such an extent that now their followers cannot distinguish between race and skin colour. Anyway, my core point is this: would you go to people to whom you introduce yourself say that you are “human”? Do you get the logic? Or would you still call me a racist?

I personally don’t have any problem with no one. But you guessed it so yes I am referring to those two, not the people of course, but the governments.

And the person representing the country with the biggest contribution to the world is classified as “white”?

And my whole argument is that they should not be “profiled” by skin colour. Rather by their status and background, so innocent people like you don’t get trapped in between.

Wasalam

Salaamun Alaikum. Your 2 relatives who almost got kidnapped, are they ok? Wa Salaam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Anyway, I don't know about you. but in asia people refer to each other by race and tribe etc, but never by their skin colour even if they look the same or not. Even the concept of the "brown" is a western label. you would not see anyone in asian countries calling anyone brown, not from what I have seen anyway.

I think people of homogenous race look for other differences to define. White people often refer to colour of hair or the person's original background due to their name.

Isnt Asian or ME classification by tribe a means of social categoriaztion? ie status?

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(14) Covetous over you. Then when fear comes, thou wilt see them looking to thee, their eyes revolving, like (those of) one over whom hovers death: but when the fear is past, they will smite you with sharp tongues, covetous of goods. Such men have no faith, and so Allah has made their deeds of none effect: and that is easy for Allah.

( ÓæÑÉ ÇáÃÍÒÇÈ , Al-Ahzab, Chapter #33, Verse #19)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
The US is huge into race – but I think that that is the only country. Don’t understand your “don’t judge me” comment. Didn’t judge you – just responded to your ideas. Is this a contest of blond relatives? You need to pick a different contest because this one I would win due to unfair advantage

Yes i am aware of your advantages. the reason I said dont judge me was because you sounded quite critical in your first post where my original intentions wasn't to cause any bad feelings. anyway I said that to clear my intentions, not to have a contest with you.

He said it because he was teaching German and was the opposite of what most people expected. He said: “I am a flamingly gay Black American with roots in Kenya” or something very close to that. He said it as an ice breaker to be funny. It worked. No need to froth at the mouth.

Exactly. he said it to make "an ice breaker", which you found amusing. whereas with my lecturer's talk there was no humour.

I missed where I called you a racist – could you refresh my memory?

I find the acceptance of this behaviour of generalized racial proflling as confusing, as Muslims (rightfully) scream with protest about the exact same stereotyping and treatment.?

If I had known your intent was to be nasty I would not have responded to the originial post.

And I still respect you.

Sorry couldn't reply to all of them because you did not reply to the things that I ACTUALLY said.

Edited by Ghorbat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Yes i have heard about them(advantages) all. But I have one which you can never reach :P

I guess it is a secret :unsure:

anyway I said that to clear my intentions, not to have a contest with you. as we don't do cat walks :!!!:

OK

Exactly. he said it to make "an ice breaker", which you found amusing. whereas with my lecturer's talk there was no humour.

Ok - I understand now. But it would not have upset me - I think in this situation it is just semantics - I wouldn't over think it. But it was offensive to you. OK.

I find the acceptance of this behaviour of generalized racial proflling as confusing, as Muslims (rightfully) scream with protest about the exact same stereotyping and treatment.?

This was not personally directed at you . I was talking in general terms about Muslims who find it PC to negatively characterize whites and wondering if they (Muslims that find that acceptable) would understand the impact more if they could relate it to incidents where we are characterized based on our ethnicity or wearing hijab, etc.

I was attempting to make a comparison with something that was familiar. I did not call you a racist. It is best to ask for clarification before jumping to conclusions and making such statements.

Sorry couldn't reply to all of them because you did not reply to the things that I ACTUALLY said.

I responded to the best to my abiliy (and I re-read your initial post) I could and with the best of intentions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Of course you are talking about individuals. You left no room for variation among members of the race in your post. None. If I make general comments about of Iraniams, I can guarantee I would get a flood of replies that are extremely personal.

Anyway

The idea of light skinned people oppressing dark skinned is your personal theory and you cannot hide racist attitudes towards a group of people due to this.

If there was something more to it than chance, then you would have to accept in retrospect that Arabs were also racist who attacked and conquered Africa.

Just because black race in Africa did not have an historical chance to oppress light skinned doesnt mean they wouldnt do it if they could.

Darker skinned Turks conquered and oppressed white Eastern Europeans for centuries... was that not a reversal?

You are taking imperial past (or *current political agenda*) of a people and accusing the whole people of racism. This is totally false.

Political predominance of certain governments run by people of certain skin colour (or even religion) cannot be equated with racism towards others who look different from them.

Sis what makes you think I was talking about individuals?

And I don't care about hypothetical scenarios in which blacks oppress whites, because I am not trying to argue that white people are inherently oppressors. I am simply stating that white oppressing black is a theme throughout history. And yes, you can find some exceptions (although I don't like your Ottoman example because they were at least religiously tolerant). That's why I called it a theme and not a law. But the fact that this is acquired and not inherent does not make the criticism of white people racist.

And I apply this same principle to all groups of people. The blame/praise for political developments within a country is collectively shared by all the people within that country. Because if they truly wanted to, they could change their outcomes.

I don't understand. What is the difference between "there is no shred of humanity in them" and "there is no shred of humanity in their worldview."? Where does the worldview come if not from the people? But I wonder what exactly is "white worldview". Actually, baradaram, if I may say so with no offence, your ideas about racism and political/imperial manipulation of one people at the hands of another are rather messed up. You are confusing a few things here. The fact that hegemonic governments in the West are run by most whites doesn't mean that they are doing this because they are white. It is a matter of having the power to make an impact, either in a right or wrong way. This is why I gave the example of Chinese, who are going to be the new power if predictions stay true to the predictors, and they are not white. They will act as powerful people act - just like US, UK et al act now - because they will be reeking with arrogance that comes with power. Would you blame "Chinese race" (is there a such thing?) when that happens?

There is a diverse historical background to the nuanced concepts of "freedom" and "the civilised world". You will confuse them with attacks on non-Western nations if you look at them without taking into account the history which gave birth of these ideas. I can't believe this is coming from you. People with a superficial understanding of Western civilisation use these sort of arguments. It doesn't suit you.

I said that bhai because many of them are under the impression that they have a lot of concern for their fellow man when in fact they justify some of the most horrific crimes.

And I never said anything was inherent so I don't know why you're bringing up China. I will be the first to admit the Japanese crimes against China were among the worst in history (and neither of them are white). That would only be relevant if I were arguing that whites are inherently oppressors (which I am not).

I am not confusing them with attacks on the non-Western world. They ARE attacks on the non-Western world. They define who is civilized based on who best imitates them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(bismillah) (salam)

Why are you breaking the peace, khadim says it isnt black and white,(so it must be true) and people who talk like this are oh sorry the words slipped my mind, in fact it was never done to oppress another race they just happened to be 'light skinned'(new word for white) and maryam is over her fears.

Welcome to the real world :!!!:

Get over it

Edited by imanbeautysoap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

ame='islamicsoldier' date='08 November 2009 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1257702961' post='1983210']

Historical reality, for the record:

There were not anywhere near 100 million people in the Americas when the Europeans arrived. Such estimates are pure fantasy fiction. Most aboriginal nations were living at hunter gatherer subsistence levels or simple villages with low population densities of a few persons per square kilometre and low usage of technology.

Even the most relatively civilized at the time, such as the civilization in Mexico, was well past its prime, and on a steady path of descent. That a civilization practices cutting the hearts out of young people in the psychotic belief that it will keep the sun in the sky is a clear sign of a culturally degraded and already doomed nation. Massive collapse and demongraphic decline were probably inevitable regardless of whether the Europeans had arrived or not.

The vast majority of deaths amongst the aboriginals in the Americas were due to lack of immunity to European diseases. The deaths due to illness did result from the Europeans' arrival, but this can hardly be called intentional. Science of the 16th-17th century had no clue about the immune system or about germs as a cause of disease.

As for conflicts and deaths through combat, this is a more complex history. There were variations depending on which European nation was doing the colonizing - French, English, Spanish, and levels of coexistence varied over time and from place to place. It is also fair to say that with regards to some of the native groups, that they shared part of the blame for instigating tensions and violence. It was an unfortunate history, and much of the bloodshed is more readily attributable to cultural misunderstandings than out of some sort of deliberate plan of genocide. Doubtless there were some racist individuals amongst leadership who felt this way, but it can hardly be plausibly claimed that this was the general attitude amongst the average New World colonists.

the bloodshed was due to cultural misunderstandings you can not be serious ether you are a dishonest racist or you are poorly read in history what comic book are you getting your history from aslo i ask you again Kadhim are you of White European decent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

the bloodshed was due to cultural misunderstandings you can not be serious ether you are a dishonest racist or you are poorly read in history what comic book are you getting your history from aslo i ask you again Kadhim are you of White European decent

Ah, the heady dialectic style of the liberal revisionist. If you pay more heed to actual rigorous research than whatever texts they adhere to, you're a racist.

Actually, the racism card is pretty much the only card they have in their deck, facts and rigorous research of course being anathema.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

He served as psychiatrist in the US Army, not a combat soldier, and I doubt he had served abroad in any capacity. He was happy to join the US Army ( US policies towards MiddleEast have been well known for a long time ) and avail of the Army sponsored Medical Training to become a doctor. He achived a fairly high rank of Major, so cant really say he was discriminated against. If he was asked to serve in Iraq or Afganistan, he could of refused and accepted a Court Martial and whatever consequences, be it jail term or discharged from the army. Instead, he chose to bring in outside weapons to Army base, and went into an area when unarmed soldiers and unarmed military personnel were, and opened fire on these unarmed people. Hopefully he will survive his wounds and have to face up to what he has done, and face the consequences of that.

Whether he survives his wounds or not he will face the consequences of his actions, if not in this world then in the hereafter.

An article stated that he had been in counseling for difficulty getting along with people, and was stressed out about his upcoming deployment and did not want to go. He clearly didn't want to be in the Army anymore, but was prevented from leaving. He had offered to repay the cost of his education, but they had refused to release him from his contract.

Maybe he went through some difficulty or he was mistreated or obligated to stay in the army etc , still he has no right to kill innocent people. He is not only responsible for his actions but also for whatever reputation he added to the already existing of Muslims. All Muslims paid for what happened in 9/11 even if the majority of them are against such crimes, we are all looked at "those people responsible for 9/11". Smallest Example: When the 9/11 happened, I was in high school back then, the same day the Muslims of my school were attacked(especially Hijabis) . I was afraid to take the bus back home for such a long time after that incident, people were VERY upset at ALL MUSLIMS. We'll pay for this crime too .

My blue eyes have scanned a lot of nonsense, but ... wow.

I'm just speechless about this thread. Half the posts are just nauseating.

I have to question whether some of the posters here are even human.

I have no idea where did they come up with that BS about blue eyed people. Just skip these posts.

Yours is a lone voice in a cold desert night. No one is likely to hear.

If I said the same thing about Arabs and Blacks what this guy Brent said about whites, I'd be thrown out of these e-premises at once. No admonishes, no warnings, no mods previews, nothing.It is people like Brent who should be under constant moderation not Irishman.

No, you're wrong Marbles. Many times I read very insensitive racist comments about Arabs on SC and it stays as it is, no mod interfere, but I guess you have to be Arab to notice these comments(that are let go loosely) as much I do. Just a few days ago, a very offensive post was made against Arabs. I usually don't waste my feelings to get offended so I never report these posters however that does not mean I don't notice them.

White converts to Islam, since they are a rarity, are looked at with excitement and wonderment by almost entirely brown/black born Muslims. Such as, those folks are interesting objects, to be discussed enthusiastically, talked about cheerily and admired for finding the Truth. This is popular behaviour among non-white born Muslims. Now, the problem begins as soon as you try to create family relationships with white converts. It is not liked because non-white Muslims (hailing from the East), due to their small world dictated by culture and custom, are not as accepting of other races as much as whites are of them. Personal experiences make us what we are and some people have a reason to complain when they speak of racism, often tacit and sometimes casual, among brown/black (mostly brown) Muslims towards whites.

This was about white converts. We have people hiding their anti-white racism - unsuccessfully I might add - behind historic imperialism (and ideas of white racial superiority which were common then), behind hegemonic political powers who are mostly under white command, and behind their dislike of the ways how most (non-Muslim) white people choose to live their lives.

The issue is not that Brent (and others) made explicit or implicit anti-white comments. To him his own. The problem is the acceptance of this behaviour by so many Muslims.

A few ignorant and racists on SC doe not speak for most Muslims just like a few hundred Canadian racists do not speak for the majority of Canadians. I am a Muslim who hold A LOT of respect for converts and NOT because they're interesting objects or "interesting pets"(like smiley said) but because I admire their sincerity in searching for the true path, whether these converts are white American or black African it makes no difference to me. It has nothing to do with the interesting blue eyed wearing Hijab(my own sister, born Muslim and Arab from both parents is a blond with blue eyes, it's NO big deal), no it's all about them finding Islam with their own effort and sincere intentions, it's just ADMIRABLE , why is this feeling bad towards them? Why is this feeling or respect translates to "are interested like their interest for interesting objects" ?? I don't get it really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Maybe he went through some difficulty or he was mistreated or obligated to stay in the army etc , still he has no right to kill innocent people. He is not only responsible for his actions but also for whatever reputation he added to the already existing of Muslims. All Muslims paid for what happened in 9/11 even if the majority of them are against such crimes, we are all looked at "those people responsible for 9/11". Smallest Example: When the 9/11 happened, I was in high school back then, the same day the Muslims of my school were attacked(especially Hijabis) . I was afraid to take the bus back home for such a long time after that incident, people were VERY upset at ALL MUSLIMS. We'll pay for this crime too .

Frankly I think Muslims in the West should stop whining. Especially in the US and Canada (maybe the Muslims in Europe have a point).

There's nothing wrong with a few isolated instances of prejudice. So as long as there is no systemic discrimination against Muslims (which, to this point, there has not been), they should stop whining. It's not a big deal to be called a towelhead or a sand n*****. I have been called a SN a few times and I thoroughly enjoyed each time. Also, it has fringe benefits: I can now use the word '[Edited Out]' with no ramifications. White people have been trying to get access to that word for ages without any success.

Edited by baradar_jackson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can now use the word '[Edited Out]' with no ramifications. White people have been trying to get access to that word for ages without any success.

(bismillah)

no 'light skinned' people used the n word a lot when they beat the 'darkskinned' slaves.

(i will have to check with khadim maybe its a lie)

and yes you had better not say it you may get killed,by some offended 'dark skinned person'

if I say I am the n8888r they all love to hate, you should know it is no joke 'they' refers to the racist 'in crowd' who view me as a n8888r. (the historical enslaved ignorant 1)

for if a blue eyed darling asks about a verse in quran it will raise no eyebrow,however the n8888r cant ask. can he/she?

======================================

(bismillah)

(5) And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Qur'an) that when you hear the Verses of Allah being denied and mocked at, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allah will collect the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell.

( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #140)

just rep red for more moral clarity.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

followers of ahl ul bayt?

You disassociate from so and so because of Quran?

ok whatever you say.

Peace be upon those who follow guidance, and if you feel no shame continue doing what you are doing.

Edited by imanbeautysoap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

no 'light skinned' people used the n word a lot when they beat the 'darkskinned' slaves.

(i will have to check with khadim maybe its a lie)

and yes you had better not say it you may get killed,by some offended 'dark skinned person'

if I say I am the n8888r they all love to hate, you should know it is no joke 'they' refers to the racist 'in crowd' who view me as a n8888r. (the historical enslaved ignorant 1)

for if a blue eyed darling asks about a verse in quran it will raise no eyebrow,however the n8888r cant ask. can he/she?

======================================

(bismillah)

(5) And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Qur'an) that when you hear the Verses of Allah being denied and mocked at, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allah will collect the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell.

( ÓæÑÉ ÇáäÓÇÁ , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #140)

just rep red for more moral clarity.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

followers of ahl ul bayt?

You disassociate from so and so because of Quran?

ok whatever you say.

Peace be upon those who follow guidance, and if you feel no shame continue doing what you are doing.

This is why the imperialistic glamourization of race needs to get amended to something more deserving. It will also help avoid unnecessary audience here on SC, who end up defending a corner they do not sit in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the racial side-debate that this topic has diverged into: power corrupts all but the best of humans. It doesn't matter what race, color, or ethnicity they are. If they have power, they will eventually oppress those who are "different" if they are not guided. Those who desire power are the worst suited for it, and those who take it upon themselves as a burden are the best suited for it. Remember that before you start saying "If MY people were in power things would be different. . . "

Also, Arabs, north Africans, Iranians, and south Asians are every bit as Caucasian as "white" people. These terms are practically meaningless. It's a physical description, not a statement about what people believe. I once met a "black" family in which one of the daughters had blond hair, blue eyes, and skin as light at mine. (Recessive traits, I guess.) I thought that was super-cool because it was a reminder that there is not one person on earth who is not a mix of various races and ethnicities, so all y'all racist folks (including the ones who deny being racist) get over your self-righteous selves. If I'm guilty of the crimes of ancient white folks, you are too.

(bismillah)

You are being vauge and blazae

Edited by imanbeautysoap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I agree and I stated this. He is accountable for his own actions. However, I'm in the habit of trying to understand. There is no justice without mercy and no mercy without justice.

On a positive note, his actions did open the door to some very fruitful conversation with my mother (who hates that I am Muslim and distrusts all "non-white" people until she gets to know them. Let's try to turn this into an open door, not an excuse to spread more hatred and mistrust.

Regarding the racial side-debate that this topic has diverged into: power corrupts all but the best of humans. It doesn't matter what race, color, or ethnicity they are. If they have power, they will eventually oppress those who are "different" if they are not guided. Those who desire power are the worst suited for it, and those who take it upon themselves as a burden are the best suited for it. Remember that before you start saying "If MY people were in power things would be different. . . "

Also, Arabs, north Africans, Iranians, and south Asians are every bit as Caucasian as "white" people. These terms are practically meaningless. It's a physical description, not a statement about what people believe. I once met a "black" family in which one of the daughters had blond hair, blue eyes, and skin as light at mine. (Recessive traits, I guess.) I thought that was super-cool because it was a reminder that there is not one person on earth who is not a mix of various races and ethnicities, so all y'all racist folks (including the ones who deny being racist) get over your self-righteous selves. If I'm guilty of the crimes of ancient white folks, you are too.

Excellent post Sis Smiley. You are always so calm and balanced. :)

Hope I can get there too. :blush:

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Shia flower is the only person who said anything about being inherently evil due to race. off the top of my head.

and everyone is crying out how they are not racist, so who exactly are you referring to in your sweeping statement, since everyone seems to think they are not racist.

And finally anyone who is muslim is not guilty of anything, who implied they were?

Are you refering to me when you say self right etc because If you are as I say you are being very vague, you need to tell me directly. otherwise I would say you are being indirect and hostile more 'in crowd' nonsense.

peace be upon those who follow guidance if you feel no shame continue doing what you are doing :)

Edited by imanbeautysoap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^No, dear sister (?), I wasn't referring to you or anyone in particular. The people who I am referring to know who they are. Hopefully my words will strike them in their hearts. If they don't apply to you, they don't apply to you. :)

I am never hostile ;) I just don't do that.

(bismillah) (salam)

excuse me sister yes we are all the same I said this already, not least because we are MUSLIM NOW.

That family sounds like mine.

BTW ghorbats reply was profound and precise.

This is why the imperialistic glamourization of race needs to get amended to something more deserving. It will also help avoid unnecessary audience here on SC, who end up defending a corner they do not sit in.

Edited by imanbeautysoap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...