The subtle micro aggressions of islamophobia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wallah is a British word? Since when?! Lol

It is a term used by Indians and Pakistani people. So we have identified our Islamophobe's background. Sheds light on where her hatred may come from. She is possibly of a minority faith and was oppressed in her country.

"We"? You and what army? I know you want to seem smart, really really smart, and that's why you come out with these "discoveries" that are only in your mind. The fact of the matter is most educated people know what a wallah is. It doesn't take a desi. You will never know my background, so resign yourself to that, and why would you want to? I don't care where you come from.

Nope. Lame explanation. I would bet you the vast majority of the public does not know a term predominantly spoken among Indians and Pakistanis. I do not know too many Pakistani people who spend this much time vilifying Islam. If you are of a minority faith, you were probably discriminated there. Pakistan is a corrupt country and notorious for abuse of nonMuslims. If this describes your experience, I am truly sorry but you can not mistake the practice of Islam by Pakistanis for true Islam. This is completely unfair for the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful and do not abuse nonMuslims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nope. Lame explanation. I would bet you the vast majority of the public does not know a term predominantly spoken among Indians and Pakistanis. I do not know too many Pakistani people who spend this much time vilifying Islam. If you are of a minority faith, you were probably discriminated there. Pakistan is a corrupt country and notorious for abuse of nonMuslims. If this describes your experience, I am truly sorry but you can not mistake the practice of Islam by Pakistanis for true Islam. This is completely unfair for the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful and do not abuse nonMuslims.

There were two people on this very board who knew the term without being Pakistani. You aren't dealing with a "vast majority" of public Joe Schmoes. This is DC, the land of the most PhDs per capita.

I know it really burns you that you can't pinpoint my background, but you drew a big fat blank. I've never even been to the subcontinent. And I don't have a faith.

Also, you aren't sorry.

And yep, we already know that most countries don't practice Islam in the way that deserves your approval. Too bad no one's zabiha enough for your liking.

[Anonymous]

P.S. Also, you are a really lousy dawwah-wallah. Just wanted to get it out there again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, the best advice I can give you is to read the ENTIRE books of the scholars I mentioned in this thread. They address all these topics through historical research and beautifully explain why the Quran mentioned these. It was not to support or encourage at all. However, for the person who refuses to read, but only wishes to google, cut, and paste, you will not understand. Historians and religious scholars have already done a fine job of explaining why the Quran mentioned these. Learn from them rather than spewing false information and pretending you are a historian or islam expert.

What makes you think I haven't?

You are just like any other dawah-wallah I met, and I met many, many of them better than you. If you tell them you disagree, they say it's because you haven't read enough - because clearly, someone who reads enough ABSOLUTELY will see think the way they do. (This is the point at which I begin to giggle pointedly). I've read more history and religious studies on the subject than you can possibly imagine. So you have a good explanation of why these things are in the Quran. That doesn't mean they are good, make sense, or should be preserved, or mean anything at all.

Beauty is the eye of the beholder.

Dawahwallah. That is a term which means one who propogates Islam. It is used by southeast Asians. Are you a person of a minority faith from a southeast Asian Muslim country? Were you mistreated in those countries? Could this be why you are so hateful of Islam?

I'm not that PP, but I know what a wallah is. All it takes is a good vocabulary or a British background. (I have the latter (and I think my relatives at both Cambridge and Oxford would find your suggestion that their current and in some cases former profs are discussing DCUM to be knee-slapping hilarious, to borrow an American colloquialism.)

You lost me. When did anyone say the scholars at Oxford would be discussing DCUM?

OP said that scholars at Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard would all be discussing DCUM at her post at 11/07/2014 01:34 on page 16 of this thread, here: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/225/420097.page

Is this what you are referring to?

"You will be the anonymous face of islamophobia in articles and your posts will probably be used, right before quotes from scholars from prestigious institutions such as Cambridge, Oxford, and Harvard contradicting you. The goal will be to shed light on the new face of islamophobia but it will inevitably make a mockery of your posts. I apologize for that but this topic is too important and your posts illustrate all too well the prejudice and discrimination Muslims are up against. "

Once again, you misread. It does not say THEY would comment on DCUM. It says their comments would follow islamophobe's comments.

For example:

Dawah wallah rafidah using islamophobe: " Muslims made up the idea there was a jahiliyah, just to make it look like Islam elevated the status of women."

World renowned historian or religious scholar quote about the existence of jahiliyah and how it did elevate the status of women would immediately follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I apologized for my comments weeks ago. As of yet, Muslims have yet to receive an apology from the poster who said our Prophet was a pedophile. I suspect it was the Islamophobe who likes to google, cut, and paste, but not sure. And Muslims have yet to receive an apology for being called liars for making up the jahiliya. Historians confirm it. So where are our apologies??

I already told you - more than once - that I don't consider the Muhammad & Aisha union anything out of the ordinary. She made out on it, and so did her father. If they are happy, what's it to me? So stop making things up. Whoever called him a pedofile, wasn't me. I don't care. If you aren't sure it was me, that's a good thing.

So you want the apology for the jahilia lie, huh? Did you ask Leila Ahmed to apologize too, since she said Muslims rewrote history to cast Islam as a sole source of civilization? When you get one from her, let me know, then I'll think about getting you one. Ask Hatoon Al-Fassi, too, if you can overcome your awe of Al-Saud. When you have these two covered, let me know.

Finally, I think you're getting too comfy on top of the pedestal when you say "Muslims didn't get an apology.." Who died and appointed you a spokesperson for "Muslims"? If it makes you feel better, I will tell you that I don't hold you personally responsible for the rewriting of history Ahmed mentioned (so it's not like YOU lied, it happened centuries before you were born). You are not a representative for "Muslims", not their spokesperson, not their interpreter, you are neither the source of Muslim achievement nor Muslim ill, and no one is holding YOU personally responsible for the failings of Islamic law or Muslim discourse. When a Muslim scientist gets a Nobel prize, you have nothing to do with it, and when a Muslim terrorist blows something up, it has nothing to do with you, nothing at all.

On the other hand, all the insults you were able to come up with were oddly personal.

What is your educational background? You misread Leila Ahmed's comment. Not only did you fail to comprehend well, you lied and implied you read her book. If you read her book, you would have known why she wrote what she did. You are an Islam hater that is simply trying to spin the truth.

There is so much in her book that contradicts you. But how would you know that when you relied solely on the few pages offered in a google preview and never even read what she wrote afterwards?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

Here you go:
Surah Al-Nahl (Chapter 16), Verses 58 and 59 (16:58-59)

“When news is brought to one of them of (the birth of) a female (child), his face darkness, and he is filled with inward grief!
With shame does he hide himself from his people, because of the bad news he has had! Shall he retain it on (sufferance)? What evil choice they decide on!"

If I lack critical thinking skills, you are a liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

No matter! If Jeff is good enough to keep these threads open, I will publish the links to the published articles. I think when people read the articles, complete with quotes from the historians and scholars, it will be enough. Who would reasonable minded people believe? A disgruntled, islamophobic Pakistani or historians and scholars that teach at Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? At that point, I will ask Jeff to shut this thread down to prevent you from continuing on with your islamophobic campaign. Looking forward...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

No matter! If Jeff is good enough to keep these threads open, I will publish the links to the published articles. I think when people read the articles, complete with quotes from the historians and scholars, it will be enough. Who would reasonable minded people believe? A disgruntled, islamophobic Pakistani or historians and scholars that teach at Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? At that point, I will ask Jeff to shut this thread down to prevent you from continuing on with your islamophobic campaign. Looking forward...

I think you overestimate your ability to make Jeff to do what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What is your educational background? You misread Leila Ahmed's comment. Not only did you fail to comprehend well, you lied and implied you read her book. If you read her book, you would have known why she wrote what she did. You are an Islam hater that is simply trying to spin the truth.

There is so much in her book that contradicts you. But how would you know that when you relied solely on the few pages offered in a google preview and never even read what she wrote afterwards?

It isn't possible to misread her comment. It leaves very little room for misinterpretation. But I look forward to your explanation of how the straightforward sentence of "some women were considerably better off before Islam than after" really means "Islam meant milk and cookies for everyone."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

No matter! If Jeff is good enough to keep these threads open, I will publish the links to the published articles. I think when people read the articles, complete with quotes from the historians and scholars, it will be enough. Who would reasonable minded people believe? A disgruntled, islamophobic Pakistani or historians and scholars that teach at Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? At that point, I will ask Jeff to shut this thread down to prevent you from continuing on with your islamophobic campaign. Looking forward...

Who would reasonable-minded people believe? Clearly not a wannabe dawwah-wallah who makes up stories about people based on nothing but weird commitment to an idea that a common word known to every single person in London, every single person who reads Salman Rushdie and probably a million others, is somehow a clear-cut indication of ethnic background. The fact that you failed to find even one sympathetic listener on DCUM, methinks, is an excellent predictor of how much credibility your future efforts will gain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

Here you go:
Surah Al-Nahl (Chapter 16), Verses 58 and 59 (16:58-59)

“When news is brought to one of them of (the birth of) a female (child), his face darkness, and he is filled with inward grief!
With shame does he hide himself from his people, because of the bad news he has had! Shall he retain it on (sufferance)? What evil choice they decide on!"

If I lack critical thinking skills, you are a liar.

The earlier reference you gave that you said prohibited female infanticide was Sura 81, which, as I have explained is an apocalyptic chapter that uses a dead buried girl as a literary device.

Sura 16 talks about the pagans who opposed Muhammed and his message by, for example, attributing daughters to God. It goes on to say that these men, when they receive news of the birth of a girl they keep her with humiliation or to bury her in the dust. It then says that what they decide is evil. This is of course a bit cryptic...is it that either of these two choices is evil (including keeping the child) or whatever they decide about anything is evil, given the previous lines denouncing their polytheism.

Other references in the Quran to infanticide seem pretty clear about prohibiting infanticide (at least male, one could infer the male plural includes females as well), but Sura 16--not so much. It seems more a general slam on the polytheists who were resisting Muhammed and his message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Is this what you are referring to?

"You will be the anonymous face of islamophobia in articles and your posts will probably be used, right before quotes from scholars from prestigious institutions such as Cambridge, Oxford, and Harvard contradicting you. The goal will be to shed light on the new face of islamophobia but it will inevitably make a mockery of your posts. I apologize for that but this topic is too important and your posts illustrate all too well the prejudice and discrimination Muslims are up against. "

Once again, you misread. It does not say THEY would comment on DCUM. It says their comments would follow islamophobe's comments.

For example:

Dawah wallah rafidah using islamophobe: " Muslims made up the idea there was a jahiliyah, just to make it look like Islam elevated the status of women."

World renowned historian or religious scholar quote about the existence of jahiliyah and how it did elevate the status of women would immediately follow.

*snort*

I just don't get why you'd resurrect one of your most horrifically embarrassing trains of thought. Why don't you just let this one die? Do you really have this little self-control?

Everybody understands that the mythical "journalist" is you (despite your discomfort with apostrophes).
Everybody understands that you haven't written this article yet.
Let alone had it accepted by a major print or online newspaper, magazine or journal.
Everybody has followed the path of your threats, from
... announcing that you were calling in CAIR (who apparently told you to buzz off)
... announcing that you were going to identify and publish the names of individual DCUM posters (nope, not without IP addresses)
... announcing that you were going to identify and publish, for the first time, the name of some alleged shadowy "new" and "unnamed" islamophobe organization you keep talking about (ditto on the IP addresses, or maybe Homeland Security is helping you?)
... so that now, having drawn a blank on all of the above, you are threatening us with the proximity of quotes from eminent academic institutions?

Whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
No matter! If Jeff is good enough to keep these threads open, I will publish the links to the published articles. I think when people read the articles, complete with quotes from the historians and scholars, it will be enough. Who would reasonable minded people believe? A disgruntled, islamophobic Pakistani or historians and scholars that teach at Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? At that point, I will ask Jeff to shut this thread down to prevent you from continuing on with your islamophobic campaign. Looking forward...

Yes indeedy! I was very impressed by the quotes someone posted here from Harvard's Dr. Leila Ahmed, and I've ordered her book. As you'll recall, Harvard's Dr. Ahmed, a Muslim, contradicted your black-and-white picture of women's rights improving with Islam. Dr. Ahmed takes a much more nuanced view, that in many cases Islam confirmed pre-existing women's rights, and in some instances it took women's rights away. You're darn right, Harvard has some smart people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No matter! If Jeff is good enough to keep these threads open, I will publish the links to the published articles. I think when people read the articles, complete with quotes from the historians and scholars, it will be enough. Who would reasonable minded people believe? A disgruntled, islamophobic Pakistani or historians and scholars that teach at Harvard, Oxford, or Cambridge? At that point, I will ask Jeff to shut this thread down to prevent you from continuing on with your islamophobic campaign. Looking forward...

Yes indeedy! I was very impressed by the quotes someone posted here from Harvard's Dr. Leila Ahmed, and I've ordered her book. As you'll recall, Harvard's Dr. Ahmed, a Muslim, contradicted your black-and-white picture of women's rights improving with Islam. Dr. Ahmed takes a much more nuanced view, that in many cases Islam confirmed pre-existing women's rights, and in some instances it took women's rights away. You're darn right, Harvard has some smart people!

It's a very good book. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

And when you post your own reviews of it here, I'm sure our resident Muslim poster will come back you calling you uneducated, too linear in your thinking and terminally unable to understand anything you read - just because you don't happen to read it the way she did. Remember, if you don't agree with her, you're uneducated. And quite possibly Pakistani.

[Anonymous]

Or maybe a non-Muslim Shi'ite or Sufi.