I'm a Muslim. Ask me anything!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Umm, didn't you address your post directly to me? Thats why I read it.

Again - why are you complaining about reading stuff no one forced you to read?

Anonymous wrote:First of all, I think I have said quite clearly I do not know about that immigrant poster's previous posts. I would have to view them all to see his position on other kinds of Muslims to determine if he committed takfir.

You respond to posts without knowing them? I copied your response to the post calling Shias non-Muslims.

Anonymous wrote:
Difference of opinion or criticism is permitted in Islam. Tafkir is quite a different story. Don't mistake one for the other. Therefore, he is not a "takfiri" let alone my "buddy."

When someone calls a Muslim a non-Muslim, is it criticism or takfir?

Anonymous wrote:
Moreover, I did not "pour wrath on nonMuslims"; I corrected your outright lies and misinterpretations of Islamic history and Muhammads relegations. You have to know if you publish false statements about Islam, somebody at some point is going to correct you.

You didn't. You tried. But you failed.

Anonymous wrote:Oh my. More evidence you are an immigrant yourself, most likely a disgruntled Pakistani of a minority faith who wants to spread hate about Islam. "Kool Aid" is not spelled "Cool-Aid." It's a typical idiomatic expression that you are clearly unfamiliar with because you can't spell it! Your posts are quite revealing.

There is no shame in spelling mistakes, or in being a Pakistani (you little bigot you), for that matter. Everyone makes spelling mistakes. You've just typed "Muhammad's relegations" two lines above. Did you mean "relegations"? Or "revelations"? Do you see me making a stink about it? And since you're getting all picky about spelling, it is my pleasure to share with you the correct spelling that is "IslamOphobe", not "IslamAphobe", as you prefer to write it. And what about your maths refresher? What is greater - 25 thousand or a hundred thousand?

Anonymous wrote: Worship of the Al-Saud? No, not really. They are not the guardians of the Islamic faith. However, they are the guardians of Kaba, a place of importance to Muslims worldwide. They do decide who may enter Mecca and who may not. You said the immigrant poster (and I) were "takfiri buddies" for rejecting Shia as Muslims and therefore I, in particular, worship Al-Saud. You are drawing a correlation between Saudi Arabia and those accusing nonSunni or nonwahabi as takfiri, particularly Shia people. I clearly showed you that by admitting Shias in Mecca, the government of Saudi Arabia admits they are indeed Muslim.

The hatred and sectarianism of Al-Saud is well known. Letting people into Mecca is not the end-all be-all of Muslimness. Al-Saud spreads hate about all non-Wahhabi Muslims in the writings it disseminates worldwide, in their schoolbooks used by many Islamic schools worldwide, and through their discriminatory, bigoted policies toward non-Wahhabi Muslims within the country.

Anonymous wrote:
If a Muslim on any thread does not like what people of another sect are doing, it is their prerogative to criticize it. Shia Muslims do engage in behavior that may be antithetical to islamic principles, but that does not make them nonMuslim.

I'm gonna give you a crash course on what is criticism and what is takfir.

"Shias are bad Muslims." = criticism

"Shias are non-Muslims." = takfir

All better now?

I did not say I did not know what takfir is; I said I did not see the immigrant poster's posts to agree with you that he committed this sin. You can dismiss it as a petty spelling error, but it is not. I generally do not pay attention to misspellings. This was no misspelling, it was a revelation that shed light on your identity and supports my theory that you are an angry Pakistani out for revenge against Muslims. You don't know much about that expression. Word of advice, don't use expressions to try to sound "cool" or American if you can't use them properly. You had no issue mocking the immigrant poster for speaking poor English...if you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I did not say I did not know what takfir is; I said I did not see the immigrant poster's posts to agree with you that he committed this sin. You can dismiss it as a petty spelling error, but it is not. I generally do not pay attention to misspellings. This was no misspelling, it was a revelation that shed light on your identity and supports my theory that you are an angry Pakistani out for revenge against Muslims. You don't know much about that expression. Word of advice, don't use expressions to try to sound "cool" or American if you can't use them properly. You had no issue mocking the immigrant poster for speaking poor English...if you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

How did you not see it if you replied to it? Did you respond without seeing it? It's not the immigrant poster, it's someone entirely different.

You are so endearingly provincial in your insistence that anyone one say or write can peg them to a particular place. It's as if you have no awareness of the way knowledge travels. It's as if anyone non-American HAS to be Pakistani. Actually, even though I'm lily-white, your continued characterization of Pakistanis as subhuman paints a a picture that isn't pretty.

What do I care what you think about my spelling? Mock away. I'll use whatever expressions I see fit. I don't care about your misspellings - and it's not like there's a shortage of material there, you know. Spelling mistakes or not, you've failed to make a single ally on DCUM - I wonder why that is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you seen All-American Muslim? What did you think of it? I started watching it after all the right-wing hoopla claiming that the show's producers were avoiding showing militant Muslims. The issues the show dealt with made sense to me based on what I know from Muslim friends and acquaintances. I was sorry the show wasn't renewed.

Folks who want to know more about one segment of the Muslim community in the US may want to check it out.

HERE IS YOUR TAKFIRI FRIEND CALLING SHIAS NON-MUSLIMS:
That show was nonsense, the families they showed were shia, aka non-Muslims, its a completely different faith! They had tattoos, the women weren't covering all the time, a few were wrapped up in haram (forbidden) money making (The club) and the list goes on and on. It was an extremely poor representation of what a real american Muslim is. Now don't get me wrong they had some key points and very real life situations that everyone goes through, but I'm glad they didn't renew it.

Who made you in charge of deciding what an American Muslim is?

More generally, who put you in charge of deciding who is and is not a real Muslim? Just go ahead and call them rafidah dogs and then catch a flight to ISIS, they seem to need people with your attitude.

AND HERE"S YOU REPLYING TO HIS POST. STILL WANT TO ARGUE YOU DIDN'T SEE IT?
Wait. Did you just use an arabic term now on DCUM? You must be the same who used the term, dawah wallah. Do you realize you alienate readership by using words very few nonMuslims know? You don't sound smart, you sound disconnected from your audience.

That pp iscorrect also. If a program is going to show Muslims, its a bit strange to show people who may not even practice Islam.

Liar liar pants on fire.

[Anonymous]

LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I did not say I did not know what takfir is; I said I did not see the immigrant poster's posts to agree with you that he committed this sin. You can dismiss it as a petty spelling error, but it is not. I generally do not pay attention to misspellings. This was no misspelling, it was a revelation that shed light on your identity and supports my theory that you are an angry Pakistani out for revenge against Muslims. You don't know much about that expression. Word of advice, don't use expressions to try to sound "cool" or American if you can't use them properly. You had no issue mocking the immigrant poster for speaking poor English...if you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

How did you not see it if you replied to it? Did you respond without seeing it? It's not the immigrant poster, it's someone entirely different.

You are so endearingly provincial in your insistence that anyone one say or write can peg them to a particular place. It's as if you have no awareness of the way knowledge travels. It's as if anyone non-American HAS to be Pakistani. Actually, even though I'm lily-white, your continued characterization of Pakistanis as subhuman paints a a picture that isn't pretty.

What do I care what you think about my spelling? Mock away. I'll use whatever expressions I see fit. I don't care about your misspellings - and it's not like there's a shortage of material there, you know. Spelling mistakes or not, you've failed to make a single ally on DCUM - I wonder why that is?

Provincial? Not really. I have lived in other countries and come from a family that is very diverse. That is how I know these are not terms commonly used in published work, even scholarly work, unless they are defined for readers. Between the Islamophobes "Cool-Aid" and her terms such as "Dawah wallah" I can guess she is likely someone who is of a minority faith from a Muslim country. She is angry and looking for revenge and used DCUM as her soap box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I did not say I did not know what takfir is; I said I did not see the immigrant poster's posts to agree with you that he committed this sin. You can dismiss it as a petty spelling error, but it is not. I generally do not pay attention to misspellings. This was no misspelling, it was a revelation that shed light on your identity and supports my theory that you are an angry Pakistani out for revenge against Muslims. You don't know much about that expression. Word of advice, don't use expressions to try to sound "cool" or American if you can't use them properly. You had no issue mocking the immigrant poster for speaking poor English...if you dish it out, you better be able to take it.

How did you not see it if you replied to it? Did you respond without seeing it? It's not the immigrant poster, it's someone entirely different.

You are so endearingly provincial in your insistence that anyone one say or write can peg them to a particular place. It's as if you have no awareness of the way knowledge travels. It's as if anyone non-American HAS to be Pakistani. Actually, even though I'm lily-white, your continued characterization of Pakistanis as subhuman paints a a picture that isn't pretty.

What do I care what you think about my spelling? Mock away. I'll use whatever expressions I see fit. I don't care about your misspellings - and it's not like there's a shortage of material there, you know. Spelling mistakes or not, you've failed to make a single ally on DCUM - I wonder why that is?

Provincial? Not really. I have lived in other countries and come from a family that is very diverse. That is how I know these are not terms commonly used in published work, even scholarly work, unless they are defined for readers. Between the Islamophobes "Cool-Aid" and her terms such as "Dawah wallah" I can guess she is likely someone who is of a minority faith from a Muslim country. She is angry and looking for revenge and used DCUM as her soap box.

And this is another thing, PP. You seem to have reading comprehension challenges or your emotions just get the better of you. Find me the post where I inferred Pakistani are subhumans. Waiting...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not even seen all of his posts. I would have to find every post to determine whether, in my opinion, he committed any grave sin.

What I did see is you mocked him for something he has little or no control over. Immigrants (Muslim immigrants) rarely have a good command of English. Why pick on him for it?

As for the christian crusader-evangelical, STD comment, all was apologized for. Sorry you can not accept the apology but its no longer something I need to address.

Besides, SOME of the criticisms I noted are preventable and controllable.

STDs are primarily preventable with abstinence. Islam demands abstinence before marriage.

Evangelicals are identified by the CIA as extremists, the same as terrorists. Those who accused Muslims defending their faith of proselytizing in attempt to lure Christians to Islam may very well be evangelicals. Who else would accuse a Muslim of proselytizing simply because he corrects falsehoods and misconceptions? Its an extreme reaction and a weighty accusation for merely defending one's faith.

As for the stereotype of women wearing mini skirts, excessively indulging in alcohol at bars, and the prevalence of STDS in American society, these were presented in response to islamophobes also painting Islam with a broad brush and implying Islam is a barbaric religion. Stereotypes are offensive to anyone.

Ahaha, I remember your so-called "apology"! You apologized for saying that *all* American women had STDs because, apparently, you really just meant to direct that comment to the American women on that thread. Only when somebody pointed that out did you issue a second, more comprehensive, apology.

Where did anybody call Islam "barbaric"? Please give a cite for this. Oh wait, nobody actually called Islam "barbaric." They merely disagreed with you about whether "women's equality" can encompass legal inequality. They disagreed with you on some other points of opinion. There's a big difference, which you still can't grasp, between islamophobia and disagreeing with you.

Also. Your insistence that that poster must be an immigrant is just as bad as mocking his language. First, how do you know he's an immigrant? Second, your assumption that he's an immigrant (and that's why his language is bad!) is just another way of saying, hey, his language is bad. It's a distinction without a difference.

FWIW, I've wondered if you're proselytizing, although I don't think I committed my musings to type. Why have I wondered if you're proselytizing? For the obvious reason that your overly-simplified platitudes seem straight out of the dawwah proselytizing book. But I assure you, I am NOT an evangelical.

In any case, I'm still waiting, with the other PP, for you to address that poster's unabashed trashing of western women, shias and sufis. What, nothing but crickets from you and Muslima about whether Yusuf and shiites are untrustworthy? Instead, you're back here resurrecting tired, old battles about the people you wrongly label islamophobes.

When I said the Islamophobe painted Islam as barbaric, that does not translate to somebody actually using the word "barbaric." It was painted as barbaric. How so, you ask?

- by saying or implying that Islam mistreats women or gives them little or no rights
- by saying that the punishment for apostasy is death when this is not the case in Islam
- by saying or implying that the actions of extremists are reflective of Islam (and worse, saying law abiding and peace loving Muslims are responsible for extremists)


Need I go on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Provincial? Not really. I have lived in other countries and come from a family that is very diverse. That is how I know these are not terms commonly used in published work, even scholarly work, unless they are defined for readers. Between the Islamophobes "Cool-Aid" and her terms such as "Dawah wallah" I can guess she is likely someone who is of a minority faith from a Muslim country. She is angry and looking for revenge and used DCUM as her soap box.

And this is another thing, PP. You seem to have reading comprehension challenges or your emotions just get the better of you. Find me the post where I inferred Pakistani are subhumans. Waiting...
I don't actually have a faith - I believe I shared that with you the very first time you called me a christianevanglicalcrusader. As I recall, at the time you responded to that by calling me an antichrist. That was good for a laugh.

Well, every time you say things like - "disgruntled Pakistani", "rich, secular Pakistani", "angry Pakistani" - as if being Pakistani actually adds anything to it. You don't have any Arabs in your family, do you? That would explain your poorly hidden disdain to the people of the subcontinent.

So you don't know that "wallah" is a common word in many corners of the plant. Utterly, utterly provincial. Someone from London already told you "wallah" is a common word there. Actually, the word "dawwah" is a lot more esoteric than the word "wallah" but you missed that. You're just angry someone called you an Islam-peddler - because that's what it means, you know - so you're frothing.

The only emotion you trigger - and only mildly - is amusement. You make me laugh. So I encourage you to post more and often.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Provincial? Not really. I have lived in other countries and come from a family that is very diverse. That is how I know these are not terms commonly used in published work, even scholarly work, unless they are defined for readers. Between the Islamophobes "Cool-Aid" and her terms such as "Dawah wallah" I can guess she is likely someone who is of a minority faith from a Muslim country. She is angry and looking for revenge and used DCUM as her soap box.

And this is another thing, PP. You seem to have reading comprehension challenges or your emotions just get the better of you. Find me the post where I inferred Pakistani are subhumans. Waiting...

I don't actually have a faith - I believe I shared that with you the very first time you called me a christianevanglicalcrusader. As I recall, at the time you responded to that by calling me an antichrist. That was good for a laugh.

Well, every time you say things like - "disgruntled Pakistani", "rich, secular Pakistani", "angry Pakistani" - as if being Pakistani actually adds anything to it. You don't have any Arabs in your family, do you? That would explain your poorly hidden disdain to the people of the subcontinent.

So you don't know that "wallah" is a common word in many corners of the plant. Utterly, utterly provincial. Someone from London already told you "wallah" is a common word there. Actually, the word "dawwah" is a lot more esoteric than the word "wallah" but you missed that. You're just angry someone called you an Islam-peddler - because that's what it means, you know - so you're frothing.

The only emotion you trigger - and only mildly - is amusement. You make me laugh. So I encourage you to post more and often.

My family and extended family is quite diverse and we do have relatives from both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In fact, some extended relatives still live there. However, I also have relatives in London. So I don't concern myself with insults and accusations by you or your merry little band. I know the truth and I know you do too. Your writing is distinctly ethnic also. The terms you use are indicative of someone not born or raised in the US. You are unfamiliar with American colloquialism or idiomatic expressions. And you harbor an endless vengeful hatred of Islam that is not typical of any good Christian or Jew. You are one of a kind. The Pakistani reference is only in response to your usage of words spoken predominantly in that country (or India). The disgruntled part is the part you should focus on. You are on a one woman vendetta, a campaign against Islam and Muslims. I quoted to you passages from Leila Ahmeds book where she praises Islam and I'm sure you were befuddled. I have a few more scholarly books written by various other nonMuslim scholars to quote from that confirm Leila Ahmed's assertions. I think you are so hateful toward Islam because of your own negative personal experience that you have lost all ability to reason, be fair, or just. The greatest outcome of your hate has been a flurry of interested reporters and investigative journalists who now want to research your posts. I never expected that, but it brings me solace to know that something good may come out of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Provincial? Not really. I have lived in other countries and come from a family that is very diverse. That is how I know these are not terms commonly used in published work, even scholarly work, unless they are defined for readers. Between the Islamophobes "Cool-Aid" and her terms such as "Dawah wallah" I can guess she is likely someone who is of a minority faith from a Muslim country. She is angry and looking for revenge and used DCUM as her soap box.

And this is another thing, PP. You seem to have reading comprehension challenges or your emotions just get the better of you. Find me the post where I inferred Pakistani are subhumans. Waiting...

I don't actually have a faith - I believe I shared that with you the very first time you called me a christianevanglicalcrusader. As I recall, at the time you responded to that by calling me an antichrist. That was good for a laugh.

Well, every time you say things like - "disgruntled Pakistani", "rich, secular Pakistani", "angry Pakistani" - as if being Pakistani actually adds anything to it. You don't have any Arabs in your family, do you? That would explain your poorly hidden disdain to the people of the subcontinent.

So you don't know that "wallah" is a common word in many corners of the plant. Utterly, utterly provincial. Someone from London already told you "wallah" is a common word there. Actually, the word "dawwah" is a lot more esoteric than the word "wallah" but you missed that. You're just angry someone called you an Islam-peddler - because that's what it means, you know - so you're frothing.

The only emotion you trigger - and only mildly - is amusement. You make me laugh. So I encourage you to post more and often.

My family and extended family is quite diverse and we do have relatives from both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In fact, some extended relatives still live there. However, I also have relatives in London. So I don't concern myself with insults and accusations by you or your merry little band. I know the truth and I know you do too. Your writing is distinctly ethnic also. The terms you use are indicative of someone not born or raised in the US. You are unfamiliar with American colloquialism or idiomatic expressions. And you harbor an endless vengeful hatred of Islam that is not typical of any good Christian or Jew. You are one of a kind. The Pakistani reference is only in response to your usage of words spoken predominantly in that country (or India). The disgruntled part is the part you should focus on. You are on a one woman vendetta, a campaign against Islam and Muslims. I quoted to you passages from Leila Ahmeds book where she praises Islam and I'm sure you were befuddled. I have a few more scholarly books written by various other nonMuslim scholars to quote from that confirm Leila Ahmed's assertions. I think you are so hateful toward Islam because of your own negative personal experience that you have lost all ability to reason, be fair, or just. The greatest outcome of your hate has been a flurry of interested reporters and investigative journalists who now want to research your posts. I never expected that, but it brings me solace to know that something good may come out of this.

different poster -- what a joke, as if any respectable journalist would be interested in anonymous postings on an internet board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My family and extended family is quite diverse and we do have relatives from both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In fact, some extended relatives still live there.

I believe that; your amicable treatment of takifiris shows as much. I can see Bin Baz's footprints all over you.

Anonymous wrote:
However, I also have relatives in London. So I don't concern myself with insults and accusations by you or your merry little band. I know the truth and I know you do too. Your writing is distinctly ethnic also. The terms you use are indicative of someone not born or raised in the US. You are unfamiliar with American colloquialism or idiomatic expressions.

That still leaves, oh, I dunno, two hundred or so countries.

Anonymous wrote:
And you harbor an endless vengeful hatred of Islam that is not typical of any good Christian or Jew. You are one of a kind. The Pakistani reference is only in response to your usage of words spoken predominantly in that country (or India).

I see the provincial remark must have stung you because you now include India in the sea of your guesswork. Hey, let me toss some more out. Or Bangladesh. Or Malaysia. Or Tanzania. Or Kenya. Or Uganda. Or anywhere where domestic workers from the subcontinent can be found.

Anonymous wrote:
The disgruntled part is the part you should focus on. You are on a one woman vendetta, a campaign against Islam and Muslims. I quoted to you passages from Leila Ahmeds book where she praises Islam and I'm sure you were befuddled. I have a few more scholarly books written by various other nonMuslim scholars to quote from that confirm Leila Ahmed's assertions. I think you are so hateful toward Islam because of your own negative personal experience that you have lost all ability to reason, be fair, or just. The greatest outcome of your hate has been a flurry of interested reporters and investigative journalists who now want to research your posts. I never expected that, but it brings me solace to know that something good may come out of this.

NOthing will come out it other than a big loss of calories on your part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not even seen all of his posts. I would have to find every post to determine whether, in my opinion, he committed any grave sin.

What I did see is you mocked him for something he has little or no control over. Immigrants (Muslim immigrants) rarely have a good command of English. Why pick on him for it?

As for the christian crusader-evangelical, STD comment, all was apologized for. Sorry you can not accept the apology but its no longer something I need to address.

Besides, SOME of the criticisms I noted are preventable and controllable.

STDs are primarily preventable with abstinence. Islam demands abstinence before marriage.

Evangelicals are identified by the CIA as extremists, the same as terrorists. Those who accused Muslims defending their faith of proselytizing in attempt to lure Christians to Islam may very well be evangelicals. Who else would accuse a Muslim of proselytizing simply because he corrects falsehoods and misconceptions? Its an extreme reaction and a weighty accusation for merely defending one's faith.

As for the stereotype of women wearing mini skirts, excessively indulging in alcohol at bars, and the prevalence of STDS in American society, these were presented in response to islamophobes also painting Islam with a broad brush and implying Islam is a barbaric religion. Stereotypes are offensive to anyone.

Ahaha, I remember your so-called "apology"! You apologized for saying that *all* American women had STDs because, apparently, you really just meant to direct that comment to the American women on that thread. Only when somebody pointed that out did you issue a second, more comprehensive, apology.

Where did anybody call Islam "barbaric"? Please give a cite for this. Oh wait, nobody actually called Islam "barbaric." They merely disagreed with you about whether "women's equality" can encompass legal inequality. They disagreed with you on some other points of opinion. There's a big difference, which you still can't grasp, between islamophobia and disagreeing with you.

Also. Your insistence that that poster must be an immigrant is just as bad as mocking his language. First, how do you know he's an immigrant? Second, your assumption that he's an immigrant (and that's why his language is bad!) is just another way of saying, hey, his language is bad. It's a distinction without a difference.

FWIW, I've wondered if you're proselytizing, although I don't think I committed my musings to type. Why have I wondered if you're proselytizing? For the obvious reason that your overly-simplified platitudes seem straight out of the dawwah proselytizing book. But I assure you, I am NOT an evangelical.

In any case, I'm still waiting, with the other PP, for you to address that poster's unabashed trashing of western women, shias and sufis. What, nothing but crickets from you and Muslima about whether Yusuf and shiites are untrustworthy? Instead, you're back here resurrecting tired, old battles about the people you wrongly label islamophobes.

When I said the Islamophobe painted Islam as barbaric, that does not translate to somebody actually using the word "barbaric." It was painted as barbaric. How so, you ask?

- by saying or implying that Islam mistreats women or gives them little or no rights
- by saying that the punishment for apostasy is death when this is not the case in Islam
- by saying or implying that the actions of extremists are reflective of Islam (and worse, saying law abiding and peace loving Muslims are responsible for extremists)


Need I go on?

It's not a -phobia or a slur, if it's true. Those things are true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My family and extended family is quite diverse and we do have relatives from both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

My DH is Saudi with family in Bahrain and Oman and he says everyone in the Gulf knows what a wallah is. Are you QUITE sure you have family in KSA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I know the truth and I know you do too.

The truth is you'll never know anything about me.

Anonymous wrote:
Your writing is distinctly ethnic also. The terms you use are indicative of someone not born or raised in the US. You are unfamiliar with American colloquialism or idiomatic expressions.

Hardly a crime, is it?

Anonymous wrote: And you harbor an endless vengeful hatred of Islam that is not typical of any good Christian or Jew.

Never pretended to be a Christian or a Jew, much less a good one. It was you who insisted on calling me an evangelical christian crusader with a fat file at the Pentagon, and then, when I told you laughingly I am no Christian, an antichrist. We had a good laugh about that.

Anonymous wrote:
You are one of a kind.

That is true.

Anonymous wrote:
The Pakistani reference is only in response to your usage of words spoken predominantly in that country (or India).

Provincial.

Anonymous wrote:
The disgruntled part is the part you should focus on. You are on a one woman vendetta, a campaign against Islam and Muslims. I quoted to you passages from Leila Ahmeds book where she praises Islam and I'm sure you were befuddled. I have a few more scholarly books written by various other nonMuslim scholars to quote from that confirm Leila Ahmed's assertions.

Just like you quoted me something that "proved" concubines were freed upon pregnancy? What is it with you kicking yourself, posting things that you think prove one thing when they prove something entirely different?

Anonymous wrote:
I think you are so hateful toward Islam because of your own negative personal experience that you have lost all ability to reason, be fair, or just.

Actually, I've had fabulous experiences with Muslims, most of whom are blessedly unlike you. I'm about to have another verrry positive experience with a Muslim - a couple of hours from now, when our Muslim son is asleep. I'm Islam-neutral. I advised much earlier to focus on the lovely, uncontroversial bits in Islam, which are many. You, for some reason, insist on focusing on the less attractive ones. Oh well, you can take the girl to the water..

Anonymous wrote:
The greatest outcome of your hate has been a flurry of interested reporters and investigative journalists who now want to research your posts. I never expected that, but it brings me solace to know that something good may come out of this.

So far, the greatest outcome of my writings has been your continued embarrassment. I look forward to much more. So, please continue to do as I say - post more, post often.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The disgruntled part is the part you should focus on. You are on a one woman vendetta, a campaign against Islam and Muslims. I quoted to you passages from Leila Ahmeds book where she praises Islam and I'm sure you were befuddled. I have a few more scholarly books written by various other nonMuslim scholars to quote from that confirm Leila Ahmed's assertions. I think you are so hateful toward Islam because of your own negative personal experience that you have lost all ability to reason, be fair, or just. The greatest outcome of your hate has been a flurry of interested reporters and investigative journalists who now want to research your posts. I never expected that, but it brings me solace to know that something good may come out of this.

Not the PP you're calling "befuddled." I posted on the Micro-aggressions thread about how you're trying to change the subject and blame it on innocent Dr. Ahmed. You ignored me and so I reposted. Here's another repost, and maybe you'll read it this time.

Your debate with the other PP was about whether pre-Islamic Arabia was good or bad for women, and whether Islam was better or worse for women than pre-Islamic Arabia. But you clearly don't want to talk about pre-Islamic Arabia. I can understand why, because Dr. Ahmed is pretty ambivalent about that. Instead, you'd much rather talk about Dr. Ahmed's opinions of Islam *today* and her theory of ethical equality and criticism of establishment Islam, both of which she does indeed discuss at the end of her book.

You're trying to switch subjects on that PP you're arguing with. And you're trying to do this by exploiting the natural historic progression in Dr. Ahmed's book -- from pre-Islamic Arabia at the start of her book to modern Islam at the end of her book. Does everybody see how that works?

The worst part of your behavior is how you blame Dr. Ahmed for your own effort to switch subjects from pre-Islamic Arabia to modern Islam. That's right. Dr. Ahmed traveled 1400 years forward in history. You're trying to label this an "evolution of opinion" and "writing something different in the beginning of the book" in your effort to suggest that she changed her mind about pre-Islamic Arabia. She most definitely did not change her mind about pre-Islamic Arabia. It's obvious what you're doing here.