Congratulations, Mullahs - #KillAllMuslims is now trending worldwide

[TankMan]

Yes, I realized that that is what you meant by the word. The rest of my post was based on the assumption that that was the sense in which it is being used. Which obviously excludes most practitioners of most forms of islam. However, the trouble that I see in the world is that plenty of "moderates" act as enablers for the existence of "extremists". The only difference is that the "extremists" are willing to do violence for the same beliefs. (To clarify, I am not saying that all muslims hold these beliefs. I'm not talking about you or your friends or mine. But in the real world, many people who consider themselves "moderate" hold the very same beliefs. The only difference is that they condemn extremists when the latter do something like this. For example, ponder over this question - how many muslims do you know, who would agree that insulting Islam or the prophet should be a crime? Punishable by law, either by imprisonment or death? Are you sure that all the people who are excluded from the definition of "extremist" do not hold such beliefs?)

Many people, who do not usually hold extremist beliefs, do in fact believe that blasphemy is a punishable offence. You are right about that, but according to Islam, they are wrong. This part has a lot to do with political Mullahs - they tend to twist religion a lot, and yes, they and their followers do act as 'enablers' for extremists. But, by my definition, they too are extremist because they are twisting religion and are hateful, going directly against Islamic teachings.

Some, of course, are simply misinformed, like some of my friends who no longer hold those beliefs but used to before they were confronted.

Those who spread that kind of misinformation are usually the same people who are also actively involved in recruiting terrorists etc. Examples being Lal Masjid molvi and Anjem Chaudhry. These people usually have cohorts, imams in mosques etc who then further spread the same misinformation. We have a few such people here on PDF too - people who subscribe to the un-Islamic views I'm talking about.

I was asking about certain particular beliefs held by some, if not many muslims. That is why I used the term "belief", not "religion". As you know, Islam is not just one belief, but a set of many. (Like most other religions.) Also, many practicing muslims do not agree on every single one of those beliefs. So to take one example, if many practicing muslims believe that somebody who insults the prophet should be killed, is that belief not a problem? Even though the rest of their beliefs are not a problem?

There are dozens of sects or schools of thought in Islam and they differ on many, many points. The blasphemy and punishment concept is one of those beliefs, which I discussed in detail in an earlier thread. In short, Islam is clearly against punishing people from blasphemy. There is more than enough evidence to prove that, but some sects and preachers continue to spread that misinformation. Unfortunately, yes, they do influence a lot of people, that is true.

Those who believe that people insulting the prophet should be killed are either misinformed about Islam or simply bigoted fools. They respond to his insult be disobeying everything he stood for. What is the bigger insult here?

There was a survey done recently in Egypt (a largely moderate country), which showed that 80% of the people wanted the death sentence for blasphemy. Surely, we wouldn't consider 80% of a large country like Egypt to be extremists? Which is why, as I said, certain beliefs held even by moderates act as enablers for extremists.

I can't seem to find that survey online, could you give me a link? I know it's a particularly big problem in Pakistan but didn't know that Egypt had that much of it.

Here it gets problematic. I will have to believe you if you say so, but are you really sure about this? If so, that would make a ver big chunk of muslims "extremists". Even many people on this forum, and possibly on this thread, and many people who have sincerely condemned this particular attack in France. I personally know lots of people who wouldn't go around killing or bombing anybody, but do agree that SR deserved the fatwa. That's just my real world observation.

You are right about that, it is problematic and it is a large chunk of Muslims that hold these views. The Salman Rushdie fatwa was based a lot on the idea that he had committed apostasy, which is a slipperier slope than just blasphemy. There is a little more evidence in favor of killing apostates in Islam, so it has more supporters (and yes, most of those are moderate in other issues) yet I am adamant that it is not so.

The apostasy law is based on hadiths, some of them authentic. However, the Quran clearly says that if someone disbelieves, he should be allowed to disbelieve - which leads me to believe that either the hadiths are not authentic or the people punished in those hadiths were guilty of more than just apostasy (there is evidence for that too).

So, in short, a lot of Muslims are moderate in other issues but are mistaken or confused when it comes to Blasphemy and Apostasy.

My point was only about the issuance of the fatwa, not the other political good or bad things Khomeini has done. And Khomeini was just an example that occured to me.

All the charges I listed would come under the issuance of the same fatwa you were talking about.

would you support the complete abolition of blasphemy laws from Pakistan and all islamic countries, since you believe that they are contradictory to islam?

Yes, I would. However, I would prefer if it was replaced by a hate speech law that gave a short time in jail or a fine for the insult of any religion, so as to avoid people taking matters in their own hands through violence.

Even if you would, how many Pakistanis or muslims in general do you think would. What percentage of muslims would agree that everybody should have the freedom to insult Islam or the prophet?

People shouldn't have the freedom to insult the prophet - it is still a sin and will be punished in the afterlife, by God, as per Islam. I'm not saying that insulting the prophet is allowed in Islam. I am saying that offenders can not be punished by humans. It should be discouraged, just as hate speech is discouraged in Western law because it offends public sentiments.

Muslims in general would agree or be neutral, considering that there is no death penalty or strict blasphemy law in 45 out of 50 Muslim countries, including Indonesia and India (two of the countries with the largest Muslim populations).

Indonesia especially has a good law, with a maximum of 5 years imprisonment for insulting ANY religion. That would mean all the Mullahs would be spending a long time in jail too, which is very good.

Pakistanis, on the other hand, will have a problem.

BTW, to answer something you asked in your first post, you do not have to take any blame or responsibility for the action of other muslims. Each person individually is to blamed or praised for their actions alone. I have said this in another context, about Indian muslims. There was a desecration of a patriotic memorial in India by a muslim, and many Indian members were asking why the muslim community is not condemning it. I explained that muslims in particular need not be expected to swear their patriotism or loyalty, any more than hindus should be, every time a hindu commits a crime. Unless you have had any part in these attacks, or at least in spreading the beliefs (the particular beliefs, not islam in general) that led to these attacks, you are in no way responsible.

Right, thanks. But I still feel responsibility towards my community to try and do something to correct the problem - that's why I said in an earlier post, it's not our fault that it happened but still our responsibility to stop it happening through our community.

can someone help a brother out? all i want to know is if the people that were killed in this terrorists attack for creating cartoons and mocking the prophet, will they be now spending the rest of their "life after death" in hell? for eternity?

Allah has promised the hypocrite men, and the hypocrite women and the disbelievers, Fire (of) Hell, they (will) abide forever in it. It (is) sufficient for them. And Allah has cursed them, and for them (is) a punishment enduring.

AYAT at-Taubah 9:68.

Not our job to judge - It's God's will. But yes, according to the warnings in the Quran, they will be punished for their disbelief etc. Still, there are many hadiths and about Allah forgiving sinners based on their good deeds. Still, not our job to judge. Doesn't matter whether they were going to hell or not, killing them is still a grave crime.

Don't you think that defensive antisemitic tirades are at least counterproductive when debating with Islamists because you're legitimizing hatred and violence

Me accusing you of demonizing Islam is not antisemitic in any way, and neither is the fact that the Torah and Bible do prescribe such punishments.

TankMan, you turned a personal criticism into a religious insult

A) Your post was not a personal criticism. It was a criticism of a piece of religious text, not of me. Thus, it was a religious criticism.
B) There was no insult in my post. If you consider a mention of religious books to be an insult, don't discuss religion.
QUOTE="Solomon2, post: 6635745, member: 12445"]You recognized your omission in telling the tale[/QUOTE]
There was no omission in any 'tale'. The Jew wasn't punished. End of story.

but nevertheless resorted to attacking me rather than thanking me for pointing out your errors.

You didn't point out any error, and I didn't attack you either.

How typical propagandist tactics. ''Attack'', ''antisemite'', ''Insult'', ''terrorist in your hearts''.

Please re-read my post and tell me which part of it is insulting, also quote the part where I 'recognized' any 'errors' that you supposedly 'pointed out'. You didn't point out anything, you just made an accusation.
My post:

Do you want quotations from the Torah and Bible that command the murder of disbelievers and blasphemers? He was a Prophet and people were fanatically devoted to him, as was [t]he case for most prophets. That is why they were enraged by it and waned to kill the Jew but were forbidden by the prophet. Clearly forbidden.

And no, the Jew wasn't killed later. Do you realize what you're saying? You're saying that the prophet killed the Jew without any witnesses, i.e he didn't want Muslims to know about it. That, if it was true, would mean that he didn't want his followers to do that - If he wanted to, he'd have commanded them and done it without caring for any witnesses.

Answer me one thing: What do you aim to achieve by proving that Islam is a violent, murderous religion? (It is not, by the way). You try so hard to demonize Islam and actually propagate an extremist narrative, do you even think about what you're basically trying to do? There are already enough extremists and you're creating more by opposing me, who is trying to counter extremism.

And by the way, he did rebuke them. I don't know what kind of rebuke you wanted, perhaps he should have killed the Muslims for uttering those words, to your satisfaction?

Perhaps you also missed the verses from the Quran that I quoted in the spoiler tag. Clear commands. In all contexts. Some of them revealed when the Muslims were strong, others from when they were weak - both Madani and Makki. There is no argument that can be used to discredit or twist those verses around.

It is clear - Islam does not allow for violence in response to insult or blasphemy.

I criticized you, yes. But didn't Insult you anywhere. What happened to freedom of speech? Can't I criticize statements made by you without being called a ''terrorist in my heart''? What, is there no middle ground between Islamic extremism and Zionist extremism? If I don't worship Jews, I become a terrorist? Give me a break.

Who cares what they think about us, all we know is that Islam will prevail in the end.

DUDE! How will Islam prevail if the whole world doesn't understand it and avoids it like the plague? How did the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) spread Islam? He spread it because people agreed to it, people were impressed by it. People were impressed by his kindness, truthfulness, forgiveness and justice. Islam didn't prevail just like that. Muslims made it prevail by doing good.

If we just sit around and let some morons destroy Islam's reputation, how can you expect it to prevail?

Honest advice, it almost far too late. Take out a procession of your entire community. I am sure Indians and other brown folks will also extend some support - and do a march for solidarity. Make it news. Otherwise the damage is done.

I can't do it alone. Even if i was to get everyone in my entire (real life) social circle to spare some time and take out a procession, we'd hardly be enough to make news. That's why I'm saying there needs to be a more co-ordinated movement, that's why I'm trying to discuss it here before making further plans.

For everyone trying to justify the murders: I don't have much respect for the cartoonists either but it was in no way justified to kill or hurt them. No way. Read the Quranic verses I posted and the hadiths. No way you can still continue to say that killing them was justified. It is not, not in Islam, it is not humanity either.

@TankMan, there is irony among us.

We ask the west to ignore the fanatics who use our religion for their political goals. We say "they're not muslims." Yet here, we're talking about how people are saying kill muslims. These people should also be ignored.

Everyone is a tough man on twitter and behind computer screen. It's kind of like one of those "Draw Muhammad (PBUH)" day, where some muslims started "Draw Jesus (AS)" day. We did not want disrespect towards our Prophet (PBUH) and yet some started disrespecting Jesus (AS), even though he is our Prophet, but also dear to the Christians.

Just as terrorists do not represent Islam and need not to be used as generalization for 1.5 billion muslims, we should also understand that these people do not represent the voice of 7 billion nor use these as generalization for 7 billion.

At this time, we should stand with the victims and worry about them, instead of worrying about ourselves and standing for ourselves. It is their community that has been hurt the most (dead people) and our community is not as hurt just because some people on the internet say "kill these people."

When you worry and care for others, they'll worry and care for you.

Perhaps you didn't read my post at all. Or any of my other posts.

This thread is not meant for Muslims to cry about being victims of a twitter trend. It is to show that our religion is being hijacked to the point of its reputation being destroyed and people actively wanting to kill us all. It is to discuss the logic behind forming movements like 'Sharia4UK' when we don't even have Sharia in our own countries. It is to discuss the misinformation spread by Mullahs. All that needs to be done.

We can't just show solidarity to the victims and just ignore everything else. We can't ignore mullahs and hate preachers who have effectively hijacked Islam's image. These people should not represent Islam, but they DO. They do end up being the representation of Islam.

 

[Solomon2]

...Me accusing you of demonizing Islam is not antisemitic in any way -

Sure it is. It wasn't part of the context and your opinions of the Torah and Bible have not impact on the situation between Muslims - you just trumpeted them to fan hatred.

A) Your post was not a personal criticism. It was a criticism of a piece of religious text, not of me.

Read it again. I wasn't criticizing the text; I was criticizing you for your choice. I didn't know about the omission until you 'fessed up in your next comment. You can easily see how an Islamist can agree with my proposed interpretation of your truncated tale, hence my comment was personal and constructive. On the other hand, you were sloppy. That wouldn't be so bad since you corrected it quickly but you tried to cover by waving the banner of Jew-hatred. I realize that's a common Pakistani characteristic - even government officials defend themselves from their failures by claiming problems exist in other countries - but it's still repulsive for it seeks to avoid personal responsibility.

There was no omission in any 'tale'. The Jew wasn't punished. End of story.

That was the omission.

What, is there no middle ground between Islamic extremism and Zionist extremism? If I don't worship Jews, I become a terrorist? Give me a break.

No. Because when you demonize Israel and Zionism you've already embraced lies to favor religious hatred - because lies are necessary to hold that what Israel does and is is bad rather than good. From that point anybody can be labelled "Zionist" to justify their destruction - you shouldn't need me to think of examples in Pakistan where this has been done.

 

[TankMan]

Well, fvck Western Hypocrates....

They talk Human rights, Freedom, Democracy, Free Speech....but when a terror attack happens. They dismiss all of these ideas and say "Kill all Muslims", A few backward minded terrorist is not equal to whole Islamic world. They know this but still talk shit as they are racists, cruel imperialists in their core. Most of the Westerns in PDF are no different than these fvcks.

OP is also an idiot...why are you disturbed by this...Terrorists' actions doesn't represent avarage muslim's mind. If they are talking shıt, they are at shame, not us.

Thank you for your constructive argument, backed by a particularly logical basis that I am an 'idiot'.

The people tweeting this were undoubtedly wrong and hypocrites. But weren't they given enough ammo by Muslims? They have more than enough ammo. More than enough reasoning.

Why am I disturbed by this? Are you telling me I shouldn't be disturbed by the fact that my fellow Muslims have managed to destroy our image so bad that a good amount of the world now wants to exterminate us. (It's not just 'western hypocrites' anymore - it's not just politicians either - it's a lot of people).

A few backward minded Muslims? Believe me, there are a lot more than 'a few'. Do you realize that Muslims have killed more Muslims in the past few years than Non-Muslims have in over a decade? Just look at the past one month. Lindt Cafe hostage situation. Peshawar massacre. Hebdo attack. Hundreds (if not Thousands) of others killed in Syria and Iraq.

Terrorists do not represent us, fine, I agree with that. But what about Anjem Chaudhry? He went on CNN and said Osama Bin Laden was his leader and that he'd killing Non-Muslims was a Muslim's duty. He said that the murder of 3000 innocents on 9/11 was based on the actions of Muhammad (s.a.w). On CNN. Does that not end up representing our religion? Do you think non-Muslims actually care what kind of cleric is radical or who is a Wahabi or whatever? And why should they?

All they see is their people being killed by Muslims, and then other Muslims going on TV and supporting those killings. What impression does that make.

Please consider these arguments and then come here and tell me I'm an 'idiot'. Clearly, it is you who are foolish.

 

[Soulspeek]

Still better than morons salivating at 9 year old girls and chopping heads like cucumbers!!

No actually the only thing muslims and practically the whole world laughs to is Hinduism. I mean comeone? 10 legged elephants, ugly *** monkeys, random purple people, Hindu pandits tieing their p3nis with trucks for their "god" and 33 million gods. What do you guys do down there?

Everytime the world looks at you guys, WE LAUGH!

 

[Dubious]

Good, good. Now the important part is to remember to challenge extremist Muslims on this in person rather than the Jew who's located a safe distance away, yes?

I am yet to hear a nut case say such things...But if you heard it and took it personally then why on earth are you becoming him and doing the same to other Muslims who dont even know the nut job you met and told you thins?

Plus what I quoted from the bible is not a criticism I made but a quote from the bible

So you're still right at the edge of violent intolerance, guys. Isn't at least half the problem with terrorism the terrorist lurking in your hearts, eager to get out?

The only violence I see is the one you type....

But what about Anjem Chaudhry?

THAT guy doesnt represent us even by a far cry...He doesnt even have any degree in Islamic studies...If CNN chooses to show him back and again they should also be responsible for his actions and saying...THEY CHOOSE to show him....even though a quick google can show you more people who are more worthy of being on tv!

 

[TankMan]

you just trumpeted them to fan hatred.

No, I did not. I brought them forward to make a point - that prophets were considered sacred by all their followers, which was in response to you saying that the Muslims were so evil for wanting to kill the Jew who insulted the prophet.

Do you want quotations from the Torah and Bible that command the murder of disbelievers and blasphemers? He was a Prophet and people were fanatically devoted to him, as was [t]he case for most prophets

I didn't know about the omission until you 'fessed up in your next comment.

I did not. Quote it - where in my post did I 'confess'.

You can easily see how an Islamist can agree with my proposed interpretation of your truncated tale

I thoroughly refuted your 'proposed interpretation'.
Also, you conveniently ignored the Hadith ('story') I posted above that one in which the Prophet CLEARLY told his wife that she was wrong for merely responding rudely. No 'Islamist' can misinterpret it. At best, he can ignore it.

if it was true, would mean that he didn't want his followers to do that - If he wanted to, he'd have commanded them and done it without caring for any witnesses.

It is clear - Islam does not allow for violence in response to insult or blasphemy.

You went out of your way to Isolate the one that you found an easy target. Talk about 'omission'. You are talking about me omitting something while you yourself clearly omitted the rest of my entire post and targeted one little part.

That was the omission.

No, it wasn't. I made it clear that violence is not allowed and that the prophet did not kill the Jew or allow for his killing. You omitted the rest and focused on the one part where the Muslims ASKED whether they could kill him and were forbidden by the Prophet.

No. Because when you demonize Israel and Zionism you've already embraced lies to favor religious hatred

Take this garbage away from this thread.

because lies are necessary to hold that what Israel does and is is bad rather than good

If you think that killing four children playing on a beach, occupying an entire population and countless other such crimes are good or acceptable, you are a terrorist. Period. You can try as much as you want to justify it, just like the Taliban tried to justify the Peshawar massacre.

From that point anybody can be labelled "Zionist" to justify their destruction

Just like you tried to justify my destruction by labeling me an anti-semite and a 'terrorist at heart'.

This is off topic, stop derailing the thread.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Who or what the heck is Charlie Hebo?

Maybe you are over-thinking this @TankMan @ayesha.a @Akheilos ?

The attack is condemnable, and any good Muslim would condemn it. I see little reason for killing a bunch of non-combatants over some silly cartoons from a magazine that anyone has barely heard of outside France. I mean, is our Lord so weak that His image need to be protected by its followers who are nothing but tiny specs of energy in all that matter He created? And from what? Cartoons made by some odd looking folks?

On another note, France has many problems with its Muslim population. They have little or close to no representation in French politics. They are typically conservative, and leftist politics like gay rights don't appeal to their demography. Right wing parties reject them outright. And hence, alienation. I suspect that this is similar in other European nations.

I suspect those chumps on the run got training in ISIS or something (?) They were most certainly trained. Given that ISIS will fall one day, those European national fighters will simply return to their countries thinking of doing who knows what. They don't walk around with typical profiling.

They say "We are not afraid." Well, not to say that they are cowards, but they should be.

As much as Muslims in their respective societies need to address the problem of extremism, the Europeans certainly need to take a very hard look at themselves in the mirror. What happened at Charlie is purely a Western problem, and not for Muslims as a whole. Doing so otherwise would complicate the matter furtha.

Internet tough guys are irrelevant.

THAT guy doesnt represent us even by a far cry...He doesnt even have any degree in Islamic studies...If CNN chooses to show him back and again they should also be responsible for his actions and saying...THEY CHOOSE to show him....even though a quick google can show you more people who are more worthy of being on tv!

He was an alcoholic and a womanizer.

 

[TankMan]

THAT guy doesnt represent us even by a far cry...He doesnt even have any degree in Islamic studies...If CNN chooses to show him back and again they should also be responsible for his actions and saying...THEY CHOOSE to show him....even though a quick google can show you more people who are more worthy of being on tv!

Yes, true. But there are more than a few people supporting him. Look at his rallies. Look at Abdul Aziz. There's too much garbage in our community, of course it stinks to the world.

We need to do something to improve our image, there are too many people doing the opposite. The media chose him because he exists and uses Islam as his justification. Do you think they'd care if some guy just came on the news and preached peace? It wouldn't make headlines. We're making ourselves too easy targets.

 

[Tshering22]

This is a sad day. Instead of exploring this beautiful planet and being happy together, we are now in dangerous times..

 

[TankMan]

Who or what the heck is Charlie Hebo?

It's a 'satirical magazine' that loves to insult religions, especially Islam but also Christianity.

Maybe you are over-thinking this @TankMan @ayesha.a @Akheilos ?

It's not just this one incident. There have been way too many of them recently.

 

[Dubious]

Is any religion that naive, not to take any kind of criticism, every religion goes through change, criticism or no criticism, no religion is perfect , and regarding wrath of god or whatever, heaven and hell lies here only, only humans can kill others in the name of one they have not seen and then justify it.

Why must men criticize a religion? If you dont believe it walk away...Why must you make it a point to hurt people with your words? No one asks this question and allow a bully the freedom while the one who practices has to answer and ward off all these "jokes" the bully throws...Why cant you let those who are practicing their religion in peace?!

When people learn to leave others alone then only you can point out one is an extremist coz he attacked unprovoked!

Then again since I am not at all for attacking and think such behaviour is not necessary because I am above that all...Why cant lousy people keep their sick humour to themselves and be against bullying?

 

[Solomon2]

...But if you heard it and took it personally then why on earth are you becoming him and doing the same to other Muslims who dont even know the nut job you met and told you thins?

I'm a Zionist. I've become used to anti-Zionists justifying themselves by such twisty thinking as claiming, "Oh, yes, the Jews bought all this land, but it was too much so the Jews have to be destroyed", "Yes, we recognized Israel, but only as a temporary state and not a a nation and people with rights to a state", and "Yes, we agreed to have peace with the Jews, we will have such peace when all the Jews are dead".

You and @TankMan, not I, insist that Islamist terrorists have twisted Islam to justify their actions. So I demonstrated that you have to be careful when you're citing religious justifications not to give them a means to do so. Discard the antisemitic rot - it's a distraction at best and completely undermines your efforts at worst.

 

[TankMan]

So I demonstrated that you have to be careful when you're citing religious justifications not to give them a means to do so.

You 'demonstrated' it by taking things out of context, ignoring the rest of the post and making a baseless accusation (that he killed the Jew later). That is actually precisely what an 'Islamist' or 'Extremist' (or whatever) would do. So, your demonstration was effective.
If that is what you intended to demonstrate, well done and thank you. But it wasn't needed, there are enough of them here and I can just have the first hand experience instead of needing a demonstration for you.

"Oh, yes, the Jews bought all this land, but it was too much so the Jews have to be destroyed", "Yes, we recognized Israel, but only as a temporary state and not a a nation and people with rights to a state", and "Yes, we agreed to have peace with the Jews, we will have such peace when all the Jews are dead".

All of these are strawmen. But please stop bringing Israel into this thread, the world won't end if you refrain from preaching Zionism in this one thread.

 

[haviZsultan]

Secularism might be the only solution to our problem.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Why must men criticize a religion? If you dont believe it walk away...Why must you make it a point to hurt people with your words?

That's just the nature of human beings unfortunately, and it will only get worse as the world becomes more interconnected.

The best solution is to ignore it, or if action is needed, then boycott the offenders.

We boycotted the French retail giant Carrefour after some controversies regarding the Beijing Olympics.

They turned around real quick. No one wants to lose 1.3 billion Chinese consumers.

And there are more than 1.5 billion Muslims in the world.