I see that we are reduced to relying on tabloids:

"Al-Qaeda has previously avoided English — believing it to be the language of infidels."

*sigh*

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 8:47 AM

Wow, what a credible source.

Posted by: loler at November 6, 2005 9:03 AM

Osama Bin Laden said this over a year ago. Why so slow on the uptake?

Posted by: Beagle at November 6, 2005 9:08 AM

Recently a British news commentator was fire for remarking on Islam - Muslims are disliked not for the "black in their faces but for the blackness in their hearts."

Islam is a set of values that can be held by any race, values that exult intolerance, pain, suffering, the humiliation of others.

Muslims are loyal only to each other: the ummah.

Posted by: epg at November 6, 2005 9:36 AM

...and he might just find them too!

Considering the fact that the front line combat troops face a military inquiry every single time they are forced to shoot; many are asking in all due respect "what the f---!?"

If you are training guys to kill; then send them to a combat zone where they get shot at; then threaten them with jail when they get home for trying to defend themselves; do you suppose some might be tempted to switch sides???

You flag-waving morons sitting on your fat rear ends at home, had better wake up to a few realities.

Posted by: witness at November 6, 2005 10:06 AM

Of course the most racist societies in the world are the Arab lands, where the most horrifying remarks are made every day about blacks that would far outdo anything imaginable in the Western world. This, by the way, has not gone unnoticed by innocent and initially philo-Arab American students of Arabic, who in the weeks or months they live as students in Egypt or Qatar, routinely get earfuls of this anti-black stuff, and can hardly believe it. This even changed the views of Malcolm X during his stay in Algeria -- though this part of his mental metamorphosis is often overlooked.

Since Islam is now a vehicle for political and social protest, and campaigns of Da'wa have selected, wherever possible, black populations in the West (which run up against the resentment of black non-Muslims for their treatment at Muslim hands, in England and in France), and have managed to exploit what was originally an the indigenous movement, that of Elijah Muhammad, little different in its promptings than the Back-to-Africa plans of Marcus Garvey in the 1920s or the more traditional tithing-for-the-top-man of Father Divine (who started out incidentally as the mere Messenger of God, but indulging in the kind of practice that makes perfect, gave himself a promotion so that in the end he, Father Divine, was God).

So for al-qaedish and related purposes, the most valuable Westeern converts are not blacks but whites, those who out of psychic need, rather than economic or social resentment, are particularly susceptible to Adult-Onset Islam. The study of Adult-Onset Islam, and how to combat or limit Da'wa among blacks, whites, and all others, within the Lands of Infidels, should be undertaken by Western governments. If not openly, then covertly -- perhaps starting with grant money given to those who wish to examine, ostensibly under the guise of studying the ideological roots of some carefully-unadjectivized and therefore seemingly inexplicable "terrorism," the etiology and epidemiology of the disease of Adult-Onset Islam. And then, of course, what mental vaccines can be developed, and how rapidly, to immunize enough of us, in our own world, is another Topic for Study and Discussion.

Posted by: Hugh at November 6, 2005 10:28 AM

Too bad that the muslim world is not as adaptable when it comes to living productively, among others or alone, as it is when devising new ways to kill them.

Posted by: t-ham at November 6, 2005 10:35 AM

Every time I hear a muslim bitching about discrimination, I just look at this sign....
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8070_Apartheid_Mecca
What utter hypocrites!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at November 6, 2005 11:08 AM

Yes Mr. Bin Laden, I'd love to join your organization. Could we meet this week, say 2pm Tuesday to discuss this matter. Please bring along your closest aides so I can get a good feel of who is helping to run your outfit.

Oh, and Mr. Bin Laden don't be alarmed if you see me wearing a Suicide Belt. I'll just be wanting to get a feel of what it will be like in my new work uniform.

Hey Osama, what's this button fo...

Posted by: William The Crusader at November 6, 2005 11:40 AM

Following up on Hugh's posting above, surely the genocide taking place in Darfur is the strongest evidence possible supporting his point. Hundreds of thousands of African people--all of them Muslims--have been murdered by Arab militias and not a word of complaint or outrage has been voiced in the Arab world. The United Nations sits on its sorry ass trying to develop a framework for negotiations while the atrocities continue. And I think it is just as disgraceful that the MSM in the West is unwilling to acknowledge the connection between Arab racism and the genocide in anything but the most indirect way.

Posted by: Howard, Fine & Howard at November 6, 2005 11:50 AM

Hugh, absolutely right!!! The Arabs are likely the most racist people in the world. With this so, why do so many black people seem to associate themselves with muslims? They need to be educated, but I won't hold my breath.
also, Israel would do good to promote Ethiopian Jews as military spokesmen, so the world would see that Israel-Arab conflict is NOT "the man" oppressing " the downtrodden" Having a black man explain to the world that those who purposely target civilians deserve death will likely make more of an impression on the left than a white jew explaining the same thing.

Posted by: templar at November 6, 2005 12:04 PM

OT,
I never knew this...what a great place for the UN....
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2004/cover113004.htm
This was posted on LGF

Posted by: Carolyn2 at November 6, 2005 12:15 PM

Muslims are loyal only to each other: the ummah.

"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." - Quran (4:135)

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 12:29 PM

Every time I hear a muslim bitching about discrimination, I just look at this sign....
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8070_Apartheid_Mecca
What utter hypocrites!

Carolyn2, non-Muslims are only banned from the holiest Muslim sites. But they can visit any other area in the Muslim world with no problem; which is why there are centuries old Churches, Synagogues and even Zoroastrian Temples all over the Muslim world along with members of those communities.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 12:34 PM

"The study of Adult-Onset Islam, and how to combat or limit Da'wa among blacks, whites, and all others, within the Lands of Infidels, should be undertaken by Western governments."

It will be almost impossible to study AOI adequately, when these Western governments suffer from the effects of the same PC dominance that helps to make whites susceptible to conversion to Islam in the first place.

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 6, 2005 12:45 PM

Carolyn2, non-Muslims are only banned from the holiest Muslim sites. But they can visit any other area in the Muslim world with no problem; which is why there are centuries old Churches, Synagogues and even Zoroastrian Temples all over the Muslim world along with members of those communities.

Big Freakin' Deal. Anyone can visit St. Peter's, the premier church in Christendom, or the Wailing Wall, the holiest public site in Judaism, any time they want.

Muslims don't let kuffar into their "holiest" cities because they are racists who believe that "unbelievers" are on the same level as dogs, pigs, feces and urine (najis). Not that any of us would want to go there anyways, mind you.

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 12:51 PM

Tazkerat (The reminder of the reports of the summation of the youth of the righteous) By Imam Shirazi

عن النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلّم): (البياض نصف الحسن).
A white complexion is the half of beauty. Mohamed
وكان رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) أبيض أزهر، والخلص من ولد اسماعيل بيض.
The messenger of Allah (PBUH) was glistening white and the choicest of the Ishmael descendents are White.
وعنه (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلّم): (ان الله خلق الجنة بيضاء وان أحب الثياب الى الله البيض فليلبسها أحياؤكم، وكفنوا فيها موتاكم).
Mohamed: Allah created the paradise white, and God’s favorite garbs are white; let your living wear it and shroud your dead with it.

وروي: (ان الكبش الذي فدي به إسماعيل (عليه السلام) كان أبيض أعين أقرن، وكنا نتحرى تلك الصفة في أضاحينا)

And he (Mohamed) narrated the male-goat that Ishmael (PBUH) was redeemed with was white with large eyes and horns, and sought out that traits in our sacrifices.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 12:56 PM

Muslims don't let kuffar into their "holiest" cities because they are racists who believe that "unbelievers" are on the same level as dogs, pigs, feces and urine (najis). Not that any of us would want to go there anyways, mind you.

Please note that the banning of non-Muslims is a Saudi Hanbali school-of-law enforcement. In other equally valid schools of Islamic thought, there is nothing wrong with non-Muslims entering even the Haram of Mecca as mentioned here.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 12:58 PM

Black in Islam

Read it all...

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 1:03 PM

Things that are najis in Islam:

http://www.al-islam.org/laws/najisthings.html

84. * The following ten things are essentially najis:

Urine
Faeces
Semen
Dead body
Blood
Dog
Pig
Kafir
Alcoholic liquors
The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat.

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 1:16 PM

الأحاديث المعروفة (أخرجوا المشركين من جزيرة العرب)، بل الأحاديث كلها فيما أعلم تتحدث عن جميع الأديان الأخرى (لا يترك بجزيرة العرب دينان) رواه احمد (لا يجتمع في جزيرة العرب دينان) أخرجه أبو عبيد في كتاب الأموال. (لا يبقين دينان في أرض العرب) ) ب) الموطئ

Sukri:

You are completely practicing taqya here by ignoring the very famous Ahadith: Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula. As far as I knowو all the Ahadith speak about all the other religions: “Two religions shall not be left in the Arabian Peninsula”, narrated by Ahmed, “Two religions shall not congregate in the Arabian Peninsula”, published by Abu Aubyed in the book of Al-Amwal, “Two religions shall not remain in the Arabian Peninsula”, from Al-motaa’

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 1:22 PM

Shukri,

Why is it that every Muslim apologia & defense is encumbered with blatant loopholes? Why can't a Muslim opinion or ruling be clear and unequivocable?

Thus, the link you offered to indicate that other "schools" of thought in Islam would allow for non-Muslims to enter the Haram Mosque in Mecca:

"In the Hanafi school, it is permitted for non-Muslims to enter all mosques, including the Haram of Mecca, as they interpreted the Qur’anic verse

009.028 O you who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship after this their year.

"to be a specific prohibition against them entering as they did before Islam in the Days of Jahiliyya, in which they entered with their idols, manifested their polytheistic worship, and engaged in reprehensible actions such as performing tawaf while naked... As for the idolaters being unclean (najas), that refers to spiritual uncleanness due to their beliefs rather than physical uncleanness."

Now tell me, Shukri: on what basis could any Muslim today be proved incorrect when he would declare, on the basis of the above citations, that

1) all the Kufr are in fact "polytheists" (even Christians who by believing that Jesus is God are joining "partners" to God and therefore guilty of Shirk)

2) all the Kufr are spiritually unclean.

?

Your Hanafi pronouncement provides sufficient loopholes to continue to bar the Kufr from the Mecca Mosque.

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 6, 2005 1:33 PM

Dr. Pepper:
Ignore that Taqya loser. I posted the Ahadith that every real Muslim know by heart. That guys needs to know that we all can and do read. He should go sell his crap to those that do not have noses.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 1:44 PM

I think as many patriots should get access to the Al Qaeda terror training manual as possible. The medicine they see fit for us to take should also be given to them in equal or greater doses. Fight fire with fire, I say Rule Britannia and God Bless America!

Posted by: IceDragon at November 6, 2005 1:53 PM

Shukri:"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah...

Thats the problem...Allah sucks...only ye who believe, believe. No one else gives one twit about Allah. Allah would fade away and die from neglect if Mohammad had not included all those threatening verses about, 'Pay attention to me or else' in the Quran. And pay that tax while you are at it.
Like this:Qur’an 9:29 “Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.”
I also like these two a lot:Qur’an 8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”
and:Qur’an 8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”
So you see, without jihad to pump Allah up, he would crush himself under his own weight. Thats why Islam needs pillars, without them the whole thing would crash.
So while Allah keeps sucking, muslims keep believing, a great arrangement for idiots.
By the way...stay out of France...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 6, 2005 1:55 PM

Suzan, as for kafirs being "najis", this is a Shi'i interpretation that most Muslims do not share.

You are completely practicing taqya here by ignoring the very famous Ahadith: Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula.

have_mercy, Taqiya is a Shi'ite concept meant to protect from oppression. I'm not sure how you understand me, a Sunni, to be following it.

As for the hadith, qualified scholars interpret the hadith since one requires a tremendous amount of study (17 years in the Pakistani madrassa system) to be able to derive juristic rulings from the Quran and Sunnah. There are entire sciences behind exegesis of the Hadith and Quran so I will leave it to the experts.
--

Dr. Pepper, the general Hanafi position is that non-Muslims are allowed into Mosques including the Haram of Mecca. Anything further, please send your questions to sunnipath.com and Shaykh Faraz will answer you.

Peace.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 1:59 PM

Duh Swami, you need to learn Asbabal Nuzul and then go reread those verses. Please let me know the results of your research.

Peace.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 2:03 PM

To detect terrorists, we need only a muslim-detector. They are easy and fun to operatie, plus they require no new technology.

Posted by: Havoc at November 6, 2005 2:05 PM

Shukri,

Taqiyah is promoted in the Reliance of the Traveler, a Shafi-Sunni book of Islamic law.

Regarding najis, how does the Sunni view of it differ from the Shiite view? Gotta link? To the opinions of all the schools?

Because a lot of Sunnis sure do act as if "kaffirs" are najis (filth).

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 2:20 PM

Shukri: the Sindi or Hindi mental slave of the Arabs

What in the language of the Ahadith that I quoted do not you understand and would possibly require asking a Pakistani guy who wasted 17 years rocking his head, reciting passages in a language that he does not understand to explain it?

Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula. “Two religions shall not be left in the Arabian Peninsula”, “Two religions shall not congregate in the Arabian Peninsula”, “Two religions shall not remain in the Arabian Peninsula”

And Taqya and Kitman are legitimate Sunna (Islamic Tradition) practices that the Sunnis did not need much for most of their history being in charge and all.

Have you heard the Hadith: “Practicing Taqya and Kittman is permisable onto Judgment day”? I am sure that you know it either directly or indirectly or you would not be here.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 2:21 PM

All I know is that my husband and I were not allowed access to the crypt (as we would call it in a church or cathedral) of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem in 1992 because we were not Muslims.
When a friend of mine visited a mosque with the class she taught the girls were not allowed in certain areas and she had to insist that all the children were treated equally. Where the girls could not go, the boys would not go.
There is no part of a Christian building forbidden specifically to non Christians. If access by the public is limited it is for security reasons, not their faith.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at November 6, 2005 2:22 PM

Why do so many Muslims go on the hajj if they don't support the segregation in Mecca?

I myself wouldn't worship at a facility that discriminated against other people for any reason, just like I'd never eat at a "whites only" restaurant etc.

And yes Granny, many mosques do not allow us filthy ones into their precious confines. A friend of mine was not allowed into the Grand Mosque in Paris because she was kuffar.

Not, as I said before, that I would want to go into them anyways.

Who would want to validate this racist, hateful belief system by visiting one of their mosques?

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 2:28 PM

Shurki...I dont need to read anything to know that Allah sucks...but you keep on trying. You try harder than most, but hardly anybody here buys what you are selling...Islam is built on a foundation of sand...there is nothing you can do or say to change that. Everything built on that foundation is at risk of collapsing. Over the years, muslims have piled more and more Islamic 'stuff' at the top, like the 17 years of study required to understand Islamic law. Allah sure made it tough to understand Islam. And after all that study and all those conclusions, Islam is still built on a foundation of sand , is top heavy, and may fall at any second.
Thats why Islam needs guys like you and other jihadists...you make up an additional pillar of Islam, without which it would collapse. Imam Bukhari agree's:

Book of Jihad, on page 580 of Maktba Dar-us-Salam’s publication of Sahih Al-Bukhari: “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its Pillars...

Sand, Shukri, sand...without that pillar...no more Islam...Peace.......Please dont go to France...the "Religion of Peace" is having a mass ritual in honor of Allah...there is no peace there at the present time, it got suspended untill further notice...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 6, 2005 2:32 PM

Well this is certainly enlightening. Before the instant I read the contents of this topic, I had no idea that I was actually that racist!

I better hurry up and quit my job, considering there is plenty of folk in the NYPD of African and European descent.

Posted by: Issac Ali Kharish at November 6, 2005 2:49 PM

The racism in Islam is not by skin color, but by religion. But it's still a kind of racism, is it not?

To speak so hatefully about "kaffirs" and compare us to dogs and sh*t, what is that but racism of the basest kind?

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 3:02 PM

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "You should listen to and obey, your ruler even if he was an Ethiopian (black) slave whose head looks like a raisin." (Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 256)

Hadith; vol.9:162,163: Muhammad warned that dreams of black women meant disease was forthcoming. Black muslims today are so uninformed that they don't even understand that Muhammad had many black slaves and called them raisin heads (Hadith vol.1:662, vol.9:256 )

Conclusion:
-----------
Mohammed calling black people as "raisin head" is absolutely unacceptable as a Prophet of God. This is surely not a good example set by a Prophet.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 3:05 PM

By: Iqbal Rahman

The color of one's skin has suddenly become relevant to religion. Muslim activists have been trying to convince African American citizens that Islam is the religion of the Black man, that Islam is African and that Mohammed was Black. Needless to say, Muslims only make these claims to Blacks; among Whites they take a different approach!

Knowing that these are well thought-out falsifications, intended only to draw Blacks towards Islam, I felt compelled to set the facts straight. Nothing in this article is meant to lend approval to this racial approach. If we are to accept or reject Islam, it should be based on Islam's own merits, rather than color or origin.

Africa was not the Cradle of Islam

Islam was born in the 7th century, in the Arabian Peninsula, which is part of the continent of Asia. Yellow Asia and Black Africa are separated by the Red Sea. Here, we are talking about two different continents and two different peoples.

Islam went to Africa relatively recently, and is not the predominant religion there. African Americans were most likely either Christians or Animists at the time they were brought to America.

Christianity has been present in Africa since the first half of the first century. St. Mark, the writer of the Gospel of Mark was a North African Jew who preached the Gospel to Egypt. From there, Christianity spread all over North Africa, and to the south of Egypt's borders. The Eastern church raised to the level of sainthood many Africans, St. Moses the Black from Egypt and St. Tekla Himanote the Ethiopian and others.

One of the teachers and prophets in the early church, Simeon, was an African from Niger in west Africa (Acts 13:1)

Eastern Africa was converted to Christianity through the ministry of a cabinet member of Queen Candace of Ethiopia who was baptized by St. Philip, one of the seven deacons in the early church (Acts 8:26 - 40).

Mohammed was not a Black Man

Mohammed was an Asian-Arab. You can't confuse an Asian-Arab with a Black- African. There are numerous evidences that Mohammed was actually white. The space limitation will allow us to mention only a few:

In Sahih Al Bukhary vol. 1 no. 63, we read "while we were sitting with the Prophet, a man came and said, 'who amongst you is Mohammed?' We replied, 'this white man reclining on his arm..."

In volume 2 Hadith no. 122 refers to Mohammed as a "white person" and in vol. 2 Hadith no. 141 we are told that when Mohammed raised his arms, "the whiteness of his armpits became visible."

Mohammed Owned Black Slaves

Mohammed owned several black slaves. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya relies heavily on the prophet's biographies written by great ancient scholars. Therefore, he is regarded by Muslims as an authority, a primary source and a leader among the students of Islamic religion. This scholar tells us in his book, "Zad al-Ma'ad" (part 1, pp. 114-116), the following:

"These are the names of Muhammad's male slaves: Yakan Abu Sharh, Aflah, 'Ubayd, Dhakwan, Tahman, Mirwan, Hunayn, Sanad, Fadala Yamamin, Anjasha al-Hadi, Mad'am, Karkara, Abu Rafi', Thawban, Ab Kabsha, Salih, Rabah, Yara Nubyan, Fadila, Waqid, Mabur, Abu Waqid, Kasam, Abu' Ayb, Abu Muwayhiba, Zayd Ibn Haritha, and also a black slave called Mahran."

Even in modern times, in Saudi Arabia the homeland of Islam, the common word for "Black" is "Abd" meaning slave.

What was Mohammed's position on freeing the slaves?

In one instance , a man freed a slave that he kept as a sexual partner. When Mohammed heard what happened, he auctioned the boy and sold him for 800 derhams to Na-eem Ebn Abdullah Al- Nahham. (Sahih Moslem vol. 7, page 83)

According to Mohammed, the punishment for committing adultery is different between a free man, a free woman and a slave-woman. The man is to be flogged one-hundred stripes and be exiled for one year. The free woman must be stoned to death. But the slave-woman (since she has a monetary value) will not be exiled or killed, she is to be flogged one-hundred stripes. If the violation is repeated, the slave-woman is to be sold.(Sahih Al Bukhary vol. 8:821 & 822)

Islam Looked Down on Blacks

Islam is a religion, whose sacred Scriptures contain explicit denigrating remarks about Black people.

Mohammed referred to Blacks as "raisin heads". (Sahih Al Bukhary vol. 1, no. 662 and vol. 9, no. 256).

In another Hadith, Mohammed is quoted as saying that Blacks are, "pug-nosed slaves". (Sahih Moslem vol. 9 pages 46 and 47).

Islam is not the Haven of Freedom and Equality

Even if we wrongly assume that Islam started in Africa and that its Prophet was a black man, this still wouldn't in itself be a good reason for Blacks to adopt Islam. Nor would it be a good reason for Whites to adopt Islam just because Mohammed was white. We have to look at Islam itself.

I wouldn't want to be a Muslim because Islam is anti freedom, which is one issue so close to the hearts and minds of African Americans, considering the inequities they have suffered in their past.

One thing Islam does not believe in is freedom of religion. If Islam takes over America there wouldn't be a choice of religion. The Quran states: "If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him; and in the hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost".(Surah 3:85)

Many of the teachings of Islam are incompatible with progress. Neither are they compatible with human rights, civil rights or constitutional rights.

Here are a few examples of the teachings of Islam:

Men are superior to women. (Surah 2:22
Women have half the rights of men:
In court witness. (Surah 2:282)
In inheritance. (Surah 4:11)
A man may beat his wife. (Surah 4:34)
A man may marry up to four wives at the same time (Surah 4:3)
Muslims must fight until their opponents submit to Islam. (Surah 9:29)
A Muslim must not take a Jew or a Christian for a friend.(Surah 5:51)
A Muslim apostate must be killed.(Surah 9:12)
Stealing is punished by the amputation of the hands. (Surah 5:3
Adultery is punished by public flogging. (Surah 24:2)
No separation between Church and State. (Surah 2:193)
No opposition party allowed. (Surah 4:59)

My fellow African-American:

Muslims don't care for your skin color, they are only using that to gain control over you. For if Muslims really care for Africans, why are African Muslims kidnapping their African Christian brothers these days in Sudan, butchering the weak and selling the healthy as slaves? (see State Dept. report: News Network International; May 26,1993)

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 3:06 PM

Taqiyah is promoted in the Reliance of the Traveler, a Shafi-Sunni book of Islamic law.

I've studied Umdat-al-Salik(I'm Shafi'i) and I don't recall ever reading anything about this "promoted" topic. Any reference?

Regarding najis, how does the Sunni view of it differ from the Shiite view? Gotta link? To the opinions of all the schools?

Hanafi
Shafi'i (See 2.3)

Hanbali and Maliki texts are difficult to find on the net. Email me shukrisATyahooDOTcom and I'll send them to you when I get them.

wasted 17 years rocking his head, reciting passages in a language

Have_mercy, Please go read the course descriptions, sir.

All I know is that my husband and I were not allowed access to the crypt (as we would call it in a church or cathedral) of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem in 1992 because we were not Muslims.

I don't know, Granny Weatherwax. What I know is that the Hanafi's permit visitation. Maybe people are following other opinions though.

I myself wouldn't worship at a facility that discriminated against other people for any reason, just like I'd never eat at a "whites only" restaurant etc.

So, Ms. Suzan, I have your word that you will never visit any facility that has separate men and women's restrooms?

OMG! Gender discrimination right here in America! Where are the feminists protesting?! Men and women must be equal and they must use the same restrooms! ;)

I have to go pray Duhar.

Peace.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 3:08 PM

Shukri, we are not the people you should be convincing.

Your time and attention (to reducing violence and creating peace as you say) would be much much better spent convincing the "misunderstanders" of your religion and pointing them to all those links you have handy.

Hey, we're only reacting to all the violence Islam is inflicting on us (the rest of the world). Maybe you should be a bit foolhardy and try to convince those "misunderstanders". Not that you'd live to see another day, of course. But that's where your energies should be directed, not this site where everyone's treated equally, has the right to speak what they want without fear of death etc.

Posted by: kufr at November 6, 2005 3:09 PM

So, Ms. Suzan, I have your word that you will never visit any facility that has separate men and women's restrooms?

OMG! Gender discrimination right here in America! Where are the feminists protesting?! Men and women must be equal and they must use the same restrooms! ;)

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb. Dumb answer Shukri, it only shows how you have no arguments to address the religious racism that is rampant in Islam.

I lurk on Islamic talkboards, and not on "extremist" ones either - but ones who actually consider themselves to be "moderate". I see how they talk about "kuffar" "kaffir" etc. They sound exactly like Ku Klux Klan members bandying about the "n-word" in every other sentence.

Posted by: Suzan at November 6, 2005 3:14 PM

www.kimata.org
By researching Islam and reading the works of Ibn Battuta, Ibn Khaldun, and Muammar Qaddafi I began to question the suitability of it as a religion for Black People. I then discovered the Hadith and found Blacks referred to as raisin heads and was totally thrown off. Nonetheless I proceeded to search the Quran and sure enough Mo'ata revealed sura 3:106ff. where those whose faces are Black are condemned to hell. Though I haven't found anything else in the Quran which could be construed as anti-Black, there is an antipathy to darkness throughout. And though it may be metaphorically referring to spiritual darkness, the Blackness of the faces of those condemned to hell was explicitly expressed (aswad).

As a Black man, any religion which rejects me, I reject, any which accepts me, I accept, any which denounces me, I denounce, and any which exalts me, I exalt - 'the law of equality'. Furthermore the Black man woman and child are God and God does not submit! "

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 3:17 PM

Also, please don't try to defend the indefensible.

There isn't a single Muslim-majority place in the world that treats non-Muslims equally. If you're non-Muslim, you're expressly forbidden from political offices where you'd "lead the believing". Saudi Arabia expressly forbids even private worship of any religion other than Islam.

When Muslims aren't in a majority, it's all tolerance and equality. As soon as it's >50%, the very land becomes Islamic, Sharia incumbent, and all the consequent horrors for the others. The Islamic "freedom struggles" in Southern Thailand, Phillipines, Kashmir, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many more all based on this principle. And of course, after these, Muslims move into the rest of the secular/kafir territory to slowly Islamize that and get the 50% principle into operation.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather not see an Islamic bridgehead in America. If you feel Muslims are discriminated against here, so much the better. You should really go back to that golden beacon of Islam, Saudi Arabia or whichever Islamic paradise you come from to exhalt in the Islam there. Please spare us.

Posted by: kufr at November 6, 2005 3:19 PM

Shukri:
Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his book, "al-Durr al-Manthoor Fi al-Tafsir al-
Ma'athoor," v2, p176, narrates that:

Abd Ibn Hameed, on the authority of al-Hassan, said: "al-Taqiyya is
permissible until the Day of Judgment."

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 3:23 PM

Shukri,

Once again, loopholes and what appears to be sly kitman. That Hanafi link which you provided to prove that Hanafis don't consider the Kufr to be najasa begins by saying -- "Examples of the strong najasa are wine, flowing blood, the flesh of a dead animal and its hide,... etc."

"Examples." This implies it is an incomplete list. Perhaps those human beings called Kufr are not included on the list along with the flesh of dead animals, urine, semen, feces, etc. because the editors of that site are being more cautious than other Muslims at other sites, lest some Kufr happen to read this?

What we Infidels require is not this kind of slippery language. We want to see Muslim "schools" (Hanafi or otherwise -- in fact, all the schools, not just one) say clearly and unequivocably:

Kufr are not unclean in any way whatsoever, and Kufr are allowed to visit inside any Muslim public space , and the beliefs of Kufr are perhaps just as true as the beliefs of Muslims -- who knows, we are not God and our Koran is not the Absolute Immutable Truth of God but an imperfect human document inspired by God but nevertheless has flaws because Mohammed and all Muslims are imperfect flawed human beings just like all Kufr are -- so we cannot judge these things.

Until I see a statement like this from every "school" of Islam, I will continue to regard Muslims with suspicion as potential threats to our modern Western values and lives.

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 6, 2005 3:35 PM

Shukri:

As a Muslim you are permitted to take any action necessary to defend your faith; expediency rules; you don't follow the Golden Rule; you don't follow the 10 Commandments; in short you are most amoral people on earth ... to non-muslims. To Muslims however, you can be nice as long as said Muslims do not do anything that brings Islam into disrepute or criticize anything about Islam or apostasize from Islam.

http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/21475

25. Lying is permissible in a time of war (or jihad)

pp. 744-745

PERMISSIBLE LYING

R8.2 The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

“He who settles disagreements between people to bring about good or says something commendable is not a liar.”

This much is related by both Bukhar and Muslim, with Muslim’s version recording that Umm Kulthum added,

“I did not hear him permit untruth in anything people say, except for three things: war, settling disagreements, and a man talking with his wife or she with him (A: in smoothing over differences).”

This is an explicit statement that lying is sometimes permissible for a given interest, scholars having established criteria defining what types of it are lawful. The best analysis of it I have seen is by Imam Abu Hamid Ghazali, who says, “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N: i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. … Whether the purpose is war, settling a disagreement, or gaining the sympathy of a victim legally entitled to retaliate against one so that he will forbear to do so; it is not unlawful to lie when any of these aims can only be attained through lying. But it is religiously more precautionary in all such cases to employ words that give a misleading impression, meaning to intend by one’s words something that is literally true, in respect to which one is not lying, while the outward purport of the words deceives the hearer, though even if one does not have such an intention and merely lies without intending anything else, it is not unlawful in the above circumstances.”

Posted by: Mentat at November 6, 2005 3:39 PM

I don't know about the rest of you, but I find it odd how Shukri insists on wasting his time, as a non-Arab, defending Arabist supremacistist ideology (commonly known as Islam). It's akin to a black defending Nazi ideology. I wonder if Shukri knows what Arabs really think of South Asians and how Arabs treat them in the Middle East. Sure they may "get along" in the West because they are the Muslim minority but this isn't a surprise for several reasons. Firstly, they need the numbers to combat the infidel. Also, Bedouin "culture" (the dominant cultural influence in Islam) has a long history of teaming up with rival tribes in order to repel an invading foe, but once that foe is repelled, the tribes go back to being rivals. And lastly, if they can use gullible Pakistanis and Bangladeshis as cannon fodder, the Arabs will do so. Just look at 7/7. Hell, look at Afghan war against the Soviets for another example of Arab racism. Ask any Afghanistani what they think of their Arab "brethren" that came to help them fight the Russians. You see Shukri, Muslim Arabs would rather spit on you, regardless of whether you are Muslim or not, rather than see you as an equal because your skin happens to be darker. Because after all, South Asian Muslims are just "converts" and not true Muslims like the "best of people", the Arabs. Your Hindu ancestors must be rolling in their graves realizing that their descendant is proud of aping the Arabs.

Food for thought.

Posted by: igor at November 6, 2005 3:40 PM

Kufr are not unclean in any way whatsoever, and Kufr are allowed to visit inside any Muslim public space , and the beliefs of Kufr are perhaps just as true as the beliefs of Muslims -- who knows, we are not God and our Koran is not the Absolute Immutable Truth of God but an imperfect human document inspired by God but nevertheless has flaws because Mohammed and all Muslims are imperfect flawed human beings just like all Kufr are -- so we cannot judge these things.

You see, that there is what we would call "logic" In a perfect world, all humans should possess the ability to reason.

The problem today is that far too few Muslims use logic, rather deciding to become another pawn in the Islamic hive-mind that doesn't do them any good.

In my opinion, it shouldn't be an issue to claim that you don't have all the answers. It shouldn't be a big deal to say that you may be wrong. Dealing in absolutes such as this is sheer foolish arrogance. I could never believe that any human, even prophets before us were simply not human enough to commit the human trait of *gasp* making mistakes. It's simply both illogical and disingenious for me to claim that I am 100% universally correct while Joe-blow-so-and-so is wrong. As a fallible human being, I have no right to make such a brash statement.

Unfortunately, instead of confronting it, many would rather make excuses for why its "okay" to hold such an attitude.

Posted by: Issac Ali Kharish at November 6, 2005 4:01 PM

Have Mercy:As a Black man, any religion which rejects me, I reject, any which accepts me, I accept, any which denounces me, I denounce, and any which exalts me, I exalt - 'the law of equality'. Furthermore the Black man woman and child are God and God does not submit!

I'm not black, but can I join up anyway?
I like that last line a lot...I hope it's not exclusivly for blacks...The man, woman and child are God, and God does not submit.
Since Islam means and is slavery, I have wondered how any black man, especially those injured in some way by slavery, can volunteer in an ideology/religion that enslaves. Slavery is the removal of manhood. Why any man, especially a black man, would volunteer for this duty , is beyond me...except in terms of psychosis or force. God does not submit also means that god does not enslave. All slavery is Godless and is then evil by definition...since Islam is the religion of submission (slavery), guess what...

Have a good day...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 6, 2005 4:01 PM

Advice for the future: If any muslim tries to bullsh*t you about "racism" in the West just bring up the magic word; Sudan.

Posted by: JadeDragoness at November 6, 2005 4:10 PM

Jade,

I suspect if you mention Sudan to Shukri, he will pull out the "but they're not following the Hanafi school" line.

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 6, 2005 4:16 PM

bob,

Where did have_mercy mistranslate that verse? I searched above and couldn't find where he did.

And what are your comments about the mountain of other Islamic data he offered demonstrating the racism of Islam?

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 6, 2005 4:31 PM

This is old news. Why post this now?

Posted by: Kemaste at November 6, 2005 4:34 PM

Dr. Pepper: LOL.

Posted by: JadeDragoness at November 6, 2005 4:46 PM

bob86 doesn't disprove have_mercy's post.

Nonetheless I proceeded to search the Quran and sure enough Mo'ata revealed sura 3:106ff. where those whose faces are Black are condemned to hell. Though I haven't found anything else in the Quran which could be construed as anti-Black, there is an antipathy to darkness throughout. And though it may be metaphorically referring to spiritual darkness, the Blackness of the faces of those condemned to hell was explicitly expressed (aswad).

bob86 quoted:
================
003.106
YUSUFALI: On the Day when some faces will be (lit up with) white, and some faces will be (in the gloom of) black: To those whose faces will be black, (will be said): "Did ye reject Faith after accepting it? Taste then the penalty for rejecting Faith."

PICKTHAL: On the Day when (some) faces will be whitened and (some) faces will be blackened; and as for those whose faces have been blackened, it will be said unto them: Disbelieved ye after your (profession of) belief? Then taste the punishment for that ye disbelieved.

SHAKIR: On the day when (some) faces shall turn white and (some) faces shall turn black; then as to those whose faces turn black: Did you disbelieve after your believing? Taste therefore the chastisement because you disbelieved.
===============

I guess the least offensive of the three is Yusufali translation because of the brackets. Although the translator has no difficulty of describing the white faces as being "lit up", his description of the black faces as being "in the gloom" seems a little forced to me. The metaphorical dualism isn't convincing and it makes more sense to read this passage literally. Therefore, the true believers will have white faces whereas the unbelievers will have black faces. The connotation is that those of darker faces have no belief. This also seems to mesh with the passages that have_mercy quoted as praising the whiteness of Mahomet and his tribe. This passage is definitely racist and I can see why blacks would be put off by it. If "allah" wanted to express the duality of darkness and light, he could have done it better. He could have just described the believers as being illuminated and the non-believers as not receiving that illumination. But describing the believers as having their faces turn white and the non-believers as having their faces turn black, when at that time it was well known to Mahomet that there was such a thing as white people and black people, it's impossible to not read this passage as inherently racist.

Posted by: igor at November 6, 2005 4:58 PM

What can a Muslim say except find sorry side arguments to distract from the main arguments? Your “Aussa Hassana: was a highly immoral man deficient in all aspects of human character except in charisma and ruthlessness. Adding to his many sins, would racial bigotry be surprising! There are other raciest ahadith that I could not find off hand their quote number such as the one where Mohammed was asked to describe the appearance of the devil and he pointed to his black slave squatting in the corner. I will not spend any more time debating the source of Islamic anti-black racism whither it is from the Sunna or the Fiqh. It was enough for the Mufti of Mecca to hear a rumor that the Turks were banning the black slave trade to declare them infidels and call for their blood. Read Pat Ye’or, the decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam. The Mufti of the Istanpole sent a letter to Mecca to put the rumor to rest. If it were not for white Christians, nearly all black people on earth would be slaves to this day, and just may be your entire blood line.

The Gulf Arabs, the most representative population of the early Islamic ethos and character, are the most racist people in the world. Their word for black people is abeed or slaves. I got into many shouting matches about this term with Arabs who are American citizens, lived here their entire life, they work for the U.S government in sensitive positions. Call me a hot head, but they should have known better!

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 6:27 PM

All translations of the especially sensitive verses are somehow mitigated either by design or by the subtleties of the Arabic language that do not transfer 100% into English. After all, the Quraan is only meant to be read in Arabic. In fact, many parts of the Quraan are an incomprehensible mingling of letters and words that not even the great Mufasroun could decipher. Yossef Ali did a very admirable job, but he had to work with material that at times makes no sense in its native tongue. Surprisingly, Jihadist, violent, misogynistic verses and ahadith are the clearest most direct verses, though their meaning is more intense in Arabic: more hatred, wrath, and spite. Truly, they are the utterances of the devil himself.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 6, 2005 6:48 PM

Muslims are loyal only to each other: the ummah.

"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." - Quran (4:135)

Posted by: Shukri

Hi Shirki! I never came over to check up on you. As the opposition seems to have withered away elsewhere, I'm going to have a lot more time to spend with you now.

=)

Note from Q 4:135 above: it doesn't say "against others of your faith".

Correct me if you can, but that doesn't support your point.

Bye Shirki!

Prophet Geoff [beer be upon me]

Posted by: Geoff at November 7, 2005 9:35 AM

"Bin Laden wants whites..."

I have been hearing that Islam is tolerant and inclusive -- doesn't this title basically prove this assertion?!?

Posted by: jsla at November 7, 2005 11:03 AM

Carolyn2, non-Muslims are only banned from the holiest Muslim sites. But they can visit any other area in the Muslim world with no problem; which is why there are centuries old Churches, Synagogues and even Zoroastrian Temples all over the Muslim world along with members of those communities.

Posted by: Shukri at November 6, 2005 12:34 PM

Shukri, the reason there are "centuries old churches, synagogues, and Zoroatrian Temples all over the muslim world, as well as members of those communities, is because CHRISTIANS, JEWS, AND ZOROASTRIANS ARE THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF THE MUSLIM WORLD! Why shouldn't they be there; it was THEIR WORLD before muhammad and his butchers laid seige to it and killed off most of the natives. The "members of those communities" are becoming fewer and fewer, their churches, synagogues and temples disentegrating because Islamic law forbids their proper maintenance. These people are second-class citizens who are denied equal employment opportunities and are forcibly segregated from society.

It is only a matter of time before the indigenous people of the Holy Land and the Levant are entirely eradicated or driven out by muslims. We are well acquainted with the dhimmi status of non-muslims in muslim lands; they are hardly tolerant, pluralistic societies. Their lives are fraught with discrimination, persecution, cruelty, and as the recent riots in Egypt against the Copts demonstrate, are subject to Islamic violence, hatred, and intolerance. It takes nothing but the slightest rumor to spark savage retribution by muslim fanatics, and all muslims are fanatics at heart.

Posted by: Susanp at November 7, 2005 10:31 PM