• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

Islamophobia & anti-Semitism

Dark Angel

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
Articles, Academic Lectures & Documentaries Only.
while thousands of articles have been written about the "execution" of galileo, the world knows close to nothing about the pride of the golden age arab scientists how they lived and how they were killed and why. in order to determine whether the defensiveness against islamic masses is warranted or not, their whole psyche should be critically analyzed.

for instance, in this very thread the islamic golden age was praised, by people who learned to parrot things out without any veracity, in conformity with the whole arabic culture.

so let's put that golden age to the test, and follow through all the major names that islamists and arabs resort when they want to reminisce over a golden age that exists only in their imagination.

so let's take these so called "muslim" philosophers and scientists, and examine their cases, one by one, and examine their views of islam, it seems that in their majority they did not hold a kind view of islam; but let's examine their views, their lives and their death, this way your serious academic study will have more merit and credibility in the western meaning of the terms.

so let's start with ibn el muqafa3.

ibn el muqafa3 captured alive, tied to a pole, his members cut to pieces one by one, cooked, and he was forced to eat them shortly before he died from pain and despair.

هو عبد الله بن المقفع، فارسي الأصل، وُلِد في قرية بفارس اسمها جور، مؤرخون أخرون ينسبون مولده للبصرة، كان إسمه روزبه پور دادویه (روزبه بن داذویه)، وكنيته "أبا عمرو"، فلما أسلم تسمى بعبد الله وتكنى بأبي محمد ولقب والده بالمقفع لأنه أُتهِم بِمّدَ يده وسرق من أموال المسلمين والدولة الإسلامية لِذا نكّل بِه الحجاج بن يوسف الثقفي وعاقبه فضربه على أصابع يديه حتى تشنجتا وتقفعتا (أي تورمتا وإعوجت أصابعهما ثم شُلِتا). وقال ابن خلكان في تفسيره: كان الحجاج بن يوسف الثقفي في أيام ولايته العراق وبلاد فارس قد ولى داذويه خراج فارس، فمد يده واخذ الأموال. فعذبه فتفقعت يده فقيل له المقفع[3]، وقيل انه سمي بالمقفع لأنه يعمل في القفاع[3] ويبيعها، ولكن الرأي الأول هو الشائع والمعروف وعلى أساسه عرف روزبه بابن المقفع[4].

نشأ ابن المقفع على المجوسية على مذهب المانوية وكان له نشاط في نشر تعاليمها وترجمتها إلى العربية، ومنها كتاب في سيرة مزدك أحد دعاة الثنوية ومن زعمائها المجددين لمبادئها. حتى أسلم على يد عيسى بن علي، فتغير اسمه لعبدالله وتكنى بأبي محمد، ولم تطل فترة اسلامه اذ قتل على يد سفيان بن معاوية بن يزيد بن الملهب بإيعاز من المنصورمتهماً بالزندقة، حيث كانت مبررات قتله على انه زنديق من الفئة التي تتظاهر بالإسلام مراءاة وخداعاً. ولكن ليس في آثار بن المقفع مايدل على زندقته، ولم يكن هنالك دليل مادي يوجه اتهامات إليه لإثبات زندقته وتبرير قتله، فالزندقة ليست السبب الحقيقي لمقتله وإنما كانت للتغطيه[4]. بالرغم من ذلك فإن احتمالية كونه زنديقاً بعد اسلامه امر محتمل، فيشير بعض المؤرخين بأن اسلامه ماكان إلا ليحافظ على كرامته وطمعاً في الشهرة والجاه وتقرباً إلى مواليه العباسيين[5].

his death, in this account they omit to say he was forced to eat pieces of his own body.

بعد ذلك ربطه وآمر بإحضار فرن تنور فَسجَّره وأوقده حتى أصبح حامياً مُتوّقداً عندئذٍ آمر سفيان رجاله بِتقطيع أعضاء وأطراف عبد الله بن المقفع عضواً عضواً وكُلما قطعوا عضواً من جسم إبن المقفع يقول لهم سفيان بن معاوية:
«ألقوه وأرموه في النار».
فجعل رجال سفيان يقطعون أعضاؤه ثم يرمونها في الفرن حتى تحترق بينما يرى وينظر لها عبد الله بن المقفع حتى هلك ومات من شدة التعذيب.

so should we count ibn el mouqafa3 as a part of the golden age of arabs/islam or not? i guess not. especially that he seems to have been neither an arab nor a muslem.

a new icon of the islamic/arabic golden age coming soon, just for you :)

but on the side, between you and me, do you think ibn el muqafa3 was an islamophobe?

unfortunately, this how most of the people we are dealing with would recount his story, ah the golden age was great, ibn el mouqafa3 was a pillar without which there would have been no european civilization, unfortunately he was invited over to lunch with the caliphate, and he died while eating cooked meet. that's precisely what we are dealing with here :)
 
Last edited:
  • Advertisement
  • Picasso

    Picasso

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    while thousands of articles have been written about the "execution" of galileo, the world knows close to nothing about the pride of the golden age arab scientists how they lived and how they were killed and why. in order to determine whether the defensiveness against islamic masses is warranted or not, their whole psyche should be critically analyzed.

    for instance, in this very thread the islamic golden age was praised, by people who learned to parrot things out without any veracity, in conformity with the whole arabic culture.

    so let's put that golden age to the test, and follow through all the major names that islamists and arabs resort when they want to reminisce over a golden age that exists only in their imagination.

    so let's take these so called "muslim" philosophers and scientists, and examine their cases, one by one, and examine their views of islam, it seems that in their majority they did not hold a kind view of islam; but let's examine their views, their lives and their death, this way your serious academic study will have more merit and credibility in the western meaning of the terms.

    so let's start with ibn el muqafa3.

    ibn el muqafa3 captured alive, tied to a pole, his members cut to pieces one by one, cooked, and he was forced to eat them shortly before he died from pain and despair.

    هو عبد الله بن المقفع، فارسي الأصل، وُلِد في قرية بفارس اسمها جور، مؤرخون أخرون ينسبون مولده للبصرة، كان إسمه روزبه پور دادویه (روزبه بن داذویه)، وكنيته "أبا عمرو"، فلما أسلم تسمى بعبد الله وتكنى بأبي محمد ولقب والده بالمقفع لأنه أُتهِم بِمّدَ يده وسرق من أموال المسلمين والدولة الإسلامية لِذا نكّل بِه الحجاج بن يوسف الثقفي وعاقبه فضربه على أصابع يديه حتى تشنجتا وتقفعتا (أي تورمتا وإعوجت أصابعهما ثم شُلِتا). وقال ابن خلكان في تفسيره: كان الحجاج بن يوسف الثقفي في أيام ولايته العراق وبلاد فارس قد ولى داذويه خراج فارس، فمد يده واخذ الأموال. فعذبه فتفقعت يده فقيل له المقفع[3]، وقيل انه سمي بالمقفع لأنه يعمل في القفاع[3] ويبيعها، ولكن الرأي الأول هو الشائع والمعروف وعلى أساسه عرف روزبه بابن المقفع[4].

    نشأ ابن المقفع على المجوسية على مذهب المانوية وكان له نشاط في نشر تعاليمها وترجمتها إلى العربية، ومنها كتاب في سيرة مزدك أحد دعاة الثنوية ومن زعمائها المجددين لمبادئها. حتى أسلم على يد عيسى بن علي، فتغير اسمه لعبدالله وتكنى بأبي محمد، ولم تطل فترة اسلامه اذ قتل على يد سفيان بن معاوية بن يزيد بن الملهب بإيعاز من المنصورمتهماً بالزندقة، حيث كانت مبررات قتله على انه زنديق من الفئة التي تتظاهر بالإسلام مراءاة وخداعاً. ولكن ليس في آثار بن المقفع مايدل على زندقته، ولم يكن هنالك دليل مادي يوجه اتهامات إليه لإثبات زندقته وتبرير قتله، فالزندقة ليست السبب الحقيقي لمقتله وإنما كانت للتغطيه[4]. بالرغم من ذلك فإن احتمالية كونه زنديقاً بعد اسلامه امر محتمل، فيشير بعض المؤرخين بأن اسلامه ماكان إلا ليحافظ على كرامته وطمعاً في الشهرة والجاه وتقرباً إلى مواليه العباسيين[5].

    his death, in this account they omit to say he was forced to eat pieces of his own body.

    بعد ذلك ربطه وآمر بإحضار فرن تنور فَسجَّره وأوقده حتى أصبح حامياً مُتوّقداً عندئذٍ آمر سفيان رجاله بِتقطيع أعضاء وأطراف عبد الله بن المقفع عضواً عضواً وكُلما قطعوا عضواً من جسم إبن المقفع يقول لهم سفيان بن معاوية:
    «ألقوه وأرموه في النار».
    فجعل رجال سفيان يقطعون أعضاؤه ثم يرمونها في الفرن حتى تحترق بينما يرى وينظر لها عبد الله بن المقفع حتى هلك ومات من شدة التعذيب.

    so should we count ibn el mouqafa3 as a part of the golden age of arabs/islam or not? i guess not. especially that he seems to have been neither an arab nor a muslem.

    a new icon of the islamic/arabic golden age coming soon, just for you :)

    but on the side, between you and me, do you think ibn el muqafa3 was an islamophobe?

    unfortunately, this how most of the people we are dealing with would recount his story, ah the golden age was great, ibn el mouqafa3 was a pillar without which there would have been no european civilization, unfortunately he was invited over to lunch with the caliphate, and he died while eating cooked meet. that's precisely what we are dealing with here :)

    Articles about Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism. Your views are welcome for discussion, but here you are posting off-topic posts.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Articles about Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism. Your views are welcome for discussion, but here you are posting off-topic posts.
    absolutely on topic. the world needs to know whether it should be afraid or not. this is not about a made up fear to be called a phobia. it is about generations of wrong and scary practices.

    the only ting unreal and unscientific in this thread is the made up term islamophobia.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    absolutely on topic. the world needs to know whether it should be afraid or not. this is not about a made up fear to be called a phobia. it is about generations of wrong and scary practices.

    the only ting unreal and unscientific in this thread is the made up term islamophobia.
    What do you call attacks against innocent Muslims in the West, which are due to incitement against Muslims and Islam?
     
    Mighty Goat

    Mighty Goat

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    the world knows close to nothing about the pride of the golden age arab scientists how they lived and how they were killed and why
    Ibn al muqafaa was not Arab.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    @Picasso

    I read your initial article... and this "historian" misses key elements:
    -Jews did not self-segregate in Europe. They were forced to segregate and could not live outside of ghettos. Not the case with Muslims today.
    -Jews were always a minority and they taught survival, not global domination. There's nothing in the Jewish doctrine about making the entire world adhere to the Jewish faith. Not the case with Islam.

    These are not only structural, but fundamental differences between the two, which the historian in question seems to dismiss.

    There is one thing the article gets right: A majority (i.e. those in power, which is more accurate) will always use minorities and foreigners as scapegoats, because they need to hold on to their power. That is self-evident, and ever present in any society. In the West, the voices who preach against such scapegoating are quite loud and are often the majority. In Islamic countries, the opposite is true.

    Having said that, attacks against innocent Muslims in the West are indeed Islamophobic. Criticism of Islam, however, is absolutely not Islamophobia. The term 'Islamophobia' is being trivialized in the media when it refers to instances of the latter, rather than the former, or when its definition is expanded to include a broader focus, rather than its limited, narrow scope.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    What do you call attacks against innocent Muslims in the West, which are due to incitement against Muslims and Islam?
    you call it what it is, and what every rational human being would call a crime and an act of aggression. you cannot call it islamophobia when minorities are being oppressed and even exterminated in the middle east, be it during the times of peace or times of war, in many muslim countries even owning a bible and reading it outside the confines of your own home, let alone distributing it and preaching it, could get you in dire trouble not simply with individual, but with the state itself. is that not something that the world should take note of?

    it is like calling jews naziphobes when they bring up the issues of their oppression by the nazis. a phobia is an irrational fear. there is nothing irrational about fearing the repercussions of islam wherever it settles.

    so what do i call it? it can be called a wide range of names, but islamophobe is certainly not one of them.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    you call it what it is, and what every rational human being would call a crime and an act of aggression. you cannot call it islamophobia when minorities are being oppressed and even exterminated in the middle east, be it during the times of peace or times of war, in many muslim countries even owning a bible and reading it outside the confines of your own home, let alone distributing it and preaching it, could get you in dire trouble not simply with individual, but with the state itself. is that not something that the world should take note of?

    it is like calling jews naziphobes when they bring up the issues of their oppression by the nazis. a phobia is an irrational fear. there is nothing irrational about fearing the repercussions of islam wherever it settles.

    so what do i call it? it can be called a wide range of names, but islamophobe is certainly not one of them.
    Fearing innocent people who are minding their own business and working hard to raise their families because their religion happens to be Islam, which they inherited from their parents just like you inherited yours from your parents, is nothing short of irrational.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Fearing innocent people who are minding their own business and working hard to raise their families because their religion happens to be Islam, which they inherited from their parents just like you inherited yours from your parents, is nothing short of irrational.
    the crimes against innocent muslims are not an act of fear, they rather are an act of wicked and ignorant aggression which represents a perfect example for the failure of collective and social justice. not much different from playing the white privilege card.

    so please name, define and describe things by their proper terminologies; otherwise you will simply be contributing to masking the problems under a layer of politically motivated abstractions.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    the crimes against innocent muslims are not an act of fear, they rather are an act of wicked and ignorant aggression which represents a perfect example for the failure of collective and social justice. not much different from playing the white privilege card.

    so please name, define and describe things by their proper terminologies; otherwise you will simply be contributing to masking the problems under a layer of politically motivated abstractions.
    "An act of wicked and ignorant aggression" -- I agree; you are, however, describing an action not its cause. That act is closely related to incitement to fear Muslims by pundits with radical political agendas. That aggression did not originate in a vacuum.

    My definition of what constitutes 'Islamophobia' is limited in scope and quite different than that which is circulated in the media.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    "An act of wicked and ignorant aggression" -- I agree; you are, however, describing an action not its cause. That act is closely related to incitement to fear Muslims by pundits with radical political agendas. That aggression did not originate in a vacuum.

    My definition of what constitutes 'Islamophobia' is limited in scope and quite different than that which is circulated in the media.
    it is neither a fear nor is it irrational. therefore it is not a phobia and the term islamophobia should not be used because it is purposefully misleading, despite the fact that the first objective of terrorism is to spread fear.


    the rejection of the current state islam and its impact on many individuals and on society overall is a better definition. this rejection did not develop in a vacuum and did not come out of the blue either. it is rather based on empirical observations.

    now having a more than a single operational neuron, i do not stand behind the concept of social justice where people are made guilty by association, no individual should be held accountable for the crimes and actions of another.

    this does not go to say that - with the exception of the crazed terrorists - everything is fine and dandy in the islamic mind and psyche. the absolute majority muslims let alone the islamic religious authorities do not perceive what requires changes and or improvement in their doctrines and ideologies and this is what nurtures terror and keeps it alive.
     
    Frisbeetarian

    Frisbeetarian

    Legendary Member
    Mental diarrhea, as expected.

    while thousands of articles have been written about the "execution" of galileo, the world knows close to nothing about the pride of the golden age arab scientists how they lived and how they were killed and why. in order to determine whether the defensiveness against islamic masses is warranted or not, their whole psyche should be critically analyzed.


    We know quite a lot actually. Its just you who's ignorant.

    so let's put that golden age to the test, and follow through all the major names that islamists and arabs resort when they want to reminisce over a golden age that exists only in their imagination.
    Badna nrawe2 el 2a3sab.

    so let's take these so called "muslim" philosophers and scientists, and examine their cases, one by one, and examine their views of islam, it seems that in their majority they did not hold a kind view of islam;
    Seems? Anything to back that up with?
    but let's examine their views, their lives and their death, this way your serious academic study will have more merit and credibility in the western meaning of the terms.
    And did you actually do that or did you take one example and used it to paint the whole of Islam and Muslims?
     
    Frisbeetarian

    Frisbeetarian

    Legendary Member
    @Picasso

    I read your initial article... and this "historian" misses key elements:
    -Jews did not self-segregate in Europe. They were forced to segregate and could not live outside of ghettos. Not the case with Muslims today.
    -Jews were always a minority and they taught survival, not global domination. There's nothing in the Jewish doctrine about making the entire world adhere to the Jewish faith. Not the case with Islam.

    These are not only structural, but fundamental differences between the two, which the historian in question seems to dismiss.

    There is one thing the article gets right: A majority (i.e. those in power, which is more accurate) will always use minorities and foreigners as scapegoats, because they need to hold on to their power. That is self-evident, and ever present in any society. In the West, the voices who preach against such scapegoating are quite loud and are often the majority. In Islamic countries, the opposite is true.

    Having said that, attacks against innocent Muslims in the West are indeed Islamophobic. Criticism of Islam, however, is absolutely not Islamophobia. The term 'Islamophobia' is being trivialized in the media when it refers to instances of the latter, rather than the former, or when its definition is expanded to include a broader focus, rather than its limited, narrow scope.
    Could appropriating, evicting millions of Muslims and then occupying their lands be considered Islamophobic as well? Or is that just run the of the mill colonialism?
     
    Frisbeetarian

    Frisbeetarian

    Legendary Member
    the crimes against innocent muslims are not an act of fear, they rather are an act of wicked and ignorant aggression which represents a perfect example for the failure of collective and social justice. not much different from playing the white privilege card.
    When crimes happen against Muslims they're justified because Islam is wicked. Gotcha. Wow. []
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Frisbeetarian

    Frisbeetarian

    Legendary Member
    this does not go to say that - with the exception of the crazed terrorists - everything is fine and dandy in the islamic mind and psyche. the absolute majority muslims let alone the islamic religious authorities do not perceive what requires changes and or improvement in their doctrines and ideologies and this is what nurtures terror and keeps it alive.
    Notice how he makes no mention of how the United States has provided political, military and financial cover to the most repressive and most corrupt regime in the region for over 50 years now. A regime which has had free hand in pumping billions throughout the world to support radical groups and its own strand of ultra conservative Islamism. Notice how he fails to mention that the opening of Salafist mosques throughout Europe coincided with arms deals now worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Notice how he makes no mention of how European and American powers have utilized and commandeered puppet regimes to steal and siphon off this region's resources while feeding its most repressive, corrupt and radical segments in order to further their own positions and interests. Notice how he makes no mention that while that has been going other more moderate Islamic movements have been squashed either through military action or coup d'etats. Notice how he makes no mention of the impact of having the two most important seats in Islam be under the domination of an imperial power who's only interested in furthering its grasp on this region and its resources. Just bloviating hatred without any context or nuance.

    Notice how he refuses to acknowledge that the destruction of our societies either through entrenched corruption (supported and enabled by foreign interest) or outright war has had a devastating impact on the lives on millions. Notice how he refuses to see or even begin to understand the plight of millions left with barely anything to eat or a land to tend to. He wants to forget about the factors that have enabled this extremism to rise except if that source is the Qoran. Just linear, simplistic, dumbed down rhetoric for the dumb Maronite masses of Lebanon.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    When crimes happen against Muslims they're justified because Islam is wicked. Gotcha. Wow. []
    had you been able to process things like normal human beings, ie anyone with at least one operational neuron, you would have easily noted that i qualified the act of aggression against innocent muslims as an act of wicked and ignorant aggression. which is exactly what you are exhibiting here.

    it has to be said, though it is sad to see another person getting further and further depleted, i do not expect any better from you
    "مِنْ ثِمَارِهِمْ تَعْرِفُونَهُمْ. هَلْ يَجْتَنُونَ مِنَ الشَّوْكِ عِنَبًا، أَوْ مِنَ الْحَسَكِ تِينًا؟"
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Mental diarrhea, as expected.



    We know quite a lot actually. Its just you who's ignorant.
    my my.. what brilliant mind you possess :)

    And did you actually do that or did you take one example and used it to paint the whole of Islam and Muslims?​

    there are plenty of examples, but the aim is simply to expose the lies of people like you who always praise the golden era of islam while in reality it was as shitty as it gets for everyone involved, especially the people whose memory you abuse to advance your case with examples, in particular the scientists, who were the first to pay the price of crappy minds like the one you possess. in all honesty your is one of the narrowest minds - if not the narrowest mind - i have ever encountered, and not simply on this forum.

    تبا لأمة فيها الزنادقة و الجهلاء يكفرون أو يقتلون العلماء ثم يفتخرون بهم، فتبا لأمة ضحكت من جهلها الأمم...

    جميعنا يتغنّى بالإسلام وأنه دين يسع كل انسان وكل فكر وكل فلسفة لأنه دين كل زمان ومكان ارتضاه الله ورسوله الكريم لكل العالمين
    , فالإسلام أول الأديان التي جعلت العلم فريضة على كل مسلم ومسلمة, وحثت المسلمين على شد الرحال لطلب العلم ولو كان خلف أسوار الصين, ولكن هل من العلماء من كان علمه سبب قتله أو نفيه أو صلبه من قبل رجال الدين وأولياء الرب في الأرض؟؟!!
    إن تاريخ حروب رجال الدين للعلم والعلماء طويل ومرير.ولهذه القصص المحزنة التي تبين الصراع المرير بين العلم والفهم الخاطئ للدين عدد لا ينتهي . وهى ليست مقصورة على دين واحد أو زمان واحد. والعالم الإسلامي لا يخلو من مثل قصص تعذيب العلماء والمفكرين وإعدامهم في الماضي والحاضر.ولمن ينكر ذلك “أو من لديه أدنى شك” , دعونا نفنّد الأحداث ونقرأ التاريخ بتمعّن , فمن منكم لا يعرف الرازي والخوارزمي والكندي والفارابي والبيروني وابن سيناء وابن الهيثم ؟.

    ومن منكم لم يسمع بالغزالي وابن رشد والعسقلاني والسهروردي وابن حيان والنووي وابن المقفع والطبري ؟؟. ومن منكم لا يعرف الكواكبي والمتنبي وبشار بن برد ولسان الدين الخطيب وابن الفارض ورابعة العدوية والجاحظ والمعري وابن طفيل وابن بطوطة وابن ماجد وابن خلدون وثابت بن قرة ؟؟؟ لا شك إنكم تعرفون هذه النخبة من علماء الإسلام التي أضاءت فضاءات الحضارة العربية وطغت بشموسها على الحضارة الغربية آنذاك حيث كانوا أساتذة العالم فكرا وفلسفة وحضارة, ولا ريب إنكم تتفاخرون بهم وبانجازاتهم في الطب والفلسفة والفيزياء والكيمياء والرياضيات والآداب وعلم الفلك والهندسة وعلم الاجتماع. لكنكم لا تعلمون حتى الآن إن هؤلاء العلماء صدرت ضدهم أبشع الأحكام التكفيرية بنصوص متطابقة مع قرارات الكنيسة التي كفّرت كوبرنيك وبرونو وغاليلو, وبولستون ولينوس في أوروبا في القرون المظلمة , وحرّمت قراءة كتبهم, وبالغت في مطاردتهم وتعذيبهم والتنكيل بهم,
    وكنت أقرأ عادة الكتب وبعد أن يذكر المؤرخ صفحات عديدة عن أحد الأعلام ، وفي نهاية المطاف يكتب: “مات مسموماً عام كذا والله اعلم …”!! دون أن يجهد نفسه بمحاولة الإجابة على الأسئلة التي لا بد أن تثور مثل: لماذا قتل مسموما؟ ما هي دوافع القتل؟ ومن يقف وراء هذا العمل؟! , فتثور لدي أفكار عدة يتركها تتضارب دون نتيجة “دين يسع كل فكر وعلم وفلسفة , نتغنى بمكانتنا العلمية السابقة , وفي المقابل جميع هؤلاء العلماء لقيوا حتفهم ….!!!!”فهل تعلم أن الطبري قُتل , وأن الحلاج المتصوف الإسلامي المشهور, إتهمه الخليفة المقتدر بالله بالكفر وحكم عليه بالموت. فضرب بالسياط نحو ألف سوط, ثم قطعت يداه ورجلاه, ثم ضربت عنقه, وأحرقت جثته بالنار ثم ألقي ما بقي من تراب جثته في نهر دجلة, وأن المعري حُبس, وسُفك دم أبن حيان, ونُفي ابن المنمر, وحرّقت كتب الغزالي وابن رشد والأصفهاني واتهموا في إيمانهم , وكُفّر الفارابي والرازي وابن سيناء والكندي والغزالي.
    وهل تعلم أن ابن المقفع ” الذي كان يجمع بين لغة العرب وصنعة الفرس وحكمة اليونانيين, ومؤلف كتاب كليلة ودمنة وكتب أخرى كثيرة توضح ما ينبغي أن يكون عليه الحاكم إزاء الرعية, وما يجب أن تكون عليه الرعية إزاء الحاكم” مما أغضب الخليفة المنصور في صدر العصر العباسي الأول. فإتهم ابن المقفع بالكفر, وقطعت أطرافه وفصلت رأسه, وألقى بباقي جسده في النار, ثم شويت أمامه ليأكل منها قبل أن يلفظ أنفاسه بأبشع أنواع التعذيب!!
    هل تعلم أن الجعد بن درهم مات مذبوحا, وعلقوا رأس (أحمد بن نصر) وداروا به في الأزقة, وخنقوا (لسان الدين بن الخطيب) وحرقوا جثته, وكفروا (ابن الفارض) وطاردوه في كل مكان.
    وربما لا تعلمون أن السهروردي “شيخ الإستشراق المتصوف في عصر صلاح الدين الأيوبي مات مقتولا بنفس الطريقة التي قتل بها الحلاج من قبل. والإمام إبن حنبل, قام الخليفة المعتصم بسجنه وتعذيبه. والكندي, فيلسوف العرب, جرد من ملابسه وهو في الستين, وجلد ستون جلدة فى ميدان عام وسط تهليل العامة.فقد لا يعلم عامة الناس ما قالوه عن ابن سينا الطبيب والعالم والفقيه والفيلسوف, وما قاله عنه ابن القيم في كتابه إغاثة اللهفان حيث قال: “إنه إمام الملحدين الكافرين بالله وملائكته وكتبه ورسله واليوم الآخر”, وقال عنه الكشميري في “فيض الباري “: “ابن سيناء الملحد الزنديق القرمطي”, ولا يعلم الناس بما قالوه عن أبي بكر الرازي, الطبيب والعالم والفيلسوف. قال عنه ابن القيم في “إغاثة اللهفان” : “إن الرازي من المجوس”, و”إنه ضال مضلل” . وقالوا عن ابن الهيثم: “إنه كان من الملاحدة الخارجين عن دين الإسلام, وكان سفيها زنديقا كأمثاله من الفلاسفة”, وقالوا عن أبي العلاء أحمد بن عبد الله المعري: “إنه كان من مشاهير الزنادقة, وفي شعره ما يدل على زندقته وانحلاله من الدين”, وقالوا عن محمد بن عبد الله بن بطوطة: “إنه كان مشركا كذابا”, وشتموا الكندي, وقالوا عنه: “إنه كان زنديقا ضالا”!!.
    لسنا هنا للدفاع عن هؤلاء العلماء الذين رحلوا منذ أكثر من ألف عام, ولكن نحن ضد تسطيح عقول الناس وضد محاربة العلم
    والعلماء ظاهراً “وباطناً” , وبناءً على أن الإسلام حث المسلمين على شد الرحال لطلب العلم ولو كان خلف أسوار الصين فإن محاولات تكفير هؤلاء العلماء الأعلام, وتشويه صورتهم بهذه الأساليب البدائية تمهد الطريق لتراجع مساهمات العرب في إنتاج وتطوير العلوم والآداب. والاستنتاج الممكن الذي نخرج فيه, هو إن الدعوات التي استهدفت تكفير العلماء في الماضي والحاضر تهدف في حقيقتها إلى تكريس الجهل والتخلف, وتأخر ميلاد الإبداع في المجتمعات الإسلامية فتصبح الشعوب بأيدي رجال الدين والسلاطين يسومونهم كيفما شاؤوا ويوجهونهم نحو الفكر والعلم الذي يستهويهم فقط ويحافظ على مكانتهم . إن الزندقة كانت وما زالت من أبشع الأسلحة التي تستخدم ضد العلماء والمفكرين , فتزرع بدورها بذور الخوف والشك في المجتمعات الناهضة لتنمو أشجار الجهل والتخلف , وإذا بقينا على هذا الحال فعاجلا أو آجلا سوف نصل إلى ما وصلت إليه أوروبا في العصور المظلمة. فالتقدم له أسبابه. والتخلف أيضاً لا يأتي من فراغ. وقد ضاعت أمم قبلنا كثيرة حين حجبت الرأي, وحاربت العقل. وطغت بظلم وعدوان على العلماء والحريات الفكرية .

    but just in case, here is another example.
    وفاة الرازي
    لقد كان الرازي بحق صورة رائعة من صور الحضارة الإسلامية، قلَّما تتكرر في التاريخ، لقد كان طبيبًا وعالمًا ومعلمًا وإنسانًا.. ومات عن عمر بلغ ستين عامًا، لكن من الصعب أن نقول: إنه مات؛ فالمرء يُكتَب له الخلود بقدر ما ينفع الناس، وصدق الرسول الكريم عند ما ذكر في الحديث الذي رواه عنه أبو هريرة ، أنه قال: “إِذَا مَاتَ الإِنْسَانُ انْقَطَعَ عَنْهُ عَمَلُهُ إِلاَّ مِنْ ثَلاَثَةٍ”وذكر منها: “أَوْ عِلْمٍ يُنْتَفَعُ بِهِ”. وفي ليلة من ليالي عام 311هـ/923م مات الرازي، بعد أن ترك تراثًا طبيًّا عظيمًا.
    وعمي الرازي في آخر عمره. وذكر أن سبب عماه, أنه صنف للملك منصور المذكور كتاباً في الكيمياء فأعجبه ووصله بألف دينار وقال: أريد أن تخرج ما ذكرت من القوة إلى الفعل، فقال: إن ذلك مما يحتاج إلى مؤن وآلات وعقاقير صحيحة وأحكام صنعة، فقال له الملك: كل ما تريده أحضره إليك وأمدك به، فلما كع عن مباشرة ذلك وعمله فقال الملك: ما اعتقدت أن حكيماً يرضى بتخليد الكذب في كتب ينسبها إلى الحكمة يشغل بها قلوب الناس ويتعبهم فيما لا فايدة فيه, والألف دينار لك صلة ولا بد من عقوبتك على تخليد الكذب في الكتب، وأمر أن يضرب بالكتاب الذي عمله على رأسه … فكان ذلك الضرب سبب نزول الماء في عينيه. ومات ببغداد. رحمه الله تعالى.

     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Notice how he makes no mention of how the United States has provided political, military and financial cover to the most repressive and most corrupt regime in the region for over 50 years now. A regime which has had free hand in pumping billions throughout the world to support radical groups and its own strand of ultra conservative Islamism. Notice how he fails to mention that the opening of Salafist mosques throughout Europe coincided with arms deals now worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Notice how he makes no mention of how European and American powers have utilized and commandeered puppet regimes to steal and siphon off this region's resources while feeding its most repressive, corrupt and radical segments in order to further their own positions and interests. Notice how he makes no mention that while that has been going other more moderate Islamic movements have been squashed either through military action or coup d'etats. Notice how he makes no mention of the impact of having the two most important seats in Islam be under the domination of an imperial power who's only interested in furthering its grasp on this region and its resources. Just bloviating hatred without any context or nuance.

    Notice how he refuses to acknowledge that the destruction of our societies either through entrenched corruption (supported and enabled by foreign interest) or outright war has had a devastating impact on the lives on millions. Notice how he refuses to see or even begin to understand the plight of millions left with barely anything to eat or a land to tend to. He wants to forget about the factors that have enabled this extremism to rise except if that source is the Qoran. Just linear, simplistic, dumbed down rhetoric for the dumb Maronite masses of Lebanon.
    terrorism and the use of terror was an integral part of islam ever since its conception.

    وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ قُوَّةٍ وَمِنْ رِبَاطِ الْخَيْلِ تُرْهِبُونَ بِهِ عَدُوَّ اللَّهِ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ وَآخَرِينَ مِنْ دُونِهِمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَهُمُ اللَّهُ يَعْلَمُهُمْ ۚ وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ شَيْءٍ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ يُوَفَّ إِلَيْكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تُظْلَمُونَ.

    the long history of islam, the life of the prophet himself, the wars and the occupation of the ancient world, that fact that most caliphs were killed or assassinated, the beheading of their own prophet's grandson, all the way to the ottoman empire, were all because of others. isn't it just amazing how it is never your fault.

    it goes without saying powers in the recent decades are seeking to use the islamic predisposition for terror to their own advantage, but they have not invented the concept, it has always been there. the life of most of the sahabas, the very disciples of the prophet, are a clear indication to that. but lamma ykoun 3a2lak msakkar ma fi nawa testaw3ib w tefham.

    look what john mccain made khaled ibn el walid do:
    ya mashallah how happy he is telling the story. ya noussetkon inta wiyeh. atheist or not, you two are equally messed up.

    but look at that wonderful excuse now :) golden age indeed.
    ومعلوم أن خالدا قتل مالك بن نويرة لأنه رآه مرتداً، فإذا كان لم يدخل بامرأته فلا عدة عليها عند عامة العلماء، وإن كان قد دخل بها فإنه يجب عليها استبراء بحيضة، لا بعدة كاملة، في أحد قوليهم، وفي الآخر: بثلاث حيض، وإن كان كافراً أصلياً فليس على امرأته عدة وفاة في أحد قوليهم. وإذا كان الواجب استبراء بحيضة فقد تكون حاضت. ومن الفقهاء من يجعل بعض الحيضة استبراء، فإذا كانت في آخر الحيض جعل ذلك استبراء لدلالته على براءة الرحم.
    la2 ma7louli b7amd el lah. all it takes is three menstruation cycles and problem solved.. so bel moutla2 wad7a, jame3it el islamophobia 3am yeftero 3leikon, ma fi shi bi khawwif.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    You are not responding on the same wavelength as I. Please reread what I wrote and tell me how exactly do I disagree with anything you wrote below.

    it is neither a fear nor is it irrational. therefore it is not a phobia and the term islamophobia should not be used because it is purposefully misleading, despite the fact that the first objective of terrorism is to spread fear.

    What's irrational is using the above as justification for not calling attacks against innocent Muslims 'Islamophobic'. Unless you think all Muslims adhere to what this 'person' is preaching, there is no disagreement between your perspective and mine.

    You don't see anyone calling bombing ISIL terrorists 'Islamophobic', do you? Why? Because they are the ones preaching hate speech, not your average Muhammad in the West who goes to work in the morning and comes home at night.

    the rejection of the current state islam and its impact on many individuals and on society overall is a better definition. this rejection did not develop in a vacuum and did not come out of the blue either. it is rather based on empirical observations.
    No one is arguing that the current state of Islam is peachy. And no one is saying criticism of Islam is 'Islamophobia'. Those that do are ignorant, and are incorrectly using the term, to the point of trivializing it and making it meaningless.

    now having a more than a single operational neuron, i do not stand behind the concept of social justice where people are made guilty by association, no individual should be held accountable for the crimes and actions of another.
    I'd say it is you who is saying Muslims are guilty by association, by virtue of adhering to Islam. That is what you are implying, is it not?

    this does not go to say that - with the exception of the crazed terrorists - everything is fine and dandy in the islamic mind and psyche. the absolute majority muslims let alone the islamic religious authorities do not perceive what requires changes and or improvement in their doctrines and ideologies and this is what nurtures terror and keeps it alive.
    The absolute majority of Muslims live their life by the golden rule. Most people do, in fact, regardless of the poison pumped through scripture.
     
    Muki

    Muki

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Could appropriating, evicting millions of Muslims and then occupying their lands be considered Islamophobic as well? Or is that just run the of the mill colonialism?
    It is a war the Muslims launched -- don't go crying now when six Islamic nations could not throw the Jews into the sea, as they repeatedly and unsuccessfully declared.

    Accept defeat, and move on. It's what adults do.
     
    Top