Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Today at 07:58 AM

Dutch elections
by zeca
Yesterday at 10:11 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
Yesterday at 08:46 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
Yesterday at 06:36 AM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 13, 2024, 05:18 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 04, 2024, 03:51 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

New Britain
October 30, 2024, 08:34 PM

Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
October 22, 2024, 09:05 PM

Tariq Ramadan Accused of ...
September 11, 2024, 01:37 PM

France Muslims were in d...
September 05, 2024, 03:21 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: ahl e-kitab

 (Read 5835 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • ahl e-kitab
     OP - February 20, 2010, 12:37 PM



    This bothered me a little when I was Islam curious and sympathetic, now I think its really an example of the arrogance, insularity and supremacist idiocy of Islam.

    In a discussion yesterday bronze said that some Muslims even allowed Hindus and Sikhs to be accepted as ahl e-kitab. This is supposedly an example of how Islam is fundamentally tolerant and Universal Brotherhood etc etc etc

    And it got me thinking, how utterly pompous, arrogant and stupid that anyone should imagine that the people of the world should think themselves honoured to be 'accepted' into this pantheon, as if people's status as fully realised and 'permissible' humans is centred on what Islamic mullahs and bigots think of them, of whether they are ahl e-kitab, as if 'kuffars' are waiting and begging for being given 'permission' by Islam to exist.

    How arrogant can you get? You are acceptable to us - now go and rejoice and count yourself lucky!

    Islam abrogates to itself the right to define what is acceptable, and which humans are to be granted acceptability on account of their religious or non-religious background. Its breathtakingly arrogant and supremacist, and yet it dresses itself up as largesse and generosity and compassion and tolerance.

    Islam is so bloody ridiculous and up its own arse sometimes. It honestly believes that it is the sun around which all other kuffar revolve and must be given light and gravity to exist by. Why else is Islam so utterly hysterical and neurotic and weeping about its status in the world, so fearful of liberal secular democracy, and everything that says 'Yeah, whatever', when it spins its nonsense out loud. Islam hates the indifference and lack of prostration that kuffars give to it - then thinks 'You ungrateful wretches, we even granted you permission to exist inside our Islamo universe!'

    Universal Brotherhood = all men and women are equal despite what religion they follow - a Muslim is equal to a Hindu and Sikh and Jew and Christian and Atheist and Agnostic and Rastafarian and Pagan and Animist - deal with it.

    ahl e-kitab my arse.




    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #1 - February 20, 2010, 05:17 PM


    This bothered me a little when I was Islam curious and sympathetic, now I think its really an example of the arrogance, insularity and supremacist idiocy of Islam.

    In a discussion yesterday bronze said that some Muslims even allowed Hindus and Sikhs to be accepted as ahl e-kitab. This is supposedly an example of how Islam is fundamentally tolerant and Universal Brotherhood etc etc etc

    And it got me thinking, how utterly pompous, arrogant and stupid that anyone should imagine that the people of the world should think themselves honoured to be 'accepted' into this pantheon, as if people's status as fully realised and 'permissible' humans is centred on what Islamic mullahs and bigots think of them, of whether they are ahl e-kitab, as if 'kuffars' are waiting and begging for being given 'permission' by Islam to exist.

    How arrogant can you get? You are acceptable to us - now go and rejoice and count yourself lucky!

    Islam abrogates to itself the right to define what is acceptable, and which humans are to be granted acceptability on account of their religious or non-religious background. Its breathtakingly arrogant and supremacist, and yet it dresses itself up as largesse and generosity and compassion and tolerance.

    Islam is so bloody ridiculous and up its own arse sometimes. It honestly believes that it is the sun around which all other kuffar revolve and must be given light and gravity to exist by. Why else is Islam so utterly hysterical and neurotic and weeping about its status in the world, so fearful of liberal secular democracy, and everything that says 'Yeah, whatever', when it spins its nonsense out loud. Islam hates the indifference and lack of prostration that kuffars give to it - then thinks 'You ungrateful wretches, we even granted you permission to exist inside our Islamo universe!'

    Universal Brotherhood = all men and women are equal despite what religion they follow - a Muslim is equal to a Hindu and Sikh and Jew and Christian and Atheist and Agnostic and Rastafarian and Pagan and Animist - deal with it.

    ahl e-kitab my arse.






    Well said Billy! The thing is, its only brotherhood and all that if you are Muslim. Not only that, but all those verses about love, charity, compassion, visiting the sick etc are for your brothers/believers, not everyone. Just try it out for yourself. All those verses about love, compassion, forgiveness, feeding the sick etc, it always says to a believer. I have yet to see one which says feed/help/have mercy upon the kuffar.

    "The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshiped anything but himself."
    ~Sir Richard Francis Burton

    "I think religion is just like smoking: Both invented by people, addictive, harmful, and kills!"
    ~RIBS
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #2 - February 20, 2010, 05:48 PM

    well, there's verses for respecting the non-Muslims who do NOT persecute Muslims...

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #3 - February 20, 2010, 08:40 PM

    What counts as persecution?

    If I write an article that Mohammad was a warlord. Am I persecuting Muslims?

    Most muslims will say yes. Persecute Islam and you are persecuting Muslims.

    Now, what is the punishment for persecution? Whatever it takes for me to back down.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #4 - February 20, 2010, 08:52 PM

    we've been over this before, persecution is attacking Muslims and driving them out of their homes:

    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=8380.msg208012#msg208012

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #5 - February 20, 2010, 09:13 PM

    how utterly pompous, arrogant and stupid that anyone should imagine that the people of the world should think themselves honoured to be 'accepted' into this pantheon, as if people's status as fully realised and 'permissible' humans is centred on what Islamic mullahs and bigots think of them, of whether they are ahl e-kitab, as if 'kuffars' are waiting and begging for being given 'permission' by Islam to exist.... ahl e-kitab my arse.


    Damn good post! Well said  Afro

    This scene from Mitchell & Webb about the Good Samaritan, popped into my mind:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rywVlfTtlMY
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #6 - February 20, 2010, 09:15 PM

    lol @ albino nubian

    you Brits are funny  Afro
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #7 - February 20, 2010, 09:27 PM

    I always cringed when I heard sheikhs proudly banging on about the 'protected status' of Christians and Jews as in an Islamic state as if that was a glittering example of how tolerant Islam is.

    Talk like that just doesn't seem to belong in the 21st century.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #8 - February 20, 2010, 09:32 PM

    Talk like that just doesn't seem to belong in the 21st century.

    It definitely doesn't.

    Is it possible though that back in the 7th century that indeed was a progressive attitude?
    I sincerely don’t know, just asking.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #9 - February 20, 2010, 09:35 PM

    Ami Isseroff thinks so:

    http://www.mideastweb.org/covenantofomar.htm

    Quote
    For some reason, this document has gained a very bad reputation among critics of Islam. However, considering the fate of conquered populations in general at that time, it seems to be very liberal, and the intention was to protect and reassure the Christian population of Jerusalem


    The covenant:
    Quote
    In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Beneficent. This is what the slave of Allah, Umar b.Al-Khattab, the Amir of the believers, has offered the people of Illyaa’ of security granting them Amaan (protection) for their selves, their money, their churches, their children, their lowly and their innocent, and the remainder of their people. Their churches are not to be taken, nor are they to be destroyed, nor are they to be degraded or belittled, neither are their crosses or their money, and they are not to be forced to change their religion, nor is any one of them to be harmed. No Jews are to live with them in Illyaa’ and it is required of the people of Illyaa’ to pay the Jizya, like the people of the cities. It is also required of them to remove the Romans from the land; and whoever amongst the people of Illyaa’ that wishes to depart with their selves and their money with the Romans, leaving their business and crosses behind, then their selves, their trading goods and their children are secure until they reach their destination.


    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #10 - February 20, 2010, 09:40 PM

    It definitely doesn't.

    Is it possible though that back in the 7th century that indeed was a progressive attitude?
    I sincerely don’t know, just asking.



    In the unruly tribal environment of 7th century Arabia - perhaps, but even they had a system of tribal protections to those who fell under their control. As far as religion was concerned the pre-Islamic Arabs were quite liberal. Persia and Rome also had forms of protection for different peoples and religions under their control.

    So I'm not sure whether the claims it was; 'Far ahead of it's time ' - is really the whole truth.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #11 - February 20, 2010, 09:44 PM

    btw Hassan,

    according to Islamic history/Hadith, when did Muslims start taking polytheist women as sex slaves?

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #12 - February 20, 2010, 09:46 PM

    btw Hassan,

    according to Islamic history/Hadith, when did Muslims start taking polytheist women as sex slaves?


    I'm not aware of this, Debunker.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #13 - February 20, 2010, 09:48 PM

    ok look at this Hadith:

    FROM SAHIH MUSLIM, VOLUME 2, #3432
    Abu Said al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: "And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (Quran - 4:24), (i.e. they were lawful for them when their Idda (menstrual) period came to an end).


    If one is going to take this Hadith seriously, then this means this started very very late, after the conquest of Mecca, since the Battle of Hunayn was after the conquest of Mecca, YET we see other Hadiths/History accounts claiming that this started much much earlier...

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #14 - February 20, 2010, 09:49 PM

    It is absolute bull. Cyrus let slaves go.

    1900 BC Middle Minoan Culture Begins - Minoan culture reached its high point during this period. Great palaces were built at Knossos, Phaistos and Mallia. There was a central government. Minoans began trading with other peoples both around the Aegean and as far away as Egypt. There is some evidence that the Minoans successfully collected tribute from many surrounding peoples.

    http://www.historycentral.com/dates/2000bc.html

    This is also for the "protection" of other people. They had to pay taxes and tribute. Usually Islamic historians look at history through a keyhole.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #15 - February 20, 2010, 09:53 PM

    Huh? The Israelites, the whole nation of Israel, was enslaved by the Babylonians! Please read what Isseroof said... he's talking about "populations".... in other words, non-combatants... not people who were enslaved in battle.. The Israelites were NON-Combatants.

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #16 - February 20, 2010, 09:57 PM

    It was not the whole nation, a group of them, some of them remained back... And they were not treated poorly, and a group of them remained back after the 70 year exile. And became merchants and so on.

    I think the history is greatly exaggerated to be honest.

    http://www.ic.arizona.edu/ic/mcbride/ws200/moss-jewc.htm
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #17 - February 20, 2010, 09:58 PM

    ok look at this Hadith:

    FROM SAHIH MUSLIM, VOLUME 2, #3432
    Abu Said al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: "And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (Quran - 4:24), (i.e. they were lawful for them when their Idda (menstrual) period came to an end).


    If one is going to take this Hadith seriously, then this means this started very very late, after the conquest of Mecca, since the Battle of Hunayn was after the conquest of Mecca, YET we see other Hadiths/History accounts claiming that this started much much earlier...


    I always took narrations giving the dates and asbabunuzul with a pinch of salt - but who knows.

    btw I think I misunderstood your original question. I didn't realise you were refering to taking capitives as slaves. There is the narration in Ibn Ishaq that says the Prophet took slaves from the Banu Qurayza in Medina after the battle of the trench.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #18 - February 20, 2010, 10:00 PM

    @ BD

    well, not the whole nation, the northern tribes (10 of them) were enslaved by the Assyrians...

    The residents of Judah were for the most part enslaved and taken to Babylon... Cyrus later set them free but not all of them returned to Judah.

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #19 - February 20, 2010, 10:02 PM

    There is nothing spectacular about treating captured enemy soldiers well.  Sun Tzu (ancient Chinese general, 722–481 BC) recommended this as it would increase the chance of them defecting to your side.  Muhammad being a warlord was aware of a few things and he needed all the man power he could get.

    "Modern man's great illusion has been to convince himself that of all that has gone before he represents the zenith of human accomplishment, but can't summon the mental powers to read anything more demanding than emoticons. Fascinating. "

    One very horny Turk I met on the net.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #20 - February 20, 2010, 10:04 PM

    I always took narrations giving the dates and asbabunuzul with a pinch of salt - but who knows.

    btw I think I misunderstood your original question. I didn't realise you were refering to taking capitives as slaves. There is the narration in Ibn Ishaq that says the Prophet took slaves from the Banu Qurayza in Medina after the battle of the trench.


    there are more than one account about enslaving polytheist women since Muslims started fighting and yet we see this account implying that it only started after the conquest of Mecca... just one of numerous Hadith contradictions... like a group of liars who can't keep track of their lies...

    A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #21 - February 20, 2010, 10:06 PM

    like a group of liars who can't keep track of their lies...


     Cheesy
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #22 - February 20, 2010, 11:45 PM


    And it got me thinking, how utterly pompous, arrogant and stupid that anyone should imagine that the people of the world should think themselves honoured to be 'accepted' into this pantheon, as if people's status as fully realised and 'permissible' humans is centred on what Islamic mullahs and bigots think of them, of whether they are ahl e-kitab, as if 'kuffars' are waiting and begging for being given 'permission' by Islam to exist.



    The word you are looking for is patronization. As if one owes Islam gratitude... They do the same thing to women when you hear them brag about how they protect women and treat them kindly etc etc....

    "Modern man's great illusion has been to convince himself that of all that has gone before he represents the zenith of human accomplishment, but can't summon the mental powers to read anything more demanding than emoticons. Fascinating. "

    One very horny Turk I met on the net.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #23 - February 20, 2010, 11:47 PM

    Muslimas are the house slaves of Islam.

    You been good to me Masta. You aint hit me in a long time Masta. Are we ok Masta?
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #24 - February 20, 2010, 11:59 PM

    btw ras111 - I'm glad u changed ur avatar - it always made my page load slowly and jump.
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #25 - February 21, 2010, 12:03 AM

     


    You been good to me Masta. You aint hit me in a long time Masta. Are we ok Masta?

      Cheesy
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #26 - February 21, 2010, 12:04 AM

    There is nothing spectacular about treating captured enemy soldiers well.  Sun Tzu (ancient Chinese general, 722–481 BC) recommended this as it would increase the chance of them defecting to your side.  Muhammad being a warlord was aware of a few things and he needed all the man power he could get.


    Releasing, hostaging, or 'buying' captured soldiers was a common occurence in the ancient world. Very true.

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #27 - February 21, 2010, 12:05 AM

    Releasing, hostaging, or 'buying' captured soldiers was a common occurence in the ancient world. Very true.


    What if I took a man's wife and daughter for hostage? Was this common?
  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #28 - February 21, 2010, 12:09 AM

    Sorry, by hostaging I actually mean 'ransom'. Ie demand X dinaris from enemy general/king for return of his captured soldiers.

    Hostaging was a different practice and not how it sounds to us today. Basically in order to put real 'assets' behind a contract or treaty, a party might take some very important relatives of the weaker party who they would treat as 'guests' that they might kill if the other side went back on any promise. The hostages were often royals related to the king.

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: ahl e-kitab
     Reply #29 - February 21, 2010, 12:24 AM

    Sorry, by hostaging I actually mean 'ransom'. Ie demand X dinaris from enemy general/king for return of his captured soldiers.

    Hostaging was a different practice and not how it sounds to us today. Basically in order to put real 'assets' behind a contract or treaty, a party might take some very important relatives of the weaker party who they would treat as 'guests' that they might kill if the other side went back on any promise. The hostages were often royals related to the king.



    The burning of the palm grove of the Banu -Nadir in 4 A.H./625 had been a dishonourable act by contemporary standards. It was done, regardless of protests, because it was the necessary means to the end of overcoming them. Qur’anic verses (sura 59, ol-Hashr, 2-17) were sent down to justify the Prophet's conduct.

    The same destructive expedient was used in the Moslem blockade of the vineyard of the Banu Thaqif at Ta'efin 8 A.H./630. First the delivery of food to the encamped occupants was stopped, but soon it became clear that they had a large stock of food and that a long siege would be necessary. For fear that the Moslem troops, in keeping with the fickle character of the Arabs, might then become tired or bored, the Prophet ordered them to burn down the vineyard. The vines were such an important source of income that the Banu Thaqif sent a messenger to the Prophet, begging him to desist from the destruction and offering the ownership of the entire vineyard to the Moslems.

    Later in the same campaign, the Prophet abandoned the siege of Ta'ef and went to Mecca to distribute booty taken from the Hawazen tribe. He then sent a message to Malek b. Awf, one of the chiefs of the Banu Thaqif, offering to release his wife and children and give him a hundred camels if he would become a Moslem. Malek b. Awf secretly left Ta'ef and professed Islam in the Prophet's presence.

    All these reports come in early source-books and are well authenticated. The record of events in the first years of Islam gives ample evidence of the contemporary mentality and of the reasons for the progress of Mohammad's cause and the spread of the new religion.

    http://ali-dashti-23-years.tripod.com/#theadvancetopowers
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »