Leftist Dons Hijab, Disproves Existence of Islamophobia

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


article-0-1CE7F15800000578-712_634x374

The indoctrination has worked quite well. Many Westerners now work hard to prove that they aren’t Islamophobic. And this once again demonstrates that the Muslim hysteria over Islamophobia is a myth.

A Canadian college student recently conducted a social experiment to see if people treated her differently if she wore a hijab – a traditional Muslim veil that covers a woman’s head and chest – and what she discovered was a bit unexpected.

Anisa Rawhani, a third-year student at Queens University in Ontario, wore the traditional Muslim garb for 18 days in January as she worked at the university’s library, visited stores and restaurants near the campus and as she did volunteer work with local children.

According to Rawhani – who conducted the experiment to see if people in her community were racist towards minority groups – she noticed that people actually treated her more kindly and with more respect than when she didn’t wear the hijab.

‘I went with my hijab and people were very nice, people were polite, parents would shake my hand, so the experience was all across the board in Kingston.’

In some cases, she says, she would go out with friends who weren’t wearing any identifying religious symbols and she was treated much nicer than they were.

‘There was this excess (of niceness) that I would experience that I couldn’t account for,’ she said. ‘Like really going the extra mile like smiling broadly and being so so polite, which I’ve never experienced before. It was a stark contrast that was going on that threw me for a loop.’

Overall Americans and Canadians are fairly nice people and they’ve heard enough lectures about how excluded Muslims feel that they go the extra mile for them.

Also many people treat someone wearing a hijab as a foreigner and act more welcoming to them.

  • Veracious_one

    Islamophobia is a Muslim invention…..

    • laura r

      considering the vile disgusting pornographic comments i read (this site & TR), i would say it’s beyound “phobia”. its hystrionic ranting hate. in addition, all the articals here are anti muslim. i have no problem w/this, i agree w/many of them. lets get real, this site is anti muslim. the public is not.

      • TheOrdinaryMan

        Let’s get real. Do you think Ayaan Hirsi Ali is anti-Muslim? How about Lee Rigby? Was he anti-Muslim?

      • Lucia Sorrente

        Of course it’s anti-muslim, when the lies about islamophobia being wide-spread are still around, while, as you seen above, they aren’t true. Why are they spreading such lies? Don’t you see something is very very wrong about them? People are, in fact, nicer to them out of fear, treat them better than their own, and don’t dare upset them… if there was no real reason to fear them, people would treat them no better no worse than their own kind.

        • laura r

          re read my comments. the public is not anti muslim in general this site is. the problem w/this site is that they dont seperate the oppressed muslims from the oppressors. i was responding to a comment that islamophobia is a muslim invention. i never critized this site in that way, just the comments can be obnoxious.

          • Gee

            As one of the favorite targets of Muslims – I find you are not only ignorant of their extreme oppression and racism but an apologist for Islamofascists.
            Tell you what – you don’t like this site – fine – go away stupid and stay away if you don’t like our comments

          • laura r

            i just made a comment several seconds ago. it is not about the articals but the comments. i said that if the forum is loaded w/vile dirty violent obcene comments then they can easily cry “phobic”. plus it turns the members of the site into an ignorant angry mob w/pitchforks. now this artical didnt bring that out of people, but often the subject has.

          • Drakken

            I would highly suggest that you familiarize yourself with the very old fable of the Little Boy Who Cried Wolf. It has a really neat ending that is true today as the day it was uttered to scare children of the dark ages.

          • logdon

            If you could learn basic spelling maybe you’d be taken seriously enough to debate.

            As it stands you are a half wit with a megaphone.

          • Gee

            I noted your stupidity very well. If you don’t care for what we have to say – you are more than welcome to go post your ignorant comments at Ha’aretz.

          • AntiLeftist

            I think what laura r is trying to say, in an inartful way, is “shut up” about Islam.

          • laura r

            dont know what ha aretz is. but, sometimes comments here feed the so called “phobia” (maybe not today). many times they are infantile comments & dont address issues. thats my point.

          • laura r

            not leaving anytime soon.

          • Gee

            You claim to be but don’t know what Ha’aretz is or means – have a very hard time believing that you are Jewish.
            We have something called FREEDOM OF SPEECH and you are not allowed to censor anybody here.
            Don’t like it – TFB

          • Drakken

            Islam is islam no matter the stripe and where ever islam goes the blood always flows, without exception, so if you want to try and separate the wheat from the chaff, you go right ahead and try, I frankly don’t care, islam has got to go, and that means by whatever means necessary. The bottom brutal line is, it is them, or us.

          • laura r

            then why does jamie glazov & pam geller claim to defend opressed muslims? listen to the vids.

          • Drakken

            They today are trying to save some them, when the SHTF, their voices will be completely drowned out as the more direct action minded will be the ones listened to. The oppressed muzzys had better get with the program or their little voices will be drowned out by the funeral pyres. If they are silent today, they will be just as silent in the grave.

          • laura r

            the radicals do have the power. the US govt wont protect the oppressed muslims. believe me i know, there are muslims of semi practice islam, like reformed jews. they want to be westernized, but maybe the wife wears a scarf the daughter doesnt. they may say a prayer 2xs a yr. i feel bad for them.

          • Moa

            “muslims of semi practice islam”
            These are called “apostates”. Guess what? pious Muslims are commanded (by their religion) to kill apostates.

            The biggest danger to Muslims is other Muslims!

          • laura r

            i wonder how much of that is going on in the US? dearborne? (maybe). brooklyn? (i doute there). i know this is rampant in europe. canada?

          • Veracious_one

            who would the oppressed Muslim oppressors be? and why do you not see the oppressed Muslims doing anything about it?

          • Minny mouses

            The oppressed muslims are not following Islam and are murdered by the religious muslims who follow the koran and hadiths. Muslims will always lie, cheat and steal and try to kill you in the end, it is the nature of the beast. Just like a tiger cannot have spots, Islam is a political statement designed to deceive non-Muslims, rob from them and murder them.

            Why do you think there are not millions of Muslims out marching against the terrorist or radicals? The reason is that there is only one Islam and the radicals are following the laws put down.

            Hitler took many ideas from Islam and the Muslims were great friends of Hitlers, but were angry that he wasn’t killing the Jews quickly enough for them. Is there such a thing as Naziphobia? It is the same as Islamaphobia

          • Moa

            This site is anti *ISLAM*.

            Please note, laura r
            ISLAM == an ideology
            MUSLIM == a person

            This site respects Muslims, it opposes Islam and Sharia (the evil ideology and its political aspect).

            Until you get the difference, laura, you’ll always sound ignorant.

            If you want to help Muslims (that is, people) you need to get clued up.

          • Hktony

            Actually I dislike Islam and in general most Muslims for supporting Islam. I cannot see how you separate the two. I don’t actually want to help Muslims. It’s not my job I would rather help someone who loves democracy and the rule of law. Why do we need to help them? The only help would be to contribute to them leaving the west alone.

      • kilfincelt

        Correction, they are anti-Islamists as any freedom loving person should be. Islam is an anti-semitic, christianophobic, anti-atheistic, anti-agonistic, anti-polytheistic and anti any other religion out there. The proof is in the Qur’an.

        • laura r

          im jewish, im not a fan of islam as a way of life.

          • logdon

            Go to Ramalah or Karachi or Kabul and publicly proclaim that you are Jewish, then you’d get an inkling as to what this is all about.

          • kertitor

            “Go to Ramallah or Karachi……” or Sweden.

          • logdon

            Exactly!

      • Softly Bob

        Nothing wrong with that. Islam is evil, or perhaps you’ve been asleep for the last ten years. Next you’ll be complaining that we’re anti-terrorist or anti-murder!

      • Drakken

        It is amusing to note that as a Jew, you give quarter to a religion and its followers, that will never quit trying to eliminate you all, no matter what it takes.

        • laura r

          read my additional comments for clarity. but now since you mentioned it, my great grandmother wore a headscarf. they were observant. a headscarf is no issue to me. modesty is no issue to me. i explained in one of my comments why she was treated well.

          • Drakken

            My dear, you are trying to rationalize Islamic behavior. The day is now here, where I do not care what kind of muslim they are, I want them all out, every bloody one of them and has history has proved time and time again, it will come to a very bloody conclusion. Sorry dear, but the day is coming soon where your actually going to have to get your hands dirty.

          • laura r

            if a head scarf for you is “islamic behavior” it is also othodox jewish behavior. choose your battles carefully. focusing on a scarf, is like focusing on the “hoodie”. im not relgious, but if i have a bad hair day i wear a scarf, its also a fashion accessory. arrest me for treason.

          • Drakken

            You know bloody well that is not what I am talking about.

          • laura r

            i know what you are talking about. the problem is radicals, millions of them. the REAL problem is the US & european govts who are behind this.

          • Drakken

            There is no such thing as radical islam, there is only islam period, and one way or another it must be eliminated from our western shores and I don’t give a rats azz what it takes to get it done.

          • Angus Robertson

            laura r,
            The radicals are not the problem, they are merely a symptom. There are 10,000 or so members of the Saudi royal family. The Sauds rule through religion, export religion and tell people that being highly religious is awesome. Islam makes their people happy and under control. The Sauds get to keep all their oil money and everybody is happy.
            What can we do about it? Nothing, because the Americans protect the Sauds. 13 years ago some Saudis, from a group led by a Saudi, financed by Saudis and spouting the variant of Islam taught by the Saudis killed lots of Americans – nothing happened.
            The problem is the Saudi – American alliance.

          • Veracious_one

            Islamic law (Sharia) requires women to cover themselves. The practical application in modern Muslim countries varies with a combination of individual taste and social expectation. The Taliban actually require full burqas (covering everything, including a mesh for the eyes), while the formerly secular governments of Turkey and Tunisia actually banned headscarves in public buildings (the bans have since been lifted following the Islamist ascension).

            The head covering is interpreted as a symbol of male domination by most critics and by many Muslim women who fight for the right to dress as they please. In December of 2007, a father in Canada beat his 16-year-old daughter to death for refusing to wear the hijab (headscarf).

            Some insist that the veil is not mandated by the religion, although they do not have anything within the sacred texts to counter the passages in which Muhammad instructed its use. In fact, verse 24:60 says that the veil is only optional for unmarried women who are too old to have children, and even then the freedom to uncover the head is discouraged.

            CAIR’s Jamal Badawi, often held up as a moderate Muslim scholar, insists that the hijab is “a command of Allah to Muslim women” and should be “the duty of the state” to enforce it.

            Some women do wear the hijab by choice, but it is impossible to say what percentage, since the pressure to cover ones head can be either subtle or pronounced. In 2011, an imam at a supposedly moderate mosque in Sammamish, Washington claimed that Muslim wives wear the hijab because they want to, but then stated that they may be “punished” if they refuse. In Pakistan, uncovered women are routinely attacked with acid. In Iran, Basij fundamentalists have raped and killed dress code violators.

            Clerics, such as Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, have said that unveiled victims of public rape invited their attackers: “If I came across a rape crime – kidnap and violation of honour – I would discipline the man and order that the woman be arrested and jailed for life.’ Why would you do this, Rafihi? He says because if she had not left the meat uncovered, the cat wouldn’t have snatched it… If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street, on the pavement, in a garden, in a park or in the backyard, without a cover and the cats eat it, is it the fault of the cat or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem.”

            In keeping with this theme, Muslim rapists in the West have been known to credit their motivation to the victim’s choice of dress (one such example being from Australia in 2011). It is somewhat obvious that many women rely on the veil for for protection against unwanted male attention. Even non-Muslim residents and Western visitors to the Islamic world often find it necessary to cover themselves so as to avoid the harassment of Muslim men on the street.

            Veils and burqas are becoming more common in Muslim countries with the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism. In the West, they are gradually becoming a chic statement of political protest or a symbol of distinction.

          • wileyvet

            Good post. I think I have read that Muhammad insisted that Muslim women wear it to distinguish them from infidels, so that when Mo and his gang went on a booty call, they could easily separate the Muslim women from those that were fair game, those that they could “possess with the right hand” i.e. slaves. I’m not sure if it is in the Koran or Hadith. Sorry, I should have scrolled down a little further, to read your other excellent posts. Cheers.

          • laura r

            been studying this issue for several years. there is robert spencer pam geller, walid shoebot, ect. have seen 100s of vids from all sides, read the books, watch S.A. t.v. your comment is well written, also true. all i meant (i repeat) is that sometimes comments on this site are infantile & offensive. rather than addressing serious issues, it just name calling. this feeds the so called “islamophobia”. i lived in 2 major US third world cities, had contact w/islamic people every day, all levels on the food chain. 2 of the drivers from boston cab comp blew up logan airport, they lived near me, & yes i knew who they were. i was shoulder to shoulder w/bin ladins family in cafes/restaurants in boston. (they were mostly students from BU, & their families). also arabs on rodeo drive in beverly hills in the early 90s. everyday in NYC in taxies (not always pleasent) w/the koran playing. the mosque was right down the street from where i stayed. tell your friends here to be careful who they call stupid. im not only book smart, but i have been around the block.

          • Veracious_one

            If Corey Saylor, Director of the Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia, and the rest of the thugs at Hamas-linked CAIR really want to end “Islamophobia,” here is how they can accomplish it. They can call upon Muslim individuals and groups to:

            1. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.
            2. Renounce definitively, sincerely, honestly, and in deeds, not just in comforting words, not just “terrorism,” but any intention to replace Western constitutions (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Sharia even by peaceful means. In line with this, clarify what is meant by their condemnations of the killing of innocent people by stating unequivocally that non-Muslim civilians, including Israelis, are innocent people, teaching accordingly in mosques and Islamic schools, and behaving in accord with these new teachings.
            3. Teach, again sincerely and honestly, in transparent and verifiable ways in mosques and Islamic schools, the imperative of Muslims coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis, and act accordingly.
            4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach sincerely against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.
            5. Actively and honestly work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

            If Muslims did those five things, voila! “Islamophobia” would vanish! But then Nihad Awad, Ibrahim Hooper and Corey Saylor, to say nothing of sinister supremacists such as Hussam Ayloush, would have to find gainful employ. It ain’t gonna happen.

          • laura r

            its the US/european govt that keeps it this way. try bringing that to the table @ the U.N. this is the fault of the govt, there are too many payoffs. SA has the cash, the politicians take. thats an over simplified version, the summery.

          • Veracious_one

            a lot of people wear head coverings,,,Muslims are the only ones forced to….. The reason is that a covering of cloth is supposed to keep the sexual appetites of passing men at bay when women travel outside the home. This can actually save a woman’s life, since she is usually assumed to bear the responsibility of unlawful sexual encounters.

          • Veracious_one

            Quran (33:59) – “Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them…”

            Quran (24:31) – “And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known.” The woman is not only supposed to cover herself, except with relatives, but to look down, so as to avoid making eye-contact with men.

            Qur’an (33:55) – “It shall be no crime in them as to their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their woman, or the slaves which their right hands possess, if they speak to them unveiled” A woman is only allowed to present herself unveiled to family and slaves.

          • Veracious_one

            From the Hadith:

            Bukhari (6:321) – Muhammad is asked whether it is right for a young woman to leave her house without a veil. He replies, “She should cover herself with the veil of her companion.”

            Bukhari (60:282) – After Muhammad issued the command (Qur’an 24:31) for women to cover themselves, the women responded by tearing up sheets to cover their faces.

            Abu Dawud (32:4092) – The Apostle of Allah… said: “O Asma’, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands” This was according to Aisha.

            Abu Dawud (2:641) – The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil.

            Bukhari (52:250) – [The Prophet said] “It is not permissible for a man to be alone with a woman, and no lady should travel except with a Muhram (i.e. her husband or a person whom she cannot marry in any case for ever; e.g. her father, brother, etc.).” – Neither is a woman allowed to travel by herself

  • Andrew

    Ironically, I remember reading an article about someone tried the inverse of this in the “socialist paradise” of Malmo, Sweden with a kipot and to put it mildly,came away disturbed by the experience. So much for Liberal Western “equality.”

  • Infidel4Ever

    As usual, reality collides with leftist pre-conceived notions. It happens often enough you think they would start wising up.

  • bigfred41

    At least that one was honest enough to admit what she discovered, which
    is rare among liberals. She is likely just the victim of liberal
    brainwashing by school and the media. Maybe she can change.

    I once saw a Dr. Phil episode (I know, shoot me :) where he had a white
    “racist” get done up as if black and go to a black neighborhood. They
    treated him normally. Then, while still done up, he went to a white
    neighborhood, slouched against a building like a thug and shouted out to
    passersby, “hey, got the time?” They ignored him, of course, This, to
    Dr. Pril, was proof that whitey be racist because of the way that the passersby ignored him. Dr. Phil is a confirmed liberal bigot who will never change.

  • DogmaelJones1

    Maybe all those people were being extra nice for fear of being blown up.

    • kertitor

      It is not fear only. It is Stockholm syndrome

  • Veracious_one

    She should complete her experiment by going to Riyadh or Mogadishu to walk the streets for a week dressed as a western woman wearing jeans, a nice blouse and no head covering,,,,just to see if she can spot a difference in the treatment of women that Muslims would bestow upon her…she could report back when she returns…if she survives…

  • iluvisrael

    This site is islamoSAVVY

  • wileyvet

    You cannot reject any part of Allah’s message or that of his prophet and be a “good” Muslim. The Koran is very specific in regards to a Muslim’s duty. It is to wage jihad, that is ceaseless warfare, until the entire world is brought to “the truth” of Allah. Dying for that cause is the highest honour to a Muslim. They love death more than we love life. Muslims believe, that it is Allah’s will to rule over all others, because they have either strayed from the truth or corrupted it. In either event, the unbelievers and People of the Book must be brought under Islam, as converts or Dhimmis. There is the Land of Islam and the Land of war. All those in non-Islamic countries are in the Land of war, and it is incumbent on all Muslims to wage war on them until they fall into the Land of Islam. Once the entire world heeds the call, then it will be the Land of Peace under Sharia. If you are an infidel, Muslims must hate you, for no other reason than you are not a Muslim, and fight you because you stand in the way of the aspiration, indeed the divine plan, of the umma and restoration of the Caliphate. I know people have a hard time accepting this, but this is Islam. So if that is what a Muslim wishes for me, then yes I am anti-Muslim.

  • De Doc

    So Cannucks are racist when she wears jeans, T-shirt and ball cap, but nicer, though still racist when she wears the hijab? You really can’t win this argument, when the conclusion is always the same: RACIST NO MATTER WHAT!

    I wonder what reaction she’d receive wearing cut-off shorts and midriff baring top, while walking into a Muslim majority enclave?

    • wileyvet

      Dear Sir,
      S/O As a white male Canadian, I find your use of the term Canuck offensive and insensitive. I don’t know why, just that I am supposed to be offended. I have suffered from that epithet all my life, and it’s time to stop the hurt. S/Off

  • edlancey

    It’s like “African-Americans”, for all their whining, they are grovelled to constantly by people scared to be seen as rayyyccist

  • Douglas J. Bender

    Has no one considered the possibility that the young lady is ugly, and wearing the hijab served to hide some of this, resulting in people being more friendly to her?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      It still proves the point if she was treated worse for her appearance than she was for being part of a supposedly demonized group.

      • Douglas J. Bender

        I was speaking mostly tongue-in-hijab.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          It’s fine. It’s just that some people might think you had a valid point.

  • Crazycatkid

    It’s a falsity that one is either anti or pro Islam. The truth is the issue. Islam is what it is. If that’s your faith or you support it’s tenets, then you do. If you take issue with it then you do not support it. Pointing fingers of “hater” is a very childish, malicious attempt to hide what Islam is.
    Raised to hate Jews and Christians? Then, you may very well do so. Rarely are Christians or Jews raised to hate anyone. Therein lies our great weakness.
    Muslim women, often polite and sweet natured coworkers, dot our Western world and seem innocuous and neighborly….and typically devout.
    If only we could be sure our culture and faiths would remain respected ( they are not ) and the constant broadcasting of lies and hate about Jews and Israel would stop, Islamic money stop running our universities, slavery in the Muslim world was abolished, women have rights to an intact body, clothing choices, testimony and driving, and current killings of Middle East/African Christians were NOT part of these sweet ladies’ faith. But it all is.
    So far, no credible “moderate” Muslims have been found.
    Sadly.

  • Rob Hoey

    People in the West are generally very accepting and “nice.” Unfortunately, this can lead to us being naiive about Islam and its not-so-nice attitudes toward women, Christians, Jews, all other infidels, and gays. It’s simply part of their scripture. This experiment doesn’t surprise me, but flip it around where a member of the aforementioned groups go to an Islamic nation, and see what happens to them. Rudeness would be a pleasure in comparison.

  • mohdanga

    Didn’t know Islam was a race.
    We are so racist that we allow millions of Muslims (to our detriment) to settle in the West. Be interesting to see what happens when they reach say, 10% of the population. France, Britain and Scandanavia are already experiencing the enrichment brought on by these vibrant immigrants.

  • Mudpuppy

    I don’t work hard to prove anything of the sort. If you ask me, I’ll tell you exactly what I think of Islam and what we should do about it and it’s adherents. I suppose that makes me “Islamophobic” in their eyes. I don’t really care. I am certainly not “more welcoming” to them. Why people bend over backwards for those barbarians is a mystery to me. Maybe they think they will saw off their heads last. Oh, and Islam is NOT a race. It’s an evil ideology masquerading as a religion. It’s Satan’s crowning achievement of deception.

  • Cliff Arroyo

    The nice treatment is only a temporary setback. Soon it will be spun as ‘yeah they were nice but for all the wrong reasons! There niceness was marginalizing, stinks of non-muslim privelege and is in fact tantamount to a painful series of microagressions!

    And once again the glass is half empty!

  • SEGrady

    Though I wonder if any steps were taken to remove confounding factors like “fear”. Some people may have felt afraid to be anything but nice for fear they might be targeted as racist, etc. Not to mention potential backlash from the Muslim community and groups like CAIR

  • Veracious_one

    Now here’s a point you might deeply consider: The neologism “Islamophobia” did not simply emerge ex nihilo. It was invented, deliberately, by a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, the International Institute for Islamic Thought, which is based in Northern Virginia. If that name dimly rings a bell, it should: I’ve mentioned it before, and it’s particularly important because it was co-founded by Anwar Ibrahim–the hero of Moderate Islam who is now trotting around the globe comparing his plight to that of Aung San Suu Kyi.

    Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, a former member of the IIIT who has renounced the group in disgust, was an eyewitness to the creation of the word. “This loathsome term,” he writes,

    is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.

    In another article concerning the many moderate Muslims whose voices have been drowned out by Saudi-financed Muslim Brotherhood front groups, Muhammad describes the strategy behind the word’s invention:

    In an effort to silence critics of political Islam, advocates needed to come up with terminology that would enable them to portray themselves as victims. Muhammad said he was present when his then-allies, meeting at the offices of the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT) in Northern Virginia years ago, coined the term “Islamophobia.”

    Muhammad said the Islamists decided to emulate the homosexual activists who used the term “homophobia” to silence critics. He said the group meeting at IIIT saw “Islamophobia” as a way to “beat up their critics.”

  • Veracious_one

    “…i am responding to the comment from verarcious_one: “islamophobia is a muslim invention” that is a crazy comment as this site IS islamophobic”
    no, it’s not a crazy statement…it’s a truthful one and you are using the word “Islamophobia” exactly as the Muslims who invented it intended it to be used…

  • Softly Bob

    My apologies. Please be clearer next time. I remember you from before and I did think it was out of character for you.
    My post still stands. Pretend that I was replying to somebody else instead of you, because that is the answer that I would have given had your comment meant what I thought it meant.

  • laura r

    i am aware of who invented the word phobic. what im trying to say is that when there are vile graphic obcene comments on this site, it gives them all the more reason to cry “phobic”. as for the girl in the headscarf: she didnt look like a threat, like a male muslim gang member would. she just looked like a traditional woman. so yes they were nice to her. also people may feel sorry for muslim ladies, as they may not have a choice living @ home or married.

  • Veracious_one

    “… what im trying to say is that when there are vile graphic obcene comments on this site, it gives them all the more reason to cry “phobic”.
    maybe you should spend some time on Muslim websites to explain to them just how their actions aren’t justified in the Qur’an and just how their actions are giving Islam a bad name…
    hmmmm voting yourself up is a nice touch…

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    Moreover there is considerably more Islamophobia in USA than in Canada. I do not deny that there are evil Muslims, but the idea that they are all evil, jihadists, etc. is fed by propaganda that fits into the agenda of the US military-industrial complex. Obama is as much a puppet of that complex as any other President. He has been responsible for the murder of many innocents by drones – how come the writers here never decry that?

  • Minny mouses

    You don’t know about vile graphic obscenity unless you look at Islam. There is nothing more vile existing today. Did you see the article/picture of the 200 little boys on their way to school in Nigeria who were murdered by the Boko Haram? That was yesterday. The previous day, there were 100 girls aged 15-18 kidnapped by this group. Name a day and Islam is murdering, raping, wiping, others Where Islam exists, so does hatred, pedophilia, murders, rapes, intolerance, etc etc

  • laura r

    thankyou. i have always said that comments should stay on the issue. not scream vulgar lunatic irrational name calling. then are cut pasted & posted elsewhere. people thinking up gross bloody “punishments” for muslims is really base. i see this also on gellers site, bare naked islam. im not interested in how some guy wants to execute another guy. or that anyone wearing a headscarf needs to be violently attacked or deported. islamic girls in boston wore jeans & a scarf. i wear jeans & a scarf, im not islamic. todays comments are fine.

  • laura r

    go into edit, then erase. then write delete. just an idea. thanks for the upvote about my close contact w/muslims.

  • Softly Bob

    I think that people are naturally (and understandably) upset by Islam. What these people do can make us very angry and fearful for the future.
    Name-calling, bad language and vitriol is perfectly understandable, childish maybe but perfectly understandable. Hatred creates hatred. The difference is that people on here don’t necessarily mean it – we’re letting off steam. When these mad Muslim radicals say it, they usually mean it!

  • laura r

    have seen zillions, i get spam in arabic. there are ALL kinds of muslims.

  • Veracious_one

    “When the world is compelled to coin a new term to take account of increasingly widespread bigotry — that is a sad and troubling development,” Annan said. “Such is the case with ‘Islamophobia.’ The word seems to have emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Today, the weight of history and the fallout of recent developments have left many Muslims around the world feeling aggravated and misunderstood, concerned about the erosion of their rights and even fearing for their physical safety.”
    — Former Secretary-General of the U.N. Kofi Annan

    The “world” was not “compelled to coin a new term” — it was Muslims who coined the word, and they did so deliberately. For that word so deliberately kept undefined is merely a weapon employed to deflect criticism, to label all those who may offer criticism of Islam and of its adherents, basing their criticism not on some blind prejudice, but on their own observations and study. Indeed, the entire Western world — its political leaders, its media, its university departments of Middle Eastern studies — have all been engaged in a massive effort to deflect criticism or disarm it. It is despite all that that Infidels everywhere are coming to some conclusions about Islam, and the more they study, and the more they observe, and the more “Interfaith” gatherings and little Muslim Outreach evenings they attend, all of which end up being dismal exercises in Taqiyya and Tu-Quoque argumentation, the more wary, and critical, and indignant, and sometimes more, they become. The game is up. From a Beslan school full of children to a Bali nightclub full of revellers, from Madrid subways to Moscow theatres, from New York skyscrapers to Najaf mosques (where Sadr’s bezonians tortured, killed, and stacked the bodies of Iraqis who had opposed their reign of terror), from Istanbul to India, the evidence just keeps piling up. And the evidence, too, of what is actually in the Qur’an and hadith and sira — and how many Infidels, a few years ago, even had heard of the “hadith” and the “sira,” or had any idea what was really in the Qur’an, or had ever heard of the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya — now online, and it can easily be read. And all the excuses, all the nonsense, can no longer be offered up — for we Infidels, fortunately, have the guidance of defectors from Islam, ex-Muslims such as Ibn Warraq (whose own guide to debating Muslims, and how not to be intimidated or snookered, will for many prove invaluable).

    Kofi Annan, as Oriana Fallaci notes in her Fallaci Intervista Fallaci, looks, on the surface, to be far more presentable, and far more decent, and far more intelligent — grey hair, gravelly voice, grave mien — than in fact he is. The words quoted above are the words of a simpleton. Perhaps Edward Mortimer, that early admirer of Khomeini and Nazi-Zionist conspiracy theorist, who feels a special responsibility to protect Islam, is the main puppet-master here, or perhaps it is Ms. Rishmawi (the “Palestinian” behind-the-scenes operative who was so influential with Mary Robinson, she of the antisemitic lynch-mob meeting in Durban in September 2001). Or perhaps it is Annan — the man on whose watch for more black African deaths occurred than anyone since Leopold III of Belgium — really thinks that the word “Islamophobia” came into use because it actually described a real, and deplorable condition; that it describes an unfair, unjust, prejudiced and irrational (i.e. without foundation, against reason and logic) phobia, or hatred, of Islam. What is unreasonable or irrational would be the opposite. That is, the continued ability of many Infidels to regard Islam as just another “religion” worthy of respect, perhaps at the edges a bit rough, but hijacked by a few extremists, or even many extremists, but having a decency at its core, a real religion of “peace” and “tolerance” as a number of Western leaders have insisted.

    If, upon reading and studying Qur’an and hadith and sira, and if, after looking around the world over the past few years, and if, after having studied the history of Jihad-conquest and Muslim behavior toward dhimmis — Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists — you do not feel a deep hostility toward the belief-system of Islam and toward its adherents (for the category of “moderate” is nearly meaningless, given the dangerous use to which “moderates” can be put in continuing to mislead the unwary Infidels), then it is you who are irrational, and need to have your head examined.

    The word “Islamophobia” must be held up for inspection, its users constantly asked precisely how they would define that word, and they should be put on the defensive for waving about what is clearly meant to be a scare-word that will silence criticism.

    So let us ask them which of the following criticisms of Islam is to be considered “Islamophobic”:

    1) Muhammad is a role-model for all time. Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and had sexual intercourse with her when she was 9. I find appalling that Muslims consider this act of Muhammad to be that of the man who is in every way a role model, and hence to be emulated. In particular, I am appalled that virtually the first act of the Ayatollah Khomeini, a very orthodox and learned Shi’a theologian, was to lower the marriageable age of girls in Iran to 9 — because, of course, it was Aisha’s age when Muhammad had sexual relations with her.

    2) I find appalling that Islam provides a kind of Total Regulation of the Universe, so that its adherents are constantly asking for advise as to whether or not, for example, they can have wear their hair in a certain way, grow their beards in a certain way, wish an Infidel a Merry Christmas (absolutely not!).

    3) I find appalling the religiously-sanctioned doctrine of taqiyya — would you like some quotes, sir, about what it is, or would you like to google “taqiyya” and find its sources in the Qur’an?

    4) I find appalling many of the acts which Muhammad committed, including his massacre of the Banu Qurayza, his ordering the assassination of many of those he deemed his opponents, even an old man, a woman, or anyone whom, he thought, merely mocked him.

    5) I find appalling the hatred expressed throughout the Qur’an, the hadith, and the sira for Infidels — all Infidels.

    6) I find nauseating the imposition of the jizya on Infidels, the requirement that they wear identifying marks on their clothes and dwellings, that they not be able to build or repair houses of worship without the permission of Muslim authorities, that they must ride donkeys sidesaddle and dismount in the presence of Muslims, that they have no legal recourse against Muslims for they are not equal at law — and a hundred other things, designed to insure their permanent, as the canonical texts say, “humiliation.”

    7) I find the mass murder of 60-70 million Hindus, over 250 years of Mughal rule, and the destruction of tens of thousands of artifacts and Hindu (and Buddhist) temples, some of the Hindu ones listed in works by Sita Ram Goel, appalling.

    8) I find the 1300-year history of the persecution of the Zoroastrians, some of it continuing to this day, according the great scholar of Zoroastrianism, Mary Boyce, which has led to their reduction to a mere 150,000, something to deplore. There are piquant details in her works, including the deliberate torture and killing of dogs (which are revered by Zoroastrians), even by small Muslim children who are taught to so behave.

    9) I find the record of Muslim intellectual achievement lacking, and I attribute this lack to the failure to encourage free and skeptical inquiry, which is necessary for, among other things, the development of modern science.

    10) I deplore the prohibition on sculpture or on paintings of living things. I deplore the horrific vandalism and destruction of Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, Hindu, and Buddhist sites.

    11) I deplore the Muslim jurisprudence which renders all treaties between Infidels and Muslims worthless from the viewpoint of the Infidels, though worth a great deal from the viewpoint of the Muslims, for they are only signing a “hudna,” a truce-treaty rather than a true peace-treaty — and because they must go to war against the Infidel, or press their Jihad against the Infidel in other ways, on the model of the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya, no Infidel state or people can ever trust a treaty with Muslims.

    12) I deplore the speech of Mahathir Mohammad, so roundly applauded last year, in which he called for the “development” not of human potential, not of art and science, but essentially of weapons technology and the use of harnessing and encouraging Muslim “brain power” for the sole purpose of defeating the Infidels, as a reading of that entire speech makes absolutely clear. Here — would you like me to read it now for the audience?

    13) I deplore the fact that Muslims are taught, and they seem to have taken those teachings to heart, to offer their loyalty only to fellow Muslims, the umma al-islamiyya, and never to Infidels, or to the Infidel nation-state to which they have uttered an oath of allegiance but apparently such an oath must be an act of perjury, because such loyalty is impossible. Am I wrong? Show me exactly what I have misunderstood about Islam.

    14) I deplore the ululations of pleasure over acts of terrorism, the delight shown by delighted and celebrating crowds in Cairo, Ramallah, Khartoum, Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, and of course all over Saudi Arabia, when news of the World Trade Center attacks was known — and I can, if you wish, supply the reports from those capitals which show this to have taken place. I attribute statements of exultation about the “Infidels” deserving it to the fact that Islamic tenets view the world as a war between the Believers and the Infidels.

    15) On that score, I deplore that mad division of the world between Dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb, and the requirement that there be uncompromising hostility between the two, until the final triumph of the former, and the permanent subjugation, and incorporation into it, of the latter.

    16) I deplore the sexual inequality and mistreatment of women which I believe I can show has a clear basis in the canonical Islamic texts, and is not simply, pace Ebadi and other quasi-”reformers,” a “cultural” matter.

    17) I deplore the fact that Infidels feel, with justice, unsafe in almost every Muslim country, but that Muslims treat the Infidel countries, and their inhabitants, with disdain, arrogance, and endless demands for them to bend, to change, to what Muslims want — whether it be to remove crucifixes, or change the laws of laicity in France, or to demand that “hate speech” laws be extended in England so as to prevent any serious and sober criticism of Islam.

    18) I deplore the emphasis on the collective, and the hatred for the autonomy of the individual. In particular, I believe that someone born into Islam has a perfect right to leave Islam if he or she chooses — and that there should be no punishment, much less the murderous punishment so often inflicted.

    19) I find the record of Muslim political despotism to be almost complete — with the exception of those Muslim countries and regimes that have, as Ataturk did, carried out a series of measures to limit and constrain Islam.

    20) I deplore the fact that while Muslims claim it is a “universalist” religion, it has been a vehicle for Arab imperialism, causing those conquered and Islamized in some cases to forget, or become indifferent or even hostile to, their own pre-Islamic histories. The requirement that the Qur’an be read in Arabic (one of the first things Ataturk did was commission a Turkish Qur’an and tafsir, or commentary), and the belief by many Muslims that the ideal form of society can be derived from the Sunna of 7th century Arabia, and that their own societies are worth little, is an imperialism that goes to culture and to history, and is the worst and most complete kind.

    21) I deplore the attacks on ex-Muslims who often must live in fear. I deplore the attacks on Theo van Gogh and others, and the absence of serious debate about the nature of Islam and of its reform — except as a means to further beguile and distract Infidels who are becoming more wary.

    22) I deplore the emptiness of the “Tu Quoque” arguments directed at Christians and Jews, based on a disingenuous quotation of passages — for example, from Leviticus — that are completely ignored and have not been invoked for two thousand years, and I deplore the rewriting of history so that a Muslim professor can tell an American university audience that “the Ku Klux Klan used to crucify (!) African-Americans, everyone standing around during the crucifixion singing Christian hymns (!).”

    23) I deplore the phony appeals of the “we all share one Abrahamic faith” and “we are the three monotheisms” when, to my mind, a Christian or a Jew has far less to fear from, and in the end far more in common with, any practicing polytheistic Hindu.

    24) I do not think Islam, which is based on the idea of world-conquest, not of accommodation, and whose adherents do not believe in Western pluralism except insofar as this can be used as an instrument, temporarily most useful, to protect the position of Islam until its adherents have firmly established themselves.

    25) I deplore the view, in Islam, that it is not a saving of an individual soul that is involved when one conducts Da’wa or the Call to Islam, but rather, something that appears to be much more like signing someone up for the Army of Islam. He need not have read all the fine print; he need not know Islamic tenets; he need not even have read or know what is in sira and hadith or much of the Qur’an; he need only recite a single sentence. That does not show a deep concern for the nature of the conversion (sorry, “reversion”).

    26) I deplore the sentiment that “Islam is to dominate and not to be dominated.” I deplore the sentiment “War is deception” as uttered by Muhammad. I deplore what has happened over 1350 years, in vast swaths of territory, formerly filled with Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, much of which is now today almost monotonously Islamic. I do not think Islam welcomes any diversity if it means the possibility of full equality for non-Muslims.

    27) I deplore the fact that slavery is permitted in Islam, that it is discussed in the Qur’an, that it was suppressed in 19th century Arabia only through the influence of British naval power in the Gulf; that it was formally done away with in Saudi Arabia only in 1962; that it still exists in Mali, and the Sudan, and even Mauritania; that it may exist in the Arabian interior, but certainly the treatment of the Thai, Filipino, Indian and other female house workers in Arab households amounts to slavery, and it is no accident that there has never been a Muslim William Wilberforce.

    I could go on, and am prepared to adduce history, and quotations from the canonical texts. And so are hundreds of thousands of Infidels who have looked into Islam, or in their own countries, had a close look at the Muslim populations which have made their own Infidel existences far more unpleasant, expensive, and dangerous than they would otherwise be.

    If this is “Islamophobia” — show me exactly why it is irrational (i.e. not based on facts or observable behavior, or a study of history), an “irrational” dislike or even hatred of Islam. If you cannot show that, then perhaps the word should not be invoked. But if you do invoke it, be prepared to have copious quotations from Qur’an and hadith and sira constantly presented to audiences so that they may judge for themselves, without the “guidance” of apologists for Islam, both Muslim and non-Muslim

  • Minny mouses

    History: WWII displaced millions and most Germans who were killed were not Nazis. When you have something as evil as Islam and Nazis, there will be collateral damage. It is just a fact of life. Why decry those who are trying to make the world safer for you and I?

    Islamaphobia doesn’t exist. If you learn about Islam and are not a Muslim, you have a good reason to fear it, just as you would fear a hungry lion sitting next to you in an empty field.That is not phobia, it is justified fear.

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    You go on and give history and I can give history of US killing innocents and fomenting regime change when people came along whom USA did not like, including those who aimed to reform Islam – Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein being cases in point. (Obama and Bush and Obama and Romney or any other Republican candidate are just flip sides of the same coin.)The overthrow of an Iranian premier in 1953 through CIA connivance, the overthrow of Allende in Chile 1973. I think I and many others have a much higher risk of being murdered by the FBI or CIA than by some boogey-man “dhimmi-hater.”

  • Veracious_one

    You failed to address the issue of ‘Islamophobia”….Why do you think Muslims use the term every time it is pointed out that Muslims quote the Qur’an when they commit acts of violence?

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    Muslims who commit acts of violence allegedly (according to the biased Western media) shout “Allahu Akbar” which is not same as quoting from Qur’an. Which Muslims use the term? Perhaps they use the term because certain people use individual acts to foment Islamophobia – meaning the view that all Muslims are threats, potential terrorists. A white supremacist just murdered 3 people on Sunday in Kansas whom he assumes were Jewish. Should we now fear all white men?

  • Veracious_one

    enabling Islamic jihad is the true goal of “Islamophobia’

  • Minny mouses

    There is no white man bible that commands white men to kill Jews, but the koran is very clear on hatred and killing. Most of the koran and hadiths are about who to hate, how to hate, how to kill, when to lie, etc. ANY Muslim who becomes devout will become a murderer to get closer to Allah, who loves death and blood.

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    Really? Have you actually sat down and talked to a single Muslim? Or are you basing your assessment of what the Koran commands and does not command on what the pro-military-industrial complex and pro-NWO propaganda (such as this webpage) say about the Koran?

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    Comparing Islam and Nazism is irrelevant. Muslims did not give Americans a second thought until the US government started interfering in the Middle East and fomenting trouble there to suit the purposes of American and British corporations after WWII. Call it Islamophobia, racism against Muslims or as the late scholar Edward Said termed it – “cultural imperialism” of the West. It is very real and it is as much, if not more, of a threat to world peace than any “jihadism.”

  • Minny mouses

    2BlackCoffee71 -You write, “Comparing Islam and Nazism is irrelevant. Muslims did not give Americans a second thought until the US government started interfering in the Middle East and fomenting trouble there to suit the purposes of American and British corporations after WWII”

    That is not based on any type of fact. In fact, MUSLIMS WERE MURDERING AMERICANS AS FAR BACK AS THE 1700′S before America even declared independence.

    Read up on the First Barbary War, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and their trip to stop the murdering of Americans who had never touched any muslim.

    Your ignorance is great, so prior to commenting again LEARN.

    Furthermore, Hitler got many of his ideas from Islam and Muslims have always been with the Nazis.

  • 2BlackCoffee71

    As far as Barbary Wars – a relevant query is what were Americans doing there? Having interfered with what went on in North Africa? The Founding Fathers were quite comfortable with having robbed the Native Americans off their land, so they were probably trying to rob the pirates of the pirates’ stolen goods. Hitler got his ideas from Islam? I do not recall Hitler having even mentioned Islam or Muslims in Mein Kampf. You want to believe the propaganda that Muslims are the enemy go right ahead. There are of course Muslims and Muslim leaders who use their position to gain power, territory and who have committed and commit gruesome atrocities. In fact Arab Muslims started the slave trade in Afrika long before Westerners got into it. It is an understatement when I say that they brutally exploited and oppressed black Afrikans who refused to convert to Islam. However the elites who control America have also committed atrocities to spread their power and increase their wealth. We need to understand what we are up against and stop being sheep. Though I am not Christian (my own beliefs are agnostic) it is worth quoting Jesus here – “let him who has not sinned cast the first stone.” All religions have their histories of extremism. The Inquisition of Christians and Crusades. More recently Jim Jones convinced his followers to have killed themselves in 1978. The point is all religions have their fanatics. Islam started up approximately six centuries after Christianity, and had not had, as far as I know, a serious reform movement yet – something along lines of Christian Reformation.