The Next Islamophobic Hate Thread

Chukcha

Electoral Member
Sep 19, 2006
215
1
18
--gopher

What I really hate is people who are so filled with their self-worth that they post in HUGE bold WORDS...but of course that could be a reflection of the fact the really have very little to say, so they post it big!!!:D

Anyway, what is, is what is...If you want to start a thread to support hatred you just go ahead, rant and rave.

For the others, l have some insightful information...

Proof of Muslims’ advocating and supporting wife beating-


http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=590wmv&ak=null [wife beaters]
wow!!! it's getting warmer and closer to the reality. Thanks Northstar, I shall spread this link around.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
```do you hate russians? ```

Nice change of subject. I'll take that as acknowledgement that what I have written is correct.

You probably missed an earlier post in which I indicated that I absolutely LOVE 19th century Russian classical literature. It is undoubtedly the world's finest literature. BTW, I have an original issue of Romanof's Three Pairs of Silk Stockings.

A question for you -- have you read Anna Poliovskaya's books or articles? What do you think about her recent murder?

Have you seen this article:

http://www.englishpen.org/writersintranslation/titlessupportedbytheprogramme/putinsrussia/

or this one [her final writing],


'A condemned woman'

The award-winning Russian journalist and author Anna Politkovskaya, a fearless reporter on the Chechen wars and critic of the Putin administration, was murdered in Moscow last weekend. In a previously unpublished article, she explains why, despite death threats, she had to continue writing

Saturday October 14, 2006
The Guardian


I am a pariah. That is the main result of my journalism throughout the years of the second Chechen war, and of publishing abroad a number of books about life in Russia and the Chechen war. In Moscow I am not invited to press conferences or gatherings that officials of the Kremlin administration might attend, in case the organisers are suspected of harbouring sympathies towards me. Despite this, all the top officials talk to me, at my request, when I am writing articles or conducting investigations - but only in secret, where they can't be observed, in the open air, in squares, in secret houses that we approach by different routes, like spies.

Article continues
The officials like talking to me. They are happy to give me information. They consult me and tell me what is going on at the top. But only in secret.

You don't get used to this, but you learn to live with it. It is exactly the way I have had to work throughout the second war in Chechnya. First I was hiding from the Russian federal troops, but always able to make contact clandestinely with individuals through trusted intermediaries, so that my informants would not be denounced to the top generals. When Putin's plan of Chechenisation succeeded (setting "good" Chechens loyal to the Kremlin to killing "bad" Chechens who opposed it), the same subterfuge extended to talking to "good" Chechen officials, whom of course I had known for a long time, and many of whom, before they were "good" officials, had sheltered me in their homes in the most trying months of the war. Now we can meet only in secret because I am a pariah, an enemy. Indeed, an incorrigible enemy not amenable to re-education.

I'm not joking. Some time ago Vladislav Surkov, deputy head of the presidential administration, explained that there were people who were enemies but whom you could talk sense into, and there were incorrigible enemies into whom you couldn't and who simply needed to be "cleansed" from the political arena.

So they are trying to cleanse it of me and others like me.

On 5 August 2006, I was standing in the middle of a crowd of women in the little central square of Kurchaloy, a dusty village in Chechnya. I was wearing a headscarf folded and tied in the manner favoured by many women of my age in Chechnya, not covering the head completely, but not leaving it uncovered either. This was essential if I was not to be identified, in which case nobody could say what might happen.

To one side of the crowd a man's tracksuit trousers were draped over the gas pipeline that runs the length of Kurchaloy. They were caked with blood. His severed head had been taken away by then and I didn't see it.

During the night of 27-28 July, two Chechen fighters had been ambushed on the outskirts of Kurchaloy by units loyal to the pro-Kremlin Ramzan Kadyrov. One, Adam Badaev, was captured and the other, Hoj-Ahmed Dushaev, a native of Kurchaloy, was killed. Towards dawn, not far short of 20 Zhiguli cars, full of armed people, drove into the centre of the village and up to the district police station. They had Dushaev's head with them. Two of the men suspended it in the centre of the village from the pipeline, and beneath it they hung the bloodstained trousers I was now seeing.

The armed men spent the next two hours photographing the head with their mobile phones.

The head was left there for 24 hours, after which militiamen removed it but left the trousers where they were. Agents of the procurator-general's office began investigating the scene of the fighting, and local people heard one of the officers ask a subordinate: "Have they finished sewing the head back on yet?"

The body of Dushaev, with its head now sewn back in place, was brought to the scene of the ambush and the procurator-general's office began examining the scene of the incident in accordance with normal investigative procedures.

I wrote about this in my newspaper, refraining from comment beyond dotting a few 'i's in respect of what had happened. I reached Chechnya at exactly the same time as the issue of the newspaper with the article. The women in the crowd tried to conceal me because they were sure the Kadyrov people would shoot me on the spot if they knew I was there. They reminded me that Kadyrov has publicly vowed to murder me. He actually said during a meeting of his government that he had had enough, and that Politkovskaya was a condemned woman. I was told about it by members of the government.

What for? For not writing the way Kadyrov wanted? "Anybody who is not one of us is an enemy." Surkov said so, and Surkov is Ramzan Kadyrov's main supporter in Putin's entourage.

"Ramzan told me, 'She is so stupid she doesn't know the value of money. I offered her money but she didn't take it,'" an old acquaintance, a senior officer in militia special forces, told me that same day. I met him secretly. He is "one of us", unlike me, and would face difficulties if we were caught conferring. When it was time for me to leave it was already evening, and he urged me to stay in this secure location. He was afraid I would be killed.

"You mustn't go out," he told me. "Ramzan is very angry with you."

I decided to leave nevertheless. Someone else was waiting for me in Grozny and we needed to talk through the night, also in secret. He offered to have me taken there in a militia car, but that struck me as even more risky. I would be a target for the fighters.

"Do they at least have guns in the house you are going to?" he continued anxiously. Throughout the war I have been caught in the middle. When some are threatening to kill you, you are protected by their enemies, but tomorrow the threat will come from somebody else.

Why am I going on at such length about this? Only in order to explain that people in Chechnya are afraid for me, and I find that very touching. They fear for me more than I fear for myself, and that is how I survive.

Why has Ramzan vowed to kill me? I once interviewed him and printed the interview just as he gave it, complete with all his characteristic moronic stupidity, ignorance, and satanic inclinations. Ramzan was sure I would completely rewrite the interview, and present him as intelligent and honourable. That is, after all, how the majority of journalists behave now, those who are "on our side".

Is that enough to make someone vow to kill you? The answer is as simple as the morality encouraged personally by Putin. "We are merciless to enemies of the Reich." "Who is not with us is against us." "Those who are against us must be destroyed."

"Why have you got such a bee in your bonnet about this severed head?" VasiliyPanchenkov asks me back in Moscow. He is director of the press office for the Interior Ministry troops, but a decent man. "Have you nothing better to worry about?" I am asking him to comment on the events in Kurchaloy for our newspaper. "Just forget it. Pretend it never happened. I'm asking you for your own good!"

But how can I forget it, when it did happen?

I loathe the Kremlin's line, elaborated by Surkov, dividing people into those who are "on our side", "not on our side", or even "on the other side". If a journalist is "on our side", he or she will get awards, respect, perhaps be invited to become a deputy in the Duma.

If a journalist is "not on our side", however, he or she will be deemed a supporter of the European democracies, of European values, and automatically become a pariah. That is the fate of all who oppose our "sovereign democracy", our "traditional Russian democracy". (What on earth that is supposed to be, nobody knows; but they swear allegiance to it nevertheless: "We are for sovereign democracy!")

I am not really a political animal. I have never joined any party and would consider it a mistake for a journalist, in Russia at least, to do so. I have never felt the urge to stand for the Duma, although there were years when I was invited to.

So what is the crime that has earned me this label of not being "one of us"? I have merely reported what I have witnessed, no more than that. I have written and, less frequently, I have spoken. I am even reluctant to comment, because it reminds me too much of the imposed opinions of my Soviet childhood and youth. It seems to me our readers are capable of interpreting what they read for themselves. That is why my principal genre is reportage, sometimes, admittedly, with my own interjections. I am not an investigating magistrate, but somebody who describes the life around us for those who cannot see it for themselves, because what is shown on television and written about in the overwhelming majority of newspapers is emasculated and doused with ideology. People know very little about life in other parts of their own country, and sometimes even in their own region.

The Kremlin responds by trying to block my access to information, its ideologists supposing that this is the best way to make my writing ineffectual. It is impossible, however, to stop someone fanatically dedicated to this profession of reporting the world around us. My life can be difficult, more often humiliating. I am not, after all, so young at 47 to keep encountering rejection and having my own pariah status rubbed in my face, but I can live with it.

I will not go into the other joys of the path I have chosen, the poisoning, the arrests, the threats in letters and over the internet, the telephoned death threats, the weekly summonses to the procurator-general's office to sign statements about practically every article I write (the first question being "How and where did you obtain this information?"). Of course I don't like the constant derisive articles about me which appear in other newspapers and on websites that have long presented me as the madwoman of Moscow. I find it disgusting to live this way; I would like a bit more understanding.

The main thing, however, is to get on with my job, to describe the life I see, to receive visitors every day in our editorial office who have nowhere else to bring their troubles, because the Kremlin finds their stories off-message, so that the only place they can be aired is in our newspaper, Novaya Gazeta.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
So what exactly is your point then Gopher?

Any critisism of any aspect of Islam is wrong?



BTW, I found the proof you asked for over in the human sheild thread, I've been waiting for you to say something on the matter.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Bear,


Sometimes you kinda confuse me -- on the one hand you criticize me then you say that you agree with me "yet again".

You accuse me of insulting you and then you say you didn't mean it.

You also accuse me of being smug without any basis and mistake a point of emphasis for snobbery.


OK, no real harm done. And BTW, you missed the fact that I answered your HRW reference in post 71 of that thread. You will note that it documents Israeli violations and only accuses Hezbollah of violations without actual concrete documentation. As you know, accusations do not constitute documentation or give grounds for conviction in a court of law.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Bear,


Sometimes you kinda confuse me -- on the one hand you criticize me then you say that you agree with me "yet again".

You accuse me of insulting you and then you say you didn't mean it.

You also accuse me of being smug without any basis and mistake a point of emphasis for snobbery.


OK, no real harm done. And BTW, you missed the fact that I answered your HRW reference in post 71 of that thread. You will note that it documents Israeli violations and only accuses Hezbollah of violations without actual concrete documentation. As you know, accusations do not constitute documentation or give grounds for conviction in a court of law.


I was just being flippent with you, you do have a tone, and I played on it. It wasn't recieved as I intended, and for that, I did apologise. And will again here, I'm sorry, I ment no offence.

I do see your point, but you have a tendency to dismiss each challenge and/or fact quite easily. the HRW quote is quite clear and it doesn't just accuse the Hezbollah, it says it has research to the contrary of your assertion that they did not use civilians as shields.

My point in this thread, as is many others, is, Islam is made up of so many factions and sects, that have taken the Quran in their own context and manipulated it to their doctrine. That is our platform. You seem unwilling to accept that as a legitamate platform and keep siting ancient Christian acts. Now here I agree with you, but on a contemparary field. The Church is still by defacto orders, killing people all over Africa. But they are not actively killing Muslims in the name of God, Bush made a faux pas with his speach, but he does not speak for Christians everywhere. As you and I can not speak for all aspects of Islam.
 

northstar

Electoral Member
Oct 9, 2006
560
0
16
Gopher the difference between these crimes is that Christianity doesn't use Holy Scriptures to justify these actions, our society criminalizes it and our media does not support or tolerate it. Furthermore a man laughing about it would be thrown in jail.

What l don't understand is how the Qur'an can justify it, and other socially unacceptable actions.How they can justify it and actually punish women for trying to escape the demoralizing and demeaning intent of these outrageous actions that find a foundation in Holy Scriptures.

If you have an answer then please share instead of these comments that equate the abuse we do not tolerate to abuse that is actually advocated.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Islam is made up of so many factions and sects, that have taken the Quran in their own context and manipulated it to their doctrine. That is our platform. You seem unwilling to accept that as a legitamate platform


Once again you have missed my earlier posts on the subject of Islamic factionalism. While there have been numerous posts on this forum in which certain bigoted types have said that Islam represents a monolithic threat to the West, I have stated previously that there is a Shiia-Sunni schism whose timeframe has surpassed that of the Catholic-Protestant schism. If you have read my earlier posts you would have looked up the www.shianews.com web site which is one of the best in the Internet. This site clearly demonstrates that the schism is longstanding, horribly violent, and is nowhere near cessation.

You have also missed my earlier posts on the subject of Marmaduke Pickthall and his teaching on the subject of historical and Koranic contextual interpretation. If you had read these posts you would know that I am very well informed on the subject of that so called "platform".

Please re-read each of my posts and you will see that you are completely wrong in your assessments of my posts.
 

northstar

Electoral Member
Oct 9, 2006
560
0
16
Fortunately l am not basing my education from your own views, which might very well be bigoted...so enjoy your little platform...
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Christianity doesn't use Holy Scriptures to justify these actions


Feminists may not agree with that argument. I am hardly qualified to answer for them but will take a stab at it: many years ago I took a collegiate course in feminist studies and several writings were used which claimed that the Bible promoted patriarchy and women's enslavement. I remember American feminist Betty Friedan speaking about that on TV in those days (early 1970s). Modern day feminists make the same claim today though much of that discourse has fallen into disfavor today.

Feminists decry the lack of female clergy and Christianity's prohibition of extending the ministry to women. While the churches use certain biblical quotes to deny women the pulpit, they fail to note that the Book of Romans gives a complete roster of female clergy meaning that this denial is without justification.

I will certainly agree that neither the Bible nor the Koran calls for enslaving women. Unfortunately, clergymen from both religions misuse both books to justify these actions. Strangely, however, as I have previously shown on these pages, the vast majority of newly converted Muslims worldwide are women! Therefore, this suggests that Islam is far less suppressive towards women as we Westerners often believe.
 

Chukcha

Electoral Member
Sep 19, 2006
215
1
18
Russophobia -- from your link:

"

The neutrality of this section is disputed."

BTW, wasn't Poland and Russia at war on several occasions? And didn't Stalin exile Armenians??

I can get some links later on if you wish ...
Stop right here, ok? this is my point, russians were slaughtered by others, jewish were slaughtered, armenians were slaughtered (by Turkish muslims, mostly, and one of the reasons was converting to Islam or die - any Armenian will confirm it Gopher);) ;) , and for you this is all inapproriate comparing to the muslim deaths. Which I still don't agree that russians are slaughtering the chechens, read about chechens betraying russians in WW2, at which consequenses russians were brutally murdered. The hate from the chechens were always present as I explained to you in my post about their history, they are very rancorous and unforgivable (for their unreasonable purpose to start with). It is almolst like what is happening in Israel, the arabs populated Ghaza, however, Ghaza used to be owned by the Jews previously, and now they claim that the Jews are the invaders. Nice stand Gopher, I wonder how much of a Jewish you are;)
 

Chukcha

Electoral Member
Sep 19, 2006
215
1
18
```do you hate russians? ```
No change of subject, just curious, because anyone who is opposing to your opinion is wrong. If someone on this forum posted that their family was brutally murdered by the muslim you will oppose to them or call them liers.

A question for you -- have you read Anna Poliovskaya's books or articles? What do you think about her recent murder?
No.
As many people as many opinions, you see her as a hero, someone else as a mercenary swine, for me, I don't care, these kind of people mostly do things for money. That is my opion though
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Chukcha's personal biases and hostilities could not be any more evident.

As for referring to humanitarian reporter Anna Polikovskaya as "swine", well that says more than enough to warrant no further reply.
 

Chukcha

Electoral Member
Sep 19, 2006
215
1
18
As for referring to humanitarian reporter Anna Polikovskaya as "swine", well that says more than enough to warrant no further reply.
I said - I DON'T CARE - I didn't think my english was that bad.
 

Chukcha

Electoral Member
Sep 19, 2006
215
1
18
That's all he has left. When you can't successfully argue the topic, attack the poster.

He still hasn't answered how he suggests the west should deal with Islamic fundamentalism.
But continues to demand the answers for his questions