Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

i came across this topic on the other forum, a guy was asking non-muslims if they hated islamic people and whether or not they wished islam never existed , the poll showed that 89% of the answers were that they dont hate muslims but they do wish islam never happened in the first place.
does anyone here feel that way? if you do, it dosent nessesarily mean you're racist , so ..

'fess up .

seeing as how being a muslim, or following the religion of islam is not considered a race...

i highly doubt anyone will not respond in fear of being labeled a racist

how can some1 claim doesn't hate Muslim yet wish Islam never existed!! do they wish Christianity never existed do they wish Judaism never existed they r all the same at least in main principles



im thankful each day for being born as muslim..its a beautiful religion if ppl only truly understand it.

bushra21 wrote:seeing as how being a muslim, or following the religion of islam is not considered a race...

i highly doubt anyone will not respond in fear of being labeled a racist

i do realize islam on it's own is not a race, it's just that i noticed how alot of non-muslims relate islam to middle eastern people and feel that if they say something negative about it it's like they are flamming the race, so like when someone wants to state that there's an aspect he does not agree with in the religion he always starts with "im not racist or anything but...."
i meant it in THAT way .

nismo wrote:yeah islam is a nice religion , its just that stupid arabs have spoilt it

we agree thats its a beautiful religion..then u must now the essence of Islam that there is no difference between humans except in taqwa awareness of God's presence as one moves through life. no arabs and non arabs no colors no races just ur deeds.

mema wrote:

nismo wrote:yeah islam is a nice religion , its just that stupid arabs have spoilt it

we agree thats its a beautiful religion..then u must now the essence of Islam that there is no difference between humans except in taqwa awareness of God's presence as one moves through life. no arabs and non arabs no colors no races just ur deeds.

Even though i completly agree with you Mema, i can see where Nismo is coming from.

The Arabs have painted terrible images of themselves over the yers with countless infighting, arrogance and total disrespect. Apologies if i sound like i am generalising.

I was recently reading up on the Moors who conquered Al-Andalus, Spain and it consisted of Africans and Berbers (often known as Kabilee). Yet many Arabs have hijacked the great achievement and called it an Arab achievement. It was a Muslim achievement which the Arabs then entered and tried to take rule of the Caliph. This then led to wide led instability and ultimately the speration of Al Andalus into quartets which the Crusaders later exploited. All throughout history Arabs have never accepted a Non Arab to be their ruler - hence they never accepted the Ottoman Empire - even though the movement was created and lead by a Caliph himself, Usman.

In the modern day, the terrorist orgs have not helped when it comes to defining peoples views . When people wage war in the name of god and all... it paints a bad picture.

Just look at their attitudes towards Shias and Sufis.
You then look at the totalitarian regimes in the middle east... Saddam, Gadafi

A lot of responsibility lies with the Arabs. I apologise if i have upset many people. But History tells a lot.

Rvp

Just to correct your history information, AL-Andalus was conquered prior to the moors era. It was conquered by an army sent under the orders of the Arab Caliph Al-Waleed, and it comprised of arabs + berbers + africans. The Moor era you are refering to, came much after that.

uae75 wrote:Rvp

Just to correct your history information, AL-Andalus was conquered prior to the moors era. It was conquered by an army sent under the orders of the Arab Caliph Al-Waleed, and it comprised of arabs + berbers + africans. The Moor era you are refering to, came much after that.

Tariq bin Ziyad was the man who conquered Al Andalus around 711 i believe, hence the name Rock Of Gibralter - which originally meant Gebel - Al Tariq. His army was what would later become known as the moors.

Tariq himself was a Berber, and his army were an overwhelming majoirty of Africans and Berbers. Arabs were only a minority during its capture.

He was actually later recalled by Caliph Al Waheed back to Damascus. As Al Waleed DID NOT authorise the invasion of Span.

So i still stand by my history and i dispute your claim.

rvp_legend wrote:

uae75 wrote:Rvp

Just to correct your history information, AL-Andalus was conquered prior to the moors era. It was conquered by an army sent under the orders of the Arab Caliph Al-Waleed, and it comprised of arabs + berbers + africans. The Moor era you are refering to, came much after that.

Tariq bin Ziyad was the man who conquered Al Andalus around 711 i believe, hence the name Rock Of Gibralter - which originally meant Gebel - Al Tariq. His army was what would later become known as the moors.

Tariq himself was a Berber, and his army were an overwhelming majoirty of Africans and Berbers. Arabs were only a minority during its capture.

He was actually later recalled by Caliph Al Waheed back to Damascus. As Al Waleed DID NOT authorise the invasion of Span.

So i still stand by my history and i dispute your claim.

Although i didnt want to turn this thread into a historical debate, but i find myself forced to give u ACCURATE facts.

U r right Tariq is a berber, and i didnt claim otherwise, and true Rock of Gibralter was meant for Tariq, but the army was sent under the approval and instruction of AL-waleed. Tariq at that time was only a general in the army, while the ruler of Morroco was a person called Moosa. Moosa was the person who got the instructions from the Caliph Alwaleed.

The Moors you a refering to came years after that, and they saw how the islamic state in Al-Andalus became weak and split into smaller states due to greed, so they crossed the shores of Morroco and conquered Al-Andalus again and united all the small islamic states in the peninsula.

You can always refer to more books for more accurate details about it

uae75 wrote:Although i didnt want to turn this thread into a historical debate, but i find myself forced to give u ACCURATE facts.

You are right, we shouldnt hijack this thread for Historical correctness.
However your idea of Accurate facts may not reflect those of Various consistent sources widely available which i have used to reach my opinion.
For someone wishing to find out they can study various sources online, books etc. and make up their own mind. Not take my or your opinions as "ACCURATE FACTS"

uae75 wrote:U r right Tariq is a berber, and i didnt claim otherwise, and true Rock of Gibralter was meant for Tariq, but the army was sent under the approval and instruction of AL-waleed. Tariq at that time was only a general in the army, while the ruler of Morroco was a person called Moosa. Moosa was the person who got the instructions from the Caliph Alwaleed.

Yes, he was the general of Musa ibn Nusair. Remember Moor is from the Greek, Dark skinned. So it was a Moorish Army from the begining. It is thought that the invading army had majority Ethiopians and Berbers and less than 10% Arabs, hence i say it was an African achievement.

If we go deeper into this and follow your line of thinking then i can confirm that the Arabs never captured Jerusalem in 1187...The Kurds did, as Salah -a-din was a kurd

uae75 wrote:The Moors you a refering to came years after that, and they saw how the islamic state in Al-Andalus became weak and split into smaller states due to greed, so they crossed the shores of Morroco and conquered Al-Andalus again and united all the small islamic states in the peninsula.

You confirming one of my original points about the Arrogance and infighting
The moors, by definition were always there. As they were the invadnig army which defeated Roderick. Tariq was made governer of Hispania -only to be recalled by Al Waleed. The caliphate of Cordoba later collapsed and then came the next group of Moors "Almoravid Dynasty" or "al-Murabitun" - which is what you are describing as the only Moors whoc came later. They were the second group.
It was this army which introduced the properous Al andalus.
So i still stand by, It was an African Achievement.

uae75 wrote:You can always refer to more books for more accurate details about it

Sure, i shall read more onto it. At the same time you should start reading your second book on it

rvp_legend wrote:

uae75 wrote:Although i didnt want to turn this thread into a historical debate, but i find myself forced to give u ACCURATE facts.

You are right, we shouldnt hijack this thread for Historical correctness.
However your idea of Accurate facts may not reflect those of Various consistent sources widely available which i have used to reach my opinion.
For someone wishing to find out they can study various sources online, books etc. and make up their own mind. Not take my or your opinions as "ACCURATE FACTS"

uae75 wrote:U r right Tariq is a berber, and i didnt claim otherwise, and true Rock of Gibralter was meant for Tariq, but the army was sent under the approval and instruction of AL-waleed. Tariq at that time was only a general in the army, while the ruler of Morroco was a person called Moosa. Moosa was the person who got the instructions from the Caliph Alwaleed.

Yes, he was the general of Musa ibn Nusair. Remember Moor is from the Greek, Dark skinned. So it was a Moorish Army from the begining. It is thought that the invading army had majority Ethiopians and Berbers and less than 10% Arabs, hence i say it was an African achievement.

If we go deeper into this and follow your line of thinking then i can confirm that the Arabs never captured Jerusalem in 1187...The Kurds did, as Salah -a-din was a kurd

uae75 wrote:The Moors you a refering to came years after that, and they saw how the islamic state in Al-Andalus became weak and split into smaller states due to greed, so they crossed the shores of Morroco and conquered Al-Andalus again and united all the small islamic states in the peninsula.

You confirming one of my original points about the Arrogance and infighting
The moors, by definition were always there. As they were the invadnig army which defeated Roderick. Tariq was made governer of Hispania -only to be recalled by Al Waleed. The caliphate of Cordoba later collapsed and then came the next group of Moors "Almoravid Dynasty" or "al-Murabitun" - which is what you are describing as the only Moors whoc came later. They were the second group.
It was this army which introduced the properous Al andalus.
So i still stand by, It was an African Achievement.

uae75 wrote:You can always refer to more books for more accurate details about it

Sure, i shall read more onto it. At the same time you should start reading your second book on it

It is funny how you actually agreed with all what I mentioned, yet you still say it’s an African achievement. Rome used cavalry of the Huns and troops from other nations to conquer lands, but it was still considered a Roman achievement. In our case, it’s called an Umawi (Don’t know the exact spelling in English) achievement since they were under the flag of the Caliph Al-Waleed. This is root of this debate, not what happened to the moors in Al-Andalus. Hence, it contradicts whatever you said earlier about the arab hijacking the achievement, cuz its impossible to hijack an achievement you are part of

uae75 wrote:It is funny how you actually agreed with all what I mentioned, yet you still say it’s an African achievement. Rome used cavalry of the Huns and troops from other nations to conquer lands, but it was still considered a Roman achievement. In our case, it’s called an Umawi (Don’t know the exact spelling in English) achievement since they were under the flag of the Caliph Al-Waleed. This is root of this debate, not what happened to the moors in Al-Andalus. Hence, it contradicts whatever you said earlier about the arab hijacking the achievement, cuz its impossible to hijack an achievement you are part of

I agreed with some of your points, but not all. I think its a debate we can be at all day long. We should save it for another day

The Hijacking accusations stems from the fact that 10% of the original invading army was Arab, whenever i have picked up a reference of it here in the middle East it has always said "Arab Spain" or "Spain was properous under the Arabs" - almost a systematic removal of the great/enormous participation of Moors who had their own identity. at that time all muslim groups had to follow "Arab" Caliphs, due to the then discourse.
anyway we are being sidetracked from the theme of the thread and me agreeing with another Forum member about responsbility.

rvp_legend wrote:

uae75 wrote:It is funny how you actually agreed with all what I mentioned, yet you still say it’s an African achievement. Rome used cavalry of the Huns and troops from other nations to conquer lands, but it was still considered a Roman achievement. In our case, it’s called an Umawi (Don’t know the exact spelling in English) achievement since they were under the flag of the Caliph Al-Waleed. This is root of this debate, not what happened to the moors in Al-Andalus. Hence, it contradicts whatever you said earlier about the arab hijacking the achievement, cuz its impossible to hijack an achievement you are part of

I agreed with some of your points, but not all. I think its a debate we can be at all day long. We should save it for another day

The Hijacking accusations stems from the fact that 10% of the original invading army was Arab, whenever i have picked up a reference of it here in the middle East it has always said "Arab Spain" or "Spain was properous under the Arabs" - almost a systematic removal of the great/enormous participation of Moors who had their own identity. at that time all muslim groups had to follow "Arab" Caliphs, due to the then discourse.
anyway we are being sidetracked from the theme of the thread and me agreeing with another Forum member about responsbility.

I understand where your confusion comes from. But I hope I can help you understand what is meant by "Arab-Spain". Whenever a nation speaks Arabic, they are considered as arabs, it doesn’t mean that they came from the Arabian Peninsula. Look for example Morroco, Algeria, Sudan, they were berbers and African speaking nations in their early days, but what are they considered now? Arabs. The same thing for Spain, people over there spoke Arabic during the Islamic rule, and that’s what is meant by "Arab-Spain" as you called it. I hope this clarified this issue.

Anyways RVP…it was really enjoyable debating with you.

uae75 wrote:I understand where your confusion comes from. But I hope I can help you understand what is meant by "Arab-Spain". Whenever a nation speaks Arabic, they are considered as arabs, it doesn’t mean that they came from the Arabian Peninsula. Look for example Morroco, Algeria, Sudan, they were berbers and African speaking nations in their early days, but what are they considered now? Arabs. The same thing for Spain, people over there spoke Arabic during the Islamic rule, and that’s what is meant by "Arab-Spain" as you called it. I hope this clarified this issue.

Anyways RVP…it was really enjoyable debating with you.

Happy to accept that perspective. And was enjoyable having a clean debate with you too.

I wish all religions never happened.

Chocoholic wrote:I wish all religions never happened.

then we would still have been chopping heads

sniper420 wrote:

Chocoholic wrote:I wish all religions never happened.

then we would still have been chopping heads

And eating each other like they used to.

and there would be no women in arabia
cause they use to bury there daughters alive.

I dont know what all this fuss about:

1. NO one is forcing any one to become a Muslim so why this filth and hate that people have towrds it????

2. Since you dont like ISLAM why on earth you live in a Muslim country?

3. Leave us alone with our own reliogion and live as you want. Just go away from our land

Enough said

kanan wrote:I dont know what all this fuss about:

1. NO one is forcing any one to become a Muslim so why this filth and hate that people have towrds it????

2. Since you dont like ISLAM why on earth you live in a Muslim country?

3. Leave us alone with our own reliogion and live as you want. Just go away from our land

Enough said

take it easy dude, this is only a discussion

if people think that islam should not exist, let them dream. Islam will never end or disappear, you know what i mean? Some people associate islam with suicide bombings and thats why they dont like islam and wished its not there

am i right or wrong?.....dudes

Sorry kanan, you must have been offended by this topic. just dont think most of us here thinks the same way of the author, its not like that.

Bleakus wrote: Islam will never end or disappear, you know what i mean?

actually....Allah tells us otherwise

bushra21 wrote:

Bleakus wrote: Islam will never end or disappear, you know what i mean?

actually....Allah tells us otherwise

thats one the the signs of judgement day in the end

what i meant was now and before judgement day

good point though bushra

Nismo you have serious issue man

he has a point though

we do mess things up for ourselves....... A LOT

Bushra, do us all a favour and dont agree with Nismo, pretend his post doesn't exist as suggested by arniegang in "Dubai General Chat"...Look what he started blabbing once he got the green light from you!!!

nismo wrote:notice how much harsher the books have gotten
you can clearly see that god has gotten frustrated/ticked off with the arabs

look at the bible and christianity, you can pray once a week , dont have to fast or anything ,, and they dont go to great detail about hell and the sins

look at islam , people have to pray 5 times a day now... they have to fast , pay zakat , go to hajj???!!!!
read the description of hell in the quran?? its down right frightnening

D`oh stupid arabs ... spoiling everything..

this shows you how much you dont know about religion. Didnt you ask yourself why islam has these things to do?

i think you want some attention dude.......your not worth it

i didnt mean for that to happen.

just stating my opinion was all.

how was i supposed to know how that idiot would react?

Cuz its obvious as Bleakus mentioned, that this guy is BADLY seeking attention.

zam wrote:Sorry kanan, you must have been offended by this topic. just dont think most of us here thinks the same way of the author, its not like that.

first of , im a muslim myself , so bleh on you .

and second of all , dont just go assuming stuff about people, i never said i felt the same way as the people who wish islam didnt exist. what i said was "check out the poll results on this topic from some other forum, whaddaya think?"

so yeah.



yeah ,that's it.