#how muslims live

[patron-saint-of-lesbeans]

Very interesting (concerning) that while there’s a general consensus of “of course there’s queer Muslims and Jews and Christians we love them!” But that love is conditional. You can be religious but not too religious. You can be spiritual as long as it’s not actually that important to you. You can be observant of your religion’s dogma and traditions as long as you keep it away from everybody else.

But I don’t want to cut myself into smaller pieces. I don’t want to take a part of my life and culture and being and hide it away behind closed doors. It’s just…hypocritical and disappointing when people, who clamor about their love for the contradictory and self-authentic, hate when they’re confronted with it.

[oldpotatoe]

regarding the hijab burnings in iran: as a muslim woman living in a liberal democracy, i don’t want to read any silly little think pieces from muslims living in liberal democracies talking about western imperialism or how this is disrespecting islam. you’re not facing what they’re facing. cut that shit out.

[allahlovesyou]

“And keep yourself patient [by being] with those who call upon their Lord in the morning and the evening, seeking His countenance. And let not your eyes pass beyond them, desiring adornments of the worldly life, and do not obey one whose heart We have made heedless of Our remembrance and who follows his desire and whose affair is ever [in] neglect.” -Alkahf

[cesareeborgia]

what is happening in Palestine is settler colonialism, military occupation, land theft and ethnic cleansing. there is an active oppressor (Israel) and an oppressed (Palestine). Israel doesn't have the right to exist at the cost of Palestinian lives. do not let western media call this terrorism. it is decolonisation.

[autismserenity]

Me, looking through books on Palestine: "Ilan Pappé wrote one called 'The Biggest Prison On Earth?!' People in Gaza hate it being called a prison. There's an entire hashtag for it. There's been an account dedicated to collecting pics and videos of #TheGazaYouDontSee for 6 years.

"Is Pappé even Palestinian? oh god wait I can tell already. this is gonna be an 'Israeli apologist' isn't it." Internet: "Yeah, Pappé's Israeli."

Me: "For fuck's--- so people will believe Israelis unquestioningly if they're shit-talking Israel, but in all other situations, Israelis are all liars?"

Internet: "Pretty much. Also, at best, Ilan Pappé must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians."

Me, admittedly in full schadenfreude now: "What?!?!"

Internet: "Benny Morris. That historian who's extremely hard-core about primary source documentation, who wrote that detailed book about how and why each group of Palestinian refugees left in 1947-9. He reviewed three books about Palestine."

Me: "Holy shit. And the book by Pappé is about the Husaynis. The family that Nazi war criminal Amin al-Husseini came from, the guy who fucked absolutely everything up for both Israel and Palestine."

Internet: "That's the one. Morris wrote, 'At best, Ilan Pappe must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians; at worst, one of the most dishonest. In truth, he probably merits a place somewhere between the two.'"

Me: "Why??"

Internet: "He says, 'Here is a clear and typical example—in detail, which is where the devil resides—of Pappe’s handiwork. I take this example from The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine'....

"Blah blah blah, basically in 1947 the UN voted to partition the land into Palestine and Israel, and extremist militias started shooting at Jewish towns and people. David Ben-Gurion was the leader of the Jewish community there, and his journal describes a visit from a scientist named Aharon Katzir, telling him about an experiment codenamed "Shimshon." Morris gives us the journal entry:

...An experiment was conducted on animals. The researchers were clothed in gas masks and suit. The suit costs 20 grush, the mask about 20 grush (all must be bought immediately). The operation [or experiment] went well. No animal died, the [animals] remained dazzled [as when a car’s headlights dazzle an oncoming driver] for 24 hours. There are some 50 kilos [of the gas]. [They] were moved to Tel Aviv. The [production] equipment is being moved here. On the laboratory level, some 20 kilos can be produced per day.

"Morris says, 'This is the only accessible source that exists, to the best of my knowledge, about the meeting and the gas experiment, and it is the sole source cited by Pappe for his description of the meeting and the "Shimshon" project. But this is how Pappe gives the passage in English:

Katzir reported to Ben-Gurion: 'We are experimenting with animals. Our researchers were wearing gas masks and adequate outfit. Good results. The animals did not die (they were just blinded). We can produce 20 kilos a day of this stuff.'

"'The translation is flecked with inaccuracies, but the outrage is in Pappe’s perversion of "dazzled," or sunveru, to "blinded"—in Hebrew "blinded" would be uvru, the verb not used by Ben-Gurion—coupled with the willful omission of the qualifier '"for 24 hours."'

"'Pappe’s version of this text is driven by something other than linguistic and historiographical accuracy. Published in English for the English-speaking world, where animal-lovers are legion and deliberately blinding animals would be regarded as a barbaric act, the passage, as published by Pappe, cannot fail to provoke a strong aversion to Ben-Gurion and to Israel.

"'Such distortions, large and small, characterize almost every page of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. So I should add, to make the historical context perfectly clear, that no gas was ever used in the war of 1948 by any of the participants. [Or, he later notes, by either Israel or Palestine ever.] Pappe never tells the reader this.

"'Raising the subject of gas is historical irrelevance. But the paragraph will dangle in the reader’s imagination as a dark possibility, or worse, a dark reality: the Jews, gassed by the Nazis three years before, were about to gas, or were gassing, Arabs.'"

Me: "Uuuuggghhhhhhhhh. Yeah, it will."

Internet: "He does say, 'Palestinian Dynasty was a good idea.' Then he does some really detailed historian-dragging about the lack of primary sources and reliance on people's interpretations of what they say instead.

"'Almost all of Pappe’s references direct the reader to books and articles in English, Hebrew, and Arabic by other scholars, or to the memoirs of various Arab politicians, which are not the most reliable of sources. Occasionally there is a reference to an Arab or Western travelogue or genealogy, or to a diplomat’s memoir; but there is barely an allusion to documents in the relevant British, American, and Zionist/Israeli archives.

"'When referring to the content of American consular reports about Arab riots in the 1920s, for example, Pappe invariably directs the reader to an article in Hebrew by Gideon Biger—“The American Consulate in Jerusalem and the Events of 1920-1921,” in Cathedra, September 1988—and not to the documents themselves, which are easily accessible in the United States National Archive.

"'Those who falsify history routinely take the path of omission. They ignore crucial facts and important pieces of evidence while cherry-picking from the documentation to prove a case. 

"'Those who falsify history routinely take the path of omission. They ignore crucial facts and important pieces of evidence while cherry-picking from the documentation to prove a case. 

"'But Pappe is more brazen. He, too, often omits and ignores significant evidence, and he, too, alleges that a source tells us the opposite of what it in fact says, but he will also simply and straightforwardly falsify evidence.

"'Consider his handling of the Arab anti-Jewish riots of the 1920s.

"'Pappe writes of the “Nabi Musa” riots in April 1920: “The [British] Palin Commission... reported that the Jewish presence in the country was provoking the Arab population and was the cause of the riots.” He also quotes at length Musa Kazim al-Husayni, the clan’s leading notable at the time, to the effect that “it was not the [Arab] Hebronites who had started the riots but the Jews.”

"'But the (never published) [Palin Commission Report], while forthrightly anti-Zionist, thereby accurately reflecting the prevailing views in the British military government that ruled Palestine until mid-1920, flatly and strikingly charged the Arabs with responsibility for the bloodshed.

"'The team chaired by Major-General P.C. Palin wrote that “it is perfectly clear that with... few exceptions the Jews were the sufferers, and were, moreover, the victims of a peculiarly brutal and cowardly attack, the majority of the casualties being old men, women and children.” The inquiry pointed out that whereas 216 Jews were killed or injured, the British security forces and the Jews, in defending themselves or in retaliatory attacks, caused only twenty-five Arab casualties.'"

Me: "Yeah. I'm looking at that report right now and it says there had been an explosion, and then people were looting Jewish stores and beating Jews with stones, and in one case stabbing someone. Some people said that some Jews got up on the roof of a hotel and retaliated by throwing stones themselves.

"And then it literally says, 'The point as to the retaliation by Jews is of importance because it seems to have impressed the Military and led them to imagine that the Jews were to some extent responsible for provoking the rising.' That's the only thing it really says about anyone blaming the Jews.

"Except.... the very beginning gives some historical context. And it does say that when the Balfour Declaration came out, Muslims and Christians 'considered that they were to be handed over to an oppression which they hated far more than the Turk's and were aghast at the thought of this domination....

"'If this intensity of feeling proceeded merely from wounded pride of race and disappointment in political aspirations, it would be easier to criticise and rebuke: but it must be borne in mind that at the bottom of all is a deepseated fear of the Jew, both as a possible ruler and as an economic competitor. Rightly or wrongly they fear the Jew as a ruler, regarding his race as one of the most intolerant known to history....

"'The prospect of extensive Jewish immigration fills him with a panic fear, which may be exaggerated, but is none the less genuine. He sees the ablest race intellectually in the world, past-masters in all the arts of ousting competitors whether on the market, in the farm or the bureaucratic offices, backed by apparently inexhaustible funds given by their compatriots in all lands and possessed of powerful influence in the councils of the nations, prepared to enter the lists against him in every one of his normal occupations, backed by the one thing wanted to make them irresistible, the physical force of a great Imperial Power, and he feels himself overmastered and defeated before the contest is begun.'

"Wow! What a great fucking example of how 'positive' stereotypes are actually used to fuck people over! We're not antisemitic, we actually think Jews are the smartest, most powerful, richest group with tremendous global power! So positive!! Not at all being used here to justify antisemitic violence!

"Also, immigration from all over the world actually meant that different agricultural and manufacturing techniques were brought into the region, and yes, financial investments to start businesses sometimes, which meant that Arab Palestinians there had the highest per capita income in the Middle East, the highest daily wages, and started a lot of businesses of their own. But go off, I guess."

"Anyfuckingway.... it basically says that the Muslims and Christians were angry and scared, the Jews were too quick to set up the functioning government that the Brits were supposed to be there to help both sides create -- and which the Arab leaders completely refused to create for Palestine, because (1) fascists and (2) didn't want Jews nearby -- and that they were "ready prey for any form of agitation hostile to the British Government and the Jews." Then it says the movement for a United Syria was agitating them real hard, and so were the Sherifians.

"Is that what Ilan Passe, I mean Pappe, meant by the Palin Report blaming the Jews?! That when it says it's understandable the Arabs were freaking out, because antisemitism, Pappe thinks it's saying the Jews were provoking them?!"

Internet: "I don't know. I kinda tuned out after the first hour you were talking."

Me: "OGH MY GOD"

Internet: "So anyway, then Morris ALSO says, 'About the 1929 “Temple Mount” riots, which included two large-scale massacres of Jews, in Hebron and in Safed, Pappe writes: “The opposite camp, Zionist and British, was no less ruthless [than the Arabs]. In Jaffa a Jewish mob murdered seven Palestinians.”

Me: "What the ENTIRE FUCK? There was no united 'Zionist and British' camp! The Brits would barely let any Holocaust refugees in, ffs!"

Internet: "Morris says, 'Actually, there were no massacres of Arabs by Jews, though a number of Arabs were killed when Jews defended themselves or retaliated after Arab violence.

"'Pappe adds that the British “Shaw Commission,” so-called because it was chaired by Sir Walter Shaw (a former chief justice of the Straits Settlements), which investigated the riots, “upheld the basic Arab claim that Jewish provocations had caused the violent outbreak. ‘The principal cause... was twelve years of pro-Zionist [British] policy.’”

"'It is unclear what Pappe is quoting from. I did not find this sentence in the commission’s report. Pappe’s bibliography refers, under “Primary Sources,” simply to “The Shaw Commission.” The report? The deliberations? Memoranda by or about? Who can tell?

"'The footnote attached to the quote, presumably to give its source, says, simply, “Ibid.”

"'The one before it says, “Ibid., p. 103.”

"'The one before that says, “The Shaw Commission, session 46, p. 92.”

"'But the quoted passage does not appear on page 103 of the report.

"In the text of Palestinian Dynasty, Pappe states that “Shaw wrote [this] after leaving the country [Palestine].” But if it is not in the report, where did Shaw “write” it?'"

Me: "I'M ON IT. [rapid-fire googling] OMG. This is.... Not the first time. In 'The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine,' he reported that in a 1937 letter to his son, David Ben-Gurion declared: 'The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as war.'

"It's not in the source he gave. It's not in any of the three different sources he's given for it.

"He apparently has never responded to any requests for an explanation, either from the journal he published in, or from other historians. But it says he did "obliquely [acknowledge] the controversy in an article in Electronic Intifada, in which he portrayed himself as the victim of intimidation at the hands of “Zionist hooligans.”'

"This is absolutely fucking wild. THEN it says the chair of the Ethics Committee where he was teaching eventually said that the second part of the quote ('but one needs,' etc) was a (combined?) paraphrase of a diary entry and a speech Ben-Gurion gave, and that the first half is 'based on' a letter to his son.

"And it's so convincing! The chair says, 'Shabtai Teveth[,] Ben Gurion’s biographer, Benny Morris and the historian Nur Maslaha have all quoted this letter. In fact their translation was stronger than the quotation from Professor Pappé: ‘We must expel the Arabs and take their place.’ Professor Pappé has documentary evidence of these quotations and the source will ensure that this is correctly cited in any future editions of the publication or related studies.'

"And IT'S NOT EVEN TRUE?!

"Ben-Gurion's actual diary entry (not a letter) says the opposite.

“'We do not want and do not need to expel Arabs and take their places.... All our aspiration is built on the assumption – proven throughout all our activity – that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.'

"Benny Morris misquoted it as "We must expel the Arabs and take their places" in the English version of his 1987 book The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, although it was correct in the Hebrew version. He corrected himself in the 2001 book Righteous Victims.

"Teveth also misquoted it in the English version of his 1985 book Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs, but again, had it correct in the Hebrew edition.

"And both Morris and Teveth explicitly point out the rest of the entry. The part about all their aspiration being built on the assumption and experience that there was enough room in the country for everyone.

"Historian Efraim Karsh’s 1997 book Fabricating Israeli History pointed out and corrected their mistakes.

"This is apparently a very well-known issue among historians of Israel and Palestine. It was a big deal in 2003, when an evangelist Christian publisher put out a book FULL of disinformation, which not only used the same quote as Pappe does, but also could not give a real source for it.

"But Pappe STILL USED THE MISQUOTE AND DOUBLED DOWN ON IT EVERY SINGLE TIME."

Internet: "Are you done? I know all this already."

Me: "Also, there are literally only two places where the phrase 'twelve years of pro-Zionist policy' shows up online, and they're both about Pappe making quotes up.

"NOW I'm done."

Benny Morris wasn't, though. The review continues at the link below. And the next part starts, "To the deliberate slanting of history Pappe adds a profound ignorance of basic facts. Together these sins and deficiencies render his “histories” worthless as representations of the past, though they are important as documents in the current political and historiographic disputations about the Arab-Israeli conflict. Pappe’s grasp of the facts of World War I, for example, is weak in the extreme."

[zombiesun]

it frustrates me how people are so dismissive of the mental state of people born in isolated fundamentalist communities. like the brainwashing that happens from such a young age is unreal. your media, the people you engage with, your general relationship with the "outside world" is all filtered through the beliefs of your commune and religious leader. it took years for me to deprogram myself but before that I had a lot of incredibly fucked up beliefs and thought patterns based on the people who raised me. I'm a success story only because of my accidental exposure to people who challenged those perceptions. people need to have more empathy for people who weren't so lucky

[papirouge]

Hopefully you have the same energy to whine about the (secular) justice system and common law because who needs rules when you're a good person who will spontaneously never do bad thing without superior incentive? 🙃

[ace-and-the-rpg-horrors]

can people be normal about Muslims for two seconds oh my God

tell me why obvious and casual stereotyping is unacceptable until it comes to us

[heir-less]

I think what a lot of people don't understand is that the cultural and societal aspects of religion can still exist in a society that is 100% secular. Most atheists aren't anti-theists, in fact, most of them still take part in many religious customs and celebrations in a secular form. Anti-theism doesn't even mean the eradication of religion, it's typically used to describe the intellectual opposition to belief in a deity,

So, I'm honestly perplexed whenever I see people arguing that the "end goal" of atheism is to eradicate religion, this is something both religious people and ill-informed atheists believe, for some reason. I guess this is what happens when Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris are your go-to atheists and you're measuring atheism against the most extreme religious zealots because that's what most people are reactive towards.

What should be completely removed are almost all forms of institutionalized religion and religious power structures. These are the exactual oppressive structures that have used religion as a tool to justify every form of bigotry and crime against humanity. They are also not essential to the practice of the religion or the survival of the religious culture. Your right to practice your religion ends if you're using said religion to advocate for the oppression of Muslims (assuming you're not practicing Islam), atheists, LGBT+ people, and other minorities. You can be a church-going Catholic without advocating for state-sanctioned religion or the rights of others being removed. This evangelical breed of religious extremism has no place in society and is what actually leads to real genocides happening today.

[swagging-back-to]

"white men literally go and kill their entire families when they've decided they no longer want to be a husband and a father yet y'all on here talking abt immigrants, black people, and arab men. your own husband/boyfriend is more likely to rape and murder you than any of those demographics" and yet arab, black, and asian males all have the societal right to honor kill any woman in their family or town who does anything out of line.

the white males will at least have the chance to face legal consequence. literally cant even fathom your logic rn girl

[starrrberry]

religion is so weird because i dont give a shit whether god is real or not

[chaiaurchaandni]

is hamas = isis?

i've been seeing zionists say that 'anti-zionist and pro-palestine jews who oppose israel are not real jews' and ... first of all. who are you to decide who is and isnt a real jew?

and secondly!!! guess what this is a disturbing parallel to? ISIS.

because when the islamic state declared a caliphate, they also said smth similar: that any muslim who opposes the caliphate of the islamic state, is an apostate.

also interesting to note that, according to isis, hamas would also be apostates + isis also opposed hamas bec isis believed that nobody besides the caliphate of islamic state had the right to declare jihad -> so isis declared war on hamas

on the other hand, israel has provided free treatment to isis and other syrian militants in israeli hospitals

obv the tactic of equating hamas with isis is pure hasbara done for the sake of creating mass hysteria against hamas and convincing the usa/nato to sanction the mass killing of palestinians (in the name of eliminating hamas). macron even said the same coalition fighting isis should also fight hamas

some more differences + links mentioned below the cut:

some other differences:

isis is a salafi/wahabi org (look into islamic statism) /// hamas is a sunni org

isis is a transnational org /// hamas is a palestinian nationalist org

the aim of isis is to eradicate all 'bad' muslims+non-muslims & establish their rule all over the world /// the aim of hamas is to secure complete liberation of palestine

isis has conducted militant operations in different countries beyond its territories /// hamas does not conduct operations beyond historic palestine

isis kills anyone who does not adhere to its extremist interpretation of islam (including yazidis, jews, christians, shia & sufi muslims) /// hamas has been tolerant to different sects (alliance with shia hezbollah org) + different religions (palestinian christians/foreign aid workers)

isis literally legalized slavery which afaik no other islamic militant org has done (besides boko haram i think?)

isis is extremely anti-shia and opposes hamas for having links with iran and hezbollah

isis also feels obligated to kill any other muslim that does not pledge loyalty to the caliphate (even attacked some of their own previous allies) /// hamas has an alliance with several other palestinian resistance organizations regardless of different ideologies as long as they share a common goal of liberating palestine (palestinian joint operations room)

pls lmk if any info here is incorrect/needs editing!

links:

What Effect ISIS' Declaration Of War Against Hamas Could Have In The Middle East : NPR

Hamas Is Not ISIS. Here's Why That Matters | TIME

UN Report: Israel in Regular Contact with Syrian Rebels including ISIS - IBTimes India

Ideology of the Islamic State - Wikipedia

Why Islamic State has no sympathy for Hamas - Al-Monitor: Independent, trusted coverage of the Middle East

France’s Macron says anti-ISIL coalition should fight Hamas | Israel-Palestine conflict News | Al Jazeera

Salafist ideological challenge to Hamas in Gaza - BBC News

[demonic-shadowlucifer]

hi christians and muslims and jews and pagans and wiccans and hindus and buddhists and sikhs and shintoists and taoists and jainists and people of other religions and athiests and agnostics are all holding hands dancing and picking flowers together and just having a fun silly time because we're all siblings in arms :)

[adhdsocialist]

I know we're well past this at this point but the actual issue with a lot of the coverage both activists and like regular news organizations have on the Palestinian Genocide is that people keep misconstruing it as a Jews vs Muslims War.

[pendraegon]

while it is true that 9/11 played a role in mcr's conception and that isn't anything that is contestable.. you know what's truly ghoulish? seeing 9/11 jokes as if making edgy jokes + memes around an incident (i will also say that some of us never made these jokes/memes because our brains were never that fucking rotted) that TO THIS DAY has intense islamophobic and racist ramifications and acts of violence against large groups of people in the united states, but also seeing fucking mcr 9/11 jokes... it's no secret that bandom circles have always had a rampant problem with racism but you guys really are showing your true fucking colors huh.

[personalrprants]

You know, there is always something hilarious about nazis always using the "Why are you unwanted everywhere you go?" Like, yes, why is it that every country that has been corrupted by the antisemitic and imperialist European countries suddenly become antisemitic, too? Gee, there couldn't possibly be any correlation here to be found!