Woman charged in Fort Hood-related hate crime:

[Sofiyya 1,687]

1. Nation of Islam is not Islamic and its members are not Muslims. This is a statement of fact, not a racist statement. Their beliefs have little in common with doctrinal Islam.

So if they say they're Muslims..... ah.... well, what are they really? And where are all these facts coming from?

I can supply some facts. I'm a born Sunni Muslim with a Ph.D in Islamic history and law, so I have a good idea of what Islam teaches via Al Quran and ahadith. NOI doesn't follow a lot of what Islam teaches, as it was a socio-political movement, serving a specific population from the beginning.

The Nation of Islam was founded by Elijah Muhammad in the early 1930's as a nationalist, separatist and Black supremicist group. After the death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975, leadership passed to his son, Wallace Deen Muhammad, who began moving the group toward mainstream Islam and away from the segregationist template his father had laid down. Currently, the leader of the reconstituted NOI is Minister Louis Farrakhan, who still embraces and teaches the original concept that Black people are God's chosen, and Whites are the devil. On the basis of this message, Blacks are encouraged to be self-sufficient, disciplined and racially superior. While Islam also teaches discipline and self-sufficiency, it teaches the antithesis of racial segregation or the superiority of any one group over another as God's chosen people.

I hope that helps.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

And where are all these facts coming from?

I say that everytime you post. You're not offering logical argument just expressing unfounded opinions so good luck with all that.

1. Nation of Islam is not Islamic and its members are not Muslims. This is a statement of fact, not a racist statement. Their beliefs have little in common with doctrinal Islam.

So if they say they're Muslims..... ah.... well, what are they really? And where are all these facts coming from?

I can supply some facts. I'm a born Sunni Muslim with a Ph.D in Islamic history and law, so I have a good idea of what Islam teaches via Al Quran and ahadith. NOI doesn't follow a lot of what Islam teaches, as it was a socio-political movement, serving a specific population from the beginning.

The Nation of Islam was founded by Elijah Muhammad in the early 1930's as a nationalist, separatist and Black supremicist group. After the death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975, leadership passed to his son, Wallace Deen Muhammad, who began moving the group toward mainstream Islam and away from the segregationist template his father had laid down. Currently, the leader of the reconstituted NOI is Minister Louis Farrakhan, who still embraces and teaches the original concept that Black people are God's chosen, and Whites are the devil. On the basis of this message, Blacks are encouraged to be self-sufficient, disciplined and racially superior. While Islam also teaches discipline and self-sufficiency, it teaches the antithesis of racial segregation or the superiority of any one group over another as God's chosen people.

I hope that helps.

Word.

[slim 1,533]

I can supply some facts. I'm a born Sunni Muslim ..... I hope that helps.

So then how come Al-Qaida and the Taliban are Muslims?

And where are all these facts coming from?

I say that everytime you post. You're not offering logical argument just expressing unfounded opinions so good luck with all that.

Please give some examples and I'll pull some facts for you from a very reputable source... like Wikipedia or the like.

You'd probably like those "studies" and stuff from MSNBC, CNN.com, etc. We can use those, I don't care.

Or if you prefer, we can use official government websites.

[Heracles 417]

Interesting that everyone has the same issue of you pulling facts out of your buttocks Slim.

[slim 1,533]

Funny how the same facts I pulled out of my buttocks materialized in a wiki link you provided, Booyah!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Spray paint IS spray paint....FACT

Spray paint on a wall is Hate...OPINION

Edited November 28, 2009 by Sousuke

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Spray paint IS spray paint....FACT

Spray paint on a wall is Hate...OPINION

True, but context and milieu determine what is hate, although we, as a society, are getting better at understanding and enbracing our differences. WWII kill the Japanese ---->OK. 2009 Kill the Japanese ---->Hate crime.

Edited November 28, 2009 by IR5FORMUMSIE

[Heracles 417]

Funny how the same facts I pulled out of my buttocks materialized in a wiki link you provided, Booyah!

So you should be able to post it then. You should be able to show me where homicides carried out by knifes are on par (equivalent) with that of homicides by guns.

Edited November 28, 2009 by Booyah!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Spray paint IS spray paint....FACT

Spray paint on a wall is Hate...OPINION

True, but context and milieu determine what is hate, although we, as a society, are getting better at understanding and enbracing our differences. WWII kill the Japanese ---->OK. 2009 Kill the Japanese ---->Hate crime.

lol I wish you had said this in another thread where I was stating that the US of today is more tolerant in "war" then in 1917 or 1942.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

I can supply some facts. I'm a born Sunni Muslim ..... I hope that helps.

So then how come Al-Qaida and the Taliban are Muslims?

And where are all these facts coming from?

I say that everytime you post. You're not offering logical argument just expressing unfounded opinions so good luck with all that.

Please give some examples and I'll pull some facts for you from a very reputable source... like Wikipedia or the like.

You'd probably like those "studies" and stuff from MSNBC, CNN.com, etc. We can use those, I don't care.

Or if you prefer, we can use official government websites.

I've already provided the New York Hate Crimes Act in an earlier post. As for the constitutional issue you raised, you are muddying the water by attempting to introduce a collateral issue. I have already including the preamble to the constitution in a previous post. You again return to your argument about sentencing, which is another issue.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Spray paint IS spray paint....FACT

Spray paint on a wall is Hate...OPINION

True, but context and milieu determine what is hate, although we, as a society, are getting better at understanding and enbracing our differences. WWII kill the Japanese ---->OK. 2009 Kill the Japanese ---->Hate crime.

lol I wish you had said this in another thread where I was stating that the US of today is more tolerant in "war" then in 1917 or 1942.

Still have a ways to go but we are getting better.

[slim 1,533]

although we, as a society, are getting better at understanding and enbracing our differences. WWII kill the Japanese ---->OK. 2009 Kill the Japanese ---->Hate crime.

How is that getting better?

Your example has nothing to do with hate crimes. I see where you're going with this (OK to target civilians during WWII.... not so much anymore) but that has nothing to do with hate crimes.

So you should be able to post it then. You should be able to show me where homicides carried out by knifes are on par (equivalent) with that of homicides by guns.

I assume that facts don't need to be backed up by Wiki links. Sorry. I'll try to post AUS news articles instead.

In AUS, homicides by knives are nowhere near on par with homicides carried out with firearms. Homicides by knife are like, 7 TIMES as numerous!

Here you go - from the AIC itself - 260 homicides in 2006-2007. Less than 16% by firearm. http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.aspx

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Actually I think he's ALSO referring to Japanese Internments IE US citizens.....

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

although we, as a society, are getting better at understanding and enbracing our differences. WWII kill the Japanese ---->OK. 2009 Kill the Japanese ---->Hate crime.

How is that getting better?

Your example has nothing to do with hate crimes. I see where you're going with this (OK to target civilians during WWII.... not so much anymore) but that has nothing to do with hate crimes.

Nonsense. Unfortunately you missed my point entirely. We have hate crimes legislation which is a big improvement. If you spray paint Kill the Japanese in 2009 it IS a hate crime but it was allowed during WWII. We do not have internment camps or as many mass arrests. Targeting civilians in a theater of war has never been officially acceptable but has always been "unavoidable," it's known as collateral damage.

Actually I think he's ALSO referring to Japanese Internments IE US citizens.....

Yup.

Edited November 28, 2009 by IR5FORMUMSIE

[slim 1,533]

I've already provided the New York Hate Crimes Act in an earlier post. As for the constitutional issue you raised, you are muddying the water by attempting to introduce a collateral issue. I have already including the preamble to the constitution in a previous post. You again return to your argument about sentencing, which is another issue.

You provided a link that says what the law is. I'm not arguing what the law is - it is the law. What I'm arguing is the law is not right and hate crimes, along with many others, are not in line with the original intent of the Constitution. Equal protection does not mean "special" protection.

Nonsense. Unfortunately you missed my point entirely. We have hate crimes legislation which is a big improvement. If you spray paint Kill the Japanese in 2009 it IS a hate crime but it was allowed during WWII.

I get your point, but there is still no actual difference between someone spray painting that wall back in '44 and them doing it in '04. They're still simply applying paint to a wall. We're now prosecuting them for their message, not their crime. When the government starts telling us what is acceptable and not acceptable to spray paint, we might as well put up a big wall between the different groups of our cities.

We do not have internment camps or as many mass arrests.

Yet. With the way things are going - Americans gladly giving up their Rights protecting them against such crimes - it's not that far off that it could happen again in the near future. Also, what if all those Nissei would've had M-1s and lots of ammo? Do you think they really would've been interred against their will? (Just for the record, they weren't interred against their will... they "peaceably agreed" to go.)

Targeting civilians in a theater of war has never been officially acceptable but has always been "unavoidable," it's known as collateral damage.

If it wasn't officially acceptable then why weren't allied commanders ever brought up on war crimes charges for fire-bombing German and Japanese cities? How about the atom bomb?

Collateral damage was a term made up for the media around the Vietnam era when bleeding hearts started to change public opinion against winning wars to "making us feel better about every single little thing in our lives."