West Double Standards Exposed

  • Thread starter Thread starter akulion
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 38
  • Views Views 6K
akulion said:
Well Trumble you have to understand that the Muslims love the Prophet more than even their families or themselves.

So it was great great offence for the people.
Click to expand...

To correct U brother, muslims are supposed to love the holy prophet more than their own families and themselves. But taking into consideration, how muslims (majority of) around the world are acting unislamically, we can come to the right conclusion. Muslims are responsible for giving the holy prophet, a bad name. Muslims have strayed from the path of sunnah and holy quran. Munafiqeen is better word for them seeing the way they have violated message of holy quran and sunnah. Even we kafirs are better than those munafiqeen according to ALLAH.

Plz let me know if I m wrong and why?

Thanks.
 
justahumane said:
But taking into consideration, how muslims (majority of) around the world are acting unislamically, we can come to the right conclusion. Muslims are responsible for giving the holy prophet, a bad name.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. If Muslims behave unislamically, how can Islam be to blame? It is stupid and foolish for non-Muslims to justify mocking our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) through the actions of (a few) misguided Muslims. Furthermore, if Muslims act unislamically then they are going against his teachings, so how can that be regarded as giving our Prophet (Peace be upon him) a bad name? This is only ignorance on the part of the claimant of this bizarre theory.

And, by the way, a munaafiq is a person (a kaafir in actual fact) who pretends to be Muslim in the eyes of people (though rejecting), not simply a sinner who has transgressed the limits of Qur-aan and Sunnah!

A.
 
aakhirah said:
I beg to differ. If Muslims behave unislamically, how can Islam be to blame? It is stupid and foolish for non-Muslims to justify mocking our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) through the actions of (a few) misguided Muslims. Furthermore, if Muslims act unislamically then they are going against his teachings, so how can that be regarded as giving our Prophet (Peace be upon him) a bad name? This is only ignorance on the part of the claimant of this bizarre theory.

And, by the way, a munaafiq is a person (a kaafir in actual fact) who pretends to be Muslim in the eyes of people (though rejecting), not simply a sinner who has transgressed the limits of Qur-aan and Sunnah!

A.
Click to expand...

Brother I haven blamed islam, but muslims who have abandoned laws of ALLAH worldwide and prefer man made laws. I dont justify any foolish or wicked act of anyone. Muslims gives impression that they are true servent of ALLAH, someone who submit themselves to the will of GOD. While in fact they dont. this makes them munafiqeens. And for ur kind information, munafiqeens are supposed do transgress the limits of holy quran and sunnah. same way as today's majority of muslims doing, and u too have accepted.

Once again, I havent blamed islam but muslims. I think that I have much respect for the holy prophet than most muslims.

Thanks.
 
justahumane said:
Brother I haven blamed islam, but muslims who have abandoned laws of ALLAH worldwide and prefer man made laws. I dont justify any foolish or wicked act of anyone. Muslims gives impression that they are true servent of ALLAH, someone who submit themselves to the will of GOD. While in fact they dont. this makes them munafiqeens. And for ur kind information, munafiqeens are supposed do transgress the limits of holy quran and sunnah. same way as today's majority of muslims doing, and u too have accepted.

Once again, I havent blamed islam but muslims. I think that I have much respect for the holy prophet than most muslims.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yes you are right that some people have taken this matter and have done to justice. But lets not forget the majority of muslims that have held peaceful demonstrations. In London on Saturday almost 60,000.00 muslims marches peacefully and the media showed this for like 2 secs on the news yet 50 people held a violent march and this was headline news for days.

Dont always believe what the media have show you!
 
Sis786 said:
Yes you are right that some people have taken this matter and have done to justice. But lets not forget the majority of muslims that have held peaceful demonstrations. In London on Saturday almost 60,000.00 muslims marches peacefully and the media showed this for like 2 secs on the news yet 50 people held a violent march and this was headline news for days.

Dont always believe what the media have show you!
Click to expand...

I m not talking about those protest sister, I m talking in general terms. Cant u see muslim hypocricy around the world vis a vis holy quran? Is holy quran only for reciting and parroting? or fighting over it? or its meant to follow??????

Its muslims who have failed to show to the world that what islam is all about. And u cant keep accusing non muslims for not understanding islam. I think lion share of musilim's bashing should be of their own ppls who have proven hypocrites by abandoning the commands of ALLAH.

Further I dont need media to know muslims, I m from India. I have grown up among muslims. I know muslims are extremely good ppls, I have muslims as my family members, but sad to say that all those whome I personally find praiseworthy have strayed far away from their religion. They have selected what is good for them and left what they feel in their heart is otherwise. So in my opinion MAJORITY of muslims in the world, be it good or bad, have left the true path of their religion. If U dont agree than plz let me know why?

I often wonder how much happy ALLAH would be feeling by seeing actions of the ummah who claim that they submit to HIS will.

Thanks.
 
To correct U brother, muslims are supposed to love the holy prophet more than their own families and themselves. But taking into consideration, how muslims (majority of) around the world are acting unislamically, we can come to the right conclusion. Muslims are responsible for giving the holy prophet, a bad name. Muslims have strayed from the path of sunnah and holy quran. Munafiqeen is better word for them seeing the way they have violated message of holy quran and sunnah. Even we kafirs are better than those munafiqeen according to ALLAH.
Click to expand...

You are partly correct I would say. The reason being that it is true that many Muslims do not act according to Islam, however the media also plays an important role in further putting such things into the limelight more than other things.

For example: An Egyptian man kills someone in Rgypt, he is announced on the news as : A Muslim Radical Extremist
On the other hand: A Christian guy could go nuts and kill 12 boys in a school shooting and be portrayed as "A man in Illinois"
Real life examples would include: Timothy Mcbae vs Any of the named "Muslim" terrorists

Apart from this we also have history against us. Not to say that it is our actions that weigh down against us, but rather it is the bias of the historians from the past who have widely spread the idea in the west that "Islam was spread by the sword". Furthermore we dont get to hear about Islamic inventions or contributions in history, why? Once again it is bias against the Muslims. If you visit Muslim Heritage website you will see exactly how great an impact the Islamic world had on the world in the past.

So All that being said, you are correct in the parts that you say, however the entire blame cannot be pinned on to the Muslims themselves. And to get a wholesome picture we must take into account the other factors as well.

Salam Alaikum
 
I would say that any time a person or people talk about something different from what they are, they will add a description. For example, if a black man living in a mostly black neighborhood has a problem with a white guy, he will say to his friends " this white guy over there ..." So when western media from majority christian population countries report on news involving muslims, it is natural to describe as muslim. At the same time when reporting about Tim Mcveigh to leave out 'christian'. In muslim media it is the same. If a christian is being reported on it is more likely to report him as such, while omitting 'muslim' about muslims. Peace to all.
 
akulion said:
You are partly correct I would say. The reason being that it is true that many Muslims do not act according to Islam, however the media also plays an important role in further putting such things into the limelight more than other things.

For example: An Egyptian man kills someone in Rgypt, he is announced on the news as : A Muslim Radical Extremist
On the other hand: A Christian guy could go nuts and kill 12 boys in a school shooting and be portrayed as "A man in Illinois"
Real life examples would include: Timothy Mcbae vs Any of the named "Muslim" terrorists
Click to expand...

The difference is still one of motivation. When most Arab terrorists were not Islamists, but Arab socialists or assorted nationalists, they were not called Muslim Radical Extremists. They were called the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine or whatever. Now that most terror is caused by people who think they are good Muslims, it is sensible to describe their motivation. Are you denying that the motivation for, say, the 7-7 bombs was a form of radical Islam? If someone who happens to be a Muslim commits a crime, no one says it is Islam. But if he does so because he think that Islam tells him to, then it is called Islamic. Has Christianity ever told anyone to kill 12 boys in a school shooting? Timothy McVey is an excellent example - it was a mixture of White Supremacy and minimal government that made him do what he did. Not Christianity. Why describe it as Christian?

Apart from this we also have history against us. Not to say that it is our actions that weigh down against us, but rather it is the bias of the historians from the past who have widely spread the idea in the west that "Islam was spread by the sword".
Click to expand...

Which depends on what you mean by that.

Furthermore we dont get to hear about Islamic inventions or contributions in history, why? Once again it is bias against the Muslims. If you visit Muslim Heritage website you will see exactly how great an impact the Islamic world had on the world in the past.
Click to expand...

This is flatly not true. Western media producers have produced many documentaries that are full of praise for Islam. One example would be Bloom, Jonathan M. and Blair, Sheila, Islam: a thousand years of faith and power, New York: TV Books, 2000. ISBN 157500092X. There was also a favorable chapter on Islam in Attenborough, David, The first Eden: the Mediterranean world and man, London: Collins, 1987 ISBN 0002198274.

Now compare this with the Muslim world - where is there a single book produced in the Muslim world that is even fair, much less supportive of, Byzantium? That does not insult Christianity and Judaism much less Animism?

There is a blatant double standard here and it is not the West's problem.
 
Well with respect to your opinion, I would disagree. The US is a melting pot as we all know, it is founded on the principles of a mulitcultural environment. Many countries such as the UK, Australia, etc have taken after that example. Therefore I believe it is highly insensitive of the media to single out one group from the others based on their religion. That being said we must also take into consideration that the US or UK are not Christian states but a secular ones. Thus in my opinion for CNN or BBC to make this distinction is actually wrong.
 
The difference is still one of motivation. When most Arab terrorists were not Islamists, but Arab socialists or assorted nationalists, they were not called Muslim Radical Extremists. They were called the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine or whatever. Now that most terror is caused by people who think they are good Muslims, it is sensible to describe their motivation. Are you denying that the motivation for, say, the 7-7 bombs was a form of radical Islam? If someone who happens to be a Muslim commits a crime, no one says it is Islam. But if he does so because he think that Islam tells him to, then it is called Islamic. Has Christianity ever told anyone to kill 12 boys in a school shooting? Timothy McVey is an excellent example - it was a mixture of White Supremacy and minimal government that made him do what he did. Not Christianity. Why describe it as Christian?
Click to expand...

If this was an Issue of motivation then that would mean that it is Islam which is motivating them or in other words telling them to do these things. Islam does not preach the killing of innocent people nor does it support terrorism as a means of accomplishing objectives. The Prophet (s) himself said once,
"If you see your brother opressed help him, and when you see your brother opressing help him"
One of the companions asked, "O Prophet we can understand how to help him when he is opressed but how will we help him when he is opressing?"
The Prophet replied, "Stop him from opressing"

But with the messages the media gives out to the people gives a general feeling that in fact it is Islam and Muslims whose way of life is violence and bloodshed. In my opinion media should be more responsible in their statements. So the same argument you are giving in defence of Christianity also applies to Islam. Does Islam tell people to go around killing people? NO!
So the blame rather than be pinned on Islam should be pinned on the individuals.

Which depends on what you mean by that.
Click to expand...
As we know in the past the western world was predominantly overshadowed by Christian/Church doctrine. As Europe started to Emerge as a power over time, one cannot deny the fact that the idea which was, and to some extent still is, propogated was that Islam was spread by the sword.
History now becomes more accurate over time as we see secular sources doing the research. One example I will give you is of General Custers Last stand.
Previously it was believed it was avaliant and brave last stand. Archeological digs have actually revealed that it was nothing more than a cowardly retreat where Americans even shot other Americans in confusion and in chaos. Has the Us changed this in its History? No, why? The statement in reply to this reseacrh was, "A nation needs its heroes" - I ask, even if they were fake?
Same way is the case of Islam being misportrayed through history, only now do we see the emergence of movies like "Islam: Empre of Faith" which shows the reality of Islam and Muslim Empire. Yet these are very few out of many which are against Islam.

This is flatly not true. Western media producers have produced many documentaries that are full of praise for Islam. One example would be Bloom, Jonathan M. and Blair, Sheila, Islam: a thousand years of faith and power, New York: TV Books, 2000. ISBN 157500092X. There was also a favorable chapter on Islam in Attenborough, David, The first Eden: the Mediterranean world and man, London: Collins, 1987 ISBN 0002198274.
Now compare this with the Muslim world - where is there a single book produced in the Muslim world that is even fair, much less supportive of, Byzantium? That does not insult Christianity and Judaism much less Animism?
There is a blatant double standard here and it is not the West's problem.
Click to expand...

On the contorary - this is once again an assumption that you make due to the influence of the misconceptions spread about Islam. If you do get the chance please do watch the movie called Islam, Empire of Faith - it has many references to Islamic scholars and historians who paid much tribute to the works of their non Muslim counter parts. Also please have a look at the website I gave you "Muslim Heritage" you will see that the Muslims scholars nor historians denied their non muslim counterparts the glory they deserved. Yet do we see the same in the Christian world? I think not...

The destruction of Jeuresulem under Christan rule and its Thriving under Muslim rule...what is portrayed? Christians as liberators and Muslims as supressors.

The enlightnment of Spain under Muslims and the decay of Spain under Christian rule (prior to occupation) - What is portrayed? Muslims were savages and Christians were cultured.

Europe was still using Parchment and churches were LUCKY to have to the most 3 or 4 books. While Muslim households contained more books written on PAPER (great tech of the times). Yet what do we see in media/movies? West was so so advanced in the middle ages and the Arabs lived in tents.

Paper Industry - started by Muslims using Chinese Tech - Attributed to the west in general.
Mass Production - started by Muslims but attributed to Henry Ford
Electricity - Discovered by Ancient Persians - attributed to (Forgot his name, sorry)_- Edison I think
Modern Science (seperating science from religion) started by Muslims - attributed to the Rennisance
Windmills - Invented by Egyptians - Attributed to Holland
And there are various such examples.
And then ofcourse my example of General Custer...

History is written by victors - a famous quote by someone.
Indeed it does seem this way to me, a biased history written to glorify the west a bit too much.
 
akulion said:
If this was an Issue of motivation then that would mean that it is Islam which is motivating them or in other words telling them to do these things. Islam does not preach the killing of innocent people nor does it support terrorism as a means of accomplishing objectives. The Prophet (s) himself said once,
"If you see your brother opressed help him, and when you see your brother opressing help him"
One of the companions asked, "O Prophet we can understand how to help him when he is opressed but how will we help him when he is opressing?"
The Prophet replied, "Stop him from opressing"
Click to expand...

Except you are operating with an unusual definition of motivation. Islam as you, and I assume most people around here, does not call for the killing of all those innocent people. But that is irrelevant because their motivation is not your motivation. The terrorists, presumably, believe in a different sort of Islam. Their Islam tells them to do what they do. Now I am not taking sides on what sort of Islam is "true" or "truer", I am just pointing out that these people do what they do because they think God wants them to.

But with the messages the media gives out to the people gives a general feeling that in fact it is Islam and Muslims whose way of life is violence and bloodshed. In my opinion media should be more responsible in their statements. So the same argument you are giving in defence of Christianity also applies to Islam. Does Islam tell people to go around killing people? NO!
So the blame rather than be pinned on Islam should be pinned on the individuals.
Click to expand...

You are missing my subtle point - it is not that Islam tells them to do things. It is that some Muslims think that Islam tells them to do things. I agree that there is an impression that the media gives out that Islam and Muslims have a way of life that is full of violence of bloodshed. But to be honest, so does this website. It is the dominance of discussions of violence and bloodshed, the lack of condemnation, and the ignoring of non-violence peaceful aspects of Islam that is the cause - but that applies equally to the BBC and this site.

As we know in the past the western world was predominantly overshadowed by Christian/Church doctrine. As Europe started to Emerge as a power over time, one cannot deny the fact that the idea which was, and to some extent still is, propogated was that Islam was spread by the sword.
History now becomes more accurate over time as we see secular sources doing the research.
Click to expand...

Except the picture of Islam "spread by the sword" is more complex and nuanced than it used to be, but basically it is still more or less true. It is less true for Christians and Jews than animists, but without the violence, there would have been few converts to Islam.

On the contorary - this is once again an assumption that you make due to the influence of the misconceptions spread about Islam. If you do get the chance please do watch the movie called Islam, Empire of Faith - it has many references to Islamic scholars and historians who paid much tribute to the works of their non Muslim counter parts.
Click to expand...

Sure, it is the work of Bloom and Blair as I cited. I have seen it actually.

Also please have a look at the website I gave you "Muslim Heritage" you will see that the Muslims scholars nor historians denied their non muslim counterparts the glory they deserved. Yet do we see the same in the Christian world? I think not...
Click to expand...

And yet Islam Empire of Faith was a product of the West. Where is the Islamic equivalent?

The destruction of Jeuresulem under Christan rule and its Thriving under Muslim rule...what is portrayed? Christians as liberators and Muslims as supressors.
Click to expand...

Where is this shown in any modern work? On the contrary the few good things that the Christians did are ignored - no one mentions the fact that Muslim sources say that the Christians treated their Muslim peasants better than the Muslim rulers did.

The enlightnment of Spain under Muslims and the decay of Spain under Christian rule (prior to occupation) - What is portrayed? Muslims were savages and Christians were cultured.
Click to expand...

This is really bad - where does anyone say this or has said it at any time in the last 150 years?

Europe was still using Parchment and churches were LUCKY to have to the most 3 or 4 books. While Muslim households contained more books written on PAPER (great tech of the times). Yet what do we see in media/movies? West was so so advanced in the middle ages and the Arabs lived in tents.
Click to expand...

Such as?

Paper Industry - started by Muslims using Chinese Tech - Attributed to the west in general.
Click to expand...

Where does anyone claim this was an invention of the West?

Mass Production - started by Muslims but attributed to Henry Ford
Click to expand...

This is nonsense. The Muslims did not invent the Factory method.

Electricity - Discovered by Ancient Persians - attributed to (Forgot his name, sorry)_- Edison I think
Click to expand...

Again this is silly. The Greeks and Persian discovered static electricity. But Europeans discovered its relation to magnetism. Muslims played no role at all.

Modern Science (seperating science from religion) started by Muslims - attributed to the Rennisance
Click to expand...

Nor did Muslims do that - they would be in trouble if they did. And besides there are dozens of article around here denying the Muslim scientists were secular.

Windmills - Invented by Egyptians - Attributed to Holland
Click to expand...

Source please.

Compare this with the Islamic world - where is there any positive reference to Byzantium?
 
Oh man I am too tired to respond for the moment

As for sources you will find them all on either: Muslim Heritage website
OR
Islam Empire of Faith movie (PBS Production)

The reason you may find this unbelieveable is the same reason that I found it absolutely astonishing when I watched that movie to discover all these facts.

As for the Electricity bit - The Muslims did not play any role true - but the Persians were using batteries before anyone else was, yet it is attributed to the west. This can be verified from this site: Baghdad Batteries

The Paper Industry founded by the Muslims was the first ever mass production mechanism ever instated to the extent that it led to the cheapning of books and paper and it became commonly used.

I would not deny that other civilizations also invented things - but I believe credit should be given where due. So you see the basic point I am making is that a lot of credit which is due to other civilizations in not rightfully given to them
 
how many of us read this article and thought... "they didn't have to put him in jail for that"?
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top