[GuestFellow]

What if they were Muslim?

The mainstream media did not report this...

 

[3rddec]

Luke 6:40-42

Why do you see the splinter in your brother’s or sister’s eye but don’t notice the log in your own eye? How can you say to your brother or sister, ‘Brother, Sister, let me take the splinter out of your eye,’ when you don’t see the log in your own eye? You deceive yourselves! First take the log out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother’s or sister’s eye.

Love and Respect

 

[SalamChristian]

"If two believers fight [cross swords] then surely they will both suffer the hell-fire." -Ascribed to Muhammad (as) in Bukhari

 

[PouringRain]

What if they were Muslim?

The mainstream media did not report this...

It looks like it was reported by mainstream media.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42152129/ns/local_news-philadelphia_pa/

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...ned-to-Death-for-Money-Brother-118452474.html

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...Death-for-Homosexuality-Police-118243719.html

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/1...th-allegedly-making-unwanted-sexual-advances/

 

[GuestFellow]

^ Oh okay, though the mainstream in the UK did not report, like the BBC. If a Muslim did that, there would have been a lot of attention towards the case in Europe.

 

[Trumble]

^ Oh okay, though the mainstream in the UK did not report, like the BBC. If a Muslim did that, there would have been a lot of attention towards the case in Europe.

I honestly don't think it would have any difference at all, in western Europe anyway. We are far less 'religious' in general than in the US and I think that sort of selective reporting is very unlikely in the mainstream media. Foreign news stories don't always get picked up, particular in era of big budget cuts and fewer foreign correspondents (especially at the BBC!)

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

"If two believers fight [cross swords] then surely they will both suffer the hell-fire." -Ascribed to Muhammad (as) in Bukhari

nice hadith, but how is it of relevance?

 

[elina]

^ Oh okay, though the mainstream in the UK did not report, like the BBC. If a Muslim did that, there would have been a lot of attention towards the case in Europe.

I agree with that. Also I go on a Question and Answer site where the news section is always full of muslim did this and muslim did that...... there could be similar stories involving people who arent muslim but they dont get posted..... if this had been done by a muslim guy i do believe the site would have crashed with all the anti Islamic posters who go on there

 

[R Khan]

I honestly don't think it would have any difference at all, in western Europe anyway. We are far less 'religious' in general than in the US and I think that sort of selective reporting is very unlikely in the mainstream media. Foreign news stories don't always get picked up, particular in era of big budget cuts and fewer foreign correspondents (especially at the BBC!)

You're honestly saying that there isn't some sort of "selective reporting" going on? ^o)

 

[GuestFellow]

I honestly don't think it would have any difference at all, in western Europe anyway. We are far less 'religious' in general than in the US and I think that sort of selective reporting is very unlikely in the mainstream media. Foreign news stories don't always get picked up, particular in era of big budget cuts and fewer foreign correspondents (especially at the BBC!)

I disagree with you. If a Muslim stoned a gay man, then that would have been on the news, especially on BBC. The BBC did not hesitate to report about that Iranian women stoning case.

 

[3rddec]

Luke 6:40-42

Why do you see the splinter in your brother’s or sister’s eye but don’t notice the log in your own eye? How can you say to your brother or sister, ‘Brother, Sister, let me take the splinter out of your eye,’ when you don’t see the log in your own eye? You deceive yourselves! First take the log out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother’s or sister’s eye.


The tensions began March 4 and March 5 when a Muslim mob attacked the 'Church of the Two Martyrs St. George and St. Mina' and burned it down, almost killing the parish priest, according to local Christians. News reports said the attack in Sool, 35 kilometers (22 miles) from the capital Cairo, came after local imam Sheik Ahmed Abu Al-Dahab, issued a call to "Kill all the Christians."

Bibi, 40, told reporters that after she refused to convert to Islam and accept the marriage, human traffickers threatened to kill her unless her father Manna Masih paid a ransom of 100,000 rupees (US$1,170) by Saturday March 5. Bibi's case has underscored concerns about wide spread cases of kidnappings in Pakistan, often involving Christian girls and women.

A Turkish court on Monday, March 21, ordered five military officers and two civilians jailed as part of an investigation into the 2007 killings of three Christians at a Bible-publishing house


It would seem that the Western Media keep missing good stories that would show Muslims in poor light, im sure Al Jazeera did manage to get them reported in the interests of balanced reporting.

Love and Respect[/QUOTE]

 

[GuestFellow]

^ Link please.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Well I'm glad we all agree that doing harm to a homosexual for his being homosexual is wrong. We appear to have made progress over the past 100 or so years. There was a time when such a stoning would have been praised.

 

[3rddec]

Guestfellow which link you looking for?

 

[Perseveranze]

I honestly don't think it would have any difference at all, in western Europe anyway. We are far less 'religious' in general than in the US and I think that sort of selective reporting is very unlikely in the mainstream media. Foreign news stories don't always get picked up, particular in era of big budget cuts and fewer foreign correspondents (especially at the BBC!)

You should try picking up a paper in the UK, every 3 days there's always something anti-islamic. They try harder ever since the reported Reverts growth stat came out.

 

[Trumble]

You're honestly saying that there isn't some sort of "selective reporting" going on? ^o)

I'm saying it's my honest opinion that there is nobody at the BBC saying 'muslim stones homosexual to death we report it, Christian stones homosexual to death we ignore it', or words to that effect, yes.

I disagree with you. If a Muslim stoned a gay man, then that would have been on the news, especially on BBC. The BBC did not hesitate to report about that Iranian women stoning case.

It would only be on the BBC news if they had a) known about it and, b) had time in the bulletin to include it. b) is the most likely possibility in view of huge current stories like Japan and Libya taking up the available time. The Iranian case is different in that stoning did not involve murder by a psychopathic fundamentalist whacko but a legal punishment. As most westerners view it as utterly barbaric, particularly for something that in Europe is not even a crime, that is an essential distinction, but not an 'anti-Islamic' one..

You should try picking up a paper in the UK, every 3 days there's always something anti-islamic. They try harder ever since the reported Reverts growth stat came out.

What connection does that have with the topic under discussion?

 

[GuestFellow]

Guestfellow which link you looking for?

Never mind. XD

I'm saying it's my honest opinion that there is nobody at the BBC saying 'muslim stones homosexual to death we report it, Christian stones homosexual to death we ignore it', or words to that effect, yes.

I disagree. I think the mainstream media in the UK and many other countries are interested in Islam and Muslims. If a Muslim stoned someone, the mainstream media would not have missed this opportunity, it would have given them publicity.

Not just talking about the BBC, we are talking about the mainstream media in general. I do suspect the media is selecting certain groups of people...

It would only be on the BBC news if they had a) known about it and, b) had time in the bulletin to include it. b) is the most likely possibility in view of huge current stories like Japan and Libya taking up the available time.

I think it is very likely that the BBC had time and knew about this case. It was even on Fox News. It reports all sorts of nonsense about the marriage of Prince Charles with a women. I'm sure it would have time to present this case...

The Iranian case is different in that stoning did not involve murder by a psychopathic fundamentalist whacko but a legal punishment.

Both cases are similar. It involved stoning, a punishment that comes from the Bible and Islam. I thought that Iranian women killed her husband? I will need to check that up.

As most westerners view it as utterly barbaric, particularly for something that in Europe is not even a crime, that is an essential distinction, but not an 'anti-Islamic' one..

...Not one is claiming that is it is anti-Islam.

What connection does that have with the topic under discussion?

Is it really that difficult to work out? :

Basically, the mainstream media usually report something negative about Muslims on a regular basis and rarely report anything positive about Muslims. If there was a Muslim who stoned someone, the media would not have missed this opportunity...a Christian stoned someone and the media was not interested.

 

[Trumble]

I disagree.

As you are perfectly entitled to do.

I think it is very likely that the BBC had time and knew about this case. It was even on Fox News. It reports all sorts of nonsense about the marriage of Prince Charles with a women. I'm sure it would have time to present this case...

It reported about the marriage of Prince William (who I assume you mean), yes. Whether you or I agree or not, or despair about it or not, the simple fact is that is a much MUCH bigger story in the UK than anyone (bar the President, maybe) being killed anywhere, anyhow in the US. You may be sure, I'm not. Frankly had I been the news editor on 21 March I wouldn't have included it whether the perpetrator had been muslim, Christian, Scientologist or worshipper of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Maybe on a 'quiet' news day.

Both cases are similar. It involved stoning, a punishment that comes from the Bible and Islam. I thought that Iranian women killed her husband? I will need to check that up.

They are not remotely similar. She allegedly commited adultery, SOURCE, not murder. Oh, and throw in the 99 lashes for daring to be photographed not wearing a headscarf - and the photo turned out to be of someone else anyway.

Also, if you read the stories you will see that far from being the fundamentalist nut I think we both assumed John Joe Thomas to be, he was actually 'just' a simple thief and murderer. Rather than any Biblical/Qur'anic 'stoning to death' the victim was actually killed by being repeatedly beaten with a sock filled with rocks. Not quite the same thing. The whole religious angle, together with claims about sexual advances from the deceased, seems a complete fabrication to construct some sort of 'defence' - sufficient to avoid the death sentence, presumably, his guilt having already been established.

Is it really that difficult to work out?

'Fraid so. I do wish people would think before attempting to patronize. It simply doesn't follow that, even if Perseveranze's claim were true, that must be reason the BBC did not report this story. That is unchanged no matter how many copies of the Sun or Daily Mail I might read.

But if you folks really believe some of conspiratorial selective news, anti-Islam is responsible for not squeezing in the story rather than trivial events like wars, tsunamis, leaking nuclear reactors, the Budget and so forth there's not much I can do. Just as likely, it seems, is that once the story effectively became 'just' another robbery and murder, it would be considered as of no interest to UK viewers at all.

 

[GuestFellow]

It reported about the marriage of Prince William (who I assume you mean), yes. Whether you or I agree or not, or despair about it or not, the simple fact is that is a much MUCH bigger story in the UK than anyone (bar the President, maybe) being killed anywhere, anyhow in the US. You may be sure, I'm not. Frankly had I been the news editor on 21 March I wouldn't have included it whether the perpetrator had been muslim, Christian, Scientologist or worshipper of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Maybe on a 'quiet' news day.

I agree there are more serious stories but the mainstream will present news that is more likely to get more views.

They are not remotely similar. She allegedly commited adultery, SOURCE, not murder. Oh, and throw in the 99 lashes for daring to be photographed not wearing a headscarf - and the photo turned out to be of someone else anyway.

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani 'confesses' to involvement in murder on Iran state TV

Also, if you read the stories you will see that far from being the fundamentalist nut I think we both assumed John Joe Thomas to be, he was actually 'just' a simple thief and murderer. Rather than any Biblical/Qur'anic 'stoning to death' the victim was actually killed by being repeatedly beaten with a sock filled with rocks. Not quite the same thing. The whole religious angle, together with claims about sexual advances from the deceased, seems a complete fabrication to construct some sort of 'defence' - sufficient to avoid the death sentence, presumably, his guilt having already been established.

There are many fundamental differences between the two but the stoning aspect was a small similarity.

'Fraid so. I do wish people would think before attempting to patronize.

I was being serious. There was no attempt to patronise you. I thought it was obvious...

But if you folks really believe some of conspiratorial selective news, anti-Islam is responsible for not squeezing in the story rather than trivial events like wars, tsunamis, leaking nuclear reactors, the Budget and so forth there's not much I can do. Just as likely, it seems, is that once the story effectively became 'just' another robbery and murder, it would be considered as of no interest to UK viewers at all.

There is no conspiracy to begin with. We all can agree that there are very serious issues that need to be reported. The mainstream media is not always interested in reporting serious issues. It is more interested to report cases that are of significant interest to the public. In general Muslims have been getting a lot of attention. If it were a Muslim were to stoned someone and justified it in the name of Islam, the mainstream media would have reported it. A man killed someone for his own selfish desires and used the Bible to justify it or as an excuse. The mainstream media is not interested because it was not a Muslim.

 

[Trumble]

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani 'confesses' to involvement in murder on Iran state TV

I would point out that the highly dubious 'confession' was made AFTER being sentenced to death for adultery.

If it were a Muslim were to stoned someone and justified it in the name of Islam, the mainstream media would have reported it. A man killed someone for his own selfish desires and used the Bible to justify it or as an excuse. The mainstream media is not interested because it was not a Muslim.

Again, I can only disagree for the reasons given earlier. Add in the fact it soon became apparent that 'stoned to death' was merely journalese rather than a remotely accurate description of the murder weapon (which might just as well have been a sock containing ball bearings, coins or whatever), and that any claim of a religious motive was complete bunkum, for a UK audience at least it became a total non-story.