This blog initially set out to focus primarily on Islam and the Islamisation of the UK. However, since that time the subjects covered have broadened. They now include (amongst other things): IQ tests, Jean Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Marxism, Trotskyism, David Cameron, Foucault, Nazism, Ralph Miliband, economics, statistics and so on. - Paul Austin Murphy
I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here.)

Sunday, 30 September 2012

Why the 'anti-Islam film' protest in Bradford?

The chief executive of the Bradford Council For Mosques, Mohammed Saleem Khan, told Bradford's Telegraph & Argus that 'peace is the hallmark of Islam'. And that's why Muslims, throughout the 

world, have been rioting and killing in response to this ostensibly 'anti-Islam' film.

More specifically, the Council For Mosque's Khan has 'called for faiths to be respected and tolerated'. Is that in the same way that non-Muslims are certainly not respected or tolerated in virtually every Muslim country; including Khan's own Pakistan?

So Muslims demand 'tolerance' and 'respect' when they do not have sufficient power or the required hegemony in non-Muslim countries. When Muslims acquire the power, then they soon disrespect and do not tolerate any other religion.

And what does Khan mean by 'respected' and 'tolerated' anyway? Is that a euphemism for demanding that Islam is never criticised, as is the case in Muslim countries? Indeed that's exactly what Khan wants. He 'wants to see new legislation brought in to protect' Islam from all criticism – including justified criticism. He wants, in other words, Sharia Blasphemy Law imposed on the British people!

Again, is criticism of Islam automatically 'abuse' of Islam? Yes, it is to most Muslims. It isn't to many non-Muslims.

Bradford Muslim Women's Council was also quoted by the T & A. (Are there Muslim women's councils in Pakistan or Afghanistan? I doubt it.) What this organisation says at first will seem quite positive to non-Muslims. Bana Gora, its chairman, said that 'some Muslims give a knee-jerk reaction' to such things as the 'anti-Islam' film. You're not wrong there! However, she then quickly goes on to say that 'all tolerant individuals condemn all acts of religious intolerance'. For instance, the mass intolerance millions of Muslims have worldwide for all non-Islamic religions? I don't think so.

In addition, was Bana Gora simply assuming that all criticism of Islam is 'religious intolerance'? I think she was. Want to see some genuine and brutal religious intolerance? Go to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia or Iran or Somalia or the Sudan...

By the way. This 'anti-Islam film' was not made by the American Coptic Church. It was made by an individual member of that church. That's not the same thing at all! Then again, Muslims do tend to see many things in terms of conflict between Islam and all the other religions in the world. Thus this film-maker simply must speak for the American Coptic Church, just as Blair and Bush spoke for every Christian on earth (or so many Muslims thought).

No comments:

Post a Comment