Saturday, October 6, 2012

AMERICA’S AND THE WEST’S STRANGE POSTURING OVER ANTI-PROPHET MUHAMMED AND DEMONIZING OF ISLAM.


…WHEN THEY ALWAYS CLAIM TO ABHOR ANY FORMS OF RELIGIOUS AND RACIAL SLURRING, AND CONFINE TO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS…
By Mansor Puteh



(Latest: This is perhaps the greatest irony of it all: British footballer, John Terry has been banned for four matches and fined 220,000 British pounds sterling for ‘racially abusing’ a Queens Park Rangers (QPR) footballer, Anton Ferdinand.)

‘Racially abusing’? Yes, ‘racially abusing!’ And Anton is not even anywhere near the status of a prophet, but a mere footballer – a colored one.

Yet, in Britain, outwardly and unabashedly criticizing a Holy Prophet of Islam and Islam is not a crime.

So can one say their system seems to ‘encourage’ anyone in England to defame Islam and the Holy Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., as does the systems in America and all the other countries in the west?

This is how backward their social and legal systems are. 

It seems they are all uncivilized in more ways than one, in that they can demean their own religions or the religions of their ancestors, and also those of the others, too.

The problem is that most of them in the west are not religious; if they are they won’t dare utter any negative word against the religions of the others, including their own.

However, the real problem with the majority in Britain is that they are pseudo-Christians or pseudo-Catholics, so they can disdain their prophets because they do not have much admiration for them and what they had tried in vain to preach.

On the other hand, no Muslim in Britain or anywhere in the world had ever uttered a bad word against the early prophets of the Jews and Christians.

And this is what is making those pseudo-Christians and pseudo-Catholics in Britain, Europe and especially, America to be annoyed that they simply had to spew their hatred of a Holy Prophet of Islam, in order that the Muslims would retaliate and do the same to the early Prophets of the Jews and Christians, who Muslims also admire and respect.

In other words, in Britain, Europe or America, with the pseudo-Christians and pseudo-Catholics, individuals like them are more respected than their early Prophets, who they cannot belittle, criticize or condemn anymore as it has become their trait to do so, an act which is less provocative for them to do anymore that they had to find the Holy Prophet of Islam in order to prove how evil they are.

Of course, they won’t dare touch the Buddhist or Hindu leaders.)

Political correctness seemed to be the new way of dealing with individuals and society in America and the west, a trait they are proud to show to the others who they thought are less cultured.

Those in America and the west often pride themselves for being politically correct most of the time.

And they pride themselves for not taking any interest in the behaviors of their immediate neighbors and frown upon bitchiness and snooping around the neighborhood or poking fun of the antics and behaviors of the others, so no wonder they can claim to lead a balanced live and away from any social as well as political control.

And it seems that in America and the west, to slur is a crime, but to condemn and demonize Islam is a right which is enshrined under the constitution of their respective countries.

One cannot comprehend what must be going through the minds of those in America and the west when they are confronted with some of them who seem to enjoy caricaturing Prophet Muhammad and belittling Islam, citing how their brand of the freedom of speech and of expression supersede any legal action against those who exhibit such acts, as it is against their constitution and laws of the land.

How so?

The latest diatribe by their political, social, cultural and religious leaders only aim to further confuse the issue.

The main thing is how we realize America and the countries in the west were supposed to abhor any forms of religious and racial slurring.

Yes, ‘slurring’ is banned and those who cite anything that sounds like the slurring of anybody from another religion or race, can be punished.

Racial and religious discrimination is also not only frowned upon, but illegal. Anyone who commits such a crime can be charged in court. Sexual discrimination, too, is frowned upon.

In fact, any employer who is charged for such an offense and if found guilty by the courts will have to pay dearly.


Even Michael Jackson was chastised when his lyrics in one of his earlier songs mentioned ‘Jew me!’ which the Jews in America found to be offensive. He tried to protest but had to relent by changing the phrase to ‘Do me!’

And the Zionists and Zionism are not for public discussion in America.

Anyone who even mentions this word or the state of Israel and their policies against the Palestinians will be condemned as Anti-Semitic – whatever that means.

Yes, there are also things in these countries which they still consider to be ‘offensive’, or anathema to their very civilization and existence.

The irony of it all is how there are many in England now who are demanding a member of the David Cameron cabinet to apologize for having commented something negative against the Downing Street police force.

So they too can be offended with some things which they find to be offensive to them, and they also know how to demand those who had offended them to apologize.

This may sound to be ironic, in light of what their stand is on the Anti-Islam remarks and acts committed by some others in their countries, who seem to enjoy getting the wrong attention, for they have nothing to lose.

And the killing of two female police officers in Manchester, England early this week, has also brought out another irony.

A twenty-two-year-old man has been taken into custody for having created a social network account where he used to laud the alleged killer.

To the British such an act is ‘offensive’. Yes, this is the very word the authorities and public in England used to describe the act of one blogger who now cannot be allowed to practice ‘freedom of expression’, and has to be charged for committing a crime.

To make it even more comical how Sky New International television station which is available on Astro live, had Sir Salman Rushdie to comment on the matter, which by all accounts was aimed to further belittling Islam.

Salman had the audacity to say on live television in England, from New York City, where he was at, on how he found Muslims to be outrageous to insist on their way all the time.

America and Americans cannot express a religious and racial slur. But they can do worse and not be punished, because they are said to be practicing ‘freedom of expression’.

Those who slur cannot claim to be practicing a similar freedom. Those who have been slurred can lodge a police report and those who slurred against them can be charged in court.

And racial and religious discrimination in these countries are also banned, yet, demeaning Islam and criticizing and making fun of a Holy Prophet of another religion is not.

Whatever it is, no one can expect to see any Muslim person actually doing what the haters of Islam and Muslims have done; they will only protest, as it is their right. But they won’t go any further by actually producing videos depicting the leaders of the religions of the others or by coming up with billboards to disparage them and their religion, or to ask Muslims to burn the texts of the other religions.

These can only be done by the haters of Islam and Muslims themselves.

No comments: