Tu quoques, moral equivalences, projections, and other "arguments" in defense of Islam

Whether it's YouTube, the Daily Bulletin, or WaPo, they're all the same. Can CAIR be everywhere at once?

In response to comments by "ahmed from bahrain."

"I consider myself very well balanced!!"

Considering Cartoon Rage, Pope Rage, and Rushdie Rage, is that saying much?

"the Western media . . . asked regarding women's rights, terrorism, suicide bombing, etc."

Yes, it's a complete mystery as to why systemic, institutionalized discrimination, brutality, and carnage overshadows any Infidel interest in prayer rugs.

"Terrorism for one is strictly a political issue"

Really? What did Mohammed say? “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

"which has nothing to do with Islam."

Hmmm. Mohammed said (that above, and) this: "Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12). Allah will not be pleased.

"It is true Muslims use Islam for their political aims but this is common in all quarters"

A false, tu quoque argument. The topic is not Buddhism's divinely-ordained oppression of women nor Hinduism's historical slaughter of innocents, but Islam's. The essential difference between offensive warfare against non-Muslims and violence by members of any other major religious group is that jihad to make the world Islam is required by Allah and his apostle.

"What I would have liked to have seen is an admission that Western/US meddling in the Middle East and Islamic countries over the last 100 years has produced what we see today."

You'd like the victims to blame themselves? That's immoral and dishonest.

Non-Muslims (and apostates) have been raped, enslaved, and slaughtered at the command of Allah and in imitation of the false prophet Mohammed for nearly fourteen centuries everywhere Muslim numbers, knowledge, zeal, and resources have been sufficient to do so. Be honest.

When Muslims behead Christian schoolgirls for Allah, is that the West's fault? When Muslims murder elderly Buddhists, is that the West's fault? When teachers of girls are gunned down in cold blood in Pakistan because they taught girls, is that the West's fault?

Current events and very recent history are enough to refute your charge that Western policy is the cause of Muslim violence, but let's go back a bit further, shall we?

When Mohammed and his minions subjugated and slaughtered the pagan tribes of Arabia, was that the West's fault? When he had the men of Jewish tribes beheaded and took their women, was that the West's fault? When, after Mohammed died (too late), his successors exploded out of Arabia west, north, and east with Qur'an in one hand and the sword in the other, was that the West's fault?

The Holy Land, North Africa, the Iberian Peninsula, the Balkans, Byzantium, Persia, Eastern Europe, Western Asia, India, Southeast Asia -- brutal jihad was waged viciously against these peoples and their cultures until many were conquered or dead (a few having survived and/or recovered to some degree) -- was all of that the West's fault?

You've got a little problem. Your "sacred" texts not only spew the bloodlust of Allah, they also record Mohammed's zeal in satisfying it. And nearly one and one-half millennia of Muslims doing the same (as circumstances allowed) all demonstrate your claim that "It's the US'/West's/Jews' fault!" to be utterly false.

"How do the Muslims see this? and what do they suggest to create a better understanding of East/West? and thus create a lasting peace?"

"Peace." Muslims keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. However, I know what Mohammed thinks. He said:

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do" (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

The kind of "lasting peace" Allah wants is the kind that comes when all dissent is in chains or the grave.

"This is the core issue that is being avoided by Western media and their leaders."

That the Source and Sustenance of Islam's War Against Humanity are the words of Allah and the words and deeds of Mohammed is THE core issue that apologists for jihad in the West feverishly hope ignorant and gullible non-Muslims will never face.

"They never admit to their wrongs . . . The blood of the innocent is being spelt with no remorse or apology . . . it is very watered down and diplomatically dressed as to cause no offence . . . causing mayhem and bloodshed that is ensuing."

More blame the victim and a good amount of projection going on here.

"To add insult to injury they try cover up their own barbarism yet paint any Muslim as a terrorist even when evidence proves otherwise."

If anything, Western political, media, and academic elite bend over to avoid offending the offenders.

And as to your last point: If one's god commands him to use any means necessary -- even violence -- to convert, subjugate, and kill all unbelievers, does it not behoove his targets to admit that and plan and act accordingly?

How are those against whom such violence is required to distinguish between those who want to fulfill those requirements and those who will never do anything to undermine non-Muslim health, wealth, and government?

Finally, why would any decent person of good will profess faith in a god who not only endorsed Mohammed's depravity and brutality, but requires the same of others?

"If they want to know about Islam then pick up the Quran and read with an open heart."

And then get some help understanding Qur'an's peculiar arrangement. For the fuller context of Qur'an and the life of Mohammed, you'll also want to study Hadith and Sira.

"This applies to Muslims too."

Ever notice how it is often the recent and devout convert that so terribly "misunderstands" their religion and becomes a member of that "tiny minority of fundamentalist, extremist, Islamofascist hijackers of the Religion of Peace"?

"When both parties look at their own faults then we can see some peace."

Not until the commands of Allah for offensive warfare against non-Muslims -- and Mohammed's fulfillment of them -- are rejected as evil will this particular conflict end. It's already nearly 1400 years old.