an example of Freedom of speech

[Okara]

Then get a divorce….Pronto!!! ?

Easiest is to build a washroom where I will have freedom of speech.

 

[The Sane]

ہاں خیر میں تو لگا رہونگا اور ایک دن انشااللہ انسان بھی بن ہی
جاؤنگا؟….لیکن تیرا کیا بنے گا کالئیے ؟..رہےگا اوت کا اوت ?

اوکے اوت بائی

 

[Keep the trust]

I am with you on that but please dont spread misinformation. Violence and hate against every group is bad, dont just talk about Arabs but turn blind eye to Jews. No one should be harrassed or attacked based on their religion, ethnicity or color of hair.

Why the freedoms of speech comes only whenever they criticize Islam, May Allah forbid mimic Muhammad and Quran, slaughter Muslims? Do they dare to say even a single word on crusade?

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

Thats nothing to do with Freedom of Speech. You are allowed to criticize ideas but you are not allowed to attack a group of people based on their religion or ethnicity.

Purpose of freedom of speech is to protect human beings and not to protect cults or religions or ideas. So while you can criticize Islam or Judaism, you cannot attack Muslims or Jews themselves.

These are hate crimes and these people have to be arrested, whether they attack Muslims or they attack Jews.

1) I would like to know how the West treats Modi and BJP who compared the Muslims with puppies and also declared them low-tier human beings.
2) Whenever Muslims raise the Islamophobia issue they are told that since Islam isn't a race so the concept of Islamophobia doesn't hold as racial hate so how can jews be considered a race.
3) One more point isn't it mockery that guys are arrested for slurs and abuses but the whole west is pin-drop silent on actual children being killed.
4) Wasnt the freedom of speech gets compromised when states act against leaking of state information and plans? That information is not directed towards any group of people but rather are plans and ideas about how a state will act and why assange was arrested for exercising his free speech right?
5) Arent KKK members still active inside USA beside their open hate towards a group of people on the basis of color.
6) Switzerland has just banned the building of mosque minarets in their country citing them to be against their culture. Now Isn't this against freedom of expression?
7) French president declared hijab against french ideals and also banned hijabs in schools and burqas in public places. Isnt this against freedom of expression? If saudia is criticized for forcing a certain dress code then how different french are?
8) Israeli law of citizenship is based upon jewish ancestory and it denies the natives Palestinian refugees from returning back to their own lands. Now why west is supporting a state whose foundation is based on racial discrimination. Not discrimination against an idea but rather discrimination on the basis of race.

Hope all these questions are being answered in a point based manner

 

[Vitamin_C]

Why the freedoms of speech comes only whenever they criticize Islam, May Allah forbid mimic Muhammad and Quran, slaughter Muslims? Do they dare to say even a single word on crusade?

You can criticize any religion or ideology whether it is Christianity, Nazism or Zionism.

But you cannot discriminate against or call for attack against a group of people whether it is Muslims, Jews or Christians.

In West’s eyes, human beings are important ideas are not. In our eyes human beings are not important but ideas are important, that’s why there is misunderstanding and disconnect between our societies.

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

You can criticize any religion or ideology whether it is Christianity, Nazism or Zionism.

But you cannot discriminate against or call for attack against a group of people whether it is Muslims, Jews or Christians.

In West’s eyes, human beings are important ideas are not. In our eyes human beings are not important but ideas are important, that’s why there is misunderstanding and disconnect between our societies.

Well, I have stated in one of my posts above that they care for humanity as long as those humans are not Muslims or anti-Capitalist. Just by their recent actions, it's clear that the position that you are presenting is wrong. It is wrong to assert that they care for humans over ideas.

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

You can criticize any religion or ideology whether it is Christianity, Nazism or Zionism.

But you cannot discriminate against or call for attack against a group of people whether it is Muslims, Jews or Christians.

In West’s eyes, human beings are important ideas are not. In our eyes human beings are not important but ideas are important, that’s why there is misunderstanding and disconnect between our societies.

Discrimination against an idea?
https://twitter.com/x/status/1393996168233840640

 

[Vitamin_C]

Well, I have stated in one of my posts above that they care for humanity as long as those humans are not Muslims or anti-Capitalist. Just by their recent actions, it's clear that the position that you are presenting is wrong. It is wrong to assert that they care for humans over ideas.

Well obviously they will care about people in their country first rather than in other country. But when you are in their country you cannot call for violence against anyone whether it is Muslim or Jew.

 

[Vitamin_C]

Whenever Muslims raise the Islamophobia issue they are told that since Islam isn't a race so the concept of Islamophobia doesn't hold as racial hate so how can jews be considered a race.

Islamophobia is a sham term. There is nothing wrong with having phobia when it comes to ideologies and its normal for people to fear certain ideologies such as Nazism.

This term is probably from Muslims who do not understand the societal dynamics in the West that they do not give too much importance to religions or other ideologies, so one can cry about Islamophobia and West couldnt care less about it.

Muslimphobia on the other hand is different and I think this is the term that should be used instead of Islamophobia.

There is genuine fear of Islam in West even in open minded country like Switzerland where public (especially women) voted in favor to ban further construction of minarets to express their fears about Islam. They are afraid that some of their hard earned rights such as womens rights, secular rule of law above religion will be lost with growing influence of Islam.

Some of the things documented in Swiss courts:
Imam of Swiss mosque in Geneva publicly justifying stoning of adulteres and amputations of limbs for theft
Muslim parents preventing their daughters from going to swimming classes
Forced marriages
Female genital mutilations (probably cultural from African refugees)
Honor killings of Muslim women
Muslims asking to introduce Shariah in Switzerland

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

Islamophobia is a sham term. There is nothing wrong with having phobia when it comes to ideologies and its normal for people to fear certain ideologies such as Nazism.

This term is probably from Muslims who do not understand the societal dynamics in the West that they do not give too much importance to religions or other ideologies, so one can cry about Islamophobia and West couldnt care less about it.

Muslimphobia on the other hand is different and I think this is the term that should be used instead of Islamophobia.

There is genuine fear of Islam in West even in open minded country like Switzerland where public (especially women) voted in favor to ban further construction of minarets to express their fears about Islam. They are afraid that some of their hard earned rights such as womens rights, secular rule of law above religion will be lost with growing influence of Islam.

Some of the things documented in Swiss courts:
Imam of Swiss mosque in Geneva publicly justifying stoning of adulteres and amputations of limbs for theft
Muslim parents preventing their daughters from going to swimming classes
Forced marriages
Female genital mutilations (probably cultural from African refugees)
Honor killings of Muslim women
Muslims asking to introduce Shariah in Switzerland

As per my request, you failed to address it in point-based manner. Islamophobia is an umbrella term for hate against an ideology and its practitioners. So if you are not cool with it we will refer to it as MuslimPhobia, the hate which is only directed towards muslims.
Addressing your last points. Hindus, Christians and jews have also done crimes so would I stop them from committing the crimes or would I stop them from practicing the religion? I mean minarets and hijabs are in no way suppressing freedom.
As per your argument that countries care about people living in their country rather than other countries. So why the whole of the west is standing in solidarity with Israel and the USA keeps on blocking resolutions against Israel in the UN? Going further they provide the biggest military aid to Israel further facilitating the apartheid. Are Israelis their own citizens? Why no such empathy is being shown for Indian Muslims or say other oppressed people around the globe?

 

[surfer]

So why the whole of the west is standing in solidarity with Israel and the USA keeps on blocking resolutions against Israel in the UN? Going further they provide the biggest military aid to Israel further facilitating the apartheid. Are Israelis their own citizens? Why no such empathy is being shown for Indian Muslims or say other oppressed people around the globe?

I agree with some of your posts, but Vitamin C also has a point. There have been cases in the UK were people have been arrested and jailed for speaking against muslims.

Lincoln man admits sending 'Punish a Muslim Day' letters

David Parnham admits sending the letters to mosques, the Queen, David Cameron and Theresa May.

www.bbc.co.uk

Also the met police themselves say "hate crimes" against muslims are increasing in the UK, which shows that at least they are being recorded as such. Whether they all lead to arrests and successful prosecutions is another matter, and more can be done here.

But I'll answer one specific point...quoted above......Because Israel uses it influence (money, holocaust guilt. religious angle) in the US and UK to gain favour for itself. Whereas Muslim countries either have not developed such influence in the US or UK over decades (Pak, Turkey, Indonesia) or what influence they have they use for business (Saudi, UAE).

 

[surfer]

Islamophobia is a sham term. There is nothing wrong with having phobia when it comes to ideologies and its normal for people to fear certain ideologies such as Nazism.

This term is probably from Muslims who do not understand the societal dynamics in the West that they do not give too much importance to religions or other ideologies, so one can cry about Islamophobia and West couldnt care less about it.

Interesting, the first use of the word Islamophobia is from the western press/writings

Islamophobia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One of the biggest problems with that word is that there is no agreed upon definitions of it, so some groups criticise it for confusing Islam and Muslims. However, fact remains that muslims are subject to bigotry and racism in the West, not dissimilar to Jews, blacks, chinese, etc at various points in history with different intensities.

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

I agree with some of your posts, but Vitamin C also has a point. There have been cases in the UK were people have been arrested and jailed for speaking against muslims.

Lincoln man admits sending 'Punish a Muslim Day' letters

David Parnham admits sending the letters to mosques, the Queen, David Cameron and Theresa May.

www.bbc.co.uk

Also the met police themselves say "hate crimes" against muslims are increasing in the UK, which shows that at least they are being recorded as such. Whether they all lead to arrests and successful prosecutions is another matter, and more can be done here.

But I'll answer one specific point...quoted above......Because Israel uses it influence (money, holocaust guilt. religious angle) in the US and UK to gain favour for itself. Whereas Muslim countries either have not developed such influence in the US or UK over decades (Pak, Turkey, Indonesia) or what influence they have they use for business (Saudi, UAE).

So their ethics are limited inside their borders and outside the borders, they are absolute barbarians. To me, this is just hypocrisy. Even inside borders they have to ban the minarets, hijabs, burqas and Algerian flags

 

[surfer]

So their ethics are limited inside their borders and outside the borders, they are absolute barbarians. To me, this is just hypocrisy. Even inside borders they have to ban the minarets, hijabs, burqas and Algerian flags

Absolutely they are hypocrites....UK law will protect muslims in the country, but don't expect UK govt to protect muslims outside the country. UK will still sell arms to whoever and for whatever - and they will still make statements like "hostilities should cease" while still supplying arms to one side.

Swiss and French are more aggressive in banning minarat's hijabs, UK is not there yet, and I think they will never go so far....maybe because Islam is more established in UK and has been for longer. So when we say "West", we also have to recognise there is differentiation there.

 

[Vitamin_C]

One of the biggest problems with that word is that there is no agreed upon definitions of it, so some groups criticise it for confusing Islam and Muslims. However, fact remains that muslims are subject to bigotry and racism in the West, not dissimilar to Jews, blacks, chinese, etc at various points in history with different intensities.

Well its a misleading term just like how freedom of speech makes Pakistanis to think it means freedom to speak which it does not.

Muslimphobia would be a better term because its talking about human beings rather than a religion or ideology which West doesnt care as much about compared to human beings.

Jews have actually done a better jobs at this by tradmarking the term Anti-semitism and Muslims have failed because Jews speak to the West in their own language while Muslims try to impose their feelings about their religion on the West without seeing how this would be viewed from West perspective.

 

[Vitamin_C]

As per my request, you failed to address it in point-based manner.

Sorry I just answered one point because I didnt have time but ill try to answer more as I get time.

Islamophobia is an umbrella term for hate against an ideology

Hate against ideology is not considered a bad thing in the West

So if you are not cool with it we will refer to it as MuslimPhobia, the hate which is only directed towards muslims.

Thats better

I mean minarets and hijabs are in no way suppressing freedom.

This was your other question about burqa ban in France.

To be clear, Burqa/face covering are banned/restricted in atleast 2 Muslim countries and other countries including Russia, China, Germany, Italy, Spain and some African countries.

Burqa are seen as a symbol of oppression against women in France. Their ban is symbolic.

In Pakistan and other Muslim countries a women's respect/dignity is connected to her body and genitals and if a woman is raped its hard for her to get married because people say that woman has lost her dignity and respect. Therefore a woman who does not cover up is seen as a whore and not deserving of respect. So in a way society is forcing women to act a certain way because of how they are judged, which means that its not a matter of choice.

These crude standards that are set for women go against values of France and they view these unfair expectations on woman as a repression. And the Burqa ban is a way to liberate Muslim womens in France from these unfair expectation that their families/religion/society places upon them. So if their society tells them they are not pious or that they are whores for not covering up they can point to the law and say they are dressing normally not because they are whores but because its against the law to walk around wearing a tent.

 

[Vitamin_C]

So their ethics are limited inside their borders and outside the borders

They are only responsible for their citizens and people living under their protection/jurisdiction. You cannot put the blame on them for human rights violations that are carried out by other countries.

They still try to give assylum to Muslims and even these Muslims will do stupid things while they are under assylum, such as the Pakistani man who was in France for assylum and started stabbing innocent bystanders in Paris outside former office of Charlie Hebdo few months ago.

There is mistrust in West of Muslims and there are strong reasons behind it.

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

They are only responsible for their citizens and people living under their protection/jurisdiction. You cannot put the blame on them for human rights violations that are carried out by other countries.

They still try to give assylum to Muslims and even these Muslims will do stupid things while they are under assylum, such as the Pakistani man who was in France for assylum and started stabbing innocent bystanders in Paris outside former office of Charlie Hebdo few months ago.

There is mistrust in West of Muslims and there are strong reasons behind it.

So hitler was not responsible for the massacre in USSR and Poland and Britain was not responsible for millions of deaths in India and France in algeria and USA in Afghanistan and Iraq because all these countries lie out of their borders?

 

[Vitamin_C]

So hitler was not responsible for the massacre in USSR and Poland and Britain was not responsible for millions of deaths in India and France in algeria and USA in Afghanistan and Iraq because all these countries lie out of their borders?

Yes and No.

Hitler killed all those people because he was following an ideology and so was Stalin - They were both dictatorships. This is why West doesnt value ideologies over human lives and they moved on. Britain and France do not hold colonies anymore but I still think they are responsibile and there is a discussion going on in UK by academics whether UK should accept responsibilities for their genocidal actions. All countries made some mistakes at some point but whats important is what direction they are moving in.

The part where I disagree is Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq was under the countrol of an unpopular tyrant and dictator who gassed millions of his own people and invaded 2-3 neighbouring countries. I would argue that Iraq was actually liberated and so was Afghanistan from rag tag taliban militias who were running the country. Now Afghanistan is on a better path towards democracy and their people might actually have a chance for a better life.

 

[AhmadSaleem264]

This was your other question about burqa ban in France.

To be clear, Burqa/face covering are banned/restricted in atleast 2 Muslim countries and other countries including Russia, China, Germany, Italy, Spain and some African countries.

Even if others countries have done it, it doesn't justify it. It is just a bandwagon.

Burqa are seen as a symbol of oppression against women in France. Their ban is symbolic.

In Pakistan and other Muslim countries a women's respect/dignity is connected to her body and genitals and if a woman is raped its hard for her to get married because people say that woman has lost her dignity and respect. Therefore a woman who does not cover up is seen as a whore and not deserving of respect. So in a way society is forcing women to act a certain way because of how they are judged, which means that its not a matter of choice.

These crude standards that are set for women go against values of France and they view these unfair expectations on woman as a repression. And the Burqa ban is a way to liberate Muslim womens in France from these unfair expectation that their families/religion/society places upon them. So if their society tells them they are not pious or that they are whores for not covering up they can point to the law and say they are dressing normally not because they are whores but because its against the law to walk around wearing a tent.

Many things are mixed up in this argument. I will try to dissect through the main things. First, it says that women are forced to behave in a certain way inside Muslim countries and they are forced to dress in a certain way. This is why France has banned burqa/hijabs because it is against oppression. Now that may be true to a certain extent but what about the ladies who willingly want to cover themselves up? Aren't you taking away their freedom of dressing? Moreover when you are forcing your values on a person against his will then it means you have the ultimate conviction of the righteousness of your system of values and then, in that case, it's just a religion.
Secondly, France's obsession with burqa and hijab actually stems from its colonial past. After facing stiff resistance from algerian freedom fighters they decided to enforce their values on algerian society. They presented themselves as reformers who want to reform an uncivilized nation. But in reality, this was just to legitimize the occupation. Every colonizer presented itself as a reformer. For this, they declared that the more a woman covers her body the least civilized she is. They tried to weaken the religion to weaken and demoralize the resistance and they also conducted burqa unveiling ceremonies. Where they used to bring several burqa-wearing algerian women onto the stage and unveils them and photograph them. Their soldiers photographed themselves against forcefully naked algerian women and France never apologized for it. So much so so for women's empowerment. So that's my friend is the background of their obsession with hijab and burqa.
The historical perspective however doesn't account for philosophical righteousness. I just shared it to have the correct context. The actual argument however is discussed above it.