Muslim silence on anti-Christian persecution
The Anti-Wahhabi, a Muslim living in the United States, calls on fellow Muslims to stop ignoring the persecution and oppression of Christians (and Jews) in Muslim countries. “God knows we tend to cry bloody murder when Muslims are being persecuted by tyrants (unless they are Islamic, cue the silence of the Taliban for example), yet what about the minorities in Muslim lands?” he wonders.
Why is it so difficult for Muslims to bring light of wrongdoings like this? We all know the Prophet (saw) would not endorse the harm of minorities so what gives these Muslims the right to do so?
If we are going to bring up the faults of non-Muslim tyrants oppressing our brothers and sisters, then we must by that same token speak out when non-Muslims are attacked and murdered by Muslim extremists. The silence of Archbishop Rahho is extremely unacceptable.
The Archbiship was killed recently in Iraq; Iraqi Muslims were upset by it, but most Muslims living in the West conveniently ignored the cowardly murder.
I think that the Anti-Wahhabi is right, and I think that as long as Western Muslims don’t speak out against oppression of religious minorities in Muslim countries, Westerners in general and Christians specifically will not take Muslim-complaints seriously when it comes to possible oppression of Muslims by members of other religions.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
Little wonder it wasn’t mentioned by Muslims living in the west. Compared to an estimated 2.7 million Iraqis killed by the sanctions or the illegal invasion or even the daily murder of Palestinians, it’s a non-event. Christians certainly were not persecuted in Iraq prior to the invasion , just as 30,000 Jews now living in Iran are not. I can’t help feeling if the UK had suffered genocide by the hands of Muslims, the death of one Muslim would not really be a point of interest.
The Iraqis were not killed by the sanctions. They were killed because their leader used money that was supposed to be spent for food and medicine during the sanctions to bribe politicians and media figures to talk their countries into lifting the sanctions. See, he had all these wonderful WMD programs he’d been running and the sanctions were crimping his style.
Google "Oil for Food" and "Claudia Rosett" for more information.
For more information on genocide in Iraq, Google, "Marsh Arabs" or "Anfal Campaign".
As for the daily murder of Palestinians, I call BS. Unless, you’re talking about the regular criminal murder that happens in every country. But I don’t think you are. I suspect villanous Jews are somewhere lurking in your statement.
I don’t assume that most Muslims approve of religious persecution of non-Muslims even if we don’t hear enough condemnation- but there’s no doubt it would go a long way if Muslim leaders would find ways to more vocally condemn it and find ways to get the media to cover their views on it. It would also be necessary to see some organization effort on the part of Muslim groups to reform the official positions of governments which sanction persecution and don’t allow for reciprocity of religious freedoms (even though some Muslim leaders and organizations fight to maintain the freedoms for Muslims to worship in non-Muslim countries.)
Michael–try reading something besides Think Progress and moveon.org. Or are you a member of International A.N.S.W.E.R.? Or a card-carrying Marxist? Or perhaps an Anarchist. In any case, please try to be more informed–it’s next to impossible to argue a point with someone so ill-informed…
Pathetic attempts to re-write history and the normal personal abuse that accompanies it. Of course the sanctions killed 1.5 million Iraqis, not Saddam, but normal Iraqis and without any doubt the USA knew exactly what it was doing. Mad. Albright in 1996 said the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children were "worth it". So seriously who can get upset over one Christian in Iraq? You are all out of your minds.
Michael, you are counting all the Kurds and Shiites that died due to poison gas, aren’t you? Or do those not count because Saddam was an official vicim? I assume that you are not counting all the Iraqi army troops that died in Saddam’s attack and war on Iran….
MIchael, again I point out that Saddam is the reasons the sanctions existed. No Saddam, no sanctions.
Additionally, the Oil for Food program was set up specifically to feed and provide medical care for the children of Iraq. Saddam used that money to bribe people to lobby for him. Food and medicine was not purchased, or in some cases, rotten food and expired medicine was purchased, and Iraqis died. That is Saddam’s fault.
You can look that up. Like I said, Google is your friend.
Unless, of course, you’re one of those close-minded folks. You wouldn’t want to be one of those, would you?
Saddam used that money to bribe people to lobby for him.
Only what he didn’t spend on getting more conventional weaponry.
Just one more point, Michael. Albright worked for the Clinton Administration. Her attitude is that of most libbies–any number of innocent lives is worth avoiding the "evils" of war. Keep your demented POV. I swear, the internet has created more sociopathic/psychopathic personalities than all the abuse in the world.
No I’m not including the deaths which occured during the Iran/Iraq war when the USA provided both sides with with the poisonous gas. As for the food for oil, the 1.5 million deaths had more or less already occured before the oil for food program came into being.
Recall that every contract entered into by Iraq had to be approved by the UN Sanctions Committee before it could be finalized and a transaction could take place. Any item which even a single member of the committee questioned could be held up. Eventually, US committee members alone held up 5,000 contracts.
30% of the oil sale proceeds were sent to Kuwait as war reparations. They gave 30% to Kuwait while Iraqi children were dying for lack of water and adequate foodstuffs., another 5% went to the United Nations to administer the program. 13%, taken off the top, was set aside for people in the autonomous northern governates. This left approximately 50% of the money for the roughly 20 million people living in the rest of Iraq. If we divide the total amount of money available to these people through the seven years of the Program (roughly $32 billion), we arrive at $225 per person per year, a pathetic amount, hardly enough to fund a healthy society, let alone rebuild one which had been so thoroughly devastated. And so people, many of them children, continued to sicken and die. This is the real disgrace of the Oil-For-food Program.
As for Albright being a so called "libby" , she was actually a right wing zionistfacsist of exactly the same kind that run the present US administration. And all of that because Saddam wouldn’t give up his non-existant WMD.
admin: call people names again and you’ll be banned
I actually know some Christians living in Iraq although I must admit they’ve been unable to make contact now for a few months, perhaps they are dead I don’t know. Whose fault is that Saddam’s or Bush’s?
False.
False.
Unsourced, probably false. Also irrelevant.
Irrelevant since Saddam was diverting the money to bribes, weapons, and palace construction anyway.
This is the kind of sad result we get when someone relies on anti-American propaganda sites for all their talking points.
What is VERY interesting about the folks who grossly exaggerate the impact of the sanctions and misplace the blame for it is their lack of alternatives. Obviously, they oppose the war, but weren’t the sanctions the alternative to war? How else would Saddam be contained or prevented from renewing his attacks on neighboring countries?
Maybe we were supposed to just assume he would be nice. This time.
Then again, giving how unredeemably evil Michael clearly believes the United States to be (both Republicans and Democrats — all “zionistfascists” every single one of them), does anyone else get the sense that he wishes Saddam HAD had WMDs, if only in the hope that he actually would have used them on the U.S.?
Wow, I did not expect to see a post of mine on this site. Thanks Michael!
To add, there is also silence when Muslims are under attack by other Muslims. Just take the example of the oppression of Shi’a Hazaras by the Taliban. Was there outrage by the Muslim world? The only country that did much for them was ironically Iran, and Iran sent weapons and aid to help Hazara militias defend themselves from the genocidal brutality of the Taliban, while other Muslims looked the other way or even blindly endorsed the Taliban because supposedly they were practicing "pure Islam".
What a bloody joke.
I’m going to make a post in the future regarding the victimization mentality of Muslims and the classic double standards we tend to possess. I tend to get attacked on both sides of the spectrum, being called an "Islamic apologist" while on other side I am accused of being "anti-Muslim" lol
So Admin it’s OK for these people to call me names but not for me to respond in a similar manner?
The Oil for Food program began because of the genocide the sanctions were causing so clearly the vast majority of the 1.;5 million Iraqis the US killed happened previously. If Saddam had WMD the US wouldn’t have launched the illegal invasion in the first place. The USA knew very well that there were none otherwise how can you explain why they deliberately misquoted Saddam’s brother-in-law Kemal Hussein’s statement that Iraq had (past tense) up to 1995 to be changed to Saddam had WMD?
Every oil for food contract passed through the UN Sanctions Committee headed up by the USA , so how can you claim that the receipts were mishandled by Saddam and funds diverted, presumably you think he ate all the food himself. Then of course you repeat the American created myth about Saddam using the money to build palaces. Well where are all these palaces which were presumably built after 1991?
Of course besides the official oil for food transactions there were also some deemed "illegal" since they didn’t pass through the UN Sanctions Committee, the majority of those incidentally were made with the co-operation of US companies or subsidiaries of American companies. Nevertheless it’s logical to assume that the rates of genocide caused by the USA would have been even higher if it had not been for these "illegal" transactions.
Yes of course I don’t see any difference between Republicans and Democrats, the USA’s policy of creating genocide in the ME has been consistent through Bush Sr, to Clinton through to the current laughing stock of the world and changes are not expected whether it’s Clinton , McCain or Obama. The only changes to US policy will result from the USA being forced to change their ways, as H. Clinton warned yesterday, China now holds the lien on the US economy.Anyway coming back to the main subject of this thread, how can anyone take seriously crocodile tears for one Christian from the same people who have killed 2.7 million plus Muslims?
@John
Please do not judge others. Jesus came to show love not hatered.