‘Conspiracy of the West and Jews’ Argument Whatever atrocities Muslims do all over the world, Muslims generally blame the conspiracy of the West and the Jews for those acts. Be it the 9/11 terrorists attacks, or the Madrid bombings or the 26/11 Mumbai massacre, Muslims tend to accuse anyone but Muslims for those evil acts. Even after the confession of Osama Bin Laden, Muslims still claimed that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job of the US government or committed by the Jews. Those, who commit those atrocities, Muslims believe, are actually agents of the West or Israel, who had taken proper training in Islam. All these they do are aimed at defaming Islam. This sort of lies released by renowned Muslim clerics or leaders eventually reaches the mouth of every Muslim, who learns it by heart, and like a parrot, speaks without any reasoning whatsoever. Why would the West and Israel try to defame Islam? Why they don’t carry out the same campaign against other religions, such as Hinduism or Buddhism? What they would achieve from these efforts? Would a person burn his own house in order to blame his neighbour? And if they undergo proper training in Islamic scripture just to malign Islam, why don’t they get inspiration from their learning the Quran, Hadiths and Sira, and become devout Muslim? Why Allah leaves them uninspired even after their reading the Quran? These are questions Muslims are afraid to ask. From the last question in this list arise Muslims’ fallacious argument discussed next. ‘Allah’s gives Hidayah as He wishes’ Argument When one asks a Muslim: Why do so many Muslims leave Islam, especially after gaining good knowledge of Islam and the Quran? Or, why there are so many non-Muslim scholars of Arabic and Islamic literature who, despite having very deep knowledge of Islam, never embrace Islam? They would retort that Allah gives Hidayah, whomever He wills. They argue that Allah did not bestow Hidayah even upon Muhammad’s loving uncle and protector. Such arguments are nothing but fallacious defence to hide the evil and treachery of Muhammad. The reason why Muhammad’s uncle did not accept him as a prophet can be another. His uncle Abu Taleb did not only deeply love him, but also swore to protect him when the Meccan expressed their desire to harm Muhammad for his insulting their religion and customs. Yet, Muslims will never reflect on why such a loving uncle would refuse to believe Muhammad’s prophetic claim, or why Allah will not give guidance to such a devoted and loving protector of His beloved apostle? Logically, if there was only one person Allah decided to give guidance, it should have been his uncle Abu Taleb. It seems Allah provide guidance to only those, who blindly trust Muhammad’s words. Other Arguments Muslims use more tricks in the defence of Islam. Whenever they are face with some Islamic duty, which are weird or difficult to follow for moral or practical reasons, they make all kinds of groundless classifications to justify their inability to follow them. Suppose, they are face with modern-day reality, where they must embrace Bid’dah (innovation), they classify it into two types—namely Bid’dah-e-Husna and Bid’dah-e-Zalala. When faced with their duty of engaging in Jihad, they classify it as Jihad-e-Nafs and Jihad Amr. But, there are such descriptions in the Quran and Hadith. When one criticizes Islam, they demand for his/her qualification, when for such one issues, one require no specific qualification is required other than their own logic and conscience to be able to judge right and wrong, to tell sinner and saint apart, to separate good from evil. Yet, Muslims themselves can go on criticizing every other religion as per their wish. When an ex-Muslim is able to show a Muslim the unsavory truth of Islam and convince him to leave Islam, Muslims accuse that new apostate must be an idiot and ignorant of true Islam or must have been forced to leave Islam. Actually those accusations apply to themselves most perfectly as they are the real ignorants of Islam and the victim of the greatest lie of the universe. Moreover, force and persecution is the weapon of Islam, of Muslims, not of the liberals because Islam legally mandates the killing of apostate. With advancement of knowledge and technology with time, Muslims innovate new justifications to defend their weird and irrational beliefs. Most recently, they innovated the excuse that Islam mandate debate in open forum with physical presence, not in writing on websites, blogs or emails. This they claim because they know well that no sensible critic would debate with Muslims on Islamic issues in front of a Muslim audience, who are ever ready to kill anybody on the slightest of criticism of Islam. So, this is nothing but a cowardly way to defend their indefensible ideology. If anything, debating on internet can be far more feasible, comfortable, cheap, authentic and intellectual than any debate with physical appearance. Debating face to face can be threatening; people can use shriek, sophism, chicanery or demagogy to win the debate. Muslims always react with shriek and insolence when one says something critical of Islam. It is well known that Muslims almost nothing substantive to support their claim that Islam is a true religion and Muhammad was a true prophet of God. Muslims only can hurl abuses and threats to silence the critics of Islam. Shrieking and stridency is their weapon to support their illogical and evil cult. If their religion is founded to truth, they would defend it with reason and logical arguments, not with threats and persecution. It seems their Allah did not provide brains or their religion didn’t provide them grounds to defend their claims. Else, they need not behave like wild beasts when people criticize Islam; they can shut the critics with logical arguments and refutations. If a people in a society do evil things, like sacrificing young children and engage in killing and plundering of opponent sects, and assume that those evil deeds are worship of God, without any inclination to listen to anything about their rituals and beliefs, and are ready to kill anyone who say anything against their (evil) beliefs, just like Muslims do, then can you tell me any method to guide them to right path. Remember, open scrutiny is the only way to separate the right from the wrong. No criticism no rectification. Bertrand Russell asserts: “Thoughts are not ‘free’ when legal penalties are incurred by the holding or not holding of certain opinions, or by giving expression to one’s belief or lack of belief on certain matters.” And when there is no freedom of thought, criticism is not tolerated, and then no reformation or purification is expected. Those who use threats, not logical arguments, are not only pauper of evidence but also intellectually impotent and ethically wimp, who depend on the means of others. Muslims fit that bill perfectly, as they use threats to suppress the critics of Islam and voices of truth. If they were on the right path, they would defeat them with the weapon of reason and ample rational substantiation in support of their claims. Just because they have no rational grounds to defend their superstitious, illogical and weird claims, they are so intolerant and ready to persecute one at the slightest of criticism against Islam and Muhammad. As far as Muslims’ fanatical attitude regarding Islam is concerned, the Great Philanthropist, Philosopher, Mathematician, Logician and Educationist Sir Bertrand Russell’s following words most fitting: The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of holder’s lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.” ‘…the problem with the world today is ignorant are cocksure and intelligent are full of doubts.’ Muslims keeps blabbering about truth, greatness and miracles of their faith, but when questioned about basis of their rock-solid confidence in Islam, about what miracles they have seen in Islam, they can comes up with nothing convincing. I have asked this question to thousands of Muslims. Most of them failed to tell me anything and when some of them come up with answers, those appear silly or ridiculous. I concur with Ali Sina’s statement that “Muslims put off their brains with their shoes and sandals and stand blindly behind an illiterate Imam who barks the Quranic verses without understanding even a single letter of it.” The Islamic ills affecting Muslims is chronic, which will take a long, long time to be cured. It can only be accelerated by their study of Islam patiently and with an open mind. There are a lot to know about Islam, judge everything by listening to both sides of arguments—all with a rational mind, and only then can Muslims realize what is true about their faith. “He, who decides a case without hearing the other side, even if he decides justly, cannot be considered just.” God will not punish anyone of us for using our brain to ask logical questions about anything we believe or even for questioning God’s existence, at least until His existence has been founded on concrete evidence. But Muhammad and his Islam intimidate Muslims against using your brains concerning his claims. Muslims are turned so morally down, dejected, downhearted and depressed that they have no moral courage to question anything about Islam than blinding believing each and everything Muhammad, the 7th-century pedophile, looter, liar, lustful misogynist and narcissist said and base their moral founds on the same. He turned Muslims into zombies, who have lost God’s biggest gifts them—their brain and rationality—thanks to Muhammad lure for them of big-bosom houris in Islamic heaven and the fear of roasting and toasting in hell. No matter how qualified they are academically, how many certificates and diplomas they may have, they are prone to utter nothing but rubbish in the matter of religious beliefs. There are honored professionals among Muslims, such chartered accountants, doctors, and engineers, but end result is all the same—they generally remain devoid of reason, when it comes to their faith. Just as Bertrand Russell has written (Sceptical Essays): “When a man adds up an account, he is much more likely to make a mistake in his favour than to his detriment; and when a man reasons, he is more apt to incur fallacies which favours his wishes than such as thwart them.”
Posted on: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 21:56:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015