Mohammed Ghouse Barq'v very premise is wrong

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Apr 21, 2012 at 03:00

Dear Dr Pipes,

Mohammed Ghouse Barq once again repeated the beaten-to-death argument that Islam gives freedom to all other religions. And the very premise of this argument is wrong for you cannot give a thing that you have not previously taken away. Barq wrote his letter from India where 80% of the population is Hindu. Now I invite Burq to see how the following statement sounds to him: Hindus of India give freedom to its Muslim population to practice their faith. You see, Muslims of India do not have the freedom to practice their faith as a Allah-given right, instead, they have this freedom as a privilege granted by Hindus. My asserton is quite shameful. Isn't it.

Burq's statement has many other absurdities also which you will realize only if your eyes are not closed to Islamic hypocrisies. First, Barq says that Islamic rulers treated the Christians and Jews of Spain nicely. This statement makes me angry and sad due to the insult that it hides. How did the Islamic rulers get to rule Spain in the first place. Did they go there like Gautam Buddha dressed as monks?

Burq also says that Islamic rulers of India were very kind because "80% of India's population is still Hindu". False on two counts. First, Islamic occupation of India then was no less objectionable than United State's occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan today. Mr Burq will not be able to appreciate this point because in his thinking it is probably the birthright of Islamic rulers to capture all land on the planet. And, second, pre Islamic India started in Afghanistan (where bamiyan Buddha statues were recently destroyed) and extended into what is today's Burma. There are three countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh) which are 90% Islamic or more in this region now. And at least 50% of the entire Indian subcontinent is Islamic.

How little do we see once we close our eyes!

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".