No Muslim will protest or make a mess out of a situation, If they were left alone in their own countries.
I'm not sure how you can make that assertion with anything even approaching certainty. How do you know?
I am a Muslim, When I go to the US, I am assumed to be a Terrorist. And checked Rigorously, Watched Vigilantly,
Not by most people, actually. Sure, there are the racist fuckwits who do that, but they're not checking you because you're Muslim, they're checking you because they've had terrorist attacks over there, and they want to make sure that they aren't letting in anybody dangerous...which is just frikkin sensible. The USA do that to their own citizens as well, so I'm not sure where this is coming from.
In my Own country a Drone strike Kills me for attending a religious school explanation : it was an Extremist we killed.
Again....no. In fact, if a drone strike DID hit a school in the Middle East and the public heard about it, the chances are that there would be a HUGE backlash against the people who ordered it. There's already a big kerfuffle over drone warfare, so...yeah. Again, not sure where you got THAT.
Tell me then, Is suddenly Being a Muslim has become a Crime in this world?. Because from the way I see it, it really has become a crime to even tell people I am Muslim.
No, it isn't, and even though some people have these preconceived notions, in my experience most people are just kind of "eh, whatever." when you talk about religion in particular. I might live in a particularly apathetic area, but that's my experience. Being a Muslim hasn't become a crime; you can't be punished for being a Muslim, and yes, some people will judge you for it, but that is - sadly - the nature of humanity in that there are always people seeking to make an out group. By and large, most people that I know really wouldn't give two flying fucks what religion you are so long as you're a cool person.
Hasn't this whole war, and fight for rights, Made my life miserable?. Now if I get up and argue about it, Defending my religion means I am siding with the terrorists, not Siding with my Religion makes me a Infidel.
Well...I'm sorry if that's your experience. I can only say what my position is on it, and personally, I don't have any problems with Muslims. Islam? Yeah, I have a few issues with Islam itself, but I have NO issues with the average day to day Muslim. In my head, at least, they're entirely separate entities when it comes to dealing with them. In my experience, there are very few people I know or have met who would engage in such "with us or against us" mentality. But then, I live in a different area. *shrug*
But If I am fighting for my religion, your so called Universal laws make me a terrorist/Extremist.
Ummm...except they don't. Unless you're trying to enslave people and suppress their freedom of speech, in which case, yes, you're a criminal.
Let's start with your First comment.
USA Did do that, Guantanamo Bay is a Example of that, Every muslim who was suspected of any wrong doing and More than hundreds were Imprisoned because they were not what they were suppose to be. That wasn't wrong? do tell me?.
That wasn't JUST Muslims, and it wasn't necessarily BECAUSE they were Muslims, but because they were suspects. Were there racist reasons for it? Probably. But whatever. It WAS wrong, and I don't see how anything I've said here could possibly suggest that I think otherwise. If this is in reference to George Bush not breaking any laws, then to the best of my knowledge there isn't enough evidence that he personally ordered that; if he didn't, then he isn't a criminal. If he did, but there isn't enough evidence, we can't convict. If there IS evidence of him doing that, then I retract that statement and agree that he is a war criminal and should be convicted.
Your Second Comment, I am saying Everyone changes their laws in their own time. No one has the right to dictate another country what to do, Otherwise why keep all the borders and make armies just make a Humanitarian army and kill or imprison anyone who does not follow. That would at least, make sense when done.
Or - OR - we could encourage free thought and talk with the leaders to get them to change their laws without warfare. But as it is, I want to extend those human rights to everybody ASAP, because while we dither, there ARE people suffering unjustly.
LOL Come on now don't joke. Half the wars going on, are going on because the all mighty USA does not agree with their Policies and their way of living. We are teaching those savages how to live. Is what the motto was. Or atleast the Ground reality was that.
Whilst I disagree with American Foreign Policy (UK Citizen speaking here), that is
a gross over simplification of what's going on. Also, I highly doubt that was the attitude of the boots on the ground, even if it was the attitude of the people on top.
France, now you don't know much about it, but let me tell you, you can wear something to cover your face if its cold but you cannot do Hijjab in public places. So if we cannot do that in Your country, because its your country, and we can't practice our religion, then when you come to Our country, by that same standard you should wear a hijjab and follow our Laws. Otherwise Yyou are promoting double standards.
I've done a quick google on it, and whilst I'm not an expert, my quick skim shows that it ISN'T specifically against Muslims. The ban is "on the wearing of face-covering headgear, including masks, helmets, balaclava, niqābs and other veils covering the face in public places, except under specified circumstances. The ban also applies to the burqa, a full-body covering, if it covers the face. Consequently,full body costumes and Zentais (skin-tight garments covering entire body) were banned. The key argument supporting this proposal is that face-coverings prevent the clear identification of a person, which is both a security risk, and a social hindrance within a society which relies on facial recognition and expression in communication. Veils such as the chador, scarves and other headwear that do not cover the face, are not affected by this law and can be worn. The law applies to all citizens, including men and non-Muslims, who may not cover their face in public except where specifically provided by law (such as motor-bike riders and safety workers) and during established occasional events (such as some carnivals)."
So....yeah, not quite what you think it is. The other thing to note is that this debate is STILL going on. So....yeah, you're kind of misrepresenting the issue here.
Now onto the topic of Who decides what, If taking of a life is against human rights, then anyone innocent killed in a war should be trialed, How is it that America is above that law when it comes to war crime. You get away by saying Its not a perfect world. All justice is exacted on us, nothing on the west....
I don't think America is above it, nor should anybody be allowed to get away with violating human rights. The sticky thing is that it refused to sign things like the Geneva Convention, which means that nobody can punish it on that note because it didn't sign. The fuckwits. See, you're slinging loads of shit at me which...don't actually apply to me.
Oh trust me the Religion of islam says, "Your Religion onto you and My Religion onto Me." this means if you leave us alone we will leave you alone. :)
It also says:
- "and the men are a degree above them [women]" (2:228)
- "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will..." (2:223)
- ""...The Prophet said, 'If somebody discards his religion, kill him.' " (Bukhari 52:260)
And ""O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." (Quran 9:73)
- "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah." (Muslim 1:30)
- Bukhari 59: 369 tells the story of a man who was stabbed to death for insulting Mohammed.
- And Islamic law states that "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed."
So....tell me again how Islam encourages equality and freedom.
I don't think in the 1900s there was any kind of slavery in muslims? Not that I am aware of?.
Actually, yes. The Arab/Middle East slave trade was only stamped out for good (hopefully) in the 1960's, about the time the World Muslim Congress FINALLY pledged allegiance to anti-slavery movements. In terms of wide-spread legal abolition, the Muslim Sultinates actually abolished it later
than most places, at the end of the 19th century, and only under pressure from people like the USA and the British. So actually...as a whole, Muslim countries are no more or less guilty of the slave trade than the West. Well, recently anyway. The Middle East was using slaves faaaaaar before the West. In fact, the Muslim Barbary Corsairs were raiding European coasts for slaves long before Europe went over and started taking their own. Also, fun fact: Britain was one of the first countries to make transporting and importing slaves illegal. Not keeping them, true, but they got a head start on everybody else. 180....7, I think it was. They didn't outlaw slavery across the Empire and emaciate the slaves until....1834. I think. Yeah, that sounds about right.