News1 min ago
Found On Fb, Thought It Interesting. Is It Correct Or Not ?
72 Answers
Answers
What happened with the Romans and what happened with the Spanish and the Portuguese in the past is totally irrelevant to me in 2018. I don't want Islam to get a grip on any sort of power in my country. If that makes me Islamaphobic , so what... I really don't care.
13:40 Mon 05th Nov 2018
The selectivity is from clearly implying it's a phenomenon either unique to Islam, or at least dominated by it, whereas in fact (a) most religions have been at it when they get the chance, and (b) it's not even a particularly religious thing anyway. That's what Empires do: they conquer.
So why specifically focus on Islam?
So why specifically focus on Islam?
Quite, Ellipsis.
Any argument that relies on only presenting half the story, however accurate that half may be, is clearly misleading because of what it omits.
For example, why was Egypt Christian? It wasn't before, being of course... well, Egyptian. Then the Romans came along and first conquered the country before then converting it to Christianity later.
Meanwhile, the religious balance in Pakistan, at least in the modern sense, was determined not so much by Muslims entering and then invading the place, but by the aftermath of British withdrawal from and partition of India. I would have thought omitting that part of the story is also rather obviously misleading.
Any argument that relies on only presenting half the story, however accurate that half may be, is clearly misleading because of what it omits.
For example, why was Egypt Christian? It wasn't before, being of course... well, Egyptian. Then the Romans came along and first conquered the country before then converting it to Christianity later.
Meanwhile, the religious balance in Pakistan, at least in the modern sense, was determined not so much by Muslims entering and then invading the place, but by the aftermath of British withdrawal from and partition of India. I would have thought omitting that part of the story is also rather obviously misleading.
I guess maybe if you'd read on you'd have found one example of a "half of the story" that was missing, ie the reason Egypt was Christian.
The history of nations in the image is started, deliberately, from well after those nations began, making it appear as if Islam was the first aggressive conquest of those countries. It was not; ergo, the story being told is far from complete.
The history of nations in the image is started, deliberately, from well after those nations began, making it appear as if Islam was the first aggressive conquest of those countries. It was not; ergo, the story being told is far from complete.
I think it's a very clear and obvious inference from the statement "Egypt was Christian" that, by implication, it was only the arrival of Islam that disrupted this. It was not.
As woofgang said right from the start, the same is basically true of Christianity, and in the New World in particular it was brutally true. For whatever reason, that part of the story is left out. Almost as if there's a deliberate political agenda against Islam wherever it exists.
As woofgang said right from the start, the same is basically true of Christianity, and in the New World in particular it was brutally true. For whatever reason, that part of the story is left out. Almost as if there's a deliberate political agenda against Islam wherever it exists.
"It's the truth."
But it's not the whole truth. And there is the point. Why isn't the whole truth being presented? Because, of course, it shows that Islam is far from unique in its role in world history. That's inconvenient for people who want to make Islam the enemy, rather than the rather painful truth, that people in general, whenever they wield power, are the problem.
But it's not the whole truth. And there is the point. Why isn't the whole truth being presented? Because, of course, it shows that Islam is far from unique in its role in world history. That's inconvenient for people who want to make Islam the enemy, rather than the rather painful truth, that people in general, whenever they wield power, are the problem.