Innocence Of Muslims – AreThe Protests Over The Movie Justified?

Film Ridicules Prophet Mohammad

Film Ridicules Prophet Mohammad
Film Ridicules Prophet Mohammad | Source

Does The Holy Koran Condone Violence?

Film Ridicules Prophet Mohammad

An American film director has directed a movie named ‘Innocence of Muslims’. The film projects Prophet Mohammad in bad light. The film mocks at the actions and preaching of Prophet Mohammad and his followers. In essence, the film ridicules the religion Islam itself. This has aroused the anger of the Muslims all over the world which has resulted in vociferous and violent attacks on American embassy, consulates and other American targets.

Muslims’ Protests Are Justified

There cannot be any doubt that the film ‘Innocence of Muslims’ deserves condemnation from one and all. No film or artwork or fiction or essay should be written to hurt the religious sentiments of any people anywhere in the world. Only sadistic people will indulge in such an act. Therefore I join the Muslim brothers in condemning the film ‘Innocence of Muslims’, its director, its producer and actors in the movie. The heartburning among the Muslims and the resultant manifestation of their feelings in the form of protests and attacks is justified on this count.

Does The Holy Koran Condone Violence?

Having said this, I feel that the Muslims are falling into the trap set by the film producer or whoever was responsible for making such a film. It could well be the US government or some powerful American responsible for producing such a movie intentionally to hurt the Muslim sentiments and make them to indulge in violence. The purpose could be to project the Muslim community in a bad light. Already there is a feeling among many people in the world that the religion Islam is associated with terrorism and violence. Opponents of Islam quote some verses of the Holy Koran to justify their statement. I don’t know whether these verses really support terrorism or they are quoted out of context by the vested interests.

Muslim painter M F Hussein painted Hindu Gods and Goddesses in a dishonourable way

Muslim painter M F Hussein painted Hindu Gods and Goddesses in a dishonourable way
Muslim painter M F Hussein painted Hindu Gods and Goddesses in a dishonourable way | Source

Double Standards Practised By Muslims

Mindless Violence Depicts Muslims in a Bad Light

But it seems Muslims are falling into the trap set for them by the film producer or his masters. By indulging in violence and attacking innocent people not connected with the film, Muslims only damage their name further and serve the cause of USA and the Western nations. Muslims and Islamic organizations should stop this mindless violence and give vent to their feelings through legitimate means like writing about it or speaking about it. Spoken or written opinion is more powerful than violence and protests.

Do Muslims Have Right To Ridicule Other Religions?

Muslims should also introspect themselves about the double standard they are practising with respect to the other religions. The Muslim painter M F Hussein painted Hindu Gods and Goddesses in a dishonourable way and earned millions of dollars for his art work. But no Muslim or Islamic organization protested about this. Many Muslims would have silently endorsed this act and felt happy at it. Imagine how much heartburning it would have caused for the millions of Hindus. Take for example the destruction of the Bamyan Buddha statue in Afghanistan by the Talibans. No Muslim or Islamic organization protested against this. Imagine how much it would have wounded the feelings of Buddhists all over the world. Look at the way the Hindu temples and Hindus are subjugated to agony and torture by the Pakistan Islamic fundamentalists in Sind Province. No Muslim is bothered about this.

Double Standards Practised By Muslims

If Muslims are hurt by some comments or art work by an artist, they raise hue and cry and indulge in violence. When Salmon Rushdie hurt the feelings of Muslims through his book ‘Satanic Verses’, the Iranian spiritual leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa and offered a $1 million reward for his head. When the Danish cartoonist drew a caricature of Prophet Mohammad, the Muslims protested and indulged in violence. In other words, if somebody belonging to other religions hurt their sentiments, the Muslims indulge in violence. But they reserve the right to hurt the feelings of people belonging to other religions. How can one condone this double standard? If M F Hussein has the right to ridicule Hindu Gods and Goddesses, does not the film producer of ‘Innocence of Muslims’ have the right to ridicule Prophet Mohammad? What is wrong in it if the Muslims find nothing wrong in ridiculing of Hindu Gods and Goddesses? You cannot fix one standard for yourself and quite another for others. One cannot have the cake and eat it too.

More by this Author

  • Symphony Dominates Air Cooler Market
    0

    Air coolers are best suited to people living in the interior away from the sea. For those who live within fifty kilometres of sea coast, air coolers are difficult to maintain and they should opt for air conditioners....


Comments 12 comments

Billy Hicks profile image

Billy Hicks 4 years ago

"The heartburning among the Muslims and the resultant manifestation of their feelings in the form of protests and attacks is justified on this count."

Really? Murder is justified?


junkseller profile image

junkseller 4 years ago from Michigan

@Billy Hicks - Did you stop reading after that line? Much of the rest of the article is a condemnation of violence.


Billy Hicks profile image

Billy Hicks 4 years ago

Yes @junkseller, I read the entire article. The length of the article is irrelevant, saying that the murder of innocent civilians is somehow justified because someone hurt their feelings is ridiculous.

Since you seem to be an expert on the subject however, I have a question for you now: let's say hypothetically, that I was planning on writing an article that deals with the ignorance and zealotry of a group of criminals who detest freedom, oppress women, encourage violence, and advocate the torture and beheading of those whom they feel have offended them, all in the name of their "prophet" who was a 7th century pedophile, and the leader of their so called "peaceful religion". My question is, how many "nice things" would I have to say about Islam in that article to make that okay?


jdmanista profile image

jdmanista 4 years ago from Ladera Ranch, CA

I also think that this article is very short-sided as it does not mention the fact that this little-seen YouTube video was released well before the beginning of the violence and that the protests just happened to occur on September 11th. I believe that suggesting in any way that the people of the Middle East are actually protesting over a cheesy YouTube video, that the majority of them probably have not even seen, rather than protesting against the West on the anniversary of the worst terror attack we have ever know completely ignores the facts and follows the ridiculous apologies that this administration has put out in the mainstream media. I believe that the way in which the attacks were thouroughly planned out announced 48 hours ahead of time and have now spread beyond American bases to bases of all Western countries just goes to show that this stupid video is simply an excuses to attack and kill members of the Western philosophy.

And to speak to your point, Billy, I don't believe that any type of speech, whether inflammatory or not, should lead to violent attacks and murder by any group. Junkseller does suggest that these people should stop the violence and find other ways to release their anger but I again do not believe that they are upset about some video and have been called by their leaders to attack members of the Western philosophy in a coordinated manner.


Billy Hicks profile image

Billy Hicks 4 years ago

The video had little, if anything to do with the attack on the Ambassador. It was a cover- a way to get people rioting as a diversion for the attack. That "video" has been on YouTube for months, and no one said a word. Then Ayman al-Zawahiri releases a video in which he called for attacks in Libya as retribution for the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi and Bin Laden.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 4 years ago from Michigan

@Billie Hicks - The author only justified their "heartburning" and "feelings" and then goes on to specifically argue against violence in favor of "legitimate means like writing about it or speaking about it." The author to me seems to find the violence as unacceptable as you do, so your criticism of him somehow condoning it seems way off base. That's the extent of my point - I am making no grand claims beyond that.


Billy Hicks profile image

Billy Hicks 4 years ago

"The heartburning among the Muslims and the resultant manifestation of their feelings in the form of protests and attacks is justified on this count."

It's pretty clear what he said. If he misspoke, that's one thing, but as the statement stands, he's saying that the violence is justified.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 4 years ago from Michigan

The basic sentence is "The heartburning and feelings [are] justified." Everything else is modifiers. I wasn't really meaning to start an argument, though. Especially a grammar one, so I'll leave it to the author to clarify.


Vaidy 4 years ago

Good article. There are double standards adopted by Muslims. But the way the followers of Islam the world over are behaving, it appears Islam seem to preach violence. The most unbelievable reflection of this is they commit suicide attacks in Mosques!!!! How can one explain that? Muslim terrorists kill other religion people. Understandable if not acceptable. Killing people from once own religion and that too in places of worship???!!!! And this happens only in Muslim countries like Pakistan. And naturally people would tend to think that Islam is a violent religion.


ramkimeena profile image

ramkimeena 4 years ago from India Author

I thank all the people for their comments. I am sorry if I have used some sentence which conveys ambiguous meaning. I condemn the violence indulged by the Muslims whatever be the reason for provocation. I only meant that their feelings could be understandable. But at the same time I have clearly pointed out the double standards indulged by the Muslims. Muslims feel it is their birth right to insult and even kill people belonging to other religions. But when somebody insults their own religion, they get provoked. This has been clearly conveyed in my article.


madhimudi 4 years ago

The article and the responses are thought provoking.Ramkimeena is very clear nay crystal clear in condemning violence.Voila!


ramkimeena profile image

ramkimeena 4 years ago from India Author

Thank you madhimudi for your comments. Best wishes to you

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working