Why do nonmulims mistreat muslims so much?

Perhaps the reason that nonmuslims mistreat muslims so much is because the vast majority of nonmuslims (and for that matter many muslims) don’t understand Islam or muslims. If carefully watching this video many times was a requirement for every nonmuslim in the world; and if nonmuslims were required to write articles on it to demonstrate their understanding; would this help nonmuslims treat muslims better? I think yes. What does everyone else think?


This video is funny like heck. Tarek Fatah should do stand up comedy. It is hard to watch this video without laughing hysterically for large chunks of it. One funny part is when Tarek Fatah said that Mohammed, may peace be upon him, was confused when he said muslims should not make friends with Jews and Christians because they are friends with each other. Didn’t Mohammed, may peace be upon him, know that Christians hated Jews?


Tarek Fatah would like for substantially reorganized Korans to be published. However he says that South Asian scholarship is not respected.


One important take away is how spot on similar older cultured educated Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are too each other.  Tarek Fatah could easily be a Deshi Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Sikh or Jain and talk the exact same way. When I was a young child, this was much more obvious than it is now. I hope that future generations don’t forget this.


Note, the post was heavily edited with feedback from Kabir. Thanks Kabir 🙂

Published by



19 thoughts on “Why do nonmulims mistreat muslims so much?”

  1. AnAN, your comment that the Quran is not the word of Allah would be deeply offensive to most Muslims. Islamic belief is that the Holy Quran is the unchanging word of Allah as revealed to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Angel Gabriel was the means that Allah chose to reveal his message, but it was not Gabriel’s message.

    Whatever one thinks of Muslims (and obviously non-Muslims don’t have to believe that the Quran is divine), it is important to respect the centrality of this belief to Islam. Just as we respect that for you the Mahabharata is a religious book, even though for us it is merely a fictional Indian epic.

    1. No disrespect intended. I have always considered the Koran to be divinely revealed, similar to other divine revelations in other faiths such as the divinely revealed Bhagavad Gita in the Mahabharata.

      Please elaborate further on the revelation of the Koran.

      I have heard many interpretations of the Koran; and I assume this differs by sect. My understanding is that the Koran was finalized 20 years after Mohammed’s, may peace be upon him, passing by Uthman and Aisha; at which time they burnt all other versions of the Koran that slightly differed from their final text.


      I have heard that there are other compilations of the Koran with different orderings. I also understand that the Koran is incomplete in that many versus in the Koran have been lost.

      One tradition is that the Koran (minus the dots and vowels) are eternally existent in a non created sort of way that they don’t come from Allah at all; but have existed from the beginning alongside Allah.

      Since the Koran are revealed sound, does this make it similar to the Vedas . . . eternally existent sound vibrations that if lost can be revealed again?

      Can I ask your interpretations of specific versus? Many muslims and nonmuslims alike have many questions on specific versus in the Koran. Where is a good place to ask for clarification and elaboration?

      Is it possible that while the Koran in heaven is correct (which I believe), Gabriel might have made an error in saying it out load? Is it possible that Mohammed, may peace be upon him, misheard what Gabriel said out load? Is it possible that Mohammed, may peace be upon him, correctly heard and thought; but slightly mispronounced what he was he was thinking? Is it possible that those who heard Mohammed, may peace be upon him, might have misheard slightly? Or heard correctly and thought correctly; but mispronounced when they repeated what they were thinking. Or the chain of carrying the oral teachings have a slight error?

      I don’t want to re-litigate every aspect of the Islamic civil war between Sunnis and minority muslims. Is it legitimate for muslims to ask how they can be 100% sure that Uthman and Aisha didn’t modify a slight number of Koranic versus? Or for muslims to ask how they can be 100% sure that Uthman and Aisha included every verse that was inconvenient for them? One example of this could be Koranic verses regarding Ali, may peace be upon him.

      As you know, a goat ate some lost versus in the Koran. Is it possible that Allah didn’t intend for humans to have access to all of the Koran, and might have intentionally sent the goat?

      Kabir, your wisdom is greatly respected and appreciated. Look forward to continuing to learn from you. 🙂

      Note the comment was edited with “may peace be upon him”.

      1. AnAN,

        I am not an Islamic scholar nor even a particularly practicing Muslim. I am Muslim in the way that many people are members of whatever religion they have been brought up in (i.e. they just happened to be born into that faith). Eid and Ramazan are part of my culture, but that is pretty much it. In the same way, bhajans etc are part of my culture because I am culturally Indian. The best place to go to get your questions answered to be to a reputed Islamic scholar or an Islamic institute like Al Azhar. You could also read the Quran in a reputable English translation.

        My limited understanding is that all Muslims (Sunni and Shia) agree that every word of the Quran is divinely revealed from Allah. If you suggest to them that the Holy Prophet misheard or mis-communicated the message, they would be greatly offended. Similarly, the story about the goat would be out of bounds. Wouldn’t you be offended if someone said to you the Gita was probably made up by a random person? Religious beliefs are just that–beliefs, with no necessary basis in facts.

        1. Kabir, I thought Islamic scholars generally agreed about the goat? Isn’t that why muslim scholars say Aisha added two sayings to the Bukhari Sahih (about stoning woman to death, and the sayings regarding woman breastfeeding males). I thought that there is a consensus among muslim scholars about many verses missing from worldly Korans? Please advise what Islamic scholars can be consulted about these matter.

          My understanding is that almost all Hindus think that the vast majority of revealed Hindu texts (including Vedas) have been lost. Similarly, I have never heard of any Hindu offended when someone argues that only part of the original Gita has been retained in the current written version (which is my belief).

          “If you suggest to them that the Holy Prophet misheard or mis-communicated the message”. There are several versions of the Koran that are officially correct. These different Korans are different from one another. This is widely discussed by Islamic scholars. While I acknowledge that some muslim scholars would be offended by the possibility that what Mohammed, may peace be upon him, said didn’t 100% match the heavenly Koran; would all of them be equally offended by the possibility that the oral tradition chain after Mohammed, may peace be upon him, slightly altered what Mohammed, may peace be upon him, said during the twenty years after Mohammed died; when Othman and Aisha finalized the Koran?

          I also look forward to any advise about how to ask questions about the Koran without offending muslims. Many muslims also ask these questions. Don’t muslims have a right to ask them?

          edited to add “may peace be upon him”.

          1. Like I said, I am not an Islamic scholar. I’m really not that interested in spending my time and energy on the nitty gritty of such issues so this will probably be my last comment on this thread.

            I do think most believing Muslims would be pretty upset if you tell them that Hazrat Aisha added stuff to the Holy Quran. They believe every word of the scripture comes directly from Allah.

            Also, you keep taking the Holy Prophet’s name. Believing Muslims aren’t going to like you very much if you do that. It seems disrespectful. You are supposed to write “peace be upon him” every time you mention his name and you are supposed to call him the Prophet of God. He’s not your best friend that you can call him by his first name. It’s like when Hindus say Sri Ram and Sri Krishna. Personally, I’m not super bothered, but some people you communicate with may get offended.

            I think the best answers to your questions will come from someone with a degree in Islamic Studies. I have a degree in English Literature, so I am the wrong person to ask 🙂

  2. Tarek Fatah! Can’t believe he is still around and making news.

    I have a family connection with him dating back to the early seventies, but know him best for his Canadian years. He left karachi in 77, spent ten years in Saudi, then showed up in Canada.

    The Canadian Muslim community was small at the time, and the “elite” was mostly engineers, doctors, and university profs (i.e, people with poor media skills). Fatah was unusual – he was a journalist and a showman. He got himself a public access channel tv show right away, and proclaimed himself a muslim community leader.

    Now any clown could be a “leader” back then, and most clowns tried. (Fatah wasn’t the worst – that would be his friend/enemy
    Elmasry). He was always entertaining. The stunt I remember best is, during a gvt crackdown on terrorist fundraising in the 90s, Fatah donated money to Hezbollah on his TV show and publicly challenged the attorney general to prosecute him.

    After 9/11, Fatah rode the wave well, with his trademark histrionics. He broke loudly and publicly with Irshad Manji because she gave succour to Islamophobia. Then brokes with the national Muslim org because they were too illiberal. He started his own Muslim organization, which then expelled him because — well I forget. It was hard to keep track. He had more beefs than a small time rapper. More drama than a Kardashian.

    About ten years ago, his reputation in Canada started falling. He alienated too many people on all sides. He went from being a possible Senate candidate to someone journalists mocked.

    So I guess he is in India now — his fourth country. I saw him as harmless and entertaining in peaceful, boring Canada, but his antics may not be as benign in India, which has an active Hindu terrorism problem (muslims beaten in the streets of Delhi, burned alive in Rajasthan). I would hope tarek has the good sense to avoid inflaming hate in a violence-prone society, but his reputation suggests otherwise.

    1. First I have heard about India having “an active Hindu terrorism problem”. By far the main threat confronted by Indian muslims comes from Islamists. Many Indian muslims insist that India do more to protect them from Islamists. PM Modi has started to do this; but needs to do much much more. Indian muslims also demand economic empowerment. My understanding is that these are the top two priorities of Indian muslims.

      India and Canada are both peaceful with low crime and violence rates. Canada is not boring 😉

      “violence-prone society” . . . glad I am learning these things. Never heard this before. 🙂

      Tarek appears to be quite popular in India and globally. Some people love his drama!

      Tarek was wrong to criticize Irshad, who I think the world of.

      1. Seriously? Muslims are being killed in India upon suspicion of eating beef–suspicion. The meat when tested in a lab turns out to be something else, but the guy is dead and we can’t bring him back to life. This happened in Dadri–not too far from the national capital. PM Modi didn’t say anything about these so-called “gau rakshaks” for the longest time. I think the Muslim community can be forgiven for not trusting him very much.

        Granted this is not happening in the whole country, but certainly in large parts of North India. Hindu extremism is a real thing.

        1. Kabir, perhaps I don’t watch enough news to know these things. I don’t anecdotally hear about these things from friends who live in India. My observation is that India is one of the least policed nations on earth and has a low crime rate in general. Relative to the number of policemen and police budgets India might have the lowest crime in the world.

          With respect to your comment on beef eaters being killed, I have been told by friends that PM Modi publicly cried and asked that beef eaters not be killed.

          India is a country of approximately 1.35 billion. Might even be more if all the illegal Bangladeshi immigrants are added (India has tens of millions of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants). Relative to population incidents of killing beef eaters might be extremely rare. Beef eaters are threatened orders of magnitude more by male misogyny than by the killers you refer to. Beef is openly sold right in front of many of India’s most important Sufi mosques, Hindu temples, Buddhist temples, Sikh gurudhwaras, Jain temples; as well as in front of most if not all major Hindu/Jain/Buddhist festivals or meet ups such as the Kumbha Mela. Many of India’s large states have more than 50% of their populations eat beef, including West Bengal. Beef is remarkably popular among Indian Hindus, let alone atheists, agnostics, seculars. [As a side note, Hinduism has always had very large and prestigious Hindu atheist Darshanas, lineages . . . along with many revered atheist saints and scholars. King Rama famously had an atheist minister. A debate between them in the Valmiki Ramayana taught me a lot about atheism when I was a child. Many Hindus revere and admire atheists if they are sincere and serious about the truth.]

          Is there any aggregate data on the number of beef eaters getting attacked or intimidated by out of control mentally ill animal rights activists? I would be deeply interested in such a data set to run econometrics.

          Every Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh leader and scholar that I know of strongly condemns violence against beef eaters. People who attack beef eaters are persona non grata in India. Many muslim leaders in India favor a pork/beef ban and have been trying to convince Hindu leaders to join them in this effort. Many Hindus also favor this. Personally I see zero chance of this happening given how much beef eating has soared among Indians.

          Could all of this be entirely media driven hoopla?

          If you remember America had a big media hoopla about unarmed black Americans being killed by police in 2015. But when the 2015 US nation wide data on police killing of unarmed Americans were released, if found:
          93 unarmed Americans killed by police:
          -White: 34.4 percent (32 victims)
          -Black: 40.8 percent (38)
          -Hispanic: 19.4 percent (18)
          -Asian: 0 percent (0)
          -Unknown: 5.4 percent (5)

          Today it is general knowledge that police in America rarely kill unarmed African Americans. Is it possible that the release of aggregate data on killing of beef eaters in India will find similar results?

          If India has a 1000 challenges, shouldn’t the first 20 or 30 be prioritized, versus challenge number 400? India does have a large challenge with cognitively challenged people with all the problems that brings. India is trying to deal with this by making Yoga or similar exercise compulsory in all schools and encouraging sports/exercise in general (which is highly correlated with mental health, physical health, intelligence–including IQ). India is also working on preventive inexpensive healthcare to increase intelligence and health. If successful, won’t this sharply reduce crime and poverty; as well as increase economic development in India?

          1. “Black Lives Matter” was a real thing. There is a real problem with racist police in the US killing black men and boys because they “looked threatening”.

            I wouldn’t call the “gau rakshaks” animal rights activists. They claim that they are doing what they do in the name of Hinduism. I understand you have a different interpretation of Hinduism (probably matching that of most normal Hindus) that killing people because they eat beef is not justified. Take it up with the “gau rakshaks” because they are totally convinced that whatever they are doing earns them points with the gods. Hindutva is a real thing. Take the furor over this (not particularly good) movie called “Padamavat”. Women are threatening to burn themselves because the movie supposedly insults Rani Padmini-a fictional character. This despite the fact that the Muslim king, Khilji, is basically portrayed as the devil incarnate.

            Here is some data regarding beef-related murders in India (all from a cursory Google search. You can go much more in depth if you feel so inclined):



  3. Holy cow. This conversation between AnAn and Kabir clearly shows that AnAn himself does not understand even the basics of Islam (position of the Holy Prophet, revelation of Holy Quran, goat story). He could be charged with blasphemy in Pakistan.
    It just appears to be a goody goody sentiment (I agree with the sentiment. It should be applauded and supported). But he is ignorant about Islam, the topic of his article.
    I don’t think this article is upto the high standards of Brown Pundits.

  4. Kabir, both articles cite a single IndiaSpend content analysis report:

    -Muslims were the target of 51 percent of violence centred on bovine issues over nearly eight years (2010 to 2017)
    – and comprised 86 percent of 28 Indians killed in 63 incidents
    -As many of 97 percent of these attacks were reported after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government came to power in May 2014, and about half the cow-related violence–32 of 63 cases–were from states governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) when the attacks were reported, revealed our analysis of violence recorded until 25 June, 2017.
    -Of the 28 Indians who died over the seven-year period, 24 were Muslim, or 86 percent. As many as 124 people were also injured in these attacks.
    -More than half (52 percent) of these attacks were based on rumours, our analysis found.

    India is a country of 1.35 billion people. 28 deaths and 124 injuries over an eight year period is statistically insignificant. Aren’t there high priority threats that we should be focusing on?

    Many Indian muslims are deeply hurt that Islamist threats against them are routinely ignored by the Indian public and police. This is a very big deal among Indian Sufis, Twelvers, Ishmaelis, Ahmedis, and liberal Sunnis. Many of them voted for the BJP in the hopes that maybe then the Indian police would do more to protect them. While PM Modi is doing better, India has a long way to go. Often nonmuslim Indians say things like:
    -muslims are very violent, let them kill each other, we should mind our own business
    -not our problem, let us fix ourselves first
    Even worse, some deny that the primary target of Islamists are muslims, rather than nonmuslims and discriminate against good muslims; who are then simultaneously targeted by very dangerous Islamists as well as brain dead cognitively challenged nonmuslims.

    Indian muslim woman are also enormously hurt by male misogyny (nonmuslim Indian men competing with muslim Indian men on who can be bigger jerks).

    In general India has to do a lot better at protecting all Indians from crime.


    To your point about “Black Lives Matter”, that is another matter. African Americans are mistreated in specific ways. My point was that police aren’t more likely to kill unarmed African Americans than they are to kill unarmed Americans of different ethnicities relative to police encounters.

    I suspect the media hoopla was partly stirred up by non blacks with the intent of stopping the police from protecting African Americans. Sadly this is a long standing problem in America. American police don’t protect African Americans nearly enough from crime. It isn’t an accident that 93% of African Americans are killed by other African Americans. Some non African Americans have encouraged this for foul purposes. This is part of the institutional racism directed against African Americans.

    1. The number of beef-related deaths may be statistically insignificant in a country of 1.35 billion people but it has certainly created a sense of fear among North Indian Muslims that they are being targeted based only on their diet and cultural practices. How would you suggest reassuring them that such actions by vigilantes will not be tolerated–whether in the name of Hinduism or anything else?

      1. Honestly, no one has ever asked me this question. I need to think about it. Does anyone else have any ideas?

        Most of the problems emphasized by our sensationalist gossip entertainment media and content providers aren’t major issues. This is true across the board. We need a lot more actual constructive feedback and collaboration on solving problems and moving the global collective forward.

        If global mental health (character, integrity, self confidence), physical health and intelligence (which is closely correlated with the first two) improved; many global issues would resolve themselves. People would be less afraid and more confident in their own agency; their own ability to defend and evolve themselves.

        Global love would also help. But saying this doesn’t help unless it is a living experience. Love might be misunderstood.

        This is a very broad brush. To the specific question of how to lower crime in India . . . I think this needs to be one of the top priorities of public policy. One of the causes of crime in India is that India has a lot of cognitively challenged people (as in mental health and intelligence) that are not taken care of the way they are in developed countries. I think India should strive to reduce the percentage of the population with limited mental health, physical health and intelligence. And take much better care of Indians who have mental health and intelligence challenges. I think the later part will happen automatically as India’s real per capita income rises.

        However, this only deals with crime committed by people with limited mental health, physical health and intelligence. How to deal with crime committed by people with high mental health, physical health and intelligence (which is a very small percentage of all humans)? Much harder.

        Swami Vivekananda use to say that someone with a clear subconscious and purified intelligence but not enough pure love is the most dangerous thing of all. A very powerful and wise demon. The prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him, called this Al-Masih ad-Dajjal. Christians call it the anti Christ. Fortunately there are very few such people alive.

  5. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1672777/wahhabism-spread-behest-west-cold-war-mohammed-bin-salman/

    “The Saudi-funded spread of Wahhabism began as a result of Western countries asking Riyadh to help counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said on Thursday, according to RT.com
    The crown prince said that Saudi Arabia’s Western allies urged the country to invest in mosques and madrassas overseas during the Cold War, in an effort to prevent encroachment in Muslim countries by the Soviet Union.
    He added that successive Saudi governments had lost track of that effort, saying “we have to get it all back.” He added that funding now comes mostly from Saudi based “foundations,” rather than from the government.”

    MBS is right. It isn’t just the west but anti marxist nonmuslims in general who did this. Nonmuslims have traditionally backed Islamists against good muslims to resist atheist post modernist marxism.

    Post modernists also back Islamists against good muslims.

    Nonmuslims need to stop this misbehavior.

Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits