West vs East – after listening to an episode of Candace Owens, Alia appreciated her clear-minded perspective. Though not everything is what Alia would agree with, Candace did manage to articulate well on views around the East and West, that reflected common values.
As the hosts discuss an array of East West related concepts, the Black Lives Matter movement that Candace reported on, kicked the show off. When realising the BLM hidden agendas, they began to question the influence of mainstream media and the powerful money groups behind them. This led them to reflect on the current state of the West, its values, and moral compass.
West vs East - Do Western Values Really Outweigh the Rest
Ep 2 – Do Western Values Really Outweigh the Rest?
*Read full details below, transcribed. Therefore the wording often appears as it is spoken by our hosts: Please listen to above podcast for full value.
Courageous Enough to See The Truth About Everything
As the conversation evolved, they pondered the role of Islam in shaping these values and morals, and whether it is possible for the two to coexist.
Read more in detail below as we explore these thought-provoking ideas and delve deeper into the complexities of our modern society.
A fresh perspective on what the scripted mass media say
After listening to an episode of Candace Owens, Alia feels there are times when she really gets things and offers a fresh perspective on what the scripted mass media say: while Candace is viewed as controversial by many, Ahmad respects her courage to speak up.
Before you get worked up about our position on anyone, we urge you to take a fair view on our discussion around her views and our thoughts.
I don’t agree with her always. I think she does definitely have her own biases. It comes out from time to time, but I do like listening to her.
Do you think you’ve warmed up to her since you’ve been forced to listen to her whenever we’re in the car together?
I was surprised that Candace Owens was so clear-minded on many subjects. Whether it’s about a movement, history, democracy, or religion, she is very courageous to at least speak her mind, in my opinion, in addressing some of the points she makes. So she doesn’t mince words and calls out the lies. However, I don’t think she addresses all issues.
She seems to have her limits, unfortunately, because she’s operating around volatile boundaries. But it’s possible that she’s blinded to some aspects of the questions. It’s like her Black Lives Matter documentary – didn’t address anything beyond the surface owners of the Black Lives Matter organization.
Though “The greatest lie ever told” was very interesting, it omitted the question of who the actual people behind the so-called owners are, and we know that’s where the real story is. Is it because she doesn’t want to investigate these more powerful people? I understand that can be dangerous.
The real truth, always hidden, reality is much deeper
Yeah, I agree. Candace Owens could have done a bit of a deeper dive, and she could have gone a degree further into the people behind the front men. Because you know that the money came from a source for the agenda that she exposed so well. I really appreciated her investigative journalism. She’s great in that, but still, I feel she didn’t go far enough.
Question Everything
Like most things that go mainstream, the media will line up where they’re told. To push the interests of the money groups behind them. So if Black Lives Matter has so much support on the demonstrations everywhere worldwide, it’s because there was a strong support by the owners of the media. It’s like they are tied in With the owners of the Black Lives Matters organization.
Exactly. There was huge money behind that BLM Movement and what Candace uncovered really left us with food for thought, everyone must see her documentary.
It makes you ask, what was that all about?
Because we know it was about everything but “black lives mattering” based on the strange woke agenda they were pushing which had nothing to do with the black community.
The undersecretary of housing under the former Bush Senior administration Catherine Austin Fitts pointed out that all the demonstrations that were violently producing fires in some cities in the US. Those were empty streets that were all earmarked for redevelopment. So it was convenient for somebody if the protestors destroy these streets and stores. The bricks were laid out for them, well positioned. They had protection. It is quite the production.
How interesting that they were already earmarked for destruction and for renovation, so it seems they needed to be destroyed anyway. Maybe to drive the prices down so they could buy it back dirt cheap according to plans that were pre-determined.
Don’t compromise on values, at any cost
We’re living in a world where we really do have to question everything. It’s sad that is the reality but it’s definitely what I’ve observed over these last couple of years. So I was listening to one of Candace’s episodes earlier, I think, yesterday, and she was talking about Qatar, and I thought she raised some interesting points.
She starts by talking about the horseshoe theory, which basically charts the similarities between the right and the left and she feels that sometimes, obviously, those lines can blur easily and overlap even when there’s a common national interest.
Attack on the wrong target
I think people are mixing two things:
- the principles and the implementation of the principles;
- the corruption of the judicial system.
And because we know the judicial system is broken, they attack the law rather than those responsible for upholding it yet failing at it. Right. So the law in general, the Sharia was developed according to principles that extracted from the scriptures into implemented according to certain conditions.
And many of the thoughts of implementing these principles were done by wonderful people within a historical context. And it’s possible that today, the solutions they propose that were valid in their context would not be implemented the same way today, right since we have lost the unifying factor, which is the Khalifa, there’s no more authority that can just say: Okay, this is the way it is. So we can say that Sharia law has adapted itself over time.
The people that are imposing it, yes, there is this idea that probably along the Mongol invasions of the Middle East in the 13th century, it was a time that closed off all the interpretations. We saw that in history. They were closed to any idea of interpreting this law.
All the thinkers, and even the founders of the four schools of law, said that according to our knowledge of the Quran, of the Hadith; the Sunnah, this is the solution we come up with, but don’t follow me if you don’t agree with me. Meaning that they were balanced. They had divine knowledge, but this solution would be eternally true for whatever their understanding is at that moment, and they were very powerful people intellectually. These religious tools in their hands were a simple example of pure power based on truth.
West vs East - Moral Culture Examples
For example, the principle of Sharia is that women should be protected. And if they get out of the house, they shouldn’t be in harm’s way. Right? All right. So in a context where crime is everywhere, stealing, attacks, as it was the case, there was no security out of the house.
Then these people said okay, Sharia means implementation of correct laws. It means that the woman should never leave her house, except if she’s accompanied by her husband or brother or member of a family. That changes the original intent of protection.
The law should protect people, right?
The intention of law is to protect people. The implementation of this principle of protection is correct. But now in a city where law and order exists, and security becomes an oppression. Because now the woman cannot just go out at 11am when there’s absolutely no risk of being attacked. Yet she cannot go anywhere without a father, brother… and this becomes an oppression right?
On that basis, would you agree that there are some Gulf states that do implement Sharia in a fair and balanced way? I lived in Dubai, as you know, for years and years, and I think they had a pretty good respect for the Islamic adherence to updated life.
I wouldn’t say it was perfect. Oh my gosh, by any means. And yes, there there were problematic issues. But what would you say about today’s implementation of Shariah?
I mean, for everyday life, probably. I would agree. The problem with its limitation today is the partial implementation. So, if you implement part of the law, the law can become unjust. Like in inheritance. The brother inherits, for example, more than the sister, right?
But in exchange, he has to take care of his sister. And if he omits this duty, then he’s oppressing her. It is the same when governments implement some of the Sharia but then the system of justice is still corrupt.
This corruption creates havoc in the whole system. Okay. But it’s true when the strongest laws were implemented in a place like Saudi Arabia, the crime rates almost went to zero. So as an ordinary citizen, you want that, except Sharia is not reduced to everyday life. All legal systems must be complete, and honestly implemented with checks and balances. It requires people to be very honest.
It comes back to developing our belief in God and God’s law. We must ask, what is the correct way to adhere to God’s mandate?
The difference between principles and one’s own recipes is that one is that which is given by Allah in His book, and they give us a framework of directions are things that are not negotiable.
But how to implement them in any and every situation? This is up to the experts who are qualified. I mean, Allah has given us a brain. He has given us leaders and what they need now is the Light.
Qatar and Their World Cup
So it’s interesting because, in the recent Qatar World Cup, they didn’t miss a beat to highlight the “atrocities” of Qatar. Candace Owens, in her episode about this, kind of rolls her eyes. Because she says, you know, for example, “you can’t drink alcohol” was one of the rules that Qatar had.
And people had a huge problem with that, though they ended up having the best time and praising the country for putting on the best World Cup ever.
Yet my take was, it’s kind of like what you said, you can’t just implement a part of the law; you have to go all the way.
So my take was, Qatar was letting people have free-flowing alcohol in the VIP boxes and they had fan zones where there was alcohol.
So if you’re going to do this no alcohol rule, then you have to be true to that rule all the way….within all the classes. You can’t just say it’s kind of there on a partial basis because then it doesn’t work. Then you are not being true to your values.
Looking at the standards from all side
The West Comes To Qatar. Photo by Abdullah Ghatasheh
Candace Owens was saying: “Why are you guys knocking Qatar?”
You can’t drink alcohol is their rule. Meanwhile, all sorts of substance abuse is happening with, record family devastation, as a result of, how we approach substances in the West. She made a very good point.
Western values vs Eastern values
Candace said the government doesn’t do anything about that. So how can we be pointing fingers that other countries that are taking a different approach to substances and even making adultery illegal in Qatar. Yes, adultery is a punishable crime.
So she said, meanwhile, we have dating apps in the West that are undergoing overhauls because married people are getting onto these dating apps just so they can cheat on their spouse.
Then they also want to stay WOKE. In their minds that’s progressive, by legitimizing polyamorous relationships. Which is so destructive. It leads to a whole string of instability in the household and society. A perverse celebration of sex can be a very serious illness. So she made some really good and profound points.
I didn’t know this was a law that she alleges that the raped person can also go to jail. But in the West, she said, by the same token, you can point fingers at anyone like in the “me too” movement. Where men can just be accused and their whole lives can be devastated.
That culture versus our laws debate was further highlighted when it was pointed out that Qatar has policies against social media practices. You can get in serious trouble for spreading false news and I know just by living in Dubai, even if you’re gossiping and backbiting you can actually get in trouble with the law for doing something like that on social media.
Yet, she says, in America they censor you if you go against their narrative so even if you post something positive, that’s truth but goes against the mainstream media’s narrative, that the government wants to push on you or the agenda wants to push on you. You can get in trouble. So she said really, how much better are we?
I didn’t know this was a law that she alleges that the raped person can also go to jail. But in the West, she said, by the same token, you can point fingers at anyone like in the “me too” movement. Where men can just be accused and their whole lives can be devastated.
That culture versus our laws debate was further highlighted when it was pointed out that Qatar has policies against social media practices. You can get in serious trouble for spreading false news and I know just by living in Dubai, even if you’re gossiping and backbiting you can actually get in trouble with the law for doing something like that on social media.
Philosophical values examples
Yet, Candace Owens says, in America they censor you if you go against their narrative so even if you post something positive, that’s truth but goes against the mainstream media’s narrative, that the government wants to push on you or the agenda wants to push on you. You can get in trouble. So she said really, how much better are we?
Well, in the West, there was a trial in Germany against a person with sound facts in his defence. And the judge said “truth is no defence”. So when we reach such, let’s say relativistic views, when we are virtue signalling, everything is just about showing that you must stand with whomever you need to appease.
There’s also some sort of a perverse movement that just obviously hasn’t seen its boundaries. They definitely seem to have no boundaries. And that’s what’s really concerning. I think she aptly points out, “which would you say is worse: Qatar or America based on what you already know?” And that’s a valid point.
I remember in the news, when I saw that the whole Germany team at FIFA in Qatar, covered their mouths for their photo op because they wanted to let everybody know that they’re being silenced because they can’t wear their armbands supporting LGBT
Principle of respect for autonomy
And that to me is really interesting because in Qatar as we know there’s no such thing as same sex relationships it’s against their law. And it’s against their religion; means it’s against Islam. So gay marriage is not recognized and you can be sentenced to prison for having a same sex relationship.
But in America, Candace Owens says “We are mutilating children by allowing gender surgeries and further devastating them with hormone blockers and whatnot”. So she says they say that it’s “love” that they are helping children to recognize their real genders, and how they “feel” inside.
She says again, I have to ask you, which is worse which society is worse in the end when you have such problems going on? I think it boils down to respecting the culture and the beliefs of the country that you have agreed to step into. Many in the West expect women to not be covered so much.
Whether it’s a hijab or whatever. So by that same token, why wouldn’t they be expected to remove their LGBT armbands when it’s against the culture of the country they are visiting? It’s clear that the country doesn’t recognize such stuff.
Totally agree.
11 Ways To Analyze and Question Mainstream Media Narratives
- Listen to a range of perspectives: In order to have a well-rounded understanding of a particular issue or topic, it’s important to listen to different voices with varying perspectives.
- Consider biases: People have their own biases and opinions, so it’s important to be aware of this when evaluating what someone is saying.
- Look for credible sources: When trying to understand a complex issue, it’s essential to seek out credible sources of information that can provide in-depth insights based on truth and not what the mainstream narrative wants to impress upon you.
- Investigate deeply: Don’t just take what you hear at face value. It’s important to dig deeper and question the motives behind the information being presented.
- Analyze money sources: It’s always important to consider who is funding the information being presented and what their motives may be. This will tell you a lot!
- Don’t compromise on sound values: No matter what the mainstream media says, it’s important to stand by God given values and principles. God will never fail you.
- Question everything: In today’s world, it’s crucial to question everything and not just accept what is being presented as the truth.
- Consider the context: It’s important to consider the historical and cultural context of a particular issue when evaluating its relevance and impact.
- Look at both sides: When evaluating a particular issue, it’s important to consider all sides of the argument, including the similarities and differences between both.
- Analyze the implementation of laws: Don’t just attack the principles of a law, but also consider the corruption of the judicial system that may be responsible for its implementation. Consider the evolution of laws over time and the historical context in which they were developed
- Be willing to be wrong, argue against yourself.
Is It Really Diversity?
I mean, people declare that they are in love with diversity, but each time they see something different to what they think is right, they become the most intolerant people that you can imagine. As the Prophet(pbuh) said, if you’re in a foreign country just act as the people unless it goes strictly against the truth.
If you don’t like the country’s banning of homosexuality, it’s the expression of it they are banning. Because I remind you that in Islam, homosexuality is an issue when it is expressed. It is the expression and the practice of homosexuality.
This is what they are dealing with. The rule states that you have to go against yourself and the urges that go against God’s mandate.
Respecting how they live, so we can prosper together
This life is about a trial. It’s a constant questioning. Do you prefer this or the truth? And it is recognised that people can be born with certain tendencies. Some people are greedy, and they have to struggle against that, for example. And the question then would be, do you prefer your greed, your jealousy, or your instincts? Or do you prefer the truth? And if you prefer the truth, you have to find ways to deal with your challenges.
And many people have challenged their same sex tendencies. I personally know some that have chosen to go in a certain way sexually, against their inclination, to go and have a family and they’re very happy?
You make a very good point. People can have violent tendencies. I mean, if we allow everyone to act on their urges, then we would have chaos. So there was a reason why the scriptures from the beginning of time, had banned certain things as a law. The Quran has maintained its authenticity. And so there has to be an adherence to God’s law and so you have to respect a country that does that.
She goes on in the show to sarcastically say, oh, how unimaginable that some people are refused that they can wear their armband. She mentioned the American journalist Grant Wall, was refused entry to the stadium to cover the game because he was wearing a rainbow football on his T shirt.
So he tweeted, “just now security guard refusing to let me into the stadium for USA versus Wales”. And he quoted “you have to change your shirt. It’s not allowed.” That’s what the guard told him. So she sarcastically says, how unimaginable to be refused entry somewhere based on what you’re wearing and then she goes, Oh, wait, it is imaginable because this society, the West, said that kids can’t go to school if they don’t mask up or you can’t go to a football game without a mask.
I think she didn’t go far enough because she fails to mention that, some Western countries don’t allow you to go to school if you wear a hijab.
Women are discriminated against in some parts of the West, if they wear a full covering bathing suit, the Islamic bathing suit, on the beach. So there are a lot of discriminations in the West too and they expect you to adhere to it.
So she shared another tweet from a journalist during an earlier time where he’s wearing a mask and he explains something to the effect that, you must wear a mask if you were to leave your home. So she’s summarizing the notion of hypocrisy between these these two circumstances.
And I really wonder at what point there will be a wake up call where they’ll say okay, we expect them to adhere to our ways. Therefore, should there not be a movement for us to really respect theirs when we’re in their regions?
A Healthy Discussion is Imperative to Justice
It’s a good sign that this discussion is taking place in different platforms. I think a lot of people are discussing it and people are are able to have that debate. I think for the first time social media has eased up on their, “cancel and shut them up” ways. Yeah, exactly.
Twitter has really made that promise they’re going to let people discuss things like this more freely. The old Twitter, pre Elon would censor you and shut you down if you said anything against the mainstream narrative. Now you can say on Twitter stuff like, I’m not comfortable with my child being encouraged to question their gender.
Censoring the truth only sets everyone back
I want to teach them grow up and be a decent human in the body they were born in, given by God. They are starting to call out the kids schools or the school board and even the government. It’s great they can now say all this on Twitter. You can finally have a healthy discussion with respect, without being afraid to take your stance.
When we are in a world where people are driven by feelings, and not by facts, because apparently facts have no bearing on many people, you will always offend someone. So, being offended is the driver. No discussion is possible. This is why people can shut down on no cause basis.
Freedom of speech is important, as long as it doesn’t pervert the constraints of the law, right. And instead of pulling the fear card of offending people. They must use their words.
Because if they feel that you’re wrong, they should be able to discuss and say it without using the “intolerance” card on you. So there’s something fishy going when they do that. They are trying to use feelings as a way to prove something. And I’m sorry, a feeling doesn’t prove anything.
That’s been a strategy for a while. To use people’s feelings like, “I felt you said this, so it must mean that you’re a racist”, or you’re anti this or you’re anti that. It’s used on people very quickly, to shut them up. Or of course, the favorite is “you’re a conspiracy. theorist”.
Like if you think Black Lives Matter has some really funny business going on. Then you’re the one that ends up being on the stand and being questioned rather than the person that you’ve actually called out for doing something wrong.
This is the idea behind habits. Every, every time a belief system has been challenged, it can be in science, it can be in culture…but every time it has been challenged, it has been pushed back viciously by people holding power. It becomes a natural psychological reaction.
Now we are supposed to have reached the point where we could have civil discussions very openly. And if someone tells me I don’t like black people, let these people say that because sometimes they have their reasons because they had that one experience, or they saw movies or things that formed their opinion.
It’s a chance to discuss and help formulate the truth around the context of it. It could turn out to be a positive, but that discourse must be allowed first.
Yeah, they will do it. It’s unjust. Jon Stewart recently came out in light of these supposedly anti-semitic comments by Kanye. He expressed this. He said:
“When people attack Jews, now is not the time that we throw the antisemitic and slander accusations, again and again, into the conversation. It’s time that we just allow the conversation to grow and to examine to open this wound. As it must be opened to be cleaned when that gets infected.“
Political or Humanitarian?
Yeah, at some point, you have to question, has it become political rather than humanitarian thing? To call somebody anti anything for saying something they believe is the truth. When is it human rights and at what point is it about a political agenda? So we need to keep ourselves in check. We need to be able to question ourselves, and bring some sanity back into the system.
We all operate on ideas. Some of these ideas, probably not reflecting of the real world. So we need always to be in a position to be able to discuss openly, to try to put in check the feelings and the passion and, and always be ready to be wrong.
We should accept that we must correct our view when we are wrong. This is not the question about West vs East – this is the only way to progress. Well, let’s see
Hiding behind the intention
Conclusion
In conclusion, exploring different perspectives and ideas is crucial for personal growth and understanding. By critically analyzing and reflecting on the complex issues that shape our society, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the world around us.
West vs East – It is important to approach these discussions with an open mind, while also considering the credibility and reliability of the information presented. Remember to continue seeking knowledge and engaging in meaningful conversations that challenge your beliefs and broaden your horizons.
More to Read
For more about values and core beliefs of Islam, read the article next, below:
- Why was I created
- Norms and Values in Islam
- The Social System and Morality of Islam
- Islam: Basic Beliefs
- Understanding Basic Beliefs of Islam
