That is why the opposite criteria, taught by an Egyptian cleric to his class of children, is so disturbing:
Ahmad quarrels with Mahmoud, and the two are mad at each other, After the show, they might got out and hit each other. What should we do? We take Ahmad aside, and say to him: “Ahmad, you are mad at Mahmoud, but Mahmoud loves you very much, and keeps saying: I love Ahmad very much and don’t know why he’s mad at me. I want to make up with him, and if I was sure he would agree to make up with me, I’d tell him I love him very much.” And then you go to Mahmoud and say to him: “Why are you mad at Ahmad? Ahmad praises you, and loves you very very much.” Did I lie to him? Yes, I did. But is this lie permitted or forbidden?Is this truly a Muslim teaching? It is easy to imagine that this teaching endorses any action a Muslim takes to blame Jews for any wrongs Muslim do to each other, because it encourages reconcilement between Muslims. It explains a lot of things, like the easy acceptance of Israel-hatred once a community is conquered by Islamic militants.
Children: It’s permitted.
Mahmoud Al-Masri: How come? Because we are reconciling two Muslims.
If Heaton had been a Muslim, would he ever have turned in his boss?
"The Truth Is What the Truth Is."
It was only when Heaton uttered the words above that he "began cooperating proactively with government prosecutors and investigators" rather than merely being a target of the investigation.
Do Muslims currently follow a different standard? If so, is there any hope this could change for the better? I invite my readers' feedback in the comments section.