We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
No connection? This is a very odd piece of reportage, from Spiegel Online:
Finally some news out of Holland that doesn’t have to do with the religious violence that has gripped the country for the last 10 days: The Dutch cabinet has decided on a March 2005 withdrawal of the country’s 1,350 troops in Iraq. Dutch Defense Minister Henk Kamp made the announcement on Friday afternoon.
What, not anything to do with it? Surely the Dutch cabinet at least hopes that Dutch Muslims will be slightly less angry about everything now, even if the actual decision to bring the boys home was made either before all the domestic rowing, or during it but for genuinely unrelated reasons.
And some will certainly argue that there is a connection, so there is your connection right there.
I do not say that the religious violence was the sole cause of the withdrawal, merely that these are definitely inter-woven news stories.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Well, unfortunately it does appear that they’ll have plenty to keep them busy upon their return and the lessons learned in Iraq could prove useful at home. That is, if they do not have something like Posse Comitatus in Holland.
I believe that was the originally scheduled withdrawal date. It’s not like the Spanish who cut and run early.
What they really decided was to not extend the mission. I don’t really blame them, not the way I blame the Spanish.
I don’t think we can compare one guy to several thousand armed terrorists, who between them controlled several cities and were able to substantially disrupt the lives of millions of people.
Unless I’m mistaken, you seem to be suggesting that the Dutch (of all people!) are going to be deploying troops on the streets of Amsterdam in the near future, thankfully a vision that is extremely unlikely. In the panic about the rise of fundamenalist Islam, it goes largely forgotten that the vast majority of European muslims are peaceful and law-abiding.
RE: In the panic about the rise of fundamenalist Islam, it goes largely forgotten that the vast majority of European muslims are peaceful and law-abiding.
This argument just doesn’t hold water. If a sect of Christians were to begin beheading innocent victims due to some sort of perceived mission from God, the balance of Christianity would rightfully suffer.
In the panic about the rise of fundamenalist Islam, it goes largely forgotten that the vast majority of European muslims are peaceful and law-abiding.
Only because they are still a minority in Western nations. Once a critical mass develops in any one country the peaceful and law-abiding would soon change.
The idea that the mere presence of a large number of muslims in any country will automatically lead to some kind of armageddon does not have any real basis in historical fact. There are millions of muslims in Europe now, yet religious violence is limited to only a handful of cases.
Yes, if a large portion of society came to held fundamentalist views then there would be quite obvious problems. We only need to look at Hitler’s example to see that. But the majority of European muslims seem to reject fundamentalism quite clearly. If they were fundamentalists, they would surely be answering the calls to jihad from the likes of Bin-Laden.
The argument that Islam is incompatible with peaceful, tolerant societies is undermined by the historical example; Muslims in Spain 1000 years ago had an educated, civilised and knowledgeable society. Spanish Muslim libraries were the best in Europe, and their translations of the ancient Greek texts provided the basis for the Renaissance, as these works were translated into modern European languages. Jewish Talmudic scholarship in Spain during that period was also tolerated and many great Jewish scholars lived during that time. When Ferdinand and Isabella completed the reconquista, they expelled the Jews from Spain. Yet today, we do not so readily associate Catholics with intolerance and persecution; in fact they have proved perfectly able to coexist with other faiths (Northern Ireland and a few other places excepted).
The idea that Islam is founded on a principle of intolerance is simply false (or, if it is true, it is true of all religions). That fundamentalist Islam diverges from this tradition is most certainly a negative development, but the answer lies not in condemning Islam, but in condeming those who use it to persecute others. I’m sure we both agree that fundamentalists are the enemy of a tolerant society, but let’s not group all muslims together.
The idea that the mere presence of a large number of muslims in any country will automatically lead to some kind of armageddon does not have any real basis in historical fact.
You are kidding, aren’t you? Have you seen any news in the last few years?
Moslems have all apologised to the Dutch people right?
Moslems everywhere are truely sorry there was such a murder as the great grandson of Theo Van Gogh, right?
Knifed, shot and had his throat slit by an ardent follower of the “Religion of Peace”.
And now the Moslems are SURPRISED and deeply hurt that some Dutch smash some windows and burn down a mosque?
What did you think was going to happen? Dhimmi?
Do Moslems think they live in an impregnable bubble?
They are lucky the Dutch are such a bunch of mealy-mouthed liberal wussies.
Do that sort of thing in Wyoming and the cowboys will take you out into the styx and beat the living shit out of you and leave what’s left for the buzzards.
The Dutch are just wussies and smoochers to Moslems. You better lick it and love it.
You do realise that the butchery of Theo van Gogh was only a warning of what is coming in Madrid, London, Rome, and Paris.
Europe has a viper at its breast.
So get used to it. It’s gonna get a lot worse.
But the majority of European muslims seem to reject fundamentalism quite clearly.
Really? I must have missed those million-muslim marches calling for jihadis to lay down their arms.
Muslims in Spain 1000 years ago …
Not exactly current.
The idea that Islam is founded on a principle of intolerance is simply false
Read the Koran.
The problem is only partly down to Islam, which happens to be the religion of a fundamentally intolerant, misogynistic Arab society. I’m not liberal but the sooner there is a feminist revolution in Arab societies the better for us all.
Surely we must have a few spare feminists knocking around that we can send over?
Rob, have you looked around the world today? The violence in more than 30 countries is directly tied to Islamic fundamentalism. Europe is a simmering cauldron, the middle east has already boiled over, SE Asia is struggling with it. How much more are you willing to avert your eyes?
Where is the condemnation in the Friday prayers, where are the Islamist vigils for peace? Where is the outrage? What of the repression in Iran? School children in Beslan? Commuters in Madrid? What of filmakers in Amsterdam? Resorts in Egypt, Indonesia and Israel? Turks in Berlin, Algerians in Paris?
Of course I have. I’ve seen plenty of instances of violence, perpetrated by muslims. What I am arguing is that this is not typical of all muslims. I see violence on the streets of the Middle East, but I don’t see it on the streets of Britain.
The liberal (in the old sense of the word) society we have has (largely) succeeded in defeating the Christian fundamentalist viewpoint – we no longer burn people for being Catholic/Protestant depending on who is in the majority at the time. I see no reason why muslims would be incapable of understanding that their freedom to worship depends on the freedom of non-muslims to worship as they wish. Yes, there are those who don’t “get it”, but let’s not forget that these ideas didn’t take hold immediately even in Christian Europe.
Besides, what’s the alternative? Sending the muslims to the gas chambers? (OK, that comment is a bit harsh. But what would you seriously propose doing about this ‘threat’?)
We actually agree here. Islam isn’t really the problem – the Turks, being of different cultural background, interpret Islam differently to those of Arab culture, for example. The problem is Arab society, its views towards women and its views towards the ideas of liberty. I guess we have a choice to make: we either decide that the Arabs are beyond reason, and resign ourselves to fighting wars until the Arabs are wiped out or sufficiently suppressed, or we make efforts to help Arab society to reform. Our own (Western European/American) journey from religious intolerance should give us the ability to help them achieve what we have achieved.
Rather than isolating European muslims, we should see them as allies in reforming Arab society. Put simply, if muslims in the Middle East behaved as muslims in Europe currently do, the world would be a better place. There would still be extremists, but they would be isolated. Let’s not forget that every society has its crazed killers and religious nuts, it’s just that in a tolerant liberal society there tends to be fewer of them.
I think that’s a pessimistic viewpoint. I don’t get the sense that Europe is a simmering cauldron right now, and the whole argument smacks a little too strongly of “domino theory” for my tastes.
Undoubtedly we must oppose fundamentalism, but to do so we must think clearly about who the real enemy is. Identifying Islam as the enemy simply makes enemies out of moderate, tolerant muslims, the very people who should be our most important allies in bringing Arab society closer to our view of the world.
Religion and political power have been intertwined for as long as there have been authoritarian rulers who needed spiritual legitimacy side by side with priests who needed some muscle to enforce orthodoxy.
A certain author described these actors as the “mystics of spirit” and the “mystics of muscle”, an analysis which only becomes more pertinent to the ongoing situation every passing day.
The reformation must and will come to Islam just as it came to Christianity, and so will the Enlightenment. I may seem pollyannish when I say this, but it is based on two very specific principles.
First, repression is not a sign of strength, but of fear and weakness. The tyranny of the mullahs, or the Saddams, is brittle.
Any system which exists in fear of the free spread of information is fragile, especially in this age, when information flows like the very air we breath from one side of the world to the other in a few heartbeats.
Second, when any reasonably intelligient man or woman is told that their mind belongs to them, and their opinions have a right to be heard, the reaction is not fear but satisfaction. The political concept that legitimacy derives from the consent of the people, not the dictates of the ruling clique, is the most volcanic philosophical and moral idea in history.
The first amendment is the first amendment for a reason. The separation of state power from religious orthodoxy is a bedrock principle which transcends any particular sect or creed.
Islam is not powerful enough to withstand free minds without undergoing fundamental changes, just as Christianity, Hinduism, Bhuddism, Shinto, Judaism, and many more have had to adapt to the operation of a secular state divorced from the enforcement of religious orthodoxy.
This will be a long, complex, and painful process. Thus it has always been. But the end result, if political processes based on individual human rights can endure, will be free men and women who happen to be believers in Islam.
Not paradise. Just one more step in the long journey to live as free human beings on a free Terra.
Gully Foyle would be proud.
“Not paradise. Just one more step in the long journey to live as free human beings on a free Terra.”
Ah, I see our old friend Historical Inevitability has come back refreshed from its post-marxist furlough, and is all ready for a route march on behalf of “secular modernity”. Surrender, Islam! Resistance is useless!
Since Popper appears to be somewhat of a genius loci here, I recommend a perusal of “The Poverty of Historicism” and the chapters on Hegel and Marx in “The Open Society and its Enemies”.
Rob writes:
“The idea that the mere presence of a large number of muslims in any country will automatically lead to some kind of armageddon does not have any real basis in historical fact.”
Nonsense. Even a cursory grasp of post-WWII history proves otherwise, and your stretching back to the Moslem conquest of Spain entirely overlooks the fact that it was…. a conquest.
One rather overlooked aspect of the Islamic infiltration is that it is causing serious and increasing problems in China, too.
Fortunately, the ever-smart Chinese will not be infected with the sort of liberal multi-culti hogwash which prefers to efface itself in the presence of any opposition, however pernicious, and will take appropriate action. They could prove to be a much-needed ally.
Rob, I think you are Panglossian to the extreme and to my mind misinterpret the situation.
“The idea that the mere presence of a large number of Muslims in any country will automatically lead to some kind of Armageddon does not have any real basis in historical fact.”
It depends what you mean by mere presence. Never before, to my knowledge, have large numbers of Muslims lived outside what may be deemed to be an Islamic society. Also large numbers of Muslims seemed also to have a rather bad effect on Byzantium. And where Muslims have traditionally lived in Europe has been due to the political power of the Ottoman Empire. Their presence was not due to some sort of large hippy love in where everyone just wanted peaceful co existence, but due to political power and violence. The historical facts aside you misrepresent or misinterpret why a problem exits. It is not to do with absolute numbers but relative number within a country and allegiance to it.
There are millions of Muslims in Europe and violence is limited as you say, but its perpetrators appear to seek influence and domination far beyond their numbers and in direct conflict with the values of their host countries.
You seem to miss the point that simply being Catholic / Protestant no longer requires the other side to be burnt. In England I would argue that such religious tolerance was more or less practised from the effective religious settlement in Elizabethan times, not seeking to peer into men’s souls etc. pre dating liberalism by several hundred years.
“I see no reason why muslims would be incapable of understanding that their freedom to worship depends on the freedom of non-muslims to worship as they wish. Yes, there are those who don’t “get it”, but let’s not forget that these ideas didn’t take hold immediately even in Christian Europe.”
With the murder of Van Gogh we are not talking about the restriction on freedom of worship..yet, but instead the very right of free speech. To be as offensive as you wish to be about someone or something and not have the fear of violence and death upon you.
I don’t disagree that all Muslims shouldn’t be lumped together, but they are the most likely pool of recruits to Wahhabist views of the world and your Panglossian views would not stop that.
“Fortunately, the ever-smart Chinese will not be infected with the sort of liberal multi-culti hogwash which prefers to efface itself in the presence of any opposition, however pernicious, and will take appropriate action. They could prove to be a much-needed ally.”
Yeah, you’re right… the Chinese aren’t known for their multi-culti approach. Strictly mono-culti for them. Hence why they’re shipping thousands of Han chinese into Tibet & (still) suppressing local culture. I’ll take multi-culti thanks. China’s a perfect illustration of how mono-culti imposition is evil. Cheers.
& All of you, do you have any useful suggestions as to what we should do here in the West? Or do you just enjoy wringing your hands & telling us the sky’s falling?
A_t writes:
“& All of you, do you have any useful suggestions as to what we should do here in the West? Or do you just enjoy wringing your hands & telling us the sky’s falling?”
This is becoming an awfully tiresome refrain, A_t, to which I would make two observations.
The first is that you know damned well what several commentators think should be done about the problems cased by Islamic fanatics, because we told you, less than a week ago.
The second is that you issued a similarly challenging request for suggestions on another thread last week. Just for once putting aside my normal principle that arguing with a liberal is one of life’s greater wastes of time, I took the time to write you a relatively full response. To which you did not respond.
So I shan’t be making that mistake again.
Apologies GCooper, please don’t assume my question was aimed entirely at you. ‘dmick’ for a start, offers a fantastically alarmist post with nary a positive suggestion.
I did read your response, if we’re thinking of the same thread, & as far as I recall, I agreed with much that you suggested in the end.
I also feel that really, you’re not suggesting much that isn’t already being done (infiltrate extremist groups, keep a general eye on potential fanatics, imprison a small number of people who there is good evidence against re. planning terrorist outrages) although you probably want more effort to be made on those fronts (but again, considering that many of these things must take place in secret, really neither of us have any idea how much effort is being made). I suppose the one thing you’d like which currently isn’t being implemented are the more stringent controls on immigration. Correct me if i’m wrong on any of this.
None of this makes me like the Chinese any more, or feel that they in any way offer a positive model to follow. The Chinese government is evil, repressive & authoritarian. The only reason we put up with it is a) we make money off it, and b) we hope interaction with us & their witnessing the benefits of a free populace may improve it in the long run.
If you could be more precise about which aspects of Chinese policy we should adopt, it would be useful; your post certainly hinted at some kind of government-imposed monoculture (as opposed to multiculture) which the Chinese have indeed been implementing for some time, & which I think is utterly evil, even if it does end up making people safer from terrorism.
On the other hand, if you want to ignore my ‘liberal’ bleatings, that’s your prerogative too, but I’d suggest that if you wish to advocate imitating a dictatorship that has little respect for individual rights, you should offer some reasoned justification beyond vague guff about how ‘multiculturalism’ is bringing down our society.
Btw, the reason why I keep following this line of argument is because I keep seeing posts decrying whatever our current policies for dealing with Islam & extreme Islam, but offering only vague concepts or references as an alternative. I usually find positive arguments (ie those proposing a useful alternative rather than just complaining) more instructive & interesting, so I try to draw people out.
“The idea that the mere presence of a large number of muslims in any country will automatically lead to some kind of armageddon does not have any real basis in historical fact.”
Right, but in the reverse direction:
A Muslim minority was able to subvert the order and submit Christian (and other religions) majorities from the Causasian mountains to black Africa, and from Indic ocean islands to the Iberian peninsula.
You can find info on that by reading Bat Ye’or’s works (Link to amazon.co.uk).
That’s called jihad, and the method that permits victory in spite of troop imbalance is terrorism.
Very Retired – For the first time since reading your posts, I entirely disagree with you and think you are arguing from imaginary logic that doesn’t hold up on close inspection.
I don’t know anything about Shintoism and little in depth about Judaism. I do, however, know for an absolute fact that Buddhism, Shintoism and (you forgot) Taoism have never had to reform “to adapt to the operation of a secular state divorced from the enforcement of religious orthodoxy.” These are religions powered by the individual consciousness. That’s their whole point. An Indian step in smartly if I’m wrong, but I believe the Hindu belief system (it’s not a religion) has never been subject to priestly bossing about either. It’s not even an organised religion.
So, in other words, you’re talking about Christianity and maybe Judaism. Even during the Dark Ages when the Church was very powerful indeed, I don’t recall reading of people being kidnapped, held hostage and then beheaded. I don’t recall reading of anyone peacefully going about their business being murdered and butchered in the street. I don’t recall reading of the medieval equivalent of suicide bombers going into crowded markets to murder as many innocent people as possible. I don’t recall reading of parents strapping gunpowder to a child and sending it into a crowd to ignite itself.
I also don’t believe that most Muslims disapprove of these actions. They are just not powerful enough – yet – to voice their approval. Yet it is there, tacitly.
As Pete quite rightly notes, there have been no angry marches by Muslims demanding death to, or even apprehension of, beheaders. There have been no anti-jihadi marches in Britain. Or the US. Or France. Or Thailand. Or the Philippines. Or Holland. Or Spain. Or Canada. Or Turkey. Or Nigeria. Et cetera. When there’s an outrage, Muslims in the West (except for the few who burn down churches) go very quiet. Their “leaders” of self-created Muslim Councils and Muslim Parliaments blah blah blah go on TV to explain that Islam is a religion of peace. This is an outright lie. Islam is a religion of conquest. It is the duty of every Muslim, via the Koran, to conquer, convert or kill infidels. The direction is right there woven throughout the Koran and it comes direct from Allah. Once you’ve conquered a country and killed all the defenders of that country, the population has to be beaten into submission to Allah. If they accept the supremacy of Allah, they will be allowed to retain their own religion while acknowledging the superiority of Islam, paying special taxes to Islam and just generally saying “Yas, Massah” all over the place. Sometimes, in the case of extremely servle dhimmis, they are permitted to wear shoes. This state of submission to Islam is called the dhimmitude.
This is not to deny that there may be peaceful and thoughtful Muslims who are genuinely appalled by the violence created in the name of their religion, but they are much too frightened to speak out. Islam is not a democracy. So no marches.
Rob is either outstandingly ill-informed or he is a troll.
A_t writes:
“Correct me if i’m wrong on any of this.”
Right in essence, wrong in degree. When the hopeless Stella Rimington was in charge of MI5, she ordered the running down of surveillance of Islamic activists in the UK. This was in the 1980s and I’m sure I don’t need to spell out for you the consequences.
Then again, perhaps I do? It seems that the role of London as a base for militant Islam is widely underestimated and that the control of it has been so light as to have, in effect, constituted encouragement. Part of this stems from the British mandarin mindset, which has always been at least half in love with Islam (particularly in the Foreign Office) and part has been an unhappy blend of bad decision-making and incompetence. As a consequence, London (and now other British cities) have become hotbeds of Islamic radicalism that little has been done to root out.
And the, key, third element – which you airily dismiss as “guff” – is that very multi-culturalism which you pretend is benign. It most certainly is not, setting a tone and culture which makes it extremely hard for tough political and policing decisions to be made. When you have hard-Left activist lawyers like Gareth Pierce and influential writers like the barking Jasmin Alibhai-Brown given more or less free reign to expound and promote their extremist views, while opposing voices are routinely silenced, then I insist that multi-culturalism is a very corrosive influence indeed.
What needs to be done at a police/intelligence is absolutely inhibited the excessive prominence given to these opinions, which in any case are held by only a noisy minority.
As for the Chinese thugocracy, I have little brief for them. But I predict they will, in time, become our allies in the war against militant Islamism.
This is the same China which still calls itself a Communist country, which dictates the number of children people can have, and closes internet cafes to prevent its citizens reading “unapproved” material on the internet?
I find it impossible to reconcile the idea that we should copy the Chinese with basic libertarian principles. If you could dispel this conflict for me, I would be very interested to see how.
Funnily enough, we can take one more example from the Spanish. After the reconquista, they outlawed Islam and forced all believers in that religion to convert. They created a very efficient means of ensuring nobody lied about their conversion, these days it is popularly known as the Spanish Inquisition.
To reproduce this now would involve an unprecedented (in a modern Western democracy) use of state force against individuals, mostly for “thought crimes”, punishing people for belonging to a religion even if their actions do not violate any known laws. Again, I can’t reconcile this with any basic libertarian principles.
That in turn depends on the definition of “Islamic society”. Does this mean a society in which Sharia law exists? In which case most Arab states are not “Islamic societies”. Again, Turkey serves as a useful example of a secular democracy that (despite relative lack of prosperity and proximity to many MidEast flashpoints, including Iraq) has survived well enough despite a majority Islamic population.
The decline of Byzantium was the final stage of the fall of the Roman Empire. And it wasn’t the Turks who looted and pillaged the greatest city in Christendom, it was the crusaders of the 4th crusade. Hmm, I’m probably wandering off the point a little now; I would sit debating Byzantine history all day if I could though.
OK, I will concede the idea that, should a large number of fundamentalists took up residence in any country, their presence would upset the previous balance. The question is whether all muslims are fundamentalists; I don’t believe they are.
It doesn’t matter what you call it, religious toleration was what allowed society to remain peaceful despite differing religious viewpoints. The reign of the Stuart monarchs saw a continuing struggle between those who wished to enforce a particular religion and those who wanted tolerance, and in the end tolerance won out – to the benefit of English society, in my opinion.
Do you want the right of free speech to extend to muslim clerics preaching that Western society is degenerate?
My argument is thus: muslims are entitled to the same religious freedom as anyone else. As private individuals they can worship as they please.
Now, in order to allow that, we do need a strong security operation to infiltrate terrorist groups. Those who encourage, comission or in any way support terrorist acts must be punished and prevented from doing so again. Hopefully this can be done without turning Britain into China or 16th-century Spain.
Perhaps I can be clearer by putting my views like this:
I believe we should assimilate muslims into Western culture, educating them about the values of tolerance, regardless of the effect that has on their faith. If this angers a few radical fundamentalists, so be it. If they try to stop it by violence, off to prison they go. This should run in tandem with a process of cultural subversion of Arab states, attacking the cultural values which lead to the suppression of women and intolerance of dissent. Where absolutely necessary to remove dictatorships or terror-supporting states, force should be used, though the aim should be to achieve most change via cultural subversion.
Is that any better?
Rob asks:
“Is that any better?”
No, because your argument is based on a false premise: that Islam can be assimilated into Western cultures. All the evidence, from Paris, from Rotterdam, from Stockholm, from Northern British cities suggests it cannot. You might very well (as been suggested on Samizdata before) get some young Moslem males smoking, drinking and clubbing, but that doesn’t mean they couldn’t be switched into radical mode with some ease – as, again, the evidence has shown repeatedly. The nutballs who slammed planes into the WTC were clubbing just a few days beforehand.
While it is true that Western culture has been reasonably good at assimilating people with other beliefs, none of those were based at its very core on the forcible conversion and subjugation of non-believers.
No amount of liberal wishing it weren’t so can change that elemental difference.
So if we can’t assimilate them, we’re left with the option of suppressing and eventually exterminating them?
Rob writes:
“So if we can’t assimilate them, we’re left with the option of suppressing and eventually exterminating them?”
If simply expelling the fanatics fails, I suppose it does.
Would you prefer to live under Sharia law?
Rob writes – “The question is whether all muslims are fundamentalists; I don’t believe they are.” Well, actually, they are because that is the definition of Islam. They have a holy duty, per Allah, to convert the world by the word or by the sword, to worship their Allah. That is mandated in the Koran in many different places, and by various hadiths whose numbers I can’t be bothered to remember, but I’m sure you can Google them if you are in the market for a snoozefest.
They believe that anyone who is not a Muslim is, by definition, an apostate because they think everyone is born Muslim. If they don’t believe it, they are an apostate themselves. No one can ‘convert’ to Islam, because all are born Islamic. And you know what the penalty, per Allah, is for apostacy. If you submit to their religion, you are ‘reverting’ to the religion you were born with. This is all in their Koran.
And while I’m on a roll, yes, the Chinese may become our allies, if they feel they need a weaker partner with less resolve than themselves. The Chinese are very, very smart people and they are pragmatic.
Yes, isn’t it appalling that they try to limit their population to the number of people they can feed? They don’t want their people starving to death! Control freaks!
The bible says some pretty uncompromising things too, but we don’t automatically assume that all christians follow the bible 100% of the time. People generally use religion to reinforce or confirm their own morality, so the parts of the religion that fit in with the prevailing culture tend to become more prominent.
In hard-working Western culture, the rules about the observation of the Sabbath are routinely ignored, for example. Exodus 31:15 says “Anyone who does work on the seventh day must surely be put to death”, but we don’t see christian fundamentalists blowing people up for working on Sundays. The reason for that is culture, rather than the written word in the holy book. Culture has the advantage of being changeable, and that is how I believe the problem should be solved.
How would you feel if your government started trying to tell you how many children you can have? If you want a communist country in which people are told how to live by the government, fair enough. I don’t want that, and I find it to be in opposition to the principles of liberty, the principles we are supposedly defending from those who would remove them. I don’t find your vision of government control much more appealing than Sharia, in all honesty.
Jakob—if you can be so far off the mark in a little comment thread, I hope I’m never around you when you’re duck hunting.
Rob—I never expected the Spanish Inquisition!
Verity— I was speaking from a purely American perspective, where any and all of the world’s religions, and most of its cultures, are represented by some group of immigrants, whether from 1624 or 2004.
Regardless of the situation in the “old country”, they are faced with the fact that others are allowed to be whatever it is they happen to be, and the police don’t come for you because you practice a different faith, but they do come to arrest you if you assault someone for daring to not be what you approve of.
I am a short term pessimist, but a long term optimist. I am never surprized when things get dicey in some particular instance, but always look to the next step, when some of the problem may get resolved.
All religions desire political support, as it makes it much easier to be the Supreme Poohbah when you can have anyone who disagrees racked. I am a Catholic by upbringing, although not much of one in practice, so the idea that Islam is somehow unique in its desire for politically enforced orthodoxy does not resonate with me.
I believe that the system can influence the product, i.e., if you have a societal system that rewards and supports repression, that is what you will get. If the system values and rewards freedom of expression, then that value will be inculcated in the inhabitants of that culture.
I think in terms of generations, and centuries, not in what will happen next week. The Islamic world is not just underdeveloped, they are living in a past century as regards the level of their political and social evolution. In their world, the Pope can still put Gallileo on trial for heresy, figuratively speaking. They must evolve, they really have no choice in that.
The essence of repression is a monopoly on the control of information that reaches the citizenry. That which contradicts the “official truth” is blocked, and only that which supports the status quo is allowed. This was the pattern for millenia.
Now, the mullahs in Iran must try to prevent the free flow of information which comes floating through the air from all over the globe. They have already lost the battle, just as the Soviets did before them.
You are condemning Islam for having the mentality of a 16th Century European peasant, who would set a heretic on fire, and roast weenies at the same time, without a second’s hesitation. This is the mindset of the isolated and ignorant.
Neither of those states is possible any longer, unless one adopts it willfully. And, as the Marines are demonstrating to the “true believers” in Fallujah, willful ignorance has its downside.
I am a child of the Enlightenment, even though I should have been born many centuries in the future, and I firmly believe that the idea of individual rights is transforming. There will always be ferocious resistance to it, but that can be overcome. The only true danger is that those who enjoy such a culture might abandon it for transitory fears.
The culture of freedom that withstood monarchism, fascism, socialism, communism, militarism, and internal subversion, can certainly overcome what is truly a feeble spasm of religious absolutism.
I apologize that this response got even longer than my usual blatherings.
.Looks like God kicked Allahs muslum [Oops!] with (Tsunami) big flush of dead muslums. how many 200,000 dead ragheads, so much for ALLAH you [Oops!] heads. Cut some more heads off you scumbags and see what God does to the rest of you. You hate everyone, but sure love a hand out, go burn some more flags while your at it. Muslums are the worst of liars. Yes, Islam is a religion of peace when they are not: – flying aircraft into buildings – bombing Aussies in Bali – bombing trains in Madrid – killing shoolchildren in Beslan – sending their children on suicide bombing missions to kill Jews – Beheading people in Iraq – Rioting and killing Christians in Nigeria – Burning Christian Churches in Kosovo – Murdering Film directors in Holland – Threatening Dutch politicians with murder – Gang raping women in the suburbs of France – constantly shouting ‘death to America, death to Israel’ – suicide bombing compounds in Saudi Arabia – bombing synagogues in Turkey Violent jihad or holy war against unbelievers. Murder, stealing, torture, slavery and rape against unbelievers is acceptable if couched in terms of jihad. Christians and Jews allowed to live in Muslim dominated lands provided they pay a special tax and accept their status as second class citizens. The status of polythiests is tenuous at best, they will eventually be eliminated either by persecution or death. My dear brother, please read Chronicles of Islamic Wisdom. Here are a few excerpts from the book of one of Islam s’ supreme spiritual leader: Ayatollah Khomeini: “A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister” – From Khomeini’s book, “Tahrirolvasyleh”, fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990. “A man can have sex with animals such as sheep?s, cows, camels and so on. However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to the next door village should be fine”. From Khomeini’s book, “Tahrirolvasyleh”, fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990 “If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned.” The little green book, Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini, Political, Phylosophica, Social and Religious with a special introduction by Clive Irving, ISBN number 0-553-14032-9, page 47″It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband’s house rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven” – From Khomeini’s book, “Tahrirolvasyleh”, fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990 REMEMBER IRAN CONTRA? Eleven things are impure: urine, excrement, sperm…non-Moslem men and women…and the sweat of an excrement-eating camel.Ayatollah Khomeini I’m so scared i have a wart on my [Oops!]. Is it a [Oops!] sucking muslim ? 93% muslim males have [Oops!] and/or genital warts. ALLAH!! Homosexuality is widely practised in Islamic countries. To please the homosexuals,Muhammad (the evil perverted prophet) promised his followers pre-pubescent boys in Paradise. So after committing plunder, loot, rape and murder in this life, the male followers of Islam get “rewarded” by untouched virginal youths who are fresh like pearls. (72 Virgins, 28 young boys and the virility of 100 men…) dead Warrios of Allah (suicide bombers and the like) believe that today. The most important information to know about Muslims,is that they will smile to your face and cut your throat from the back. Muslims are EVIL, period!!! Like Muhammad, Ayatollah Khomeini and most other Islamic clerks, Iranian Mullahs and American Catholic Priests, are perverted mentally and sexualy.(paedophiles) WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR WAR. Booooom!! You get to meet that [Oops!] wipe allah 🙂 Evil Killers , Mass Murders, Rapist, and LIARS call themselves islamic muslims and pray to a ( moon god ) they call allah, Muslims scream (allah akbar) as they cut off heads of people who will not pray to their MOON GOD. Their lives are orchestrated by an evil book called the (qur’an). Muslims are killing thousands of Innocent Children, Women, and Men, God Have Mercy. As a group of people they are some, if not the most Evil the world as ever seen. Learn of them, fear them, OR pray to their Moon God. They teach their children that only Allah fearing muslims are worthy of life and after life. Their aim is to destroy us, they respect nothing; not even the lives of children. Every day there are bombings, every day innocent people are targeted and murdered. Unthinkable atrocities take place on daily basis. Terrorism is not an ideology, it is a tool; but the terrorists kill for an ideology. They call that ideology Islam. The entire world, both Muslims and non-Muslims claim that the terrorists have hijacked the religion of peace and Islam does not condone violence. Who is lying? Do the terrorists understand Islam better, or do those who decry them? The answer to this question is the key to our victory, and failure to find that key will result in our loss and death will be upon us. The key is in the Quran and the history of Islam. Those of us, who know Islam, know that the terrorists of Islam are doing nothing that their prophet did not do and did not encourage his followers to do. Murder, rape, assassination, beheading, massacre and sacrilege of the dead, to delight the hearts of the believers were all practiced by Muhammad, were taught by him and were observed by Muslims throughout their history. If truth has ever mattered, it matters most now! The root of Islamic terrorism is Islam. The proof of that is the Quran. No matter how painful the truth may be, only truth can set us free, Why so much denial? A nuclear disaster is upon us. This will happen. It is not a question of “if” but “when”. How many more innocent lives will be lost before YOU open your eyes? A nuclear disaster is upon us. We urge the Muslims to leave Islam. Stop with excuses, justifications and rationalizations,stop dividing mankind into us vs. them and Muslims vs. Kafirs. We are One people, One mankind! Muhammad was not a messenger of God. Terrorists take their moral support and the validation for their actions from the Qu’ran. Your very adherence to the Islamic cult of death, is a nod of approval for their evil crimes against humanity. We also urge the non-Muslims to stop being politically correct, lest they hurt the sensitivities of the Muslims. To Hell with their sensitivities! Let us save their lives,and the lives of millions of innocent people. Millions, if not billions of lives will be lost if we do nothing. Time is running out! All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. Do something! Send this message to everyone in your address book and ask them to do the same. Defeat Islam and stop terrorism, one billion dead evil muslims is not to many if it saves humanity. Together lets say to HELL WITH MUSLIMS, THE Qu’ran, an the pedofile, pervert, murderer Muhammad (as he burns in HELL),.. Allah, evil God of the Qur’an, Qur’an evil doctrine of nasty, brain dead, weak minded, not quit human muslims. ALL 9/11 terroist where muslims, all suicide bombers are muslims, all TOWELHEADS are Muslims, do not let muslims live in your towns, they will destroy your way of life and cause you much evil as they change your laws to comply to their lislamic laws of the Qu’ran. Muslims CAN NOT live in peace, even with eachother. Example: Muslims hate more that they love their childern,Muslims will tie a bomb on their own children to kill another human. God Have Mercy Direct quotes from the Quran: ANNOUNCE PAINFUL PUNISHMENT TO THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE (9:3) O Prophet! urge the believers to war; if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred… (8:65) Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve (8:55) And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah (8:39) When the sacred months have passed away, THEN SLAY THE IDOLATERS WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM, AND TAKE THEM CAPTIVES AND BESIEGE THEM AND LIE IN WAIT FOR THEM IN EVERY AMBUSH, then if they repent and keep up prayer [become believers] and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them (9:5) And if they intend to act unfaithfully towards you, so indeed they acted unfaithfully towards Allah before, but He GAVE YOU MASTERY OVER THEM (8:71) FIGHT THEM: ALLAH WILL PUNISH THEM BY YOUR HANDS AND BRING THEM TO DISGRACE, AND ASSIST YOU AGAINST THEM. (9:14) FIGHT THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN ALLAH, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, NOR FOLLOW THE RELIGION OF TRUTH, OUT OF THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE BOOK [Christians and Jews], until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and THEY ARE IN A STATE OF SUBJECTION. (9:29) O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination. (9:73) O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). (9:123) I WILL CAST TERROR INTO THE HEARTS OF THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE. THEREFORE STRIKE OFF THEIR HEADS AND STRIKE OFF EVERY FINGERTIP OF THEM. THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ACTED ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER; AND WHOEVER ACTS ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER – THEN SURELY ALLAH IS SEVERE IN REQUITING (EVIL). THIS – TASTE IT, AND (KNOW) THAT FOR THE UNBELIEVERS IS THE PUNISHMENT OF FIRE. O you who believe! When you meet those who disbelieve marching for war, then turn not your backs to them. And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day – unless he turn aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to a company – then he, indeed, becomes deserving of Allah’s wrath, and his abode is hell; and an evil destination shall it be. So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy) but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; (8:12-17) And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back, then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the people are transgressors. Is it then the judgment of the times of ignorance that they desire: and who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure? O YOU WHO BELIEVE! DO NOT TAKE THE JEWS AND THE CHRISTIANS FOR FRIENDS; THEY ARE FRIENDS OF EACH OTHER; AND WHOEVER AMONGST YOU TAKES THEM FOR A FRIEND, THEN SURELY HE IS ONE OF THEM; SURELY ALLAH DOES NOT GUIDE THE UNJUST PEOPLE. (5:49-51) The punishment of those who pit themselves against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement, except those who repent before you have them in your power (5:33-34) Believe therefore in Allah and His apostles, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one god: far be it from his glory that He should have a son. (4:171) What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him. THEY DESIRE THAT YOU SHOULD DISBELIEVE AS THEY HAVE DISBELIEVED, SO THAT YOU MIGHT BE ALL ALIKE; THEREFORE TAKE NOT FROM AMONG THEM FRIENDS UNTIL THEY FLY THEIR HOMES IN ALLAH’S WAY; BUT IF THEY TURN BACK, THEN SEIZE THEM AND KILL THEM WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM, AND TAKE NOT FROM AMONG THEM A FRIEND OR A HELPER. (4:89) As for those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the punishment (4:56) Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah – they shall have a severe punishment; and Allah is Mighty, the lord of retribution. (3:4) Allah ‘s Apostle said, ” I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)” (Hadith 4:52:196) Allah’s Apostles said, “When a slave (of Allah) commits illegal sexual intercourse, he is not a believer at the time of committing it; and if he steals, he is not a believer at the time of stealing; and if he drinks an alcoholic drink, when he is not a believer at the time of drinking it; and he is not a believer when he commits a murder,” ‘Ikrima said: I asked Ibn Abbas, “How is faith taken away from him?” He said, Like this,” by clasping his hands and then separating them, and added, “But if he repents, faith returns to him like this, by clasping his hands again. (Hadith 8:82:800e:) [So, with the clap of a hand, they can do whatever they want?] The Prophet said, “The one who commits an illegal sexual intercourse is not a believer at the time of committing illegal sexual intercourse and a thief is not a believer at the time of committing theft and a drinker of alcoholic drink is not a believer at the time of drinking. Yet, (the gate of) repentance is open thereafter.” (Hadith 8:82:801) (Isolated incident) …then prostrated himself, and all who were with him prostrated too. But an old man took a handful of dust and touched his forehead with it saying, “This is sufficient for me.” Later on I saw him killed as an infidel. (Hadith 5:59:311) [yes the Jews and Muslims are both descendents of Abraham, but here is the attitude towards descendants of Abraham through Isaac (the Jews]: “If they find you, they will be your enemies, and will stretch forth towards you their hands and their tongues with evil, and they ardently desire that you may disbelieve. Your relationship would not profit you, nor your children, on the day of resurrection; He will decide between you; and Allah sees what you do. Indeed, there is for you a good example in Abraham and those with him when they said to their people: Surely we are clear of you and of what you serve besides Allah; WE DECLARE OURSELVES TO BE CLEAR OF YOU, AND ENMITY AND HATRED HAVE APPEARED BETWEEN US AND YOU FOREVER UNTIL YOU BELIEVE IN ALLAH ALONE (60:2-4) Contrast that with what Jesus said: “But I say to you, love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. Be merciful as your Father is merciful. This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” Jesus, SON of God See What about the Old Testament? and What about the Crusades? Again, Mohammad first went to the Jews as a prophet, writing of peace; was rejected. Mohammad then went to the Christians claiming to be a prophet and wrote peace; was rejected. Mohammad went back to his own people and was rejected until he (for a short time) said Allah allowed them to worship Allah’s daughters. Mohammad then began to slaughter unbelievers and masterminded over 60 massacres, and the Quran changed dramatically to hate, that is why there are so many contradictions. That is also why there are so many familiar phrases and precepts between the religions. Mohammad appeared on the scene over 600 years after Jesus was resurrected, he tried to claim to be a prophet, though illiterate, he knew the scriptures of the Bible well. But “Allah” is certainly NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The characters are exactly opposite! In fact the Hebrew phonetic word Allah (aw-law) means to lament, mourn and curse. (Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance #421, 422, 423) Hate Muslims? NO! Jesus would never have advocated hating anybody! But should we insist our children “assume you are a Muslim soldier” about to conquer a nation? Should they memorize the tenants of Islam, repeat the words, pray to Allah, build Mosques, imagine they are Muslim and write what they like about it? NO!!! And at the same time, school textbooks claim that the Old Testament prophets could not tell the future (yes they could when God revealed it to them countless times!). Additionally, the textbooks actually teach that the Israelites only accepted what the prophets told them so they could explain away the disasters they went through! “Across the Centuries” and “Message of Ancient Days” claim the religion of Islam is truth, (beliefs are given as fact) and that Judeo-Christian beliefs are false. Public schools INSIST our children learn this. WHERE ARE OUR RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS??? A true account of history shows that Islam repeatedly attacked Christian lands, desecrated sanctuaries and tortured Christians who fought back without desecrating Mecca in return. Yet Houghton Mifflin and modern historians would rather vilify Christians than give the truth. A Deadly Give and Take Crusaders fought many terrible battles in the Middle East, but Muslims started—and won—the war. by Paul Crawford, assistant professor of history at Alma College in Alma, Michigan. He specializes in ecclesiastical history with emphasis on the crusades and military orders. Osama bin Laden called America’s response to September 11, a “new crusade and Jewish campaign led by the big crusader Bush under the flag of the cross.” He clearly meant to link the military campaign to European campaigns from a millennium ago, during which, the prevailing mentality holds, Christian warriors unjustly attacked Islamic possessions in and around Palestine. By establishing this connection, though, the fugitive fanatic admits more than he alleges. In the Middle Ages, as in 2001, Islam struck first—and in such a way that the West would certainly respond. Waves of conquest Jerusalem has changed hands many times over the centuries, but the seventh century was particularly tumultuous. Pagan Persians stormed the city in 614. Eastern Christians, led by Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, reclaimed it by 630. Within a few years, though, Islamic forces had broken the Byzantine military and chased them out of Palestine. Jerusalem surrendered to a Muslim army in 638. Construction began soon afterward on a mosque at the Temple Mount. Sophronicus, the patriarch of the city, is said to have burst into tears and wailed, “Truly this is the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet!” After capturing Jerusalem, the Muslim armies poured through the eastern and southern provinces of the reeling Byzantine Empire. In the 640s Armenia in the north and Egypt in the south fell to Islam. In 655 the Muslims won a naval battle with the Byzantines and very nearly captured the Byzantine emperor. By 711 Muslims controlled all of northern Africa, and a Muslim commander named Tariq had set foot on European soil—on a rock that took his name (Jebel al-Tariq, corrupted into Gibraltar). By 712 Muslims had penetrated deep into Christian Spain. At the battle of Toledo that year, they defeated the Spanish and killed their king. The Spanish kingdom promptly collapsed. Surviving Christians retreated into the mountains of northwestern Spain and dug in their defenses. The Muslim armies bypassed them and began raiding across the Pyrenees into France. Meanwhile, in the East, Muslims continued to push into the Byzantine Empire. By 717 they had landed in southeastern Europe, and they besieged the Byzantine capital, Constantinople. Had they taken the city, they might have conquered the entire continent. But the Byzantines resisted. Their capital would not fall to Islam until 1453. Western Christians stopped the Muslim advance into their territory in 732 at the Battle of Tours (or Poitiers), France. Charles of Heristal, Charlemagne’s grandfather, led a Frankish army against a large Muslim raiding party and defeated them, though Muslim raiders would continue attacking Frankish territory for decades. For his victory, Charles became known as the Hammer—in French, Charles Martel. After regrouping, Muslim forces began to move into south central Europe, lauching invasions of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica in the ninth century. They mounted operations on the Italian mainland as well, sometimes at the invitation of quarrelling Christian powers. In 846 Muslim raiders attacked the outlying areas of Rome, the center of western Christianity. This act would be comparable to Christians sacking Mecca or Medina, something they have never done. Toward the end of the ninth century, Muslim pirate havens were established along the coast of southern France and northern Italy. These pirates threatened commerce, communication, and pilgrim traffic for a hundred years or more. During the tenth century, however, the tide began to turn. In the East in the 950s and 960s, the Byzantines mounted a series of counterattacks. They eventually recovered the islands of Crete and Cyprus and a good bit of territory in Asia Minor and northern Syria, including Antioch. They lacked the strength to retake Jerusalem, though they might have struggled harder had they known what terrors the city would soon face. New threats In 1000, much—perhaps even most—of the population of the Holy Land was still Christian, of one affiliation or another. This was about to change. One reason was the rise of a local Muslim ruler named Hakim, who was possibly insane and certainly not an orthodox Muslim (he claimed to be divine). Hakim persecuted Christians and Jews fiercely. In 1009 he ordered the destruction of the rebuilt Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. The Christian population of the Holy Land began to shrink under his tyrannical rule. Hakim aroused great hostility even from other Muslims, and his reign was soon over. The Byzantines, distressed by the damage to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, negotiated with the Muslims and in 1038 were allowed to begin rebuilding it again. But the losses to the local Christian (and Jewish) communities were harder to repair. Another, and perhaps more serious, cause of distress for the local populations of all faiths was the intrusion into the Middle East of the Seljuk Turks. The Seljuks, pagan nomads from the steppes of central Asia, made steady inroads into the more sophisticated world of the Muslim Arabs in the early eleventh century. In 1055, the Seljuks captured Baghdad, destroying a long-lived Muslim dynasty and seriously disrupting the stability of the Middle East. This might have provided an opportunity for the Christian Byzantines to recover their lost provinces, but even as the Seljuk Turks conquered the Arabs, they converted to Islam. The Muslim Arab overlords of the region were thus replaced by harsher, coarser Muslim Turks. Pleas from the East In 1071 Byzantine Emperor Romanus Diogenes confronted a Turkish invasion force in the far eastern provinces of the Byzantine Empire. The two armies met at the village of Manzikert, near Lake Van, and the Byzantines were utterly defeated. As a result of this disaster, the Byzantines lost all the territory that they had recovered, painstakingly, in the ninth and tenth centuries. This included the entirety of Asia Minor, the breadbasket and recruiting ground of the empire. Succeeding Byzantine emperors sent frantic calls to the West for aid, directing them primarily at the popes, who were generally seen as protectors of Western Christendom. Pope Gregory VII received these appeals first, and in 1074 he discussed leading a relief expedition to Byzantium himself. But this proved impractical, and no aid was offered. The Byzantines continued sending appeals, however, eventually finding an audience with Pope Urban II. Allah, who, according to Muhammad, orders all unbelievers to be killed torturously to strike terror in their hearts. Allah gives an open-ended invitation to KILL ALL unbelievers, infidels, Christians and Jews that do not submit to Allah. This is a standing open-ended order. The Houghton Mifflin textbook claims that all is well for those who simply pay the poor tax and remain in their own faith, but it fails to mention the rest of the verse which states one must keep up prayer to Allah. Christians and Jews WILL NOT DO THAT. So all is NOT well as fingertips, hands and feet are cut off among other grisly acts Muslims continually try to convince Christians that we believe the same thing, when in fact, beliefs are distinctly opposite. Muslims do not believe Jesus is the Son of God for the Quran states Allah has no son. The Quran states Jesus is a teacher and that Muhammad is THE prophet. The Quran curses Christians and Jews for our beliefs. Muslims claim the Bible is corrupt. This is rather hysterical since Muhammad claimed the Quran was an extension of the Bible and would never contradict it, yet because it was written by Muhammad, it flip-flops in the Quran. Muslims who claim that Islam is peaceful will point to the verses that condone the Bible. But Muhammad changed his mind. Ask any family member of dead Christians in the Sudan, slaughtered by Muslims following Muhammad’s writings. The Bible is full of exact names, dates, places, whereas the Quran believes things like Noah, Moses and Jesus all lived at the same time and Mary was the sister of Moses, Miriam. Many loving peaceful verses are written in the Quran, until Muhammad was rejected as a prophet by Christians and Jews, and then the instructions are bitterly to kill us. Muhammad demonstrated this himself as he led many slaughters as a warrior against Christians and Jews. Why? Because we correctly would not accept him as prophet. When Jesus came, the new covenant began because people broke the old one, not God. (Jeremiah) God is always making provisions, extending His arms out to a rebellious people, calling to us, He even sent His only begotten Son… What about the Crusades? The Pope did not call knights to arms to gain more land as the textbooks claim. One of the “most famous speeches in history” shows that the Pope described how churches were being desecrated as Christians entrails (guts) were cut out and one end staked down. The Christian was then whipped as he tried to escape, alive, entrails hanging out until he died. Islam was conquering nations and spreading, it was only a matter of time before England would stand alone. There was no choice, the knights gave up lands and riches to defend their brothers in Jerusalem. Why the history books have chosen to write history with Christians as the bad guys is explained in the Bible. “They will hate you because they first hated Me.” -Jesus I have wondered what the true calling of Western Islamic groups really is oftentimes as I read about what they are doing and what they are trying to accomplish. Groups such as CAIR, ADC, CIOCG, IAP, and others have been very proactive in trying to push out literature to the people of this nation in media and through civil activities that tell us how harmless they are and how they have no ties to terror, how peaceful they are. There have been lawsuits all over the nation that have tried to quench the Free Speech of Americans who have done little more than quote individuals and groups and question the intent of those quotes. I really have to wonder how much cash is spent in delivering this message to the public and how it could be utilized for a better purpose if Muslims truly want their religion to be seen in a different light. Did any Christian organization start lawsuits when the media attacked their faith through the acts of Jim Jones? Do we see a flurry of lawsuits by Jewish individuals and groups towards Islamic groups that have called them Monkeys and Pigs? Do I see Jews killing those who have left Judaism for another religion? I do not see this on a mass level, and no Muslims; it is not due to the Jews owning the media or the Zionist Christians who support them. It seems to those outside your bubble that is simply is inherent within Islam to fight those who disagree with you or refuse to accept your ideology as truth. We in our non-Mohammedan religions allow people to disagree or dismiss what we believe, and to the shock of Islamists worldwide we allow them to even leave our faiths without fear of brutal death and intimidation to their families. It is because in the true sense, our faiths are not those of compulsion. Though some have been aggressive in trying to proselyte, and some have done so in a manner that would even turn people from religion, we let them be. We feel that God will judge those who do not want to hear our message in the afterlife and in the end all will get their reward one way or another. We also feel that God is quite able to defend Himself from blasphemers and evildoers and has no need for us to fight His battles for Him using terror and brutal tactics. Our God has no need to blow up a school bus or a shopping mall. Our God has no need to sneak around and send His children to their death to force people into His way of life. We feel our God can fight His own battles, unlike Allah who seems to bless those who murder and dominate, if we are to believe the global acts of terror and the ranting of imams. Our God punishes those of us who do so. Even for those who believe in no afterlife, or in reincarnation. The tenets are closely tied to God Himself being judge. I wish Allah would fight his own battles. It would save the lives of so many and allow children to live and enjoy life rather than perpetuate unadulterated evil in order to enjoy some strange sexual bliss in Muslim heaven. And we do not issue fatwahs against the lives of those who make fun of our religions. So why do Islamists feel such a great need to push an agenda and use lawsuits to keep people from speaking their mind? And how much money has been spent on this huge blitz to try and make people see something they do not seem to see? Why, if Islam is so peaceful, do you have to spend millions on literature, ads, and lawsuits to convince people of something that should be self evident if what you say is true? Your proactive stance in this nation and other nations should not be to show westerners that your religion is peaceful. It should be used to protest and sue those who supposedly have hijacked your religion. It should be used to keep students in Berkeley from chanting about being martyrs during an anti-terror protest. It should be used to keep people like the Boston street gang M-13 from giving your religion a bad name. Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus are not using vast amounts of money to have to tell the world they are peaceful. Because perhaps they are inherently peaceful in spite of a few who have used religion for evil purposes, and anyone looking closely at them would see that. Why not use those funds to dismantle militant groups in America? Why not use them to extradite militant imams in the mosques you want everyone to believe are havens of goodness and peace? Why not use them to form huge protests against mosques in England, Canada, and America that are preaching violence, domination and hate? Why not use them to speak against organizations like Hamas instead of publicly claiming they are merely patriots who have a right to commit terror? Why not use them to print literature that shows them how and why your Koran and Hadiths are so peaceful in spite of the violent verses so prevalent in them? Or why not use that money to depose your own group leaders who speak in such an inflammatory and flamboyant way of desiring an entire Islamic society within these nations? Why not use those vast resources to train peaceful missionaries of Islam to go into the hundreds of militant schools in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Syria to teach those people about the Islam you so badly want westerners to buy into? You see the daily bombings in the Middle East. You hear about clerics who spew hatred and death. You hear the inflammatory fatwahs and sermons. You know the clerics who call Jews monkeys and pigs, and call Christians Zionists. In fact, some have been right there under your nose within your organizations. Some in fact are in prison for their ties to terror. Money that has been taken from people thinking about charitable deeds has been propping terror activities against innocent people. And if these were small and isolated incidents most educated people would toss it off as just that. But it seems the events and deeds of those are seen daily throughout the world. Slavery, torture, genocide, oppression, death, a twisted form of martyrdom, kidnapping, murdering those who speak against your religion. It’s all there. It is documented, it is happening; it is being perpetuated on a global level. Why not use those funds to fight those crimes against humanity? Why not create lawsuits against those who so blatantly misuse your peaceful religion for evil? Instead, you use it to create propaganda, you use it to allow groups of people and mosques preach hate by funding them or protecting them. I have read the Koran and the writings of Islam. I see the word Jihad more than I do the word peace. Perhaps you protectors of Islam, you apologists for Mohammed, it is not the people hijacking Peaceful Islam for evil purposes. Perhaps Islam has been hijacking peaceful people for evil purposes. If you desire to show the world that Islam is peace, use your money and energy fighting those who supposedly gave you the reputation you have. Because no other religion I have seen has had to fight so strongly to convince people they are peaceful. I think you need to carry the fight to your own people, your own cultures, and your own leaders. It is not those of use who are from peaceful religions that need the convincing. It is the Islamists who need to be convinced not to do evil deeds, not those who question or fight those deeds. So drop these lawsuits against those who question your deeds and your proclamations and use it change Islam from within. Because until you do, those of us without will never take you seriously, and your words will fall in silence to the shouts of martyrdom and insults towards those who refuse to believe. I have heard on and on about how Islam is peaceful. Some of our politicians as well as pretty much all Muslims make this claim. I have looked, I have read the Quran, Hadiths, I have tried to find the peace that I am told is within the Islamic writings. And yes, there are some. But I see the more violent aspect of the religion within those writings and in the actions of those who are using them to commit atrocity. Just this week in New Jersey we see a family wiped out because they disagreed with some Muslims online. I have personally received threats and intimidation as well as other writers I know who have had to change their names due to threats. So tell me, followers of Mohammed, why are you so intolerant of those who disagree with your religion? Do you see other religions forcing their ideology onto entire populations? Do you see Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and others cutting throats? Kidnapping? Committing acts of suicide while in the midst of committing murder? Killing innocent people? Do you see over 90% of the world’s conflicts and wars having any religion other than Islam involved? Do we see Christian pastors teaching to kill Muslims? To Hate Muslims? To fight daily against Muslims, as Islam does with Jews and Christians? Can you show me in the Bible where it says to slaughter those who disagree with you? Can you show me where the Bible or any other Holy Book orders to occupy and dominate lands and people and force them to submit or die to Christianity? Can you show me where any other religion is celebrating great catastrophes caused by their religion as the Imams in England do? Can you show me where Christians danced in the streets and passed out treats during the Iraq War or after the Tsunami because we see dead Muslims all over the world? Or do you see us sharing our wealth and resources with a religion that has shown only that they desire to kill us? Tell me Oh Muslim, what is more holy? To forgive your enemy and aid them when they lay dying? Or to use your mosques and Holy places to plot terror and hide munitions? To raise our children to love one another or to raise your children with rifles in their arms and a mind set that sends them into public areas with bombs strapped to their backs? You can show me all the Quranic writings you may have on peace. And you can tell me how little you think I understand on Islam. But I know what I read, and I know what I see. And I know what threats have been made to me for merely speaking my thoughts. Though I have never threatened or vowed to kill anyone in this world for blaspheming my God or my Religion. I have never had that moral authority given me through Christian Scriptures. There is nothing in the Bible that would condone my celebrating death or to order me to kill. The Christian Jesus never lifted a sword to any, nor did He defile Himself with women, nor did He rob a caravan. He lived a life without sin in order to be made a Perfect Sacrifice. If Mohamed really served the same God, he would have never claimed to be who he was, nor would the Quran and Hadiths show so much violence. Tell me, if you are a Peaceful Religion, WHAT is the meaning of Peace to you? The meaning of Peace to everyone else seems to take on a whole different meaning, a different interpretation. Most people generally think of it as non-conflicting ways. No wars, no terror, no oppression, no violence. How long will this world suffer the Sudan? How long will we suffer Chechnya, the Philippines? How long will we suffer Iran and Syria funding and sending terror worldwide? How long will we suffer Saudi Arabia financing Madrassas worldwide to instill violence against non-Muslims? How long will we watch families slaughtered for disagreeing with Islam as in New Jersey? How long will we see people murdered in the street for making fun of or disagreeing with Islam as in the Netherlands recently? How long will we watch idly by while Palestinians murder innocents on school buses? How long will we suffer Hamas and Al Qaeda? How long Oh Muslim, shall we sit and listen to how peaceful this religion is? How long shall we watch no progress from “peaceful” Muslims? And when you can truly define peace to me with your actions and bring back that peace to the nations and peoples you have slaughtered, terrorized, kidnapped, enslaved, and forced Islam upon, you can preach to me about your peaceful ways. Because when it comes down to it, we do not care about what you say. We care about what you do. So please, no more words, you followers of Mohammed. Your words have been made numb by the actions of your people. And our ears have been turned deaf to your scriptures by the loudness of the bombs that explode in our cities. And even the patience of the best can be tried before they decide to act upon your “peaceful” ways. Until this world becomes quiet enough, peaceful enough to listen to your words, we will listen to the actions of those who feed your hungry and rebuild your homes. I prefer that to the screams of “Allahu Akbar” in celebration of death.
World Hope, Freedom, Peace, Love, free speech
Lets make America safer from Muslim Killers,Rapist,and liars.
(1) Seal our borders, and ports. No illegal immigrants allowed to enter America.(2) Deport all but native born muslims to the middle east countries. (3) Out law the Islamic religion. Declare it a threat to national security. (4) Convert islamic Mosque into public recreational facilities for young people. (5) Double the sizes of our military. (two year military service mandontory after high school, Starting pay, twenty thousand a year )
(6) Remove Islamic dictators that do not promote civil rights!
(Vote World Freedom Fighter for President.)
PS> The GEN> is right.,it’s a hell of a lot of fun too kill muslums.
You should try it. HO!! I forgot Muslums allready kill anyone, even other muslums. Allha!!
The words of
Samuel Adams:
“The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards;and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood,and transmitted them to us with care and diligence.
It will bring an ever lasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.”