An American, Australian ,Israeli, British "Judeo Christian Friendly " blog.
Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Labor Green Loon Independent People Smuggling Scam on Track under new Minister OcONNER
Labor Green Loon Independent
Immigration Minister tells Australians all is well on their "Open Borders Front" fast tracking,illegal,predominantly 80% single Muslim males, into Australia as fast as they can.
Who is Captain Emad ?
Immigration Minister tells Australians all is well on their "Open Borders Front" fast tracking,illegal,predominantly 80% single Muslim males, into Australia as fast as they can.
Who is Captain Emad ?
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Geert Wilders Down Under : Insurgents and supporters try and stop Wilders speaking
Muslim Insurgents,their apologists and supporters attack attendees and Police outside Geert Wilders speaking venue.
More at :
Geert Wilders Down Under "Welcome Let him remember Theo Van Gogh while he is in Australia" Kulin Ban Melbourne. SBS website
Monday, February 18, 2013
Geert Wilders Down Under "Welcome Let him remember Theo Van Gogh while he is in Australia" Kulin Ban Melbourne. SBS website
SBS, Australia's Tax payer funded "Harmony Day" "Multicultural" "all Cultures Religions beliefs behaviours are equal" "Diversity and Tolerance" TV and Radio network permits a varity of views to be expressed on their programs so long as you don't disagree with their preferred Political Religious,Ideological or Sexual Preference view.
Example:
.....Welcome....
Kulin-Ban - from Melbourne, 3 hours ago
Let him remember Theo van Gogh while he is in Australia...
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1738228/Cold-reception-for-anti-Islam-campaigner
Theo Van Gogh's dead body lies on the footpath outside his home, after he as savagely butchered buy a Muslim who objected to a documentary he made.Bystanders prevented his decapitation but were unable to save his life.
Muslim Family "Harmony Day" supporters, at Sydney's Muslim Insurgency Riots in the Central Business District of Sydney September 15 2012
Right-wing Dutch MP Geert Wilders has told SBS he is "happy" to be in Australia despite getting a frosty reception from local politicians.
"Even your Prime Minister said not the most kind things about me, and your former Minister of Immigration stalled granting me a visa," he said.
"Freedom of speech is one of the most important things in our free society and I am happy to be here."
Wilders is visiting Melbourne at the invitation of Q Society, where he will speak about his anti-Islamic platform in what he calls a warning to Australia.
"If you really want to preserve your freedom, if you really want to preserve your identity as a country that is not Islamic, that is based on Christianity and Judaism... you should open your eyes, learn from the mistakes we made in Europe and make sure they don't happen here," he said.
Calling the Prophet Mohammad a “terrorist” and the Koran a “terrible book”, Wilders rallied against Australia’s multicultural policy, saying he believes it could lead to the persecution of non-Islamic groups.
“Islam has no room for anything but Islam, and Islam will get its way also in Australia. People who are non-Islamic, Jews, Christians and women, would be the first ones to pay the price.”
Labor Green Loons standing with the Savage..... as usual.
Geert Wilders has postponed a visit to Australia because of delays in obtaining a visa.
Green Loon says Geert Wilders not welcome in Australia
Islamic Sociopaths Inc. aka. the Religion of Peace, Feiz Mohammad , Geert Wilders Video’s
Aussie cleric Feiz Mohammad calls for beheading of Dutch MP Geert Wilders
Australia :Burqa ban, Muslim woman dressed like an idiot Arse Clown declares “……I'm an Australian more than anyone else here.”
Australia: Alan Jones interviews Janet Levy on her American Thinker article, The Narrative of Defeat.
Far Left Extremist Multicultural Australian Taxpayer funded TV Station reports on Geert Wilders election victory
Dutch Nazis doing the bidding of Islamofascists and International Socialism
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Yvonne Bornstein,Abducted,Tortured and Gang Raped with a sword at her throat by Chechen terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda tells her story Eleven Days of Hell
A terrifying true story of kidnap, torture and dramatic rescue by the FBI and the KGB. Chechen terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda orchestrate a Moscow abduction, holding westerners Yvonne and her husband Danny hostage for $1.6 million they don't have. It will take enormous courage and an international rescue effort to bring them home. ELEVEN DAYS OF HELL is the chilling true story of kidnap, torture, rape and survival. Yvonne Bornstein relives the trauma that still has the power to make her shake with fear.
Born Yvonne Shilkin in Western Australia, the author of this debut memoir failed to get a start as a singer, survived one divorce and the murder of a fiancé, then married businessman Daniel Weinstock. As Bornstein tells it in this tabloid-style account, in 1992 they set out to make a killing exporting Western consumer goods to the newly opened Russian economy. Unfortunately, their Russian partner was a criminal, which eventually led to Yvonne and Daniel being kidnapped and held outside of Moscow, separately, for $1.6 million ransom total. Their prospects looked bleak, as cooperation between Russian and Western law enforcement authorities was negligible, but a shrewd Russian lawyer in the U.S. established communication between the FBI and the KGB. United efforts led to a rescue; the captors eventually got off with six months for racketeering; the marriage ended a few years later in divorce.
This true story is simply told, and although the most brutal parts are not graphically described, what we are told is more than enough to understand the meaning of Primo Levi's words, "I am constantly amazed by man's inhumanity to man."
Friday, February 15, 2013
Sydney's Occupied Territories: Sudden Decapitation Syndrome
Sydney's Occupied Territories.
Khoder Zahab goes wild.
Retired carpenter Toufic Zahab beheaded in a horror family feud
Simon Black
The Daily Telegraph
February 15, 2013 12:00AM
A RETIRED carpenter was allegedly beheaded by his son during a domestic dispute at a house full of children in Bankstown yesterday.
It is believed the victim, Toufic Zahab, 69, came to his wife's defence as she was being assaulted by their 42-year-old son Khoder Zahab.
Up to seven children were at home when much-loved Mr Zahab was allegedly attacked with a brick and knife in his Stacey St home shortly after 6am.
It is alleged that, moments earlier, his wife suffered candle burns and had been kicked down a flight of stairs.
She then watched helplessly as her husband died.
Police found the man dead inside the lounge room of the home with horrific injuries.
According to neighbours, Mr Zahab's visibly distraught wife was taken from the scene in an ambulance to Bankstown Hospital where she was treated by doctors.
Shocked police said the scene inside the family's home was so disturbing, officers who attended were receiving counselling.
"The scene was quite disturbing," Detective Chief Inspector Glen Fitzgerald said.
"It has been a difficult morning for both the family and police." It is understood Mr Zahab owned both units in the duplex where he was attacked.
Several other relatives, including the children, were at home at the time.
Mr Zahab's grandson Abdul Elesh said his grandparents had allowed their son to sleep in the house as a favour after a family dinner.
"They're warm people, generous people," Mr Elesh said.
"He (Toufic) was always welcoming. They are a great family.
"Everyone's devastated and shocked."
Another relative claimed Khoder Zahab suffered from a mental disorder.
Police confirmed the victim had been decapitated and Khoder Zahab was known to police. Zahab, of Villawood, was arrested at the house.
He was taken to Bankstown police station, where he was charged with murder, assaulting police and common assault.
The man faced Bankstown Local Court yesterday and was refused bail to appear at Burwood Local Court on April 10.
Police set up a major crime scene and northbound traffic on Stacey St was diverted for several hours as extensive forensic examinations were carried out by scientific officers.
Motorists travelling through the area are advised to consider alternate routes and expect delays.
Khoder Zahab goes wild.
Simon Black
The Daily Telegraph
February 15, 2013 12:00AM
A RETIRED carpenter was allegedly beheaded by his son during a domestic dispute at a house full of children in Bankstown yesterday.
It is believed the victim, Toufic Zahab, 69, came to his wife's defence as she was being assaulted by their 42-year-old son Khoder Zahab.
Up to seven children were at home when much-loved Mr Zahab was allegedly attacked with a brick and knife in his Stacey St home shortly after 6am.
It is alleged that, moments earlier, his wife suffered candle burns and had been kicked down a flight of stairs.
She then watched helplessly as her husband died.
Police found the man dead inside the lounge room of the home with horrific injuries.
According to neighbours, Mr Zahab's visibly distraught wife was taken from the scene in an ambulance to Bankstown Hospital where she was treated by doctors.
Shocked police said the scene inside the family's home was so disturbing, officers who attended were receiving counselling.
"The scene was quite disturbing," Detective Chief Inspector Glen Fitzgerald said.
"It has been a difficult morning for both the family and police." It is understood Mr Zahab owned both units in the duplex where he was attacked.
Several other relatives, including the children, were at home at the time.
Mr Zahab's grandson Abdul Elesh said his grandparents had allowed their son to sleep in the house as a favour after a family dinner.
"He (Toufic) was always welcoming. They are a great family.
"Everyone's devastated and shocked."
Another relative claimed Khoder Zahab suffered from a mental disorder.
Police confirmed the victim had been decapitated and Khoder Zahab was known to police. Zahab, of Villawood, was arrested at the house.
He was taken to Bankstown police station, where he was charged with murder, assaulting police and common assault.
The man faced Bankstown Local Court yesterday and was refused bail to appear at Burwood Local Court on April 10.
Police set up a major crime scene and northbound traffic on Stacey St was diverted for several hours as extensive forensic examinations were carried out by scientific officers.
Motorists travelling through the area are advised to consider alternate routes and expect delays.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Sydney Muslim Insurgents "Fury" after Police Target Muslim Crime Gangs
Muslim fury at crime gang link
Mark Morri
The Daily Telegraph
February 13, 2013 12:00AM
POLICE will hold a secret meeting with Middle Eastern community leaders today after a major announcement about Sydney crime backfired, causing tensions between Muslim leaders and police.
Islams Finest, Bilal Skaf
Nothing to see here! move along please.
The government and police launched Operation Apollo last week with a major press conference announcing the Middle Eastern organised crime squad would have an "over-arching role" in investigating and targeting criminals involved in Sydney's shootings, especially in the south-west.
Some community leaders are incensed Operation Apollo appeared to centre on Middle Eastern gangs. "It is insulting to say all gun crime is the fault of Middle Eastern people," said Keysar Trad, a spokesman for the Muslim Australia Organisation.
"I was contacted yesterday afternoon by NSW police and told about the meeting and would be texted the location later."
But police stressed the meeting was part of ongoing community consultation about Operation Apollo. "We have held meetings before Apollo was announced and will have more in the future," Detective Superintendent Arthur Katsogiannis, commander of Operation Apollo, said.
The Australian in this Coffin.......
Sydney Riots: The radicalization of Muslim children you have when you are not radicalizing Muslim Children
"It is a low-key meeting where we want to convey to the community our aim is to get guns off the street and we are not targeting any one ethnic group."
Police said there was a misconception that only the Middle Eastern organised crime squad was involved.
"We will be using officers and intelligence from the homicide squad, the gangs squad, drug squads and other specialised police.
"The job is to get guns off the street and we need the community to help us as well."
It's believed about six leaders from a number of organisations have been asked to attend the meeting to try to calm angry community leaders.
Many leaders said the way the announcement was made gave the appearance all gun crime was being blamed on Middle Eastern people.
"There are bikies and other people involved in crime" Mr Trad said yesterday.
Another community leader who is attending the meeting said: "We have been asked not to talk about the meeting or say when or where it is. I'm surprised the media have found out. I was told it was to explain their position and to try to explain they are not singling out Muslims."
No No need for a Middle Eastern Crime Squad to investigate Muslim Crime Gangs
Omar Halaby 19 year old Muslim Insurgent / Rioter and Disability Pensioner.
Muslim rioter and vandal Omar Halaby spared jail following September 15 2012 Sydney CBD Muslim Insurgency Riots..Life on the pension is a riot for Omar
What makes the "Mufti of Sydney's Occupied Territories and his fellow insurgents "feel like we is on cloud nine" ?
Sydney's Muslim Insurgency Riots Aftermath: Spin Doctors and apologists still performing CPR on Multiculturalism.
Labor Green Loon's Islamic Colonization of Australia :Truth worse than the Fiction
Australia's Labor Green Loon Co Party Government sets new Olympic Record for Islamic Colonization of Australia
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
South Australia:Muslim school Principal, Kadir Emniyet decrees all female staff must wear head scarf
Furious debate as teachers at Islamic College of SA's West Croydon campus ordered to wear hijab or face sack
Investigations Editor Bryan Littlely
Daily Telegraph
February 11, 2013 10:30PM
A WARNING from South Australia's biggest Islamic school that teachers - including many non-Muslims - will lose their jobs if they do not wear a hijab to school functions and outings has sparked outrage among News Ltd readers.
Irum Saeed,"Regaining Honour" Acid attack victim seen here wearing a very attractive hijab
Furious debate has erupted, with many respondents irate over what they perceive as double standards in the school's stance, claiming the ruling is religious discrimination. There were repeated calls for an end to any government funding to the school.
Up to 20 non-Muslim female teachers, who do not wish to be named, have been told they will be sacked from the Islamic College of South Australia's West Croydon campus after three warnings if they do not wear a headscarf to cover their hair.
"If a female Muslim teacher working at a non-Muslim school was ordered to stop wearing her hijab at school functions and outings then that school board and principal would be before the Anti-Discrimination Commission before you could say 'hypocrisy'," wrote "Sir Loin of Lamb".
Meg of the Hills said: "I have no problems with women wearing a hijab if they so wish. I also don't have any problems with covering my head if I go to a Muslim country. But I have problems with this school's attitude. What is it teaching the kids?"
Many readers asked whether it was appropriate for non-Muslims to wear the religious garb.
"That is blatant discrimination against a non-Muslim's beliefs to force them to wear an Islamic religious garment. I would have thought that it was also sacrilegious of the non-believer to do so," wrote Concerned Citizen of Aberfoyle Park.
JaneAd of Adelaide said: "The hijab is a highly visible outward sign of one's faith. What is the point of forcing non-Muslims to wear it? I would find the thought of anybody faking another's religion to keep their employment revolting and insulting. The children are so fragile that exposed hair confuses them? Really?"
Mike of Australia of Brisbane added: "The wearing of scarves in Muslim countries differs from country to country. There is no standard. Why should the teachers be made to wear a scarf if they are not Muslim?"
Others argued that the school had the right to set its own dress rules.
"If you choose to work at this school, then you follow the rules set by your employer. If you don't like the rules, then leave and work elsewhere. Seems straight forward to me," said Peter the Observer of Norton Summit.
"I wonder what would happen if I showed up to job at Macca's wearing an HJ's t-shirt...," said Gary.
Many pointed out that church-run institutions often had rules based on religious values and said strict rules were not unique to Muslim schools.
"I don't see how this is any worse than what Christian schools do. Except Christian schools have won the right, through discrimination law exemptions, to only employ Christians in the first place. So those 20 women wouldn't have even found employment in a Christian establishment, if they are not Christian that is. At least the Islamic College isn't discriminating by only hiring Muslims," said Chad of Adelaide.
Wiseimp of Adelaide added: "How is this any different than a Christian School refusing gay kids or gay parents? There is no difference, just because you don't belong to the religion doesn't mean you should still have to fit in to get their service? See old aged homes refusing gay couples... people speak so harshly of Islam but then forget this is not different to Christianity."
"Banging the racist anti-Muslim drum, (WHAT RACE IS ISLAM AGAIN ? ) is missing the point," said Wakey Wakey. "This is the problem with all private religious schools generally. Their primary focus is religion (and money), not childrens' education. Catholic/Anglican schools have on-ground chapels and churches, school masters may be priests and nuns. This is the nature of religion. If a school is founded on outdated or discriminatory principles then parents need to make REASONED decisions about where they send their kids to be educated. Let the Muslims be."
Earlier it was reported that the order, from the school's governing board and chairman Faruk Kahn, contradicts the policy of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils.
Mr Kahn yesterday referred The Advertiser to AFIC for comment on the matter. "I have no comment ... I think you better go to AFIC, they are the only ones that are to make comment," Mr Kahn said.
School principal Kadir Emniyet did not return calls.
AFIC assistant secretary Keysar Trad said the policy was at odds with the national federation, but it was powerless to intervene.
"I'm aware there's a policy at that school with respect to the scarf," Mr Trad said.
"The AFIC policy is not to require any teacher to observe the hijab. In SA, the board itself has decided they want to operate in their way and we are not allowed to interfere in the matter.
"We maintain that staff should dress modestly but not be required by the nature of policy to wear the hijab."
Mr Trad said that matters of unfair dismissal resulting from teachers disobeying the school's hijab policy should be referred to Fair Work Australia.
"It's confusing for our children to see their teachers wearing the scarf in school and then they take it off when they are out shopping and the children see them there," he said.
"It is also a respect thing for our staff. If they are not Muslim they should not be forced to dress as Muslim."
One long-term teacher at the Islamic College of SA said a new school board was now "forcing teachers to put hijabs back on".
"There's no discussion ... you wear it or you're fired," the teacher said. "The teachers have always adhered to the policies and we are respectful of that.
"We are respectful of their religion but they are not going to respect us."
The college has about 800 students and 40 staff.
Guidelines from the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils to other Islamic schools do not require teachers to wear hijabs.
Glen Seidel, state secretary of the Independent Education Union, said the union was monitoring the policy.
"Essentially it means female staff have to wear a scarf covering most of their hair, and not have legs and arms exposed," he said.
"In 2012, the requirement was being managed moderately, but with a new principal in 2013 enacting the decisions of a very conservative school board, there is no room for compromise."
Mr Seidel said the union's view is staff should be free to decide whether to wear a scarf.
"The ultimate test would be in an unfair dismissal action to see if that requirement would be considered a `reasonable direction' and the termination therefore being reasonable.
"This is not a matter (in which) religious organisations are exempted from equal opportunity legislation in order to not cause offence to the `adherents of the faith'," Mr Seidel said.
"Non-Islamic staff are not being discriminated (against) in their employment as it is the same code for all.
"Non-Islamic staff can, however, feel rightly aggrieved that they are being coerced to adopt the dress code of a religion to which they do not belong."
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Black and Half White Fellas Slaughter White Fellas and Half White Fellas
Half White Bastards Slaughter White and Half Black Bastards
Indigenous All Stars dazzle at Suncorp Stadium
The Indigenous All Stars big guns put on a masterclass to give their side a 32-6 win in the season opener against NRL All Stars.
Finally somebody asks Why do we idolise scumbags and sociopaths like Ned Kelly?
Thank God at Last somebody asks the obvious. Apologies to the "Beautiful People"
Cheers to Justin Owen.
No heroics
Why do we idolise scumbags and sociopaths like Ned Kelly?
Justin Owen
Spectator
9 February 2013
No heroics
Why do we idolise scumbags and sociopaths like Ned Kelly?
Justin Owen
9 February 2013
Who would have thought that wearing a tin piss-pot on your head and murdering police officers was a passport to greatness? Only, it seems, in Australia. January might be a relatively quiet month in the media, with the main stories traditionally being bushfires, floods and the inevitable Fairfax Australia Day efforts to rename the event Invasion Day, replace our national flag with a Ken Done tea towel and suggest anyone hosting a backyard Oz Day BBQ and grasping a cold beer is fanning the flames of xenophobia.
Last month, however, we saw a twee little event that goaded the summertime slumbering media into action. An orgy of mawkish sentimentality, misplaced national pride and straight up, old-fashioned village idiocy unfolded as the executed mass murderer Ned Kelly was buried for the second time. The interment 2.0 of this evocatively named ‘bushranger’ — never a murderer or a criminal — was apparently as significant a moment in Australian history as VJ Day, the arrival of Arthur Phillip and the end of the 6 o’clock swill. With a gaggle of Kelly distant relatives, fans and apologists singing his praises and hogging the cameras like a drunken uncle at a wedding, any visitor to our shores would reasonably expect Ned to swiftly follow Mary MacKillop to beatification, our new $20 bill and his name emblazoned across the next new seat in the House of Representatives.
In some ways the undeserved attention paid to Kelly’s bones is to be expected. The education so many Australians received over the past century was marred by an inexplicable whitewashing of the crimes of the sociopath Kelly and his gang. When I was an innocent eight-year-old, my local Catholic primary school played its part with a celebration of his life on 11 November 1980, 100 years precisely since Kelly went to the gallows for putting seven bullets, including one into the eyeball, of the dying Constable Lonigan. We were told, with a note of glee, that the hanging judge Lord Justice Barry collapsed and died just a fortnight afterwards — surely divine retribution for such perfidious betrayal of his Irish ancestry. Cardboard Kelly helmet-wearing kids were told Kelly was a figure of brave nobility who proudly went to his death as a veritable martyr for us, the oppressed Catholic working class. We were also gloomily informed the day incidentally marked five years since the dismissal of the Whitlam government: an event undoubtedly caused by the very same evil Anglo-Australian rah-rah Establishment.
Despite such a fulfilling education, it is difficult to ponder how any thinking Australian could celebrate the life and times of Ned Kelly. His Soviet war memorial-sized criminal record includes multiple murders of both police and citizens, numerous assaults, assorted violent robberies, numerous bashings. He and his gang stole from the bodies of murdered police. He even cruelly sent the childless wife of one enemy a box containing calves’ testicles and a note with some disgusting advice on what to do with them. What a guy! He attempted to commit a veritable act of terrorism and potential mass murder by derailing the trains carrying police to Glenrowan.
By every measure, the bloke was a scumbag and a sociopath. He had an Anthony Mundine or perhaps even a Queensland State of Origin-level persecution complex. It’s all the fault of the British, the Establishment, the cops, and so on. They made me do it. Legitimate excuse enough for the average social commentator with a BA or tenured, bearded academic from a former College of Advanced Education.
Thankfully, the judiciary of the 1880s took a much more straightforward view of such paranoid gibbering. It is unfortunate our national myth-makers could not do the same. It was deplorable that in January the Catholic church in Wangaratta saw fit to open its doors for a service celebrating Kelly’s contribution to society.
It is doubtful that same church ever saw fit to honour Sergeant Michael Kennedy and Constables Thomas Lonigan and Michael Scanlan with a Requiem Mass: real heroes, brave men with young families, murdered by the Kelly gang while defending the honest and peaceable citizens of the Colony of Victoria.
The honouring of such a criminal highlights a broader faultline in Australia’s view of what represents heroism and what we hold up as the personal attributes and characteristics to which we should aspire.
Criminality is celebrated every time the telly is turned on. The glamorisation of some of the most objectionable, violent and deranged criminals and killers in our history by the Nine Network through the Underbelly series marks a particular low even for the shiny-arsed bottom-dwellers of commercial TV. Sure, some of the ludicrous scripts and storylines give every appearance of being hastily banged together by a chimpanzee. But under the soft lens of the Underbelly writers, these criminals and their toadies are held out to the viewer as beautiful, powerful, articulate, wealthy, charismatic and one step away from a regular back-slapping spot with Kochie on Sunrise.
Take the recent Underbelly: Razor series. Photos of Sydney’s major Depression-era criminals shows they had faces like dropped pies and heads more suited to racing in the fifth at Randwick than gracing the cover of a glossy magazine. Yet any TimTam-munching viewer at home on a Sunday night would have thought all the good-looking people in Sydney in 1930 chose to live (with their hair dryers and fake tan) among the filth, squalour and slums of Darlinghurst. The slums’ lack of electric lighting was not, as we would have assumed, the result of economic deprivation. Rather the locals were able to bathe in the glow of the perfectly white teeth of these telegenic Underbelly crooks and spivs. Viewers of this sort of show are led to believe the star wasn’t really a deranged, sadistic killer with a massive pair of ears, a cleft palate, a club foot and a steel bolt in his neck. He was a kindly charity worker whose good looks and chiselled chin would put him in a boy band today. Give us a break.
For too long the rotten, the corrupt and the plain evil like Ned Kelly have been held up as national icons through ignorant arguments that they represent healthy Australian anti-authoritarianism and egalitarianism. Australia, it needs to be remembered, only narrowly escaped ‘Waltzing Matilda’ — a song celebrating a vagrant and a sheep thief — as our national anthem. Australia has enough genuine heroes (such as the late Sergeant Kennedy) and achievers across all walks of life we can rightly honour. Ned Kelly and his criminal ilk do not need to be remembered. They don’t need to be romanticised. And they certainly don’t deserve to be celebrated.
Justin Owen is a Sydney lawyer.
Friday, February 08, 2013
The Muslim Hate Filled Koran
| Summary Answer:The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter. Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's many calls to violence according to what their own moral preconceptions find justificable. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology. Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history. | |
The Quran:
Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensivewarfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."
Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.
Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').
Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.
Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"
Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).
Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war 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"
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."
Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:293, also). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."
Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."
Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."
Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."
Quran (9:5) - "So 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 and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam. Prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars.
Quran (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."
Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The "striving" spoken of here is Jihad (Arabic).
Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.
Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"
Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.
Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).
Quran (9:73) - "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." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that they are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.
Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."
Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme."
Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."
Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).
Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)
Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"
Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.
Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.
Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."
Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"
Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.
Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.
Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist."
Quran (61:10-12) - "O ye who believe! Shall I lead you to a bargain that will save you from a grievous Penalty?- That ye believe in Allah and His Messenger, and that ye strive (your utmost) in the Cause of Allah, with your property and your persons: That will be best for you, if ye but knew! He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of Eternity." This verse was given in battle. It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.
Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.
| |
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.
Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'
Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)
Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious
Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah
Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."
Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."
Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."
Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"
Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihid died the death of a hypocrite.'"
Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."
Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them.
Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.
Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.
Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 327: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.
| |
Additional Notes:
Other than the fact that Muslims haven't killed every non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal persecution with little resistance. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if Muslim demands are not met. Either situation seems to provide a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism.
The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. This is why Muslim apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret the Quran without their "assistance" - even while claiming that it is a perfect book.
Far from being mere history or theological construct, the violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and genocide. This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni's bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam's Genghis Khan) slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from destruction. Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian subcontinent. Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more slowly) in areas conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran.
So ingrained is violence in the religion that Islam has never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.
Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own. On several occasions he rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butchered captives. He actually inspired his followers to battle when they did not feel it was right to fight, promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if they did not. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their husbands and family members were slaughtered.
It is important to emphasize that, for the most part, Muslim armies waged aggressive campaigns, and the religion's most dramatic military conquests were made by the actual companions of Muhammad in the decades following his death. The early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a town was to be destroyed (ie. men executed, women and children taken as slaves) if they defended themselves. Although modern apologists often claim that Muslims are only supposed to attack in self-defense, this is an oxymoron that is flatly contradicted by the accounts of Islamic historians and others that go back to the time of Muhammad.
Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely obliterated only five years after Muhammad arrived in Medina. Their leader opted to stay neutral when their town was besieged by a Meccan army that was sent to take revenge for Muhammad's deadly caravan raids. The tribe killed no one from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Muhammad after the Meccans had been turned back. Yet the prophet of Islam had every male member of the Qurayza beheaded, and every woman and child enslaved, even raping one of the captives himself (what Muslim apologists might refer to as "same day marriage").
One of Islam's most revered modern scholars, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, openly sanctions offensive Jihad: "In the Jihad which you are seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is invading other [countries] inorder to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way." Elsewhere, he notes: "Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom. Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the 'homeland of Islam' diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life."
Muhammad's failure to leave a clear line of succession resulted in perpetual internal war following his death. Those who knew him best first fought to keep remote tribes from leaving Islam and reverting to their preferred religion (the Ridda or 'Apostasy wars'). Then, within the closer community, early Meccan converts battled later ones. Hostility developed between those immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar at Medina who had helped them settle in. Finally there was a violent struggle within Muhammad's own family between his favorite wife and favorite daughter - a jagged schism that has left Shias and Sunnis at each others' throats to this day.
The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a Religion of Peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual repression, warfare...) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating. Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does it make apologies or any real effort at moral progress. It is the least open to dialogue and the most self-absorbed. It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns self-examination and represses criticism.
This is what makes the Quran's verses of violence so dangerous. They are given the weight of divine command. While Muslim terrorists take them as literally as anything else in their holy book, and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to contradict them - outside of opinion. Indeed, what do they have? Speaking of peace and love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks to Allah's hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced conversion, or subjugation, it's little wonder that sympathy for terrorism runs as deeply as it does in the broader community - even if most Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.
Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam's most respected philosophers, understood that"the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force", many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully ignorant of the Quran's near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others. In the West, it is typical for believers to think that their religion must be like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and tolerance - because Muslims are taught that Islam is supposed to be superior in every way. They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to learn that the evidence of the Quran and the bloody history of Islam are very much in contradiction to this.
Others simply accept the violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death for being too Westernized. A family friend came to their defense, excoriating the jury for not understanding the "culture", claiming that the father was merely following "the religion" and saying that the couple had to "discipline their daughter or lose respect." (source). In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutal murders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca by the Saudi king - without a single Muslim voice raised in protest.
For their part, Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous.
There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran literally... and too many others who couldn't care less about the violence done in the name of Islam.
| |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)