And then demand what only amounts to our submission.
It's not rational.
"When thy Lord spake unto the angels, 'I will be with you: therefore stablish ye the faithful. I will cast a dread into the hearts of the infidels.' Strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every finger tip." - Sura 8:12But if the weight of 138 'leading Muslim scholars' signing on to an open letter sent to the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury can't make the case for my reverting to Islam I don't know what will.
In the letter frequent references are made that we worship the same God (Allah doesn't get named) but doesn't mention the fact that Muslims consider Christians as polytheists and therefore infidels by our nature.
So how will the Pope and the Archbishop respond? Benedict XVI has already said his piece when he quoted a 13th century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus.. More importantly, the English and Western European people are growing restive.
Will the Pope urge Catholics to not resist? I think not.
Amber Pawlik writes
For the percentage (of passages that refer to various subjects-ed) I was most interested in, how much of the Koran is nothing but hatred at infidels, it was exactly at 53%. I was also quite happy that this sampling captured several verses about women. The confidence interval was also much better this time: with 95% confidence, we can say the proportion is somewhere between 45.8% and 59.6%. You can read the verses I took, my commentaries, and the calculation of the confidence interval here.
Here are the results of my larger study:
106/201 (52.7%) is hatred aimed at infidels, defined as
*Threats towards infidels either in the after life or this life
*Degrading infidels by calling them evil, stupid, blind, deaf, liars, thankless, etc.
50/201 (24.9%) Deals with believers, defined as
*Calls to fight against them.
*Verses that say "except the believers" when wishing death on nonbelievers were counted as hatred since avoiding death is not a positive to believers
*The threat or insult can be aimed at infidels in general or any specific infidel.
50/201 (24.9%) Deals with believers, defined as
*Saying they are righteous
*Saying they will get good things
*Any mentions of one of the prophets was snuck into this category too
23/201 (11.4%) deal with Allah,
*Who he is
*That he is almighty
*Any of his creations
10/201 (5%) deal with the Day of Doom or the Day of Judgment
*Either the Day of Doom when destruction is sent on the earth or
*Day of Judgment when all are judged before Allah
*Any message pertaining to how God records what men do was assigned this category
4/201 (2%) are anti-woman
*That it’s OK to beat a woman
*Women and slaves get married off but have no choice in the matter and is very self-serving to Muhammad or men in general.
4/201 (2%) deal with giving to the poor in some way
2/201 (1%) deal with some kind of Muslim custom or etiquette, for instance
*How to divorce your wife
1/201 (0.5%)disapproves of a man who murdered someone, but only because it was for the wrong reason to kill someone.
1/201 (0.5%) actually says it is OK for people to have their religion while Muslims have theirs
If you're more or less normal, you stopped the above video before it got gruesome. It's only there to prove a point--none of this is exaggerated.
FrontPageMagazine.com | July 24, 2007
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Laurent Murawiec, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and the author of the new book Pandora’s Boxes, The Mind of Jihad, vol. 2, the sequel to The Mind of Jihad, vol I.Read the rest
FP: Laurent Murawiec, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
Murawiec: Hello Jamie, I always enjoy returning to Frontpage.
FP: Let’s first sum up the Mind of Jihad, vol. 1. Can you talk a bit about the bloodlust characteristics of the jihadis?
Murawiec: When you look at a political movement, a terror movement, you look at what is similar, what is different, in order to understand what species, what kind of “animal” it may be. You try to see what it has in common with others, what is uniquely different. There’s one thing that uniquely differentiates the modern jihadi movement from all others: it is the bloodlust. Let me explain: the decapitation “live,” on camera, of Paul Johnson, of Nick Berg, of Daniel Pearl and of countless others is an exaltation of their raw power to kill, to be the masters of life and death.
Now, they do that in the name of God – “if God wills it, everything is permitted” – just like for the Russian Nihilists like Nechaev and his Bolshevik progeny, “if God does not exist, everything is permitted.” Nechaev said that the revolutionist was “a man of another nature.” So they are. Some say that the jihadis are “criminals” and should be treated as such. But the type of criminality is very special: it is the permanent and deliberate transgression of “Thou shalt not murder.” There is something extraordinary with the filming and especially the airing of the murders: this is a pornography of crime served as identity fare – “we are Muslims and this is what it means.” Al Jazira and others air snuff movies 24’7, there is a supply – the jihadis – and there is a demand – the viewing public. If it revolted the public, they would zap it off. They don’t, ergo… they like it. They are serving human sacrifice as snuff movies! Think of the famous pictures taken in Ramallah in October 2000, when two young reserve Israeli soldiers were lynched by a Palestinian mob. One of the mob has dipped his hands in their blood and ecstatically displays his bloody hands to the ecstatic mob: they all commune in the bloodlust. But whether jihadis or mob, they are not “criminals” in that sense; they are more like serial killers, but this is not criminality, it is like a disease of the mind.
The al-Qaida training manual speaks of killing enemies like of a “slaughter,” an animal sacrifice to Allah: it is human sacrifice. That’s what Mohammad Atta says in his last text. The jihadi practice is a return of human sacrifice in the 21st century. This is the product of more than thirty years of jihadi practice, what I call the bloodtrail. Every single type of jihadi is represented on this bloodtrail: Sunni and Shia, secular so-called and religious, Marxist-Leninist and nationalist.
You have the PLO assassin who shoots the Jordanian PM to death and kneels down to lap the blood; the video-cassettes that show the Algerian GIA ambushing draft soldiers are complacently showing the blood spurting from their severed carotid arteries; an Algerian intellectual whose tummy is sliced open in front of his family and his guts slowly pulled out by laughing killers. You have the Baathists of Iraq displaying corpses, cutting various fallen leaders into small pieces; the Syrian Baath giving public displays of hundreds of their victims, pour encourager les autres, a carnival of death. The Turkish Hizbollah torturing a kidnapped feminist, torturing her for 35 hours and filing it all. Why is that? We find an idolization of blood, of savagery, a cult of killing, of death. Gruesome murder is lionized and proffered as model, as pleasing to Allah, as opening the gates of Paradise for the “martyrs.” The highest religious authorities sanction it, governments condone it, approve of it, the media enthusiastically endorse it. Think of the notorious “Waiting Room of Paradise” at the Martyrs’ Cemetery of Tehran where a 14-feet high fountain of blood-like red liquid symbolizes the essence of Islam’s message, the guide says!
There is a theory to all that, a theology of carnage. The Saudi clerics proudly speak of Allah and Muhammad bestowing upon the Muslims “our industry of death.” Among the best-known dicta of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, there is “our art of death.” Death is central to the ethos of the Brothers. The chief ideologues of Iraqi nationalism wax endlessly and proudly on “mastering the manufacture of death.” Killing is the Eros of Baath ideologue Michel Aflaq. The same goes with the Shiites. Ali Shariati, the islamo-marxist ideologue, defines his movement as “Red Shiism,” he advises his disciples to “die before you die.” “Killing is tantamount to saying a prayer,” states a prominent Iranian Islamist. “Islam is a religion of blood for the Infidels,” says Khomeiny himself, who never tires of the subject: he positively wallows in blood. “It is war that purifies the earth.”
This is a turnpost