The Forever Wars

In furtherance of the discussion begun in my previous post, The Problem With Islam, I wanted to take a look at the two Islamic forever wars. If you haven’t read that post please do so, as it forms a necessary prelude to these war stories.

While many people are aware that Mohammed was the Prophet of Allah and the founder of Islam, fewer people know that he has another curious claim to fame.

He was pivotal in starting the two longest-running wars in history, wars that began in the 7th Century and have continued right up until today. One is the forever war of Islam against Jews, Christians, “pagans”, and the world in general; and the other is the forever war of the Sunnis and Shiites. The war against Jews and Christians started during Mohammed’s lifetime. The Sunni-Shiite war started after he died, but before he was buried … and under Islamic law, burial has to occur within a day of the death. And both wars have continued in fits and starts right up until today.

War the First: Sunnis and Shiites

The subject of the Sunni-Shiite split was simple and ancient—who would be the new ruler? Who should succeed Mohammed as the “Caliph”, the head of Islam? The faction that would eventually become Sunnis, including Mohammed’s favorite wife Aisha, thought the new Caliph should be Aisha’s father and Mohammed’s father-in-law, a man named Abu Bakr.

On the other side were the Shiites, literally the “Shiat Ali” or the party of Ali. They favored Mohammed’s son-in-law and cousin, Ali Ibn Abi Talib.

In best 7th century fashion, of course, it turned into a small fight between the two factions … which led to a larger fights between the factions … and the party of Ali lost. The first three Caliphs were Sunnis.

Eventually, after those three Caliphs had come and gone, Ali finally got his chance to be Caliph. It all should have gone well and fine, but hey, it was the Middle East and the seventh century, so after five years or so he was assassinated in 661. Not only that, but neither of Ali’s sons were allowed to take over as Caliph, which angrified the Shiites blood mightily.

After Ali was assassinated the split was complete. The members of each side were confirmed in their belief that they were the only real true Moslems, and the other side were dangerous heretics whose ideas need to be suppressed.

Now, you know how they use DNA genetic tests these days to determine where your ancestors came from? I have a theory that the genes connected to a Middle Eastern origin are also related to a specific kind of memory defect.

What kind of memory problems do those genes cause? Well, it seems that people with those Middle Eastern genes are unable to ever forget an insult, a slight, or a loss, even after centuries. And the Sunnis and Shiites are certainly in that category.

And these ancient Sunni and Shiite griefs and losses based long-gone wars and assassinations and deaths are still not forgotten today.

Now to be fair, it is true that during the fourteen centuries of often violent Shiite-Sunni antipathy, peace has unexpectedly broken out occasionally between Sunnis and Shiites …

… and then they have a year or a decade or a century of peace, during which time the two sides kind of get along and even have times when they intermarry and live next to each other without actually killing each other …

… but sooner or later, without warning, the chronic Middle East memory problem kicks in again. Something sets them off and they remember how much they really, really hate each other because of some stupidly vicious thing that happened to some distant ancestor in the 7th century or the 17th century or in 1917 or 1977 or 2007, because when you have this kind of memory problem all those years are somehow the same.

And when they start remembering ancient wrongs real and imagined as if they happened yesterday, pretty soon both sides start screaming about long dead and buried crimes of commission and omission and the Shiite-Sunni forever war starts up anew.

As to the depth of the current antipathy, about a decade ago a Sunni man loaded a pickup truck with watermelons. He drove it to a Shiite village, and offered watermelons at a low price in the open-air market. And once he and his truck were surrounded by Shiite housewives wanting to get in on the bargain, and of course their kids, he blew up the bomb under the watermelons and leveled the marketplace …

And a couple weeks ago, on one single day, a bomb in Baghdad killed fifty Sunnis, and a bomb at a Shiite shrine killed seventy Shiites … and the Western news media hardly noticed. The sad news in 2017 is that barbaric heartless brutal Islamic savagery is so common as to be unremarkable.

The thing that is remarkable  is that many, many imams and mullahs and Islamic leaders are celebrating the actions of these kinds of mass murderers.

People keep claiming that Islam is just another religion, that underneath the trappings they are the same. Here’s my deal. When Baptist men start suicide bombing Lutheran women and children, and the Baptist pastors start celebrating their actions, I’ll believe that Christianity and Islam are equal. Until then, I say that Islam is a religion AND a terrorist organization, and that far too often the latter predominates. But I digress …

Regarding ending the Sunni-Shiite war, there’s a totally non-PC riddle which goes “Why did God give whiskey to the Irish?”

The answer is “To keep them from taking over the world!”.

The same is true about the Sunni-Shiite forever war. Despite the fact that it is a huge ongoing human tragedy, it has one overwhelming good feature.

Were it not for the Shiite-Sunni forever war, Islam would have taken over the world long ago, because Mohammed was a military genius.

War the Second: Islam versus the West (and everyone else)

Mohammed was an intuitive tactician and strategist who understood the use of terror. His religion was also a political ideology shaped by war and expressly designed to take over the world by a combination of terrorism and the force of arms. The Koran spells out in great detail how to use jihad, the holy war, to establish a worldwide Islamic Caliphate to bring “peace” to all. And very early on, the Muslims were well on their way toward that goal.

During Mohammed’s lifetime they raided extensively, with Mohammed leading some of the raiding parties in person. They defeated local villages, established the first Caliphate, and started doing their best to take over the world by force of arms.

Mohammed set into motion one of the most astounding military campaigns in history. Singlehandedly he started a seemingly endless war between Islam and the West that is still going on before our eyes today. Who else in history ever started a fourteen-hundred-year war? So to understand ISIS and Boko Haram and Al Qaeda and the rest of the current Islamic madness, we need to take a short cruise through that amazing Islamic military history.

When Mohammed died on June 8, 632, there were numerous Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, and various other ethnic and religious communities in Arabia and all across North Africa and the Middle East … and there were a handful of Muslim communities in Arabia.

A mere three years after his death, Islamic armies took the ancient city of Damascus. Three years!

Five years after Mohammad’s death, Jerusalem, the holy city of Christianity and Judaism, was captured. Five years to take Jerusalem! A whirlwind of fire.

By eleven years after his death, the Islamic armies had captured Alexandria, the ancient outpost of Western civilization. The “Religion of Peace” was already hard at work spreading peace around the world … the peace and quiet of the conquered, the terrorized, and the dead.

Then in 648 Cyprus was invaded, followed by Rhodes. By the year 700, not even seventy-five years after Mohammed’s death, all of North Africa was under Islamic rule. Astounding.

Next the Islamic armies moved into Europe. Spain was invaded in 711, and within a mere ten years, the Islamic forces had taken it over entirely and moved into France. Finally driven back there, they attacked again in 734, taking Avignon, and Lyons a few years later.

Then in 846 Rome itself, at that time the holy of holies, the spiritual center of the Western world, was attacked and occupied by an Islamic army. The churches and the religious graves of the saints were desecrated and sacked, and the city was looted.

Islamic forces then took Sicily in 859. And Malta in 870. In 873 they attacked and totally destroyed the town of Calabria.

I won’t bore you with further details of endless warring, but the attacks by Islamic armies attempting to spread their religion worldwide and to take Europe by storm continued through hundreds and hundreds of battles for the next 200 years or so.

At that point, for a variety of reasons, the West said “Enough”. In 1095 the First Crusade was organized to try to strike back and at least attempt to stop the four-century long Islamic onslaught. After four hundred years, four centuries of endless attacks by a succession of Islamic armies, the violent Islamic drive for world domination via force of arms was more than clear to the West. Oh, there were probably university professors in Padua Italy or somewhere whining about “Islamophobia”, but other than that people were fed up with being attacked by Islamic armies and were quite reasonably afraid of Islam.

The various Crusades, of course, were failures, and after the Crusades, the Islamic attacks continued unabated—In 1529, for example, Islamic armies laid siege to Vienna, Austria. It took hundreds of years of fighting before the last Islamic armies were driven out of Europe.

But that didn’t stop the drive to take Islam worldwide. It has gone on and on right up to this very day, with various Islamic splinter groups and armies attacking the West on a wide variety of fronts. Currently, in every Islamic country there are jihadis … and in 2017, bizarrely, Brussels is a hotbed of terrorist activity.

So how did they achieve this amazing feat of arms? How did they keep a war going for century after century, endlessly attacking the West?

Like I said, Mohammed was a military genius, and his secret weapon was that he devised the world’s finest army recruitment program. The laws of the Koran are perfectly designed to appeal to teenage boys and young men. As a result, Mohammed’s army and then his followers’ armies to this day have grown rapidly as they went along. Here’s how they draw in recruits.

A deal which is specified in detail in the Koran and discussed in the Hadiths like everything Islamic was offered to the men of the villages, cities, and countries defeated in war by Islamic armies. In the 7th century when Mohammed was alive, the terms of the deal for men in conquered countries were (and of course still are, Islam doesn’t change) as follows:

EITHER you can stay a Christian/Jew/Hindu/Zoroastrian whatever and pay an annual 10% tax on everything forever and have no legal rights and you and your wife and your descendants will be second-class oppressed citizens until the end of days …

OR you can convert to Islam, be given eternal power over all the women in your life, join the jihad to establish the worldwide Caliphate, ride off to noble war, get rich plundering the unbelievers, divide up the booty, kill the infidels, rape the female prisoners, have four wives, divorce them at will … all with the blessing and protection of the eternal laws of the Koran.

BUT WAIT … as they say on TV, there’s more!. If you are killed in the process of  massacring infidels and raping their wives, you go straight to heaven where beautiful young virgins will screw you silly forever!

From the admittedly warped perspective of your average youthful victim of acute testosterone poisoning, what’s not to like? That’s a teenage boy’s idea of heaven, complete with submissive babes and big swords. That image is why Frank Frazetta’s artwork is so popular for science fiction novels. Here’s what I mean. This was a WWI recruiting poster for the US army.

army recruiting poster

And here’s one of Frank Frazetta’s paintings that could be the basic recruiting poster for Islamic armies from the 7th century all the way up to ISIS …

frazetta artwork 01

I know which army I would have joined at age 18 … and as a result of this brilliant recruiting campaign, the Islamic armies have rarely lacked for cannon fodder, and Islam has rarely lacked for converts.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed in the millennium since the First Crusade. It is just this same seductive call of violence, sex, weapons, and power that is currently being broadcast online around the world. ISIS and Al Qaeda and the rest are singing the same old tune, bringing disaffected young men from all over the world to fight on the side of Islam.

Come join us, they call out over the Internet and on social media, we have established an Islamic Caliphate as described in the Koran, and we want to take it worldwide. We capture young women and you can rape them as much and as long as you want! You can have four wives, come join us and kill every infidel who ever insulted you or did you wrong. Come to the dark side, we have cool weapons you can shoot at bad people … it is the age-old siren song of the terrorist ideology known as Islam, the same one spelled out in detail in the Koran, and it is even more dangerous now to the Western world than it was when Rome was sacked in the ninth century. I offer Belgium and Paris as only the latest evidence.

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Let’s start with the ugly reality. The source of these problems is not “extremists” or “radicals”. The source of these problems is not Sunnis or Shiites or Muslims of any kind. The problem, curiously, has nothing to do with Muslims at all, so any abuse of them is misplaced.

The source of the problem is the Koran itself. It is half religious instruction manual and half terrorist instruction manual, and it has never been able to shed the barbaric 7th century half and come into the modern world.

This leaves us with several challenges. In fourteen centuries there has never been a successful reformation of Islam. Baha’u’llah came closest to reforming Islam. Sadly, all that happened was his followers split off as the very pacifistic Baha’i religion, while Islamic 7th century brutality and repression of women continued unabated. Plus, of course, following the clear instruction of the Koran the Baha’i who left Islam and followed Baha’u’llah have been ruthlessly killed by orthodox Muslims ever since …

That doesn’t mean it is impossible to reform Islam. But Islamic folks would have to grasp the nettle. They would have to agree that certain laws that are clearly spelled out in the Koran would have to be marked as being well beyond their use-by date … by about ten centuries … and thus declared, in the lovely Richard Nixonian phrase, “no longer operative”.

There is precedent for this in Islamic legend. The story is that when the Koran was being written down and assembled long after Mohammed’s death, that the very Prince of Darkness, Beelzebub in person, slipped some verses into the Koran. These were special malevolent verses that were designed to cause discord and strife both in Allah’s perfect world and in Allah’s perfect word, the Koran.

Now, it seems simple to me. Do it one verse at a time. We begin with the low hanging fruit. I’d start with the verse saying it is OK to keep female prisoners of war as sexual slaves … could we start by tossing that one overboard?

Qur’an 33:50—O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you [for sex] your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses [slaves] out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war …

Can all intelligent human beings on this planet agree that keeping women as sexual slaves is A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY? Can we put that verse of the Koran on the list of Satanic verses and be rid of that evil forever?

Because either we do that, or we put Islam itself on the list of terrorist organizations. That verse is pure vicious terrorism.

And that, of course, brings up the biggest challenge. You can literally get killed for saying that the Koran verse about sexual slavery is an abomination.Consider that Salman Rushdie tried to say that there might be Satanic verses in the Koran, and he got sentenced to death for his troubles. He had to live for years with bodyguards. And he is far from the only person threatened with assassination or killed for questioning Islam.

Perhaps you can begin to see why there has been no Islamic reformation in fourteen centuries … more liberal Muslims might not like some of the laws of the Koran, but they are intimidated into not even suggesting that the Koran might contain Satanic verses. People get killed all the time in Muslim countries for speaking out against Mohammed, or against the Koran.

However, if I were leading the charge to bring Islam forward into the 21st century, I would certainly seize upon and use the ancient Islamic idea of the Satanic verses. The beauty of that one is clear—you can blame it on the Devil. No individual is to blame, the ancient sages were not wrong, you don’t have to diss the historical holy men of Islam. It wasn’t their mistake, the Devil can do what he wants, he can fool anyone.

Further, the Koran is not changed, it is simply purified by removing the influence of the Evil One.

This focus on the Koran would also keep us from the danger of becoming like those we fight. Yes, it continues to be necessary to fight Islamic terrorism militarily. But the true enemy is not Muslims, it is the Koran. As long as the Koran keeps preaching its message of female subjugation and global jihad and retaliation against those leaving the religion, we will never be free of the 7th century madness.

Let me close by saying that these two forever wars are the over-riding challenges of the 21st Century. It will take a long and coordinated effort to achieve some kind of lasting peace in either one. However, the alternative is very ugly, so we all need to do what we can to end these endless wars without losing our own ideals and our own humanity in the process … and we better hope that we solve Islam’s forever war with the West before the Muslims solve the Sunni-Shiite forever war …

Best wishes to all sides in this important discussion, carnetarians as well as vegivores,

w.

PS—I continue this discussion in a new post, “Orthodox Hate Speech“.

 

Advertisements

50 thoughts on “The Forever Wars

  1. Very persuasive.

    One clarification needed though:
    “And he [Salman Rushdie] is far from the only person killed for questioning Islam.”

    I don’t think he’s been killed…

    Like

    • I bought three copies of Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses” from Cody’s Books after the store got firebombed. Maybe the author questions Islam, I don’t know, I could not get over the first fifty pages. They are still trying to make his life miserable, just as the Left is trying to make Ivanka Trump’s life miserable.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Since Salman Rushdie and “Satanic Verses” are a theme here, let me try to help.

        The book certainly will not appeal to everyone, not even close, and it’s not easy reading either. Easier than James Joyce 🙂 Partly this is due to the “magical realism” and partly because it’s complex and the plot is not straightforward. For a good oversight of the plot and the controversy see:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses

        I thought ‘Satanic Verses’ was a reference to the Koran before I read it. I’ve read it twice and now understand that the famous Satanic Verses refer to three pre-Islam goddesses, three lines of text which were supposedly put in then taken out. Islam in monotheistic, so that was a no-no, and hardly a mistake that Mohammed would not notice.

        If Rushdie meant to imply the Koran as a whole was a satanic text, I have not heard that. It’s believable, but who would dare say it? If so, Satanic Verses would be equivalent to Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” — which was also banned. I doubt anyone will make a movie of “Satanic Verses” any time soon.

        Like

        • YMMV March 11, 2017 at 9:19 pm

          Since Salman Rushdie and “Satanic Verses” are a theme here, let me try to help.

          The book certainly will not appeal to everyone, not even close, and it’s not easy reading either.

          Thanks for that, YMMV. I read the whole thing when it was published. I came away convinced of two things. First, that they should punish him for turgid prose, not for apostasy. And second, that very few people who “hated” the book ever read it.

          If Rushdie meant to imply the Koran as a whole was a satanic text, I have not heard that.

          I don’t think I ever said that. I said that there was an ancient Islamic legend that when the Koran was written, Satan snuck some verses in to cause grief and trouble.

          My guess is that the verses that I (or European law) would call Satanic are less than 10% of the total, although I’ve not taken a hard look.

          I thought ‘Satanic Verses’ was a reference to the Koran before I read it. I’ve read it twice and now understand that the famous Satanic Verses refer to three pre-Islam goddesses, three lines of text which were supposedly put in then taken out. Islam in monotheistic, so that was a no-no, and hardly a mistake that Mohammed would not notice.

          Mohammed was long dead by the time the Koran was finally written down … so he could hardly object if Satan snuck in some verses.

          Regards,

          w.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Koran was created by a committee. The Third Caliph established a Learned Committee to write a canonical form of Koran because oral renditions kept diverging from each other. The Committee wanted the Book to reflect the order in which Allah revealed his will to the Prophet. However Allah liked the Prophet very much and frequently revealed to him a new version of an old Sura, better suited for a new tactical situation. After long weeks, the wisest imam said – It is clear that we could sit here till Doomsday and not agree on a chronology. Why don’t we abandon the idea and use something we can agree on, a word count for example? Standing ovations, and Koran was born. Sura 1 is a short daily prayer, Sura 2 (the Cow, read it if you can) is the longest one, and then they get shorter and shorter.

            I can not link to it, it was a foreword to my long lost copy of the book.

            Like

  2. one good thing is that by their own terms, the Caliphate only has authority if it controls territory, if it gets knocked out as a nation, it’s moral authority (or at least that of it’s leaders) vanishes and they go back to being run-of-the-mill terrorists rather than being the embodiment of prophecy.

    Like

  3. Willis I’m afraid you’re talking about a real mission impossible. Where are the world leaders who would have the balls to agree with your solution?
    They all say that the religion is NOT the problem, but the problem is Muslim extremists and the vast majority of Muslims are similar to us. Your recent apologist for a leader had this retort down to an art form and castigated anyone who had the temerity to disagree with his delusional nonsense.
    So it’s not just a problem from within but without this mad cult as well. Hitchens reminded us that Rushdie got little support from other religions when he was under their threat of death. They condemned him as well, just unbelievable but true. I hate to knock your optimism but I think it’s a lot harder than anyone understands. This mad, crazy cult is unique and the west better hope that these crazies don’t use the BIG bomb in the near future.

    Like

    • ngard2016 March 11, 2017 at 3:02 pm

      Willis I’m afraid you’re talking about a real mission impossible. Where are the world leaders who would have the balls to agree with your solution?

      Hey, I’m a guy who’d rather light a candle than curse the darkness …

      w.

      Like

  4. WE, a very well done post. Two separate lines of larger possible ‘thinking’. The first extending a comment to your previous post. The second offering a broader perspective, possibly OT.
    1. You propose cleansing the Quran using the Satanic verses strategy. Don’t think that works, because the original version will still be available to those imams who disagree, and who can still preach ‘orthodoxy’ since the Quran is ‘Allah given’.
    The issue (IMO) is to reduce the propensity to orthodoxy. Here, we might learn from Judaism and the Amish. I am somewhat familiar because my lutheran brother married into the reform side of Judism. Most Jewish are not Orthodox (Hasidic being the most extreme form) because they won’t give up the benefits of modernity. So stuff like TV shows, music, nice cars, Disneyland are all seditious to any orthodoxy. Same reason the Amish are not a growing religious sect. Certain advantages to electricity and modern farm machinery become obvious the more younger Amish generations are exposed to them.
    A corollary is that most Deash recruits come from dirt poor places with no future opportunities. Increase those opportunities, perhaps increases the seditious value of modernity.
    2. I am not convinced Daesh and its derivatives (orthodox Islam) are the biggest threat the world faces. A big, pernicious, nasty issue–yes. Especially when European mores and social welfare let it fester and grow unassimilated in France and Belgium.
    Biggest IMO is North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and ICBMs. They are crazy like a rabid dog. The only solution in sight is to kill the rabid dog (remember the old Disney tear jerker ‘Old Yeller’?). Nobody wants to talk about that. We should.
    Second is China’s South China Sea moves. They have been held wrong by international courts, but don’t care. This the US has to confront because nobody else can. I am hopeful that between China’s internal structural weaknesses and US military strength post Obama, we can squeeze through that one.
    Finally, Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Obama was deluded. Iran sits on half of the worlds largest conventional natural gas field. CCGT is much cheaper than nuclear electricity. Iran does not need or want nuclear electricity–they want nucs to wipe out Israel. Waiting 10 years just kicks the can down the road rather than addressing the issue squarely. That aspect of Iran seems simple to fix. Put Israel under the US nuclear umbrella. Tell Iran simple and in writing and in public that if they ever attack Israel with a nuc, they will simply cease to exist. Heck, even give them a specific public city targeting list by megaton. Lots of global pearl clutching. So what. Doesn’t work for North Korea because they are crazy.
    A short concluding story. My father flew B-29s in WW2, and knew (casually) Judd Tibbits who dropped the first nuc from a B-29. He used to volunteer as a docent at Udvar Hazy Museum outside Dulles Airport in Virginia, where the Enola Gay is on display. One day as he was explaining B-29 stuff, a pacifist group came up to him and started complaining about Enola Gay and Hiroshima. (This to a career officer with the other US neck order). He looked at them, said it saved at least a quarter million US lives (the estimate based on Iwo Jima had the US had to invade Japan), then said sometimes you have to use all the tools at your disposal, then said he would volunteer to fly the next one. He used to retell that story to us and his grandkids often at family gatherings. Now interred at Arlington with full military honors, 21 gun salute, horse drawn caisson, and all that stuff.

    Liked by 3 people

    • ristvan March 11, 2017 at 3:50 pm

      WE, a very well done post. Two separate lines of larger possible ‘thinking’. The first extending a comment to your previous post. The second offering a broader perspective, possibly OT.
      1. You propose cleansing the Quran using the Satanic verses strategy. Don’t think that works, because the original version will still be available to those imams who disagree, and who can still preach ‘orthodoxy’ since the Quran is ‘Allah given’.

      Rud, thanks as always. All we need is to split Islam. The fact that the bad half will still be available is not the problem. Currently we can’t tell the good from the bad. Once they are clearly identified they will be easier to counteract.

      2. I am not convinced Daesh and its derivatives (orthodox Islam) are the biggest threat the world faces. A big, pernicious, nasty issue–yes. Especially when European mores and social welfare let it fester and grow unassimilated in France and Belgium.

      I don’t think it is the biggest issue TODAY either. I agree that’s N. Korea. However, that N. Korean problem hasn’t been around for 14 centuries or even one century. It is the phoenix-like nature of Islamic militarism that is the long-term concern.

      Plus, of course, the N. Korea problem is local. There are not hundreds of thousands of N. Koreans trying to spread their ideas in the US and Europe …

      w.

      PS—I agree with your dad. In fact, I see no way for the US to NOT have dropped the atomic bomb. I can’t imagine what we would have told the families of our servicemen who were gearing up to die in an extremely costly invasion of Japan.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Just to be clear, he was implicitly advocating nucs again if the situation was sufficiently dire. Like maybe North Korea, something to consider. Not Cold War MAD. Just common sense. Highest regards.

        Like

        • Your issue with North Korea makes no sense to me. Neither the people nor the leader are “mad dogs.” Just because someone learns from watching others, doesn’t make them overly dangerous or insane. North Korea has learned by watching that to get “big bad A-holes” off your back, you have to be tough and have weapons they fear. They have watched and seen what has happened to countries that prefer to be their own rulers, if you will, and have not found a way to put fear into those that desire to rule them. Those nations, such as Germany, Japan, Iraq, and Libya, all fell to the big bad “A-holes” when they got a little too big, but failed to have the weapons of fear. If North Korea was treated like an equal instead of a 3rd rate piece of “crap,” the nation would not be a problem.

          As for China and the South China Sea, it wasn’t China that started the issues there. It was the big bad “A-holes” that found lots of gas and oil there and wanted to control it. China’s reactions and actions in the waters off its nation are not abnormal, but it might be considered abnormal if they tried to sail through the gulf of Mexico on the boundaries of national waters and declared their “rights” to do so. China in no way attempted to block world trade through the area, so pretending that is an issue is just so much BS.

          And before you think I am referring to the US as “the big bad A-holes,” merely because they have been involved in all of these things, that isn’t the case. I am referring to those that would rule the world, and do with it what they want. They are the ones that are actually at war with Islam even as they use Islam to have their way. Just as they have used the US to have their way.

          Last thought for now. I don’t think “western” teens are won over to ISIS because the Koran and Islam say you can have all the hard sex you want with your war prisoners. Like any other person “with no future whatsoever where they are at, “being paid to do video games that you have been playing most of your life for real” is a future although not a very good one. Western values teaches that sex is not just getting your rocks off, there is more to it than that, and after having that instilled in them for 17 or 18 years, the lure of dominating women and forcing them to have sex would not be that strong for many if any. But having a future, even if only as a mercenary, is better than having a slow death not being able to dream at all. And that is the lure of ISIS, a future of some sort. It may be short, but you live while you’re alive, not dying a day at time.

          Like

      • I think it would have been infinitely more realistic to have accepted the Emperor’s unconditional surrender than to drop the bomb, since it had been offered.

        Like

        • Whoa, Tom, I’ll need a link or citation to your claim that we should have “accepted the Emperor’s unconditional surrender” rather than drop the bomb. I’ve never in all my reading come across that claim. Doesn’t mean it’s wrong, of course … just that it requires substantiation.

          I suspect it is a typo or a senior moment, since AFAIK the Japanese clearly rejected the Potsdam Declaration calling for Japan’s unconditional surrender.

          w.

          Like

  5. I’m an Aussie and I do have the odd visit from the Mormons, JWs and 7 day Adventists. I quite enjoy explaining their religions back to them and particularly how they started and the people involved in those days.
    Nearly all seem genuinely confused about the fraudster Joseph Smith or the plagiarist Ellen White or the strange ideas and forecasts of Charles Taze Russell. But I’ve never convinced any of them that their religions are not true and yet they all think Islam is not a true religion and is a bad influence.

    I remember Dad shaking his head after watching a TV show about religious cults in the 1970s. He said if you had no conscience or morals and the gift of the gab (a good BS artist) you could make a bloody fortune by starting up a new cult. We all laughed at the time but I fear he was spot on. There’s always someone willing to listen.

    Liked by 3 people

    • “He said if you had no conscience or morals and the gift of the gab (a good BS artist) you could make a bloody fortune by starting up a new cult.”
      L.Ron Hubbard and Scientology fits perfectly. Amazing how they can suck in even Hollywood and other big shots who somehow are convinced that Hubbard’s blend of Sci-Fi and religion is reality, worth a billion year contract and totally give up their privacy (E-meter exams). Estimated to cost only $128,000 to attain a Clear state in Scientology where one then can spend even more money to become an “operating Thetan” who can “move [matter, energy, space, and time (MEST)] and control others from a distance, or create his own universe”. If even “more intelligent” individuals are taken in by crap like this, then Islam has easy pickings for that mass of “human” beings that are lower on the logic scale. Truly effective solutions, such as classifying Islam as a terrorist entity, disallowing mosques and deporting or jailing any not following Western law (in other words use mirror standards on them) would receive major backlash from those uneducated in Islamic history and it’s real future intentions. Europe is probably not recoverable from Merkel’s insult and is most likely only decades (or less) away from major civil wars or a complete takeover as a result of the populace being convinced that cultural extinction is for the greater good. When that happens they will of course have access to the big bombs and things will become quite unpredictable, as how does one go to a nuke war with a mixed cultural populace. May at that time need China or Russia in the fray who wouldn’t hesitate.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_%28Scientology%29

      Liked by 1 person

      • > disallowing mosques

        This is not going to happen in the US. While a large percentage of Muslims worldwide do hold beliefs incompatible with the US, not all of them do. And those that do hold beliefs compatible with the US should be allowed to worship in peace.

        This is where a ‘satanic verses’ split amoung Muslims would be extremely useful, we could clearly identify the two groups.

        > in other words use mirror standards on them

        mirror standards would be that All Muslims had to pay a 10% tax every year in addition to their normal taxes, and that they would have no civil rights.

        again, not going to happen

        > deporting or jailing any not following Western law

        or better yet, work on identifying thos who will not follow our laws and prevent them from entering the country in the first place.

        This has a good chance of happening, but unless you are limiting immigration, you have to wait for them to break the law first.

        Like

        • “And those that do hold beliefs compatible with the US should be allowed to worship in peace.”
          As has been pointed out in two articles, those beliefs are NOT compatible with US values and they are permitted to deceive by pretending to act tolerant. So would be difficult to separate or identify those few not causing or not supporting the extinction of Western culture. By mirror standards, I meant that their intolerance (or support of same) should be turned on them (not every little Islamic law).
          “not going to happen”
          As I pointed out, of course not. The only allowed process would be to force strict compliance with Western law, which has already fallen aside in most of Europe. Because it’s “not going to happen” is why Europe is, relatively shortly, going to be the worlds number one hot spot and then in an additional relatively short time will drag the rest of the West into the morass with them. I suspect that climastrology, along with a lot of other by then inconsequential concerns (except for the “doomsday” clock), will then become moot.

          Like

          • it doesn’t matter if they are allowed to lie to us or not. What they say doesn’t actually matter much. What matters is how they act.

            As I noted in another post, we didn’t knock out the KKK by surpressing speech, but by responding to their actions and punishing those that are against the law.

            In Europe, they seem more worried about words than actions, and that doesn’t work.

            Like

  6. I will say that internecine warfare among sects happens in other religions. Just look at Northern Ireland.

    One question I have is where Islam was adopted peacefully. Only major region I can think of is Indonesia and I’m not sure why it flourished there.

    Your comment about the Koran being a recruiting tool is too real. Even the leaders of groups like ISIL long for the days of jihad. Add to the Koran the fact that the Middle Easter cultures have a long history of brigandry and a good war looks like a lot of fun to them.

    The thing is that outright war isn’t even necessary for them to win. The saying “Once you let the nose of the camel into the tent the rest follows” really applies here. Civilized countries reach a point where the birth rate starts declining. That seems to be historical going back to even the Romans. The Muslims that idiots like Merkel have let into Europe will literally win by out breeding the natives. We’ve already seen a Muslim elected the Mayor of London (Londonistan) because of the large influx.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Cartoonist Bill Leak was pursued until his death by Islamic state and the left in OZ hated him as well. He even had to sell out and move house and family because Islamic state plotted to kill him.
    But why do the left promote and encourage this mad cult and will even bash people on the streets if you hold a different opinion? When will these fools wake up?

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/credlin-bill-leak-tackled-islam-when-politicians-wont/news-story/06cdf12ffe269271dcaab2176e710a40

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Pingback: Orthodox Hate Speech | Skating Under The Ice

  9. Pingback: The Problem With Islam | Skating Under The Ice

  10. Speaking of the Crusades… Here is an awesome book that few have heard of:
    “Orlando Furioso: A Romantic Epic”, by Ariosto. It’s an epic length poem (!) about knights fighting the Muslim invaders. Don’t let the poem part put you off, it reads very well.

    Like

  11. One problem with the idea of identifying Satanic verses as a way of de-fanging Islam is that there is no central, top-level authority that governs Islam (other than the Quran itself). Unlike, say, the Catholic or Mormon churches, which each have a worldwide headquarters and a designated hierarchy of leaders to whom all the followers look for religious/spritual guidance, Islam has nothing similar. So I can’t see how anyone could identify Satanic verses in the Quran and expect any Muslim to agree.

    Another issue that your memory problem might potentially be related to is the issue of first-cousin marriage in Islam. The Quran (4:23) identifies a long list of relatives with whom it is prohibited to marry (parents, siblings, children, etc.) with one glaring exception: first cousins (possibly because Mohammed was married to a first cousin?). As a result, there is an extremely high percentage of first-cousin marriages in the Islamic world. In some countries it is as high as 70% (Pakistan) of all marriages. One has to wonder how fourteen centuries of that has impacted the mental health in the Islamic world. More about this here:

    http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Cousin_Marriage_in_Islam

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Thanks Willis, another great piece. I have to agree with you on all points.10-15 years ago, I read a historical fiction book on the taking of St. John’s Monastery on Malta in 870. I can’t remember the title nor find the book. It’s description of the Janissaries was all it took for me to come to your perspective. The Janissaries were the captured youth of their enemies, raised to be soldiers, and sent into battle first, loaded with opium, to throw themselves into the slaughter. Thus, should you find yourself at war with Islam, the first you kill to defend yourself may be your own or friend’s children.

    Like

  13. Willis, what happens if Iran stops ISIS, takes over Iraq, Syria and Lebanon?
    Isn’t that ISIL?
    Would Muslims be required to follow the caliphate and put Iran’s supreme religious leader with nukes in hand in charge?

    Like

  14. Along with the writings of the Koran the fact that from the time you are a young child, five times each day, you prostrate yourself before your god and ask how you may do his bidding.
    How do you change a teenager’s thinking after 10 – 15 years of that kind of training?

    Like

  15. Interesting points Willis, and more knowledgeable than most in the Western world. I have no quibble save the Caliphate being accepted by both. Shiites do not accept Caliphs, that was a Sunni thing. Something omitted was the major even of the takeover of the Caliphate by the Umayyads. They were a political family and not that much interested in religion. It was they who turned things violent. It makes for an interesting read.

    For those who are Revelations readers, the prophecy about:
    “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth.”

    It refers to this group (many things in the latter part of the New Testament are about Islam).

    The meaning of the verse (Rev 21, v3-4) is this:

    “These signs are an allusion to the dynasty of the Umayyads who dominated the Muḥammadan religion. Seven heads and seven crowns mean seven countries and dominions over which the Umayyads had power: they were the Roman dominion around Damascus; and the Persian, Arabian and Egyptian dominions, together with the dominion of Africa—that is to say, Tunis, Morocco and Algeria; the dominion of Andalusia, which is now Spain; and the dominion of the Turks of Transoxania. The Umayyads had power over these countries. The ten horns mean the names of the Umayyad rulers—that is, without repetition, there were ten names of rulers, meaning ten names of commanders and chiefs—the first is Abú Súfyán and the last Marván—but several of them bear the same name. So there are two Muáviyá, three Yazíd, two Valíd, and two Marván; but if the names were counted without repetition 70 there would be ten. The Umayyads, of whom the first was Abú Súfyán, Amír of Mecca and chief of the dynasty of the Umayyads, and the last was Marván, destroyed the third part of the holy and saintly people of the lineage of Muḥammad who were like the stars of heaven.

    Verse 4. “And the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour the child as soon as it was born.” As we have before explained, this woman is the Law of God. The dragon was standing near the woman to devour her child, and this child was the promised Manifestation, the offspring of the Law of Muḥammad. The Umayyads were always waiting to get possession of the Promised One, Who was to come from the line of Muḥammad, to destroy and annihilate Him; for they much feared the appearance of the promised Manifestation, and they sought to kill any of Muḥammad’s descendants who might be highly esteemed.”

    Sourced from: http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-13.html.utf8?query=umayyad&action=highlight#fr2

    Islam is imploding. This is not a rising threat, it is a fade to black. Of course there will be the gullible and the crazy, but these very acts are driving people to, for the first time, think for themselves and question long-held deeply ingrained behaviours of obedience to a class of leader raise in the dark. The centre cannot hold, and it has not. Yes it is slow, but it is real. Turkey is a major conflict zone for exactly this break-out. The clerics are losing their influence. Independent investigation of truth is all the rage. It is not in the headlines because there is no need to be. It is not threatening when people educate themselves.

    Congrats on a thought-inspiring piece.

    Like

    • Crispin, thanks for your kind words. However, I fear I don’t care a fig for connecting prophecy “A” with world event “B”. Why? It provides me with no new information. It tells me nothing about what will happen tomorrow. And it is infinitely elastic, as any look at the “prophecies” of Nostradamus will show. People make them “fit” just like you’ve made the Bible “fit” … not impressed in the slightest.

      However, I did have to laugh at the Biblical prophecies you list. I can GUARANTEE you that for every connection you’ve made above of prophecy “A” with world event “B”, someone else in previous explanations has connected that same prophecy with events “C”, “D”, and “E” … you do realize that people played that exact same prophecy game in the year 1000, and the year 1200, and in the year 1500 and 1800 and right up until now. Do you think they connected those prophecies with modern events? Not. They connected them with events happening in the year 1000 or whatever year they were alive in.

      Of course, now people connect them with modern events. A quick look at Google tells me that the shape of the ISIS flag fulfills a Biblical prophecy … and of course, whatever prophecy they are using to connect those has been used for MILLENNIA to connect to something else.

      So please, while I am interested in your other comments, let me invite you cordially to discuss your Biblical prophecies elsewhere. Let me also recommend that you pick a year, say 1950, and read say twenty claimed Biblical prophecies from that year. I remember them from when I was a kid. I used to go hear the tent revival preachers, they had the exact same line of patter … but with the events of that time. The Russian bear taking over Hungary was supposed to be a sure-fire sign of the end days, the Berlin wall was supposed to be a symbol of the Anti-Christ, it was the exact same kind of fluff that you are telling us above … sorry, but all that does is make me laugh. FOR EXAMPLE:

      As we have before explained, this woman is the Law of God. The dragon was standing near the woman to devour her child, and this child was the promised Manifestation, the offspring of the Law of Muḥammad. The Umayyads were always waiting to get possession of the Promised One, Who was to come from the line of Muḥammad, to destroy and annihilate Him; for they much feared the appearance of the promised Manifestation, and they sought to kill any of Muḥammad’s descendants who might be highly esteemed.

      Say what? That’s crazy talk. You can make up anything if you’re willing to reach that far. Here’s some more special pleading:

      The ten horns mean the names of the Umayyad rulers—that is, without repetition, there were ten names of rulers, meaning ten names of commanders and chiefs—the first is Abú Súfyán and the last Marván—but several of them bear the same name. So there are two Muáviyá, three Yazíd, two Valíd, and two Marván; but if the names were counted without repetition there would be ten.

      Really? I’m supposed to take that seriously, as though it means something that if you count the names of some obscure line of rulers, AMAZINGLY THERE ARE TEN OF THEM! … but only if you count them in some special manner. That impresses you? Because I’m quite sure that in the year 1000 they made the same claim but about some other bunch of names that numbered ten … if you counted them in a special way …

      Dear heavens, if I believed something that convoluted and bizarre, I certainly wouldn’t reveal my strange fixation to other people … in any case, not interested, please discuss it elsewhere with those who will take it seriously. I will do nothing but point out the unlikelihood that the connection of the prophecies to an unending string of different events in the year 1000 and 1200 and every year since are all true …

      On a more serious note, Christians have ALWAYS believed that we were living in what are often called the “End Days”. It is evident from the earliest writings that believers thought it very possible, even probable, that the Messiah would return during their lifetime. This same belief, that “Jesus Is Coming” in some immediate sense, is an odd one. In my own life I’ve seen a number of Christian preachers claim that they have used the Bible to figure out the exact day of the Rapture. And this is not a modern phenomenon. It has been the claim since the beginning, that tomorrow, the next day, soon, the Messiah would return.

      Now, to maintain that belief as the decades and centuries and millennia have slowly rolled away, believers have turned more and more to imagined connections between real-world events and biblical prophecies. And guess what they find in every case?

      They find that we are living in the End Times, just as you are claiming above. This is my shocked face … but every century they have to connect the prophecies to NEW EVENTS. Which they do. Every century has been the End Times … and now here you are to tell us that yep, by gum, the Bible proves that this is the End Times, honest, the other prophecies were all wrong but this one is the real deal.

      Seriously, amigo, look at your history! For twenty centuries, every believer from Popes to you today has said yep, the Rapture is near, these are the End Days.

      Can you understand why I find this kind of claims to be fruitless? They didn’t work the last thousands of times they were claimed. The end day didn’t come. I don’t find your arguments persuasive in the slightest, no more so than the same arguments made in the yeqr 1000 or 1200.

      Finally, your idea that “Islam is imploding” is simply not borne out by the facts. It is the fastest growing religion in the world. The number of Muslims is expanding worldwide. Their reach into Europe has been hugely increased. The Pew Research Center study says that by 2050, Muslims in Europe will INCREASE from 6% to 10% by 2050 … and over the same period Christians are projected DECREASE from 75% to 65%. Somebody may be “imploding” but it’s not Islam …

      At a time when Brussels is a hotbed of jihadi violence, and there are riots in Sweden, and burning cars and dead cartoonists in Paris, and globally the number of Muslims is going up faster than the population increase, claiming that Islam is “imploding” is an unpleasantly bloody joke …

      My thanks for your comments. Whether we agree or disagree is immaterial, the point is the discussion and dialog.

      All the best,

      w.

      Like

      • another way of looking at this is: so what?

        Assume that the people interpreting the prophacys are correct, what should you do differently than if they are wrong?

        you could die at any time from a plan crashing into your building (or a meteor), you should always be prepared to die at any time, just in case.

        But you also need to be prepared to NOT die at any time and keep living.

        So what difference does it make to your actions if we are living in the end times?

        Like

      • Willis

        I am not sure why you launched into that. I have always taken it from your writing s that you carry no truck with religion and that is OK by me. You have however launched into an analysis of a history of Islam. A friend of mine wrote a really good book on the subject you are looking at. It is called simply “Shia Islam”, by Dr Moojan Momen. He is a doctor living in the UK and is one of the greatest historical authorities on that subject, though not a Muslim. It will clarify who they are and why they behave the way they do.

        I do have a quibble with what you wrote:

        “They find that we are living in the End Times, just as you are claiming above. ”

        I said nothing at all about the end of times that I can recall. I certainly was not intending to. I am not much of a Bible scholar but I read a bit. As a simpleton on Islam’s rich history I can’t say much either, but the basic history is available with short reads (“Shia Islam” is not a short read).

        You have held in your essay that Mohammad initiated wars of expansion. This is simple not so. He authorised self-defence and practised it. The Umayyads did not. They were another kettle of fish. There is a parallel in the Christian world which was strongly pacifist until the appointment of Leo 1, Bishop of Rome, as the first selected Pope in 451. No one before him was ‘Pope’. He was not responsible for holy war, but his position was not all that secure. His immediate successor was legitimately elected and thereafter, things changed from 460 AD. Within 30 years, the veneration of pictures – something completely unacceptable until then – was approved. By 525 Christianity was being spread by the sword in the East.

        Muhammad appeared amongst the most backward, violent, ignorant peoples in the world. Through the application of his teachings, a great civilisation arose, in spite of the behaviour of those within it who sought to use it for their own purposes. I feel that it is not a good idea to spread the misconception that ‘Muhammad taught people how to make war’. He permitted self-defence if attacked. I agree with that principle. By that definition or shall I say, sanction, suicide bombers are automatically apostates. We also know they have been misled by clerics who are responsible for inducing their behaviour.

        I am not the first to say that we should not blame the Messengers for the behaviour of the followers. There are all kinds of followers. I don’t blame Jesus for the Christians killing polytheists, Jews and Zoroastrians in the East in order to convert them in the 6th century.

        Like

        • Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek March 14, 2017 at 8:30 am
          Willis

          I am not sure why you launched into that.

          Bad start. Very bad start. Since you seem to be unable to follow a simple instruction to quote whatever it is you are babbling about, I have no idea just what you mean by “that”.

          I will not play that game with you or anyone. I’m not interested in your vague claims that I’m wrong somewhere about something you don’t specify. If you want to discuss something, it is essential that you let all of us know just what has your knickers in a twist.

          Come back when you decide to do that, and I’m more than happy to discuss things with you. Generally you have interesting ideas.

          But I will not respond to your claims about unknown words of mine. Sorry, but that goes nowhere except spiraling into greater misunderstanding.

          w.

          Like

        • Crispin in Waterloo but really in Bishkek March 14, 2017 at 8:30 am

          A friend of mine wrote a really good book on the subject you are looking at. It is called simply “Shia Islam”, by Dr Moojan Momen. He is a doctor living in the UK and is one of the greatest historical authorities on that subject, though not a Muslim. It will clarify who they are and why they behave the way they do.

          So? Are you going to share his wisdom with us? I don’t go read books without knowing where I’m headed.

          I do have a quibble with what you wrote:

          “They find that we are living in the End Times, just as you are claiming above. ”

          I said nothing at all about the end of times that I can recall. I certainly was not intending to.

          All of the kind of thing that you quoted, tying prophecies to actual events, is part of a two-thousand-year-old Christian attempt to convince people that we are in the “End Times”. The Bible describes the end times with a number of prophecies, including those you mention. To show that we’re in the End Times you need to show that those prophicies are true … as you were doing. So yes, you are indeed talking about the End Times, you just don’t know enough about Christianity to realize it.

          I am not much of a Bible scholar but I read a bit.

          No comment.

          You have held in your essay that Mohammad initiated wars of expansion. This is simple not so. He authorised self-defence and practised it.

          I’m sorry, but when you attack the village next door, AS MOHAMMED DID, and you order all the men among the prisoners or war to be killed, AS MOHAMMED DID, and you take over the village as your land and you take the women and children as slaves, AS MOHAMMED DID, you are on a war of expansion.

          Nor did it stop there. During his lifetime Mohammed and his men conquered the entire Arabian Peninsula … by the sword, of course.

          So I don’t know what kind of Muslim apologists you’re hanging out with, but your claim that Mohammed did NOT initiate wars of expansion is a sick joke.

          The Umayyads did not. They were another kettle of fish. There is a parallel in the Christian world which was strongly pacifist until the appointment of Leo 1, Bishop of Rome, as the first selected Pope in 451. No one before him was ‘Pope’. He was not responsible for holy war, but his position was not all that secure. His immediate successor was legitimately elected and thereafter, things changed from 460 AD. Within 30 years, the veneration of pictures – something completely unacceptable until then – was approved. By 525 Christianity was being spread by the sword in the East.

          So we’re back to “Islam is really like Christianity”, are we? No, Crispin, Islam is NOTHING LIKE CHRISTIANITY, no matter how many bogus parallels you bring up.

          Muhammad appeared amongst the most backward, violent, ignorant peoples in the world. Through the application of his teachings, a great civilisation arose, in spite of the behaviour of those within it who sought to use it for their own purposes. I feel that it is not a good idea to spread the misconception that ‘Muhammad taught people how to make war’. He permitted self-defence if attacked. I agree with that principle. By that definition or shall I say, sanction, suicide bombers are automatically apostates. We also know they have been misled by clerics who are responsible for inducing their behaviour.

          Bullshit of the most pernicious kind. Mohammed kept sexual slaves, murdered prisoners of war, and married a nine-year-old. He not only taught his people how to make war, he PERSONALLY LED THEM IN WAR. He raided the caravans going to Mecca, not for defense, but as part of his scheme to take over Mecca as part of taking over the entire Arabian Peninsula, which he did … and your ludicrous claim that is he needed Mecca and conquered the entire Arabian Peninsula for “self-defense”? Dude, that doesn’t come near passing the laugh test.

          And even so, somehow I don’t remember Jesus teaching the people that they needed to conquer the Middle East and drive out the Romans for “self-defence” … you’re reaching.

          I am not the first to say that we should not blame the Messengers for the behaviour of the followers. There are all kinds of followers. I don’t blame Jesus for the Christians killing polytheists, Jews and Zoroastrians in the East in order to convert them in the 6th century.

          Whoa, you’ve got it backwards. I’m not blaming Mohammed for the actions of his followers. That’s your misinterpretation, sorry for my lack of clarity.

          I blame the Messenger Mohammed for his OWN ACTIONS, actions which have been repeated by his followers. Unlike Jesus, Mohammed kept sexual slaves. Unlike Jesus, he was a mass murderer of prisoners of war. Unlike Jesus, he married a nine-year-old. Unlike Jesus, who washed the feet of a prostitute, Mohammed oppressed women for his whole life. Unlike Jesus, he led his men in wars of expansion.

          Not only did he personally do those brutal, sadistic things, but he created a so-called “religion” that has led to his followers DOING THE BARBARIC THINGS THAT HE DID RIGHT UP UNTIL TODAY.

          So don’t give me this moral equivalency crap. Islam is no more like Christianity than Mohammed was like Jesus. Mohammed was a brutal killer and oppressor of women, and far too many his followers are just the same.

          As I said in my first post, do NOT ask “What would Mohammed do?”, because the answer is, he’d kill your sorry apologist butt. You are a perfect example of the old saying:

          When Muslims are in a minority, it's all about human rights.
          
          When Muslims are in a majority, there are no human rights

          w.

          Like

      • Hey Willis,

        When looking at Biblical prophecy, I like to keep two things in mind:
        1 – Any interpretation before the event is likely to be wrong, but afterward it will be clear as day (hindsight is 20:20 vision). I figure it’s not there for us to stop it, or change it, or even predict it as such, but for us to be comforted that God is not surprised when it does happen.
        2 – It’s more like a fractal than a news story… if God is the infinite, then he is not limited to a one dimensional story… the rules of a fractal are simple, and they repeat on different scales.. just like prophecy has happened, is happening, and will happen… and moral lessons in the Bible apply at personal, community, national and global scales…. So arguing that because there is more than one interpretation doesn’t mean it’s wrong, or any one interpretation is wrong…. perhaps history repeats for a reason…. or it could just be that the record lines up with the movie just because we want it to… you see it your way, I’ll see it mine.

        As for Islam, for the most part I think that you are tragically right. But I don’t see the solution as reformation, I think it has to be total abandonment… a change of heart on a large scale… being a Christian I would like to think that they would start to follow Jesus instead of Mohamed, but I fear it’s more likely to be Quinn the Eskimo.

        Like

        • CommonA March 14, 2017 at 11:22 pm

          Hey Willis,

          When looking at Biblical prophecy, I like to keep two things in mind:
          1 – Any interpretation before the event is likely to be wrong, but afterward it will be clear as day (hindsight is 20:20 vision). I figure it’s not there for us to stop it, or change it, or even predict it as such, but for us to be comforted that God is not surprised when it does happen.

          We’re supposed to be “comforted that God is not surprised”? That makes no sense at all. I think that God is continually surprised. I mean, think of how infinitely boring it would be to live forever and never, ever be surprised. A slow afternoon is boring, but a slow infinity? You’d never get out of bed if that was all you had to look forward to. I think God doesn’t want to know which bush the rabbit is hiding behind. So she’s figured out a way to not know the outcomes beforehand, she throws celestial dice in the crucial moments or something, to keep it interesting.

          Do I actually believe that?

          No … or yes … but either way it’s just as believable as the BS you’re putting out there. You have no idea if “God”, whatever that means to you, is “surprised” or not. Sorry, but you’re just making up comforting stories, and I can make up stories just as believable as the ones you can make up. And yes, I do actually think that if there were a God, she’d be more likely to be infinitely surprised than infinitely bored.

          2 – It’s more like a fractal than a news story… if God is the infinite, then he is not limited to a one dimensional story… the rules of a fractal are simple, and they repeat on different scales.. just like prophecy has happened, is happening, and will happen… and moral lessons in the Bible apply at personal, community, national and global scales…. So arguing that because there is more than one interpretation doesn’t mean it’s wrong, or any one interpretation is wrong…. perhaps history repeats for a reason…. or it could just be that the record lines up with the movie just because we want it to… you see it your way, I’ll see it mine.

          Oh, please. You might get away with that feel-good “every interpretation is equally valid” BS in a college seminar. In the real world, you can’t just wave your hand and say it’s not wrong, its just fractal and has multiple meanings.

          FOR EXAMPLE. If a guy says according to the Bible prophecies the world is going to end on Thursday September 15, 2016, and it doesn’t end on that date, you know what he’s gonna say?

          He’ll say something like “I wasn’t wrong! The problem was, it’s more like a fractal than a news story… if God is the infinite, then he is not limited to a one dimensional story… the rules of a fractal are simple, and they repeat on different scales.. just like prophecy has happened, is happening, and will happen. So my prophecy of the world ending on 15 September actually has happened and it is happening, and it will happen on February 30, 2018.”

          And all the sane listeners go “Yeah, that’s the same old stale fractal multiverse BS we always get served up from someone whose prophecy just crashed and burned”.

          As for Islam, for the most part I think that you are tragically right. But I don’t see the solution as reformation, I think it has to be total abandonment… a change of heart on a large scale… being a Christian I would like to think that they would start to follow Jesus instead of Mohamed, but I fear it’s more likely to be Quinn the Eskimo.

          You could be right, CommonA. I have no idea what the eventual solution to Islam will be. We haven’t found it in fourteen centuries, but I continue to hope. The fact that there are any reasonable Moslems is a testament to human possibilities in the face of brutal ideologies.

          However, I do greatly like the idea of them following Quinn the Eskimo, because according to legend at least, “When Quinn the Eskimo gets here, everybody’s gonna jump for joy!”

          Many thanks,

          w.

          Like

    • My vote for the weirdest book in the Bible is Revelations. Written by a Greek nut-case hermit. I have no idea why it was selected for the anthology we call The Bible. It’s a big favorite with fundamentalists though; I have no idea why. Everybody loves the apocalypse? Everybody loves a riddle?

      As it happens that same quote came up in the mainstream press about the coming solar eclipse.
      http://www.greensboro.com/washingtonpost/features/first-solar-eclipse-to-cross-u-s-in-years-is/article_00d6aa63-a276-505e-8f6f-246cf299029e.html

      The Bible is full of miracles, which “prove” something. The Koran has the miracle winged horse flight to Jerusalem but doesn’t have the big emphasis on miracles. One small point in favor of the Koran 🙂

      The other big difference is that Christians get bogged down in little theological puzzles, like “what is the Trinity?”. The Koran is a “don’t think, just do it!” kind of book. That’s not necessarily a good thing, but it has a much wider appeal.

      Like

  16. Here in the SF Bay Area, we have adherents of the Ahmadiyya branch of Islam who are in the process of reaching out to the public (holding “talk with a Muslim” events etc.). These folks call their branch of Islam the “True Islam” and espouse ideals of tolerance, equality of women with men, disdain for violence and so forth. I have one such adherent in my circle of acquaintances. I wonder whether anyone on this forum can offer an opinion about this branch of Islam. Can we take them at their word?

    Some of them have stepped forward publicly to assist with restoring vandalized Jewish cemeteries. What do we infer from this? Are these words and deeds just a part of deceiving The Infidel? I would appreciate any feedback.

    Like

    • The Ahmadiyya are indeed among the least violent of the sects of Islam. And they have been active in protecting Jewish cemeteries. However, the only way for Muslims to be friends with Jews is to ignore the clear instructions of the Koran, which espouses violence against and hatred of Jews.

      Can we “take them at their word”? Sorry, but Islam specifically allows them to lie about the religion, what it means, or even what religion they are, if the situation calls for it.

      I would first ask your Ahmadiyya friend if the laws of the Koran are eternally true and valid and should be followed. I suspect they will say “yes”. If so, ask them if the Koranic law about apostasy under which Ayaan Hirsi Ali lives in fear of her life is eternally true and valid and she should in fact be killed …

      Don’t like that one? Ask them if a woman is justified in beating her husband if he disobeys her. I mean, consider the logic:

      1) The Koran says it is OK for men to beat their wives if the women don’t obey their husbands.

      2) The Amadiyya espouse equality for women.

      3) THEREFORE, it must be perfectly fine for women to beat their husbands if the men do not obey their wives.

      You see the problems, I’m sure. The Koran is INCOMPATIBLE with Western ideals such as equality of women. The real problem is that they likely don’t see the problems …

      Thanks,

      w.

      Like

  17. Willis, thanks for your response. You’ve clearly done considerably more comparative study of religions than have I. I share your skepticism but I was actually hoping you might be able to say: “Hey this branch of Islam gives us hope that Islam might someday undergo a Reformation of sorts”. The inherent contradictions are obvious and I note in a little further reading of my own that this branch of Islam is considered heretic by the majority of Muslims. I find the situation sad and perplexing because it is so difficult for a rational thinking person to separate the individual Muslim from the ideology laid down their “Holy Book”.

    But the Ahmadiyya are inviting dialogue so I think your suggestions are worth a try.

    CF

    Like

  18. Pingback: The Forever Wars – HiFast News Feed

  19. Haven’t any of you read ‘ The Chronicles of Gor’? If you read and understand the stories then you will discover the true nature of women.

    Like

  20. Pingback: Suicidal Murderers | Skating Under The Ice

You are invited to add your comments. Please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING so we can all be clear on your subject.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s