|
We read numerous articles of people defending Islamists against being called terrorists, and telling of the peacefulness of the religion and so on. I am thoroughly convinced that those writers (or at least most of them are honest and sincere) But I want us to look at certain factors which are never brought out in their pleas for acceptance and not to be associated with terrorists.
Let us take for granted that the Muslims who have taken up residence here and in other countries of the western world are peaceful and wish us no harm. I believe that is true of the majority of them. But how can we know that? The men involved in flying the planes into the twin towers were living here and seemingly peaceful. We accept that the teachings that are being done in their mosques is that of peace and tolerance, but often we have discovered that was not the case. In some cases, they have refused to allow our security personnel to review their study materials in their schools. What would happen to Americans or British in one of their countries who refused to allow them to see their teaching materials?
If the common people of the Muslim countries are tolerant and wish us no harm, answer the following question. When the twin towers came down on 9/11, why then were those peaceful common people, and children(!) dancing in the streets and flashing "V" signs when the news came to them? Or were they only the terrorists? Why did those peaceful Muslims not announce publicly and loud, that they were opposed to those who perpetrated that act and that they would swiftly join forces with the U.S. and other western nations in eradicating such terrorists from their lands? If this had been the resulting scenario, the so-called minority terrorists would now be eradicated and Muslims would no longer be associated with them.
Even the countries who are supposed to be friendly toward us and trade with us, such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan, etc., were almost totally silent as far as their opposition towards the terrorists and only behind the scenes would work with us. The resulting wars which we are now engaged in would not have been necessary. And speaking of those wars, those peaceful and tolerant Muslims are still secretly funneling money, weapons and personnel to perpetuate them.
Also, a totally intolerant religion cannot prevail in free countries. Proponents of Islam who have control of their nations, are shamefully intolerant of freedom of religion. Even Saudi Arabia, our friends(?) will not tolerate open Christian worship or teaching. If they had the power or authority, they would not tolerate it here in the U.S.
Islamic teaching toward their women is abominable and can never be acceptable in the free world. The main points I am trying to get across is that the western world is free. No religion can, or should it, be forced upon any people. If it is not acceptable in one's own heart, it is totally worthless. Regardless of what is taught otherwise, the Bible has always taught that man is a free moral agent and that it is not other men's place to force them to accept what is right. Muslims contend that their Allah is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (and Ishmael). God does not teach one group one thing and something else to another.
Peaceful and tolerant: Christians extol Jesus Christ. Christians are offended at anything which is derogatory towards Jesus Christ. But if one is truly a Christian, they will not rave and riot over someone making derogatory remarks about Him. We may try to defend Him verbally but with civility. In fact it is our duty to pray for those who do such things that they might see the error of their ways and repent.
Muslims on the other hand, revere Muhammad. Let anyone make disparaging remarks about him and see what happens. In a free land, one is allowed to say what they feel about any subject. What about Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses"? The Muslim world went postal. The Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa (death sentence) against Rushdie and there were at least two killings made of those who published the book or sold it. This one act separated the Muslim world from the Western world.
The western contention, "no one should be killed, or face a serious threat of being killed, for what they say or write" while the Muslims contend, "no one should be free to "insult and malign Muslims" by disparaging the "honour of the Prophet" Muhammad." (Quotations taken from Wikipedia)
Then on September 30, 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten printed 12 caricatures of Muhammad, one with a bomb for his hat, again the Muslims reacted without restraint, rioting in most of the Muslim world and in Europe. Clashes with police resulted in over 100 deaths. They set fire to the Danish and Norwegian Embassies in Syria, stormed European buildings and desecrated Danish, Norwegian and German flags in Gaza. Some Muslim leaders called for the demonstrations to remain peaceful while others made death threats.
This type of resentment has not just begun, and can be traced back even into Old Testament times and having it's initial beginnings with the progeny of Abraham. The Muslims have been upset over remarks, which they deem to be ridicule or insulting to Muhammad many times in the past. About the end of the 12th century, Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321), wrote an anthology entitled The Divine Comedy
"In book One, the Inferno in Canto 28, Mohammed (called Mahomet by Dante) is described cleft from his chin "to where one breaketh wind. Between his legs were hanging down his entrails; His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten. While I was all absorbed in seeing him, he looked at me, and opened with his hands his bosom, saying: "See now how I rend me; How mutilated, see, is Mahomet; In front of me doth Ali weeping go, cleft in the face from forelock unto chin; And all the others whom thou here beholdest, disseminators of scandal and of schism while living were, and therefore are cleft thus."
Mahomet is witnessed by Dante, accompanied by Virgil, his guide through the Inferno. Mohammed is disembowelled, and Ali, the figurehead of the Shia faith, has his face split in two. We depicted illustrations of this subject by Gustave Dore, Salvador Dali and WIlliam Blake. (April 17, 2006 Italy: Muslims Whine Over Cartoon Of Mohammed In Hell [ http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/001717.html ])
Needless to say, all of the followers of Muhammad were infuriated and one cannot help but understand their ire over such writing, regardless of what motive the writer might have had. That seems to be carrying things a lot too far. I suspect I would have been angered to see such about Jesus Christ. But on the other hand, I would not have taken to the streets, inflicting damage on others property, killing any suspected Italian or such nonsense. It is as if they go berserk. For instance, during the rioting over the Danish cartoon, some of them tore down and destroyed a Ronald McDonald statue! What kind of vengeance is that?
I have religious beliefs that few others have. I am willing and pleased to discuss those points, where I differ with most, with anyone who wishes to hear. But I never try to force those beliefs on anyone. I believe that those who teach Islam should be free to do so and to worship as they please. But never when it interferes with the beliefs of others and their freedom to worship as they would. Islamists know that Christians do not agree with them. I know that Islamists do not agree with us. So be it. But all must learn that in free countries, they will face verbal persecution from time to time. I find it very irritating when some try to denigrate the Almighty God or His Son, Jesus Christ. But that is their problem, not mine. God is perfectly capable of avenging Himself.
|
