Islam is the Most Aggressive Religion

IN AN ARTICLE on JihadWatch entitled, Muslim commentator: "I find many statements in [the] Quran are not defensible in the justice system of the civilized world," I found some comments worth sharing.

First, Traeh wrote:

OF TEN RELIGIONS, ISLAM'S CORE TEXTS MOST AGGRESSIVE

Tina Magaard, a linguist who got her Ph.D. in Intercultural Communication from the Sorbonne, did a three year study of the original texts of the ten largest religions. One of her conclusions was that Islam's texts are the most aggressive against other groups.


MukeNecca responded:

Wow! That's what I call a bombshell!
By "out there" you must mean Mars.

Seriously now; the fact that it took little Tina three years of hard studies to arrive at that conclusion is way more sensational then her findings.


Traeh responded:

You don't have to go all the way to Mars to find people who don't understand that the core texts of Islam are more aggressive than the texts of the nine other largest religions.

It may be obvious to you. But huge numbers of people -- right here on earth -- think that only ignorant fools agree with you. Large numbers do not hold your view on this issue, MukeNecca. If you don't know that, maybe you need to get out a bit more.

We can't afford to be complacent and self-satisfied that our own view of things is "obvious." We have to try to convince as many others as possible that Islam represents a serious worldwide threat to freedom. To those huge numbers of people who don't find your convictions obvious, it might well be a surprise that not only someone called "MukeNecca" in a comments thread at jihadwatch see Islam as a serious threat to the West, but also someone with a Ph.D. from the Sorbonne, a linguist who can read perhaps ten languages, and who studied the original texts of ten religions, and concluded (among many other things) after a detailed, three-year study of those ten religions, that Islam's core texts are the most aggressive against other groups.

It's not enough to say that something is obvious. In the West, the obvious has been turned on its head many times by scientists. Many of those we need to persuade are educated enough to know that. That's why, MukeNecca, it's foolish to reject appeals to serious research and science.

Read more...

Why Does The West Repeatedly Lose Against An Enemy It Could Easily Destroy?

The Sultan Knish wrote a good article explaining the four main reasons the West continues to lose. It is not only interesting reading, it is insightful. He shows us what needs to be changed, or what barriers we will have to overcome in order to win. One of the four reasons is that diplomacy has become more important in the Western mind than war. As he explains:

War then becomes a halfhearted effort to hurt the enemy just enough to convince them to give in to our peacemaking demands. Unfortunately when the enemy has no interest in giving in, the military campaign quickly becomes a painful bloody drawn out mess with no real objective except buzzwords such as "Stabilization" and "Reining in the Extremist Elements Who Stand in the Way of Peace."

The latest example of such a misguided military campaign could be seen in Gaza, but it can just as well be seen in Iraq, and for that matter Vietnam. If you're not playing to win, but assuming that the enemy will give up and come to the negotiating table, then you're playing to lose... particularly against an enemy who knows how the game is played, and knows that all he needs to do is stay alive long enough for you to give up and go away.

Read the whole article: Playing To Win.

Read more...

Islam Leads To Tyranny

Serge Trifkovic said most of the conflicts in the world involve Muslims, and if you ended all conflicts that involved Muslims right now, the world would be a pretty peaceful place.

Muslims, both moderates and extremists, are always quick to point out that Islam is a religion of peace. But Trifkovic's statement made me curious, so I've been searching on Google for a map of world conflicts (and which ones involve Muslims). I haven't found what I was looking for yet, but I found two maps (on two different web sites that have nothing to do with each other) that are interesting when you see them together.

The first map is by Freedom House, an organization that tracks democracies around the world. It shows their map of world freedom. The purple countries are the least free:


A few clicks later, I found this map of populations of Muslims. It shows by color where the densest population of Muslims live in the world (the highest population of Muslims is darkest blue):


Pretty interesting, huh? One of the things I've advocated repeatedly is that we can reduce Islamic terrorism by pushing for women's rights.

In order for women to have rights, the Muslims cannot have Shari'a law. Or it would have to be so modified as to be unrecognizable. To weaken the hold of Shari'a would probably weaken the population's belief that the Qur'an is the perfect word of Allah, which would include the instructions to take over the world. This would make it more difficult for jihadis to recruit new soldiers. And hopefully those young men would find more productive things to do with their time than blowing themselves up.

And all this could be brought about by focusing solely on promoting women's rights.

Do you think every woman should have human rights? Yes? So does almost everybody else in the world. This is a place we can join together in a mutual and important purpose.

In the war against the Islamization of the world, this is the place where the strength of the free world can overcome the weak spot of Shari'a.

Read more...