Replies

Islam is a man-made religion of empowerment through force as its underlying theme. It is no wonder that people who live by force and lawlessness are drawn to its tenets. Christianity is founded upon God's Grace toward the broken spirit of the sinner acknowledging his or her fallen state. To all but a very few in prisons, this is anathema for survival. Islam appeals to survival by force over others under the specious premise that the God of the Universe must have men to do his bidding. Christianity offers the already settle power of the Universe to those who are of broken and contrite spirit. The pride of humankind in a fallen state meshes with the pride of 'doing it for god' as found in Islam (and all other cults), where is the big lie told even in the Garden --man can be as God by doing his own salvation--which draws the prideful to ultimate destruction of the individual spirit. The same lie, the same appeal to human pride, permeates all of the great evils now infesting this age.

It is no accident that Muslims are over-represented with respect to crime -- and terrorism.

Few will openly embrace terrorism and will attempt then to distance themselves by means of semantics. As the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism’s director Boaz Ganor observed, the Arab League’s position neatly exemplifies the mindset. They declare that they are against terrorism, but assert that acts “aimed at ‘liberation and self determination’ are not in the category of terrorism.” Thus, nearly any means can be used to justify the end.

Thus crime and terrorism are permitted if it is deemed [by whom?] to be of Divine Will:

...All is permitted to the Righteous side; none is permitted the other because there can only be one group that is Chosen. The most explicit and voluminous articulation of this point of view was aptly articulated by Egyptian scholar Sayyid Qutb. Executed by Nasser in 1966, Qutb was likely, as observed by the Times of London’s Middle East editor Robert Irwin [among others], to be one of the Founding Fathers of modern Islamism. Citing obscure thirteenth century history as foundation, Qutb and his ideological descendants held that the Koran allowed for no peaceful coexistence with any other way of life – even within Islam. One interpretation of Divine Will led Mullah Omar to be content with creating a single country governed by Shari‘a, while the al Qaeda version would settle for nothing less than “global jihad that will end with all men under direct, unmediated rule of Allah” [presumably through his chosen human intermediaries] (Irwin). In either case, no limits could be allowed for those acting under the Almighty’s direction -- and no tolerance allowed for those who are deemed as not.

Quoting from Hadith 390, the virtual Islamic Library Witness Pioneer notes: “I have been commanded (by Allah) to fight people until they testify that there is no true god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform Salat and pay Zakat. If they do so, they will have protection of their blood and property from me except when justified by Islam, and then account is left to Allah.” This passage is explained as meaning that non-believers who pay tribute may be spared, but goes on to assert that defensive war is not sufficient to be a good Muslim. “The real distinction of Islam lies in its enjoining Muslims to wage war for upholding the truth besides fighting for their own defense.” Any place wherein Islam is not practiced is by definition a place of “darkness, heresy and tyranny” that must be liberated as it is the realm of man-worship. Thus, true “Muslims are bound to fight such evils and finish them by means of Jihad”