[cornelis]

There is nothing about Allah in the piece, nor of him attacking Aristotle, nor any philosophical roots about violence. There is, however, a distinct attitude toward religion. The implied conjecture is preposterous and uncivil.

[js1138]

There is nothing about Allah in the piece, nor of him attacking Aristotle, nor any philosophical roots about violence. There is, however, a distinct attitude toward religion. The implied conjecture is preposterous and uncivil.

You picked up on that, did you? I also detected a distinct disdain for the true believer, but I thought the presentation was quite civil. Anyone who attempts to take every word of any religious text as completely and literally true will go mad (or already is).

Flame away.

Hint: there have been so many interpretations over the centuries as to what "completely and literally true" means, that I doubt if you could find any random group of believers to agree on any major issue.