Explain why the Church of St. Sophia in Constantinople became a mosque in Istanbul. Why is Turkey Muslim? Why is Syria and Lebanon Muslim? Why is Egypt Muslim? Where are the Coptic Christians? Why are there no Jews in Saudi arabia? There are no Jews in Saudi Arabia because Muhammed commanded there should be no Jews in Saudi Arabia.
If Islam is so peaceful, why are millions of people fleeing the Taliban right now in Pakistan? They're fleeing because they are strict in their implementation of Islam and sharia law (codification of life and deeds of Muhammad and statements of Allah in doctrine). The Taliban IS Islam. They are living according to specific dictats of the world of Allah which is Koran and the orders of Muhammad, his one and only prophet-- the perfect human being all Muslims are to follow.
Jihad existed since Muhammad left Mecca. The history of Jihad is 1400 years old. It's not about political borders drawn on a map. This is an ideological military conquest that's been ongoing since Muhammad left Mecca and is still going on now. This isn't about countries or national identity or treaties. This is about the expansion of Islam
through violence and jihadl that's it.
The figures I gave you can be found in history books.
The criticism about the Crusades is a sop to ignorant people who don't know history. the crusaders went to Jerusalem in the middle east after decades and decades of pleading by the Christian communities in the middle east for help because they were being massacred by Jihadists. The Crusades was not a cause. It was a response to Jihad. Some of the Crusaders screwed up and massacred innocent people, but not anywhere near to the extent the Jihadists did. Nowhere near.
There is no apologizing for this; it's wrong. But, they were there to protect the Christian communities from Islam and to take back the conquered lands by Jihad. Why are there Knight's Templars Churches all over Lebanon and Syria? Because they tried to rebuild the Christian culture that had been destroyed by Jihad, yet they were unsuccessful.
Muslim violence is not a response to political frustrations. The refusal of the Palestinians to accept a Palestinian state when it was offered to them no less than
three times is proof of this. This is not a political struggle. This is Jihad. It's a1400 years old tactic of war that Islam has used with great success across the world. If you look at the books of Islam, it is clear. All adherents of Islam are required to participate in Jihad. This is a religious obligation. Jihad is violent warfare to expand the boundaries of Islam. In modern times, Jihad is meant to destroy all non-Muslim states and cultures and bring them under the dominion of Islam. This is clearly stated in their religious doctrine: no other religions, no other political systems are acceptable to Islam other than Allah's. What you see today in the Middle East is Jihad and nothing else. We see this in Europe and we see this in the U.S. The liberals who know nothing say that this is frustrated poverty rising up against oppression. How did the Khaybar Jews oppress Muhammad? Muhammad massacred (beheaded) all 800 of their men and took all their women as sex slaves. And, Khaybar is chanted today during attacks: "Khaybar Khaybar ya Yahoud, jaish Muhammad saufa ya‘ud" And, no, they're not saying anything nice or cheerful except that they'll do it again and are, I guess, seemingly happy about this part.
The history of Islam is a history of cruel massacres of innocents across the world. This is a tactic called Jihad that allows Jihad to grow. There is no totalitarian system more oppressive to the individual, to women and to non-believers than this. For a comprehensive look at Jihad, read Andrew Bostom's
Legacy of Jihad.
Walid Shoebat (former terrorist) You said "I'm not saying Islam isn't guilty but I am saying that the West also had a role in the current mess!". This is absolutely incorrect. The victims have no role in their victimization. Recently a 13- year old girl was stoned to death in Pakistan because she came forward and said she had been gang raped by three men. In Islam, the victim is blamed. In the media of the west, the dhimmi media, the victims are blamed for Jihad. The victims of totalitarian violence are blamed for the violence itself. When a gay kafir walks down the streets of Copenhagen and is beaten or killed by a Muslim mob screaming Allah-hu Akbar, does one blame the victim of the mob? Or, does one say that the existence of the victim impelled the mob to violence? This is moral relativism; this is insanity. It is completely inaccurate in every single sense of the word.
Is
thisthe West's fault, too?
Interesting philosophical point. Not relevant, though, since we have what we have.
Have a good night.
