Is there really a difference?
I know this is heretical, and I understand the need not to paint all members of that faith with the same brush. After all, there have been murderous maniacs claiming adherence to all kinds of faiths before ( possibly the worst of which, btw, is the Marxist faith and the millions it has tortured and killed).
There ARE good, fine people who call themselves Muslim. But increasingly, the evidence is leading me to believe that those people are considered heretics by the larger Muslim world and are in a vast minority.
The Bible exhorts people to spread Christianity, but says "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Give to God what is God's.
The Koran, in contrast, makes no such distinction. There is the world of Islam and the world of War. It calls for total control in all areas or death, or at the very least, slavery to the Caliphate.
It is a book of legal, monetary and religious dominance. Islam, by no coincidence, means submission".
The Qur’an tells Muslims to be compassionate with one another but ruthless to the infidel:
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves… (48:29)
Allah intends for Muslims to triumph over believers:
And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way to triumph over believers [Pickthall – “any way of success”] (4:141)
The only acceptable position of non-Muslims to Muslims is subjugation under Islamic rule:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (9:29 Jizya is the money that non-Muslims must pay to their Muslim overlords in a pure Islamic state.)...
Allah himself fights against the unbelievers (9:30), so why should Muslims not fight in his cause rather than in the cause of evil (4:76)? About 19% of the Qur'an is devoted to the violent conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims:
Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know (8:60)
.Non-Muslims are to be fought until religion is only for Allah:
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah… (8:39 – “Persecution” in this context means resistance to Islam – defined in the prior verse as an unwillingness to believe (see verse 38). This passage was “revealed” following a battle that Muhammad deliberately provoked. Verse 2:193 essentially says the same thing and was also “revealed” at a time when the Muslims were not under physical attack).....
Allah provides instructions to Muslims for dealing with unbelievers who are unwilling to accept Islamic rule:
Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them." This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment. (8:12-13)
Other verses of violence may be found here.
Yeah, I know Jesus founded a religion of eeeeevil Fundamentalists bent on converting people through persuasion n' stuff (fascists!) but did he ever call for them to cut off people's heads and fingers? Did he massacre thousands to spread his word? Uh, no. He let his enemies them kill him. And he loved them. Lil' diff there.
Mohammed began his religion with mass murder. Does a rotten root really produce fine fruit? C'mon. It's rotten and doesn't fall far from the tree.
Jonah Goldberg, as usual has some insightful things to say:
We have a real problem when much of the political and journalistic establishment is eager to jump to the conclusion that peaceful political opponents are in league with violent extremists, but is terrified to consider the possibility that violent extremists really are violent extremists if doing so means calling attention to the fact that they are Muslims.
I am more sympathetic toward this reluctance to state the truth of the matter than some of my colleagues on the right. There is a powerful case to be made that Islamic extremism is not some fringe phenomena but part of the mainstream of Islamic life around the world. And yet, to work from that assumption might make the assumption all the more self-fulfilling. If we act as if "Islam is the problem," as some say, we will guarantee that Islam will become the problem. But outright denial, like we are seeing today, is surely not the beginning of wisdom either.
I have no remedy for the challenge we face. But I do take some solace in George Orwell's observation that "to see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."
He's is absolutely correct in saying we don't want to equate the radical Islamofascists with so-called "mainstream" muslims for fear of pushing them all into actually following the dictates of their faith. The mainstream that remains silent. The mainstream that follows the same books that call for our violent demise.
But at what point does this understandable strategy become self-destruction? Its not comfortable, it offends American's natural desire to be inclusive and it will enrage the the muslim population. But to pretend and ignore what is becoming a preponderance of evidence is suicide.
Or mass murder. And so we have Maj. Hasan:
He demonstrated that being a trained psychiatrist provides no immunity to ancient hatreds and religious fanaticism, nor does psychiatric training provide much acuity in spotting such things in others. For example, the London Telegraph reports that, in what was supposed to be a medical lecture, Hassan instead gave an hourlong briefing on the Koran, explaining to colleagues at Walter Reed Army Medical Center that nonbelievers should be beheaded, have boiling oil poured down their throats and set on fire.
His fellow psychiatrists completely missed this "red flag" -- a suddenly popular euphemism for incandescently obvious evidence this man had no place in the U.S. Army.
He proved how lacking our domestic security system is. According to ABC News, intelligence agencies were aware for months that Hasan had tried to contact Al Qaeda. His colleagues reportedly knew he sympathized with suicide bombings and attacks on U.S. troops abroad, and one colleague said Hasan was pleased by an attack on an Army recruiting office and suggested more of the same might be desirable. That's treason, even if you're a Muslim.
Which raises the most troubling revelation: For a very large number of people, the idea that he is a Muslim fanatic, motivated by other Muslim fanatics, was -- at least initially -- too terrible to contemplate. (Jonah Goldberg)