Churchill's struggle

Submitted by Rebecca Moulds (United States), Feb 21, 2008 at 21:13

Having only read parts of the Koran hardly makes me an expert on Islam, but I think I understand Churchill's point, (perhaps he was comparing how an ideology can grow into terrorism) although banning the Koran or Islam or any religion just doesn't work. The reason there is "Western hostility to the Koran" (quoting Daniel Pipes) is that is represents Islam, and most people know that there is a growing surge of radical Islamists coming from normative Islam.

The attacks of 9/11 were perpetrated from these radical types from this religion. They were not Buddhists, Animists, Jews, Christians, or other religious zealots. They were Muslims, who got it into their heads that America is evil and has to be obliterated in order to establish a world-wide Caliphate. Most suicide bombers are Muslim, although always the radical type, blowing themselves up along with innocent bystanders. There is no greater religion in this day and age that is more feared--or perhaps misunderstood?--- than Islam.

Unfortunately, the gap seems to be narrowing between radical Islam and normative Islam, and the greatest fear is that Islam really does want to take over the world. That Winston Churchill was intelligent and insightful is irrefutable; comparing Mein Kamph the the Koran, however, may be disputable.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".