Don't revise the Koran; deep-six it!

Submitted by Nick4693 (Japan), Aug 1, 2009 at 23:06

As I have said elsewhere, ALL religions are utter nonsense. They were premised on age-old, pagan myths and legends now lost in obscurity, nevertheless, to debunk a faith, one must of necessity go back to its roots. 'When one researches the origins of Islam, it should be apparent to those of sound mind that it was founded by a self-proclaimed "prophet" of unsound mind -- Mohammed.

While the historicity of god and Jesus, which could prove their existence, is NIL, at least there is a historicity of Mohammed, which provides much evidence of his evil character.

He was an epileptic; not his fault, of course, but not all epileptics choose during their lucid moments to follow the path which he chose to do. He was the epitome of evil.

One must of course, go back to the days of the 6th and 7th centuries which produced this human aberration. Many were simple desert-dwellers, more concerned with scraping out a living than anything else. Religions, all phoney, were rife, and Mohammed, in reality, was no different to the phoneys that take to the airwaves these days -- televangelists.

If people with their present-day level of education can be so easily taken in by these frauds today, one can imagine how much more easy it was to do the same thing 1,400 years ago, when most in Arabia were goat or sheep-herders or lived an agrarian existence.

Most will say that they would never be tricked by the dozens of charlatans who simply want your money. Yet people, somewhere, somehow, in their droves, continue to donate millions to these fraudsters each year.

Thus, it should not be too difficult to understand how poor, ignorant Arabs were seduced by the lies and sweet talk of the first Islamists, who told them exactly what they wanted to hear.

There were provisos, however. They had to toe the "party" line and do as they were told, without exception. Obviously, and with little to consider and even less to lose, they formed the vanguard of Mohammed's gang of robbers and cutthroats, which roamed Arabia in those early days, attacking unarmed caravans and isolated desert settlements, first killing off all the males, then plundering. looting, and raping to their hearts' content until they had satisfied their lust and bloodlust.

In such manner was Mohammed able to fund his "new religion" and keep his followers in line. All could have four wives; he, as leader, had 12. Of the females taken in their possession, they were shared out as sex slaves. His take of the loot was 20%, double theirs, because he was custodian of god's share.

And many call this a religion with noble causes and honorable intent?

"Islam is a peaceful religion," said gullible Tony Blair, who proudly stated that he had two copies of the Koran at his bedside. Thankfully, he's gone, but his insane legacy of uncontrolled immigration and multiculturalism lingers on, while Muslims declare many areas in London as no-go areas to infidels and blatantly refuse to assimilate, quickly turning what were nice residential areas into slums and ghettoes.

It gets worse. Prince Charles, the UK's court jester, who has a penchant for putting his foot in his mouth, had this to say about London's 7/7 bombing. "As I understand it, Islam preaches humanity, tolerance and a sense of community.... It is for this reason that so many Muslims have been quick to condemn these and other atrocities."

As far as I remember, Muslims took to the streets, dancing with joy! Perhaps Charles and I are talking about two different planets.

It is indeed ironic that the simple truth I write here will quickly be lost in cyberspace, while the "profound" words of these two idiots will "bring comfort to many" for a long time to come.

No, Jim, I do NOT think that the Koran badly needs a revision; it needs to be deep-sixed.

---

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".