You read history Mohammed Klaus

Submitted by Dharma (United States), Feb 2, 2011 at 21:35

You say Islam did not spread by the sword, why then is Islam limited to where the Arab armies/traders reached ? You say that you are required to preach the religion and spread the word, yet, when others do not want to listen to it, and just live their lives you find it necessary to spread it by force of arms or allurements. Looks like all Mohammedans actually lead a unspiritual and debased life, and are trying to buy their way out by making more people similarly debased as themselves.

Islam verily spread with the threat of death (North Africa, Levant, Persia, Central Asia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, parts of India) under the Arab armies or by monetary inducements (Malaysia, Indonesia, parts of India).

When you dismiss that spread of ... Islam has happened through force of arms/money rather than by change of heart and uplifted spirituality, by saying that "granted it has happened", you forget that between them India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia account for ~45% of total population of Mohammedans. And in all of these places it spread by the sword or by force of money where non-Mohammedans had to pay jizya.

You Mohammedans claim that Christians worship Christ, and denigrate them, yet when non-Mohammedans draw cartoons depicting the truth of what Islam is you get angry, and kill people (often your own) and ask for vengeance. Why should you do that, he was just another mortal human, why would you all do it if you do not believe that the kaffirs are insulting your God ? For Mohammedans, Mohammed is the God, however much you deny it.

The life of Mohammed expressly describes how he killed people (or asked others to do so), fought wars, plundered others' wealth and women, yet to you he is a prophet and the chosen one of your so-called merciful Allah. In no other religion major or minor did their main preachers of the word of God have to resort to butchery and bestiality to spread the spiritual truths.

Jesus, the Buddha, the Jain Tirthankaras, Zarathustra, the innumerable sages of the Hindus, not even the Ba'ab (who came after Mohammed), no one, not one of them have ever been indicted by anyone (not even by the Mohammedans themselves), much less written about, as being killers, rapists, plunderers and generally debased.

And still you wonder why the Mohammedans are so poorly off ? Mohammedans are devil worshipers, because only the Devil (Satan) has all the epithets that Mohammed had, both in his preachings (irrational, worldly inducements to the so-called faithful, self-contradictory ayats in the Koran) and in the way he lived his life (war-mongering, bestiality, thievery, and generally being intolerant and mortally violent). It is but natural that the rest of the World regards Mohammedans as ... violent. If you folks haven't get got to grips with this, then the rest are not to blame !

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".