The Difference Among the "Abrahamic" Religions

Submitted by Ludvikus (United States), Feb 1, 2015 at 06:36

I think your points are well taken, and cab be summarized by saying that the Melting Pot in the United State is working, and minorities get Assimilated over time much better here that in Europe.

I would even say that this that such assimilations even works well - over time - wherever the British Empire spread or the Union Jack flew - except among the Muslims or Islam. Look at England, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South African, India, Israel, and finally the United States, etc. I will not spell out the Muslim countries were peace and democracy haven't taken root and Arab Spring has turned into a Muslim Nightmare.

If you look at the Old Testament, which the Jews call the Torah, you will find that the ancient Jews were not different than the Muslims of the founding Seventh, and subsequent centuries. But the Jews weren't a violent people after their expulsion from the Holy Land by the Romans - until they sought an escape from European anti-semitism, especially that of the French, and started to return to the Mandate of Israel. In that respect Islam first asserted its "anti-Colonialism" against this Jewish "return." It is to be noted that the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was a British WWI strategy against the Axis powers. Furthermore, after Europe's (not merely Germany's) "incomplete" Holocaust, the European and Communist dominated United Nations recognized the need to recognize the State of Israel - against the opposition of the Muslim Arabs and other members of the religion of Islam. That was in 1948. After 1967, when Muslim Egypt and Muslim Jordan lost their Occupied Palestine, and Israel acquired these Liberated Territories which had been conquered by Egypt and Jordan, the United Nations decided to continue the recommendation that there be an additional Arab-Palestinian state besides Jordan. And in that vein the current United States policy is in agreement with United Nations member states that non-Israeli Palestine be 100 % free of Jews; that Jews are not to settle in "Palestinian" land which wasn't Israel before 1967. This is a new application of the principles behind Ghettoes and Ethnique Cleansing; Israel, effectively is the new Ghetto or "Pale of Settlement" and Jews are prohibited by "International Law" from living as residents in the Disputed Territories like Gaza or the West Bank; furthermore, there will be no need to "cleans ethnically" the "Occupied [Palestinian] Territories" - because these are to remain from the start, free, clean, of the ethnicity, known as Jew or Israeli.

But Europe now is faced by the reality that it was blind to until now, and still refuses to call it by its proper name. Europe is full of what European call Muslim Immigrants - even though in fact these populations should be called Arab and Muslim Colonies which do not assimilate. These Colonies are more like the Europeans of the Americas - they wish to supplant the indeginious populations and cultures and replace them with their own. Women are to be dressed modestly; first prohibit the length of the miniskirt, and later adopt the Niqba: http://theagenda.tvo.org/sites/default/files/Pond5_5435143.jpg And suppress the Freedom of the Press by prohibiting images of The Prophet. Religion must be repected - clearly an anti-Enlightenment idea, since European mores require merely religious Toleration, meaning the right to practice one's religion as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others, including Deists, Agnostics, Atheists, Feminists, and Homosexuals.

Christianity also had a violent past - as in the Middle Ages - in the Time of the Crusades. And of course, the West gets continuously accused of engaging in Crusades against Islam and Muslim countries, even though wars in the name Christ have ceased quite some time ago, and have been replaced by Imperial Wars.

Yet what George Orwell dubbed Doublethink exists among Muslim. We are told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace" and that "Jihad" does not mean "Holy War," even though we now see that in former Syria and Iraq an Islamic Caliphate has been established not quite too peacefully, but in the name of Jihad no doubt.

So I object to the distinction of Ideology being manifest in what allegedly isn't "true Islam" and needs to be called "Islamist." George Orwell didn't really use the term "Doublespeak"; but the term has been coined. And though I agree with very much of what Daniel Pipes writes, I think that he's unwittingly engaging in Dpublespeak when he takes Muslims off the hook by telling us all about "Islamist" as opposed to "Islam." It is generally believed, I imagine, that Daniel Pipes isn't himself a Muslim, so it's not for him to say what an evolving contemporary living religion is. That should be left to practicing Muslims - who are to be placed in the position of defending the true nature of Islam by expelling the cancer within their populations. And this kind of disease doesn't require Doctors with No Borders. It requires Cops, the FBI, the CIA, Interpol, Scotland Yard, and, unfortunately, something like our Patriot Act that puts limits on the Privacy Rights of Citizens in this Age of the Internet. It all began with the climax of 9/11 in 2001 when 19 Islamic, as opposed to Islamist, Muslims successfully and catastrophically, engaged in a Jihad against the United States. Are they now in Paradise enjoying 1,368 Virgins (72 for each of the 19)?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks#mediaviewer/File:North_face_south_tower_after_plane_strike_9-11.jpg

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".