Response to Naimat Khan

Submitted by Crusader (Canada), Sep 27, 2006 at 21:38

Mr khan... Making a comparison between Islam's blood soaked history and the rest of the religions is preposterous and insane.

It also boggles my mind that you fanatics in order to rationalize and justify murderous acts of violence on innocent citizens hark back centuries(even upto BC). Lets compare apples with apples and talk about contemporary times and see who is doing all the kiiling and mayhem TODAY, after all, aren't we all living in the present time and shouldn't that concern us most. By your illogic, if the ancestor of your neighbour killed one of your ancestors then you have the inherent right and moral justification to kill his descendant.

In Islam, the more blood you have on your hands, the more points you score to be rewarded in heaven(with an orgy of virgins). All other religions on the other hand promise you punishment and eternal damnation for taking the life of another human being. That is the core difference between Islam and the rest of the world. ...The rest of us non-Moslems believe in a God who is loving and merciful and not a blood-thirsty and vengeful God...

On a final note, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq would not have occurred if 9/11 had not occurred. The United States was in neither of these countries before 9/11 and in fact President Bush was elected on the platform that he wanted to limit America's role abroad. So who was the spark that ignited this current quagmire? Well, you guessed it; blood-thirsty, savage and immoral co-Islamists.

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".