Michael, you have it entirely wrong!

Submitted by Noah Wilk (United States), Jan 8, 2007 at 05:13

Michael, you have it all wrong, and much of this we've already covered in other threads. First, you wrote:

"In 2006 (For heaven's sake) I heard a respected preacher yell from the front, that, if you do not believe in the Christian God, you will " BURN IN HELL". it is the duty of the church to "save the non-believers and make them Christians."

And what happens to you when Christians try to convert you and you refuse? They go off and pray for your soul. They don't enslave you or cut off your head or force you to convert at the tip of a sword! Yes, there was a time that Christianity was like that, but it is now civilized. Christianity started peacefully, became violent at one point, and then became civilized and peaceful and has remained that way ever since. Islam on the other hand has always been violent, from its inception to the current day.

Next, and here is where your greatest misunderstanding of the situation comes from, you wrote:

"Depending on my own personal viewpoint, I can find in the Q'uran as well as the Bible paragraphs and statements supporting my individual opinion"

Yes, you do indeed find violent verses in the Bible. In the Old Testament.

What you seem not to realize is that in Christianity, the New Testament supercedes the Old Testament. Where we once had "an eye for an eye" in the Old Testament, Jesus Christ comes along in the New Testament with "turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy".

In Islam, it is the exact opposite. The later, more violent additions supercede any earlier, peaceful ones.

That is why your comparison is flawed and inaccurate.

Finally, you wrote:

"It is the other 15% I am so scared of. And yes, the Islamic 15% is much more dangerous, as the Q'uran is indeed much more radical and aggressive in its writing."

That "10%-15%" claim is hotly disputed, and as I have written elsewhere defies both common sense and reality as proven by the actions of Muslims, polls, surveys, events, etc. The number is more probably several times higher. But let's work with your 15% claim, for sake of argument.

Let's go with the lowest claimed number of Muslims in America from amongst the most accurate estimates we have. That would be, and Dr. Pipes has publicly agreed, about 2 million Muslims in the USA. Some claim higher, some lower. But let's go with only 2 million in the USA and only 15% of them being violent. Given those low-end claims, that would produce a literal standing army of 300,000 barbaric, depraved, violent Jihadists/terrorists within the United States. I say a literal standing army, because that's what it is. Britian has roughly 213,000 troops in its military, and France has about 241,000 combined from its army, navy, and air force.

Given your minimalist numbers, that still produces the equivalent of the entire British or French military forces standing as an enemy army right here on our own soil! Think about that! And remember that where the British or French would fight honorably, this standing Islamic Army in our midst would prefer to fly airplanes into skyscrapers, gas subways, kill innocent, unarmed civilians (including women and children) with their suicide vests, and ignite nuclear weapons on entire cities. They believe in beheading and torturing prisoners, gang raping captured women (even female children!), and so on.

I would argue that there are more than 2 million Muslims in America and that far more than 15% of them are violent, or eager to see violence against the USA. Based on polls done elsewhere, I'd guess that the actual number is about double, which would give us 600,000 evil Muslims residing in this country, waiting to do us harm. That would be akin to the entire South Korean Army sitting in our cities waiting to attack!

People need to wake up, and soon!

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".