and the debate goes on..

Submitted by gellin&infidellin (Canada), Feb 5, 2007 at 11:58

Following is a sample list of atrocities showing how peace-loving and tolerant Muslims are.

Blew up three Israelis at a bakery.

Slashed the throat of a non-Muslim teenager in Thailand.

Butchered a Buddhist man in Thailand as he drove his 7-yearold son home from school. Murdered a teacher on her way to a girl's school in Baghdad. Gunned down an "infidel" advocate for the victims of Armenian genocide in Turkey. Slaughtered at least 70 students at a mostly women's university in Baghdad, using a car bomb followed by a suicide bomber on foot to kill survivors. Murdered a married couple in Thailand, pinning a note to the beheaded body of the husband reading, "We kill all Buddhists." Beat to death an Indonesian police officer at a funeral for a fellow terrorist. Beheaded a newspaper journalist in Pakistan. Beat to death a Christian with a metal bar in Ethiopia. Shot and set on fire two Buddhist teachers in Thailand. Killed three Afghan police officers with a bomb. Decapitated 26 Afghan men and strung their bodies from trees. Killed 15 civilians in Chad, including a man who was disemboweled and a woman set on fire. Hacked to death a Hindu leader in India.

Blew up a passer-by outside the U.S. Consulate in Peshawar, Pakistan, using a bicycle bomb.

Blew up two dozen innocents at a Shia wedding in Baghdad.

We are at war with an enemy that is driven by a religion that is far from peaceful. And the battlefront is worldwide, in what looks more and more like a clash of civilizations — the "mujahedeen" of pan-Islam vs. the "infidels" of the West. We don't divide the war that way, but they do. And that's the problem.

For us, this is a technical war, one from which we hope to quickly extract ourselves so we can go about our business. For them, it's a perpetual holy war, led by fanatics who are patient, counting on us tiring of the fight as it becomes too savage and costly.

Where are the imagined "moderate muslims that are bandied about? I perused Dr. Pipes bibliography and couldn't help but notice how superficial and dated it is. The few thousand moderates named there are going to do battle with CAIR as it transforms every law on the books? This debate is wearing thin on the realists.

As the murder and grizzly mayhem increases with every day and we hear less and less from the "theoretical" moderates. I can easily form the conclusion that if there are "moderates" then why haven't their cries been heard? Why is the violence increasing? If there are "moderates" it is quite obvious that their work against the militants has been for naught.

The world reels under this absolute evil as its frequency and horror increases every minute of every day unabated.

Dear Dr. Pipes. The moderate angle is finished, kaput, bin-dare-done-dat. No good has come of the moderate angle. Its only purpose is to allow the militants to buy time. It infuriates them and pushes them harder.

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".