Islam: Why the Violence? This article follows History and Origins: The Life of Muhammad. See also The Quran: Verses of Violence The only thing more shocking than the ridiculous level of violence coming out of the Islamic world is the genuine indifference shown by most of those Muslims who are not directly involved. Though the number of terrorists is relatively small, they are sustained by the apathy of hundreds of millions, even in the heart of the Western world. One of the biggest questions asked in the aftermath of 9/11 was, “Where’s the outrage?” as Americans had trouble understanding why Muslims did not act as people of other religions would have in the wake of a horrific mass murder committed in the name of their faith. The simple fact is that Islam is not like other religions. The roots of the faith, the history, and the teachings from basic texts compel both the violence and the broad indifference that sustains it. Despite the drive that Westerners have to believe that other people are just like them, and that other religions are just like theirs, it is anti-intellectual to ignore the stark evidence that demands otherwise. Abu Ala Maududi, the founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, puts it this way in his book, Jihad in Islam: Islam is not a normal religion like the other religions in the world, and Muslim nations are not like normal nations. Muslim nations are very special because they have a command from Allah to rule the entire world and to be over every nation in the world. Islam is a revolutionary faith that comes to destroy any government made by man. Islam doesnt look for a nation to be in better condition than another nation. Islam doesnt care about land or who owns the land. The goal of Islam is to rule the entire world and submit all of mankind to the faith of Islam. Any nation or power in this world that tries to get in the way of that goal Islam will fight and destroy. In order for Islam to fulfill that goal, Islam can use every power available every way it can be used to bring worldwide revolution. This is jihad. This truth is so disturbing to some non-Muslims that they are willing to do anything they can to deny it. They latch on to whatever reflects the faintest glimmer of their own value system in Islam, usually by ignoring the teaching and listening exclusively to those who have a vested interest in the advancement of Islam, yet are sophisticated enough to disguise its true nature of the religion with a palatable facade. Clever “fifth column” groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), have learned that multiculturalists can be easily manipulated with tactical language that includes broad, but ultimately meaningless, “condemnations against terror” and periodic declarations that “innocents” are not legitimate targets for Jihadis. Although fooling some into believing what they want to believe, astute observers recognize that these groups almost never define their key terms, such as “terror attacks” and “innocents,” and that a tiny minority of attacks are specifically denounced. CAIR, for example, only acknowledged eighteen acts of terror in the four years following 9/11 – less than 1/2 of 1% of the actual number of documented attacks. So what explains the violence and the level of comfort that many Muslims have with those who kill in the name of Allah? Given that Islam’s founder was a military leader who personally conducted terror attacks on caravans, led offensive battles against communities in order to steal and subjugate, who took slaves, broke truces, supervised the execution of captives, advocated the murder of Jews, and even advised his warriors on raping women captured in battle, the wonder is that there isn’t more violence than we see today. Immediately following Muhammads death, the Religion of Peace turned against itself in a bloody fratricide that continues to this day in the form of sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni. Muhammads own companions and relatives fought each against other. Three of the first four caliphs were murdered, and many other early Muslims lost their lives including the nearest members of Muhammads family. The first act by the first successor to the Prophet of Islam, Abu Bakr, was to wage war against Arabian tribes who did not want to be Muslim anymore. Obviously they had converted under duress and did not feel obliged to stay following Muhammads death. Thousands were slaughtered until they submitted once again to the Religion of Peace. Muhammad’s martial philosophy against unbelievers has been faithfully practiced by his followers, who obeyed his commands to wage Jihad (holy war), and succeeded in spreading Islam by the sword throughout the Middle East, Central Asia, North Africa and well into Europe. Unlike the Crusades, for example, which were founded on papal proclamation and not Christian scripture, there are literally dozens of verses in the Qur’an that exhort violence against people who do not follow the ways of Allah as dictated by Muhammad, and only a handful that could be construed as suggesting tolerance. There are literally hundreds more that speak of hate toward unbelievers Unfortunately, the more violent verses were spoken later in Muhammads life, which leads most Islamic scholars to believe that they abrogate the handful of earlier, more tolerant ones (as is the tradition with other parts of the Quran that are in contradiction). Muhammad and his followers did not have power over the people around them at the time that the more peaceful verses were spoken. As the balance of power shifted, so did the strategy of winning detractors over, from the use of deception, murder, intimidation and outright military force. These militant verses, combined with Wahabbi teachings (a radical and violent strain of Islam), are being drummed into the heads of children in religious schools called madrasses well before they are able to develop an independent moral character. Radical mosques throughout the globe do their best to reinforce rigid personalities that are unable to see the world in anything other than dualistic terms, where there is only Dar al-Salaam (the believers) and Dar al-Harb, which literally means “the house of war” and refers to those outside the faith. The goal of existence, according to the Qur’an, is a struggle for Islamic domination by any means – including deceit and terror, which were both practiced by Muhammad. The world must submit to Allah. There is no other point to life, and this explains the near absence of cultural and technological innovation on the part of Muslims in history, who merely borrowed from the hapless souls they conquered. Knowledge outside of religious teachings is not encouraged, except as it contributes to Islamic goals. This dual nature of Islam is responsible not only for the astonishing apathy toward the victims of Islamic violence on the part of those affected by the religions attitude toward those outside the faith, but it also explains the dismal condition of Muslim countries. Political freedom and civil rights are distinctly lacking and there is little economic opportunity. Although Islam comprises about a fifth of the world’s population, for example, the Arab countries combined have an annualized non-oil GDP that is less than the state of Louisiana. Islam has proven itself incapable of building societies in which Muslims themselves want to live, as evidenced by the modern day trend in immigration between Islam and the West, which is decidedly one-way. Despite the stated confidence that Islam is the supreme and perfect religion, Muslims have always preferred life in countries built by those of other faiths. The Middle East before the time of Muhammad was mostly made up of Jewish and Christian communities – in addition to some who practiced pagan and polytheistic religions. Within a century, these people were brought under the heel of rulers who had no interest in them beyond what could be squeezed from them in the form of the jizya (tax on unbelievers). Slowly, the subjugated began to lose their cultural identity under the pressures of a brutal system that discriminated against them even to the point of stealing their children to make them into Fedayeen warriors in foreign campaigns. Entire populations were consumed. Most felt they had no choice but to convert to Islam, sacrificing their religion, identity and culture to their masters. Once a person professes Islam, they can only recant on penalty of death. The system is also skillfully set up to ensure demographic triumph by allowing a Muslim man to marry women outside the faith, provided that the children are to be raised Muslim. By feeding on conquered populations, Muhammads heirs fulfilled his mandate for the military expansion of Islamic rule with an unquenchable appetite, quickly threatening the very center of the Christian world, Constantinople. The first attempted siege of this city in 670 exposes the biggest fib that that contemporary Muslims like to tell about Islams military advance, namely that it was only as a result of self-defense. In fact, there were no Byzantine armies threatening Muslims when the fifth caliph, Muawiya, struck at the capital of the eastern Christian world. The citizens of Constantinople were surprised by the naval attack, even though they were well-prepared to defend against it. (The same could not be said for the hapless Persians and Buddhists of central Asia, who were quickly clobbered). More importantly, following the humiliating defeat of the Muslims at Constantinople, there were no Christian armies marching into the vacuum to capture land, as might have been expected had there truly been an aggressive threat to Islam. The siege of the city, like the many other campaigns of Muslim aggression was about Jihad and the spread of Islamic rule. In the west, Islamic fighters invaded Europe and conquered Spain. Attempting to overrun the rest of Europe, they were finally stopped by Charles Martel at Tours, but not before burning and plundering abbeys, churches and homes - and subjecting their occupants to a horrible fate. In the East, the empire quickly expanded into the heart of the Indian subcontinent, taking an awful toll on Hindu and Buddhist lives as well as the destruction of their beautiful temples. All this a mere century after Muhammad’s death by those who knew him best. Such was the violent legacy left by the prophet of Islam. Through horrific massacres and cultural cannibalism, Islam maintained a stranglehold on its occupied territory. The reactive Crusades that followed, as well as the Mongol invasions, were mere setbacks in the religion’s insatiable quest for imperial expansion. Constantinople eventually fell in 1453, well after the Crusades. Three days of looting, raping and killing followed, as soldier and citizen alike were butchered. Entire families waited in their homes for death or slavery. Churches were ransacked and burned, and a significant part of Christian and Greek heritage in the form of relics and ancient text were completely destroyed. Jihad and genocide threatened Europe for the next two centuries until the Muslims were finally stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683 by a determined Christian army of Poles, Austrians, Lithuanians, Germans and others. If not for their victory, and that of Frances Charles Martel on the slopes of the Pyrenees nearly a thousand years earlier, the lights of civilization would have been dimmed and the continent overrun before the great contributions to science and medicine could be made. None of the technology that improves the quality of life for billions in the world would have been possible had the vision of Jihad succeeded. The medicine that we take for granted (that we ship to Islamic countries when they face natural disasters, for example) would not have been discovered, and the miracles of modern science would never have seen the light of day had the Prophet’s followers been able to take the rest of Christian Europe. Since the religion discourages art, it can be assumed that there would have been no great Renaissance, as there has never been such in the Muslim world, and generations of scholars would have been limited to studies of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Islam’s mandate to consume and dominate religion and culture means that there is little if any emphasis placed on advancing knowledge or improving life for future generations. Submission to Allah is the only mandate and Jihad is the highest duty. Academic contributions that are often attributed to Muslims, such as the mathematical concept of zero, were actually borrowed and preserved from the civilizations and people they destroyed, much as a looter might keep the ill-gotten gain that he finds useful. Beyond religion and death, the Islamic world has never made a single significant contribution to the planet. In contrast to other religion, the most devoted Muslims on earth are usually the most dangerous. Other Muslims often use words to distinguish these purists from themselves, such as Salafi or radical, but at the end of the day, it is these fundamentalists who better know the history, Quran and other sacred texts of their faith. Moderates who condemn violence do not win theological debates against their more devout counterparts. In part, it is this ignorance of Islam that explains why most Muslims, particularly in the West, do not believe that theirs is a violent religion. They are removed from the true teachings of Islam and rely on others, such as family members or friends, to convey what their religion is supposed to be. Often the result is a moral framework that mimics the Judeo-Christian tradition, but is based on a tenuous foundation of wishful thinking and minor episodes from the life of Muhammad that are relatively insignificant or found in later historical accounts that are considered to be unreliable by true scholars. Muslims are a broad and diverse group. As such, the Muslim individual should never be stereotyped under any circumstances on the basis of religion. If any judging is necessary, then (as with all persons) it should be based only on an individuals words and deeds - not their group identity. This does not mean that Islam is an acceptable ideology. The violent history and bigoted teachings of the faith, particularly the dual nature whereby non-Muslims are less than equal, is very much a threat regardless of the best intentions of the best Muslims. There is a reason why there are no apologies. Islam is not a religion that invites introspection within itself or true dialogue with other faiths. Despite the millions of victims of Jihad over the centuries, there are no memorials to lost lives and lost cultures to be found anywhere in the Muslim world. This even includes the Armenian genocide of the 20th century, which claimed over a million innocents. Whereas Western religion often inspires humility, Islam breeds personal superiority. Though rare exceptions certainly exist, the Islamic community is generally characterized by arrogance and indifference to the lives and welfare of unbelievers. Unless it occurs directly to them, there is nothing that approaches true rage over terror in the name of Allah or honest sympathy for its victims. Muhammads legacy was a political ideology that commands its followers to fight those outside the faith until they either convert to Islam or accept complete subjugation to Islamic rule. There simply is no such thing as an innocent infidel exempt from the threat of death - except those who demean themselves to subordinate status and pay the jizya to Muslim masters. Armed with religious teachings, todays terrorists are merely continuing what was begun by their prophet
Posted on: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 23:30:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015