Read it, it said almost exactly that.

"The entire religion of Islam is simply the violent ideology of a sixth century despot masquerading as a religious leader, which justifies endless war against anyone who opposes it and calls for the murder of unbelievers and apostates.
The truth is Islam is not like any other faith. It is the religious equivalent of fascism, and just because the followers of this savage belief were not the killers in this instance does not make them blameless.....
....Those who follow a violent religion that calls on them to murder us can not be surprised when someone takes them at their word and responds in kind."



He clearly says ALL who follow Islam. He says they are all fanatics. His speech did not include the words homosexual, Jews, free speech, or woman, you added that in it's entirety.

The dumb lie that no one condemns the destructive parts of islam is ludicrous. People are lining up to shoot Muslims over these usually ignored parts of the Koran, not egg them. Christianity has all the same requirements to murder non believers and apostates, the same violent prescriptions against women's rights, Jews, Homosexuals, atheists, inpious people, nonchristian people living where they want to, etc. and has actively done so for centuries, and it creates plenty of viciously violent fanatical terrorists too, obviously. Why does he not attack them as well?.....hmmmm.....since these related religions share so much of their doctrine, what's different about the average worshipper....hmmmmmmm......just can't put my finger on it.

Did you ever consider they ganged up on him because he's so incredibly anti American and destructive that anyone who cares about American Democracy would oppose him, Democrats, Republicans, independents, honest media, the intelligence community, law enforcement, etc? Probably not, you're convinced his party is turning on him because he's winning too much.

Lol. Steele dossier....the one that was just upheld in court when Trump's lible/slander cases were thrown out....or did you not know that?

Yes. It was the turn to backing him that was the wrong, self serving, proven short sighted move.

Trump has not sold out conservative principles, he's thrown them in the trash and shit on them. Clearly principles are NOT what you hang your hat on, he has none and you've admitted it privately.

The creature from the bronze lagoon was hardly the one to help clean up the swamp, and his most criminally convicted administration ever is pretty good proof of that.

That $80 you got goes away in a few years and becomes a raise in your taxes by around $160, in case you won't read the actual law. You didn't get a tax break, you got a tax raise and a 5 year loan packaged as a tax break, and you bought it. Trump, according to economists that studied his public holdings, stands to gain around $1 million per year forever....his tax breaks are permanent. Not what he said, but you don't care he outright lied to you about it for months, do you, yet one corrected mistake by Clinton (Benghazi was a protest over Koran burnings in America, quickly retracted) and you still think she'll be indicted for....something you're incapable of naming, but something.

Fuck, Bob. Your insistence on backing Trump's every move no matter what has made you bat shit insane, inconsistent, and totally disconnected from reality. I hope you can get therapy.

@gorillaman

The only thing I see failing completely is your absurd attempt at rationalizing your bigotry--more aptly labelled in this case by its proper name: Islamophobia. I don't for a second believe what I'm about to post will change your mind about Islam or Muslims in general but I do believe that this kind of bigotry needs to be called out when it rears its ugly head. And my, you went full ugly there, didn't you... comparing Muslims to rats and seriel killers? Classy.

Despite your protestations to the contrary, there are in fact Muslims who do not believe in God but for a variety of reasons (keeping peace with religious family members, maintaining a connection to their cultural heritage, networking, etc.) continue to attend services and identify as Muslims. This is true of many believers in all the major religions, including Christianity and Judaism.

You see, as much as you'd like Muslims to all be boogeymen coming to bring Sharia law down on the rest of world, anyone who has actually met and talked with a Muslim (and god-forbid actually visited one of the countries StukaFox listed) realizes that Muslims, like all people, are extremely diverse (again, despite your protestations to the contrary).

Indeed there are Sharia zealots. But there are also moderates and reformers and even liberal radicals. Mostly, though its just a lot of people trying to get on with their lives the best way they know how.

Now, I find most religious beliefs to be repugnant. However, I don't find the ideas expressed in the Koran to be much more repugnant than, say, the Bible. In fact, I'm less concerned about what is written in supposedly holy books and more concerned with how believers attempt to implement those ideas in reality. I do indeed find particular forms of this implementation, such as forcing women to wear a bhurka, disturbing (just as I find Christians' attacks on LGBT rights disturbing). It's important to note, though, that such practices are NOT universal. For example, in some Islamic countries like Malaysia it's enough to simply cover your hair with a colorful scarf.

On the other hand, other practices that you mentioned such as Female Genital Mutilation and virginity tests ARE NOT Islamic. FGM predates Islam and is still practiced in the locales where it originated (places such as Mali, for instance) that now happen to be Islamic majority areas. The Indonesian virginity tests as well do not stem from some universal commandment in Islam but from Indonesian culture which sees women as "the symbol of the nations moral guardians".

Again, I don't suppose any of this makes any difference to you. You want to see the world in black and white, us versus them, "rats" and "serial killers" versus you, the white knight who is just trying to save us all from our cultural relativistic blindness. And so the shades of grey I am describing to you will likely go overlooked. I would be happy to be proven wrong, but I suspect the reality is I'll receive some lengthy reply that can be distilled down to, "Islam bad, hur." Or perhaps, "All religions bad, but Islam worst, hur." To which I can only reply, that demonizing the practitioners of any particular religion is unlikely to bring about the reforms you seek.

Agreed all religious books hate gays, subjugate women and worse. But protect your Koran. Just don't ever pretend to be progressive or for equal rights. Not sure what happened to the old bareboards2, guess something changed. And btw, I don't remember everything, but I do remember people and their hearts. That part is so fucking easy I seriously think other people just don't care. I want equality, and that sometimes means people are equally full of shit--ie. religious texts. And also, no fucking way can someone defend it as being "interpreted differently by different people." Maybe a book says kill all the faggots and certain people would say it means kill them with kindness, but only a truly fucking ignorant person would think that about followers of that religion. I couldn't care less about prejudice against a book.

First, I always point out Christianity's faults, specifically Westborough and Mormon secs...it's like you listened to me for years, then decided to belligerently use something I said over and over again against me just because it felt good? I get that you can't remember everything we talk about, but the gist should be gotten at least.

Second, just like the Bible, the book itself is homophobic. Are there fantastic Muslims? Sure. Just like I am sure there are good Scientologists, which I am sure you must defend. But their religion is against psychology medication, period. Does that mean all practice it? No? Well shit, then their doctrine gets a free pass!

I spoke only of their book--not of them. You then support that book, so not sure if that qualifies as supporting Muslims in general (Hint, since I NEVER once said anything about Muslims themselves, you didn't actually defend them. That means you supported the literal doctrine of the Koran.)

So yeah...care to explain how your Progressive beliefs jive with the Koran?

The persecution of others to the exclusion of all but the primary religion is a tact shared with many major religions, and yes, Christianity has left its scorching mark upon humanity as a terrifying blot.

However, it is not, on this day, nor in these recent years, the acts of Christians, or Catholics that most burns a hole in our hearts and minds. Indeed, it is the acts of Radical Islamism, which is no more than a literal taking of their Koran brought to life by hate and malice.

And no, Islam is not a religion of peace, neither is Christainity-based religions for that matter. It is a matter of choice, and now, it is the choice of these Muslims, being great in number at this point in the Human Timeline, to continue the exploitation and caging of Women as sex slaves, to behead hundreds of thousands in the name of their God, and to spread their holy war to every corner of the globe until all is ruled by Islam.

That is fact, sir, as they(ISIS) have stated, as they show their brand of religion to state, as they act, and chose to carry forth action.

Sir, yes, all religions have committed to horrible deeds, but, it is always the purview of those of us that realize this to deny the growth of violence-via-religion, and now, in this day and age, that primary religion which we must stop from continuing violence is radicalized Islam.

I think we can agree that in the early ages of Islam it was very promising. Math, medicine, etc, all came from there.
That doesnt change how its interpreted today, and they even say themselves publicly that the Hadithes are more important than the Koran, because they show Muslims how to live Islam, yet they dont live after the things you mentioned for example. And honestly, I find the Hadithes much worse than the Koran, but both together make it very logical how Muslims act.
I never understood it before. For example I tried to make friends with a lot of them, even my dentist was one, but I never got really close to them. They never let me. Until I realized how disrespectful and insulting they talk about me and other "unbelievers", after I learned some Turkish and Arab words. And even still then for a long time after I thought "Its just these guys", but more and more experience with others, analyzing how they treat not only me, but all these "unbelievers" and ultimately the study of those writings was like a revelation. I was shocked, to put it mildly. It all fits together. Everything.

I'm impressed Unlike @newtboy, I don't automatically assume you're lying and feel compelled to do a bit more reading myself before discussing it further.

It's been a long time since I studied it at Uni, and even then we never studied the entire Koran (a one semester course would not have been sufficient for that).

There is, of course, some disagreement about what the hadiths say. The one that immediately springs to mind is "Seek knowledge even as far as China", and I'll quote the former prime minister of Malaysia here:{quote}A hadith says: “Seek knowledge even as far as China.” It was pointed out by detractors that this was just a saying of the Prophet and it was not a command from God. When they disagreed with a particular hadith, they were quick to discredit it and refused to acknowledge it as a source of Islamic teaching. But if they subscribed to it, then they would not cease to highlight it repeatedly, even if it’s authenticity is doubted. Surely seeking knowledge in China does not mean Islamic knowledge. During the Prophet’s period, China was also known to have deep knowledge in such fields as medicine, literature and paper, explosives and many others.{quote}

Certainly the early muslims were very keen on acquiring knowledge, and did indeed travel as far as China to do so (and brought the art of paper making back with them).

Ah, the usual apologistic crap and generalization while crying about generalization.

Sorry if I learned to not make myself much work to prove ignorant and idealistic extremist people like you facts. They get ignored anyway. Theres a simple search you have to do, if you know how to use the Internet. There you will get all the facts.

Facts are facts. If you like them or not. If you dont like them, you should become a politician.

You should have read my second comment. Read the Koran and the Hadithes before you spew out such bullshit. The Bible reads like a story, the Islamic writings read exactly like a manual, how to live Islam, and its a very successful indoctrination method, as you would know if you have ever something to do with Muslims and saw them how they act if they think non-believers dont watch them or hear them. Another thing that is described perfectly in the Hadithes, even with murder: Taqiyya. Not to mention that you cant compare the modern Christian world with the modern Islamic world. If you seriously compare them both (and yet I dont like ANY religion), then you just show how audacious you are to talk about things you have no clue about whatsoever. Stop wasting my time and inform yourself properly instead.

And yeah, not all Muslims are like that. But the vast majority and even the ones you think they wouldnt be that way, suddenly expose themselves as full blown Taqiyya users. Theres a few cases in German media right now, who they thought were well integrated, but they actually are extremely conservative Muslims.
If you knew any Muslims well, you would know you cant trust them, because lying to unbelievers and disrespecting them because of their lack of belief in Islam, is their duty as a good Muslim.
Maybe you will learn the hard way. If you reality denying leftists get your way, you surely will.

Best counter to this leftist propaganda is reading the Koran and the Hadithes for yourself.
But that is obviously too much work, or too much reality.

The problem is you have 30,000+ armed jihadist who follow a distorted literal interpretation of the Koran. Who cares what any book reads. It's the interpretation and actions in it's name that matters.

I would say that example is a false dichotomy. You're never going to find a case in Palestine or elsewhere in the world that someone blows themselves up purely for the religious reasons. There are clearly political and social motivations at play in every terrorist attack.

This relates directly to my main point though. Some some pundits want to use a suicide bombing in the West Bank as proof that Islam is "evil" or "dangerous" without addressing the elephant in the room--that the Palestinians are living in the world's "largest open-air prison" (to use Chomsky's words) and are resisting what they see as occupation of their lands in any way they can. It is no where near as simplistic as the "Muslims good/infidels bad cuz Koran says so" argument that some people seem to want to make.

And let's be clear, I'm not saying there aren't passages in the Koran that are being interpreted by Hamas and others as justification for the use of terrorism as an acceptable form of resistance. I'm saying this isn't unique to Islam. During the height of fighting in Northern Ireland both sides were using the Bible to justify the car bombs, assassinations, and other violence that occurred during The Troubles (another complex conflict where religious, political, and social issues intertwined). Yet I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who would claim that Christianity is "evil" or "dangerous" based on what went down in Northern Ireland. It is a great example, though, of how any organized religion can be mobilized to support evil acts.

Since you brought up unusual punishments, let's take stoning people for adultery (which exists in both the Koran and the Bible). When was the last time someone was stoned to death by a group in the U.S., U.K., Australia, or even Malaysia for adultery? Hundreds of millions of Muslims and Christians around the world seem perfectly fine ignoring that part of their holy texts. Just because something that we find distasteful today is written in the holy text doesn't automatically make the religion evil nor does it suddenly force the practioners to behave like savages.

You need to look at the specifics. Take a look at the countries where stoning actually does still occasionally happen and who actually carries it out: Iran, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan. Invariably when it does occur it happens in rural areas where there are people who still actually live like it is the middle ages, with extreme poverty and little education to speak of (other than religious). Sure, the book gave them the idea but it wasn't the only factor in play and to ignore these other factors or the fact that honor killings are in fact common across a wide number of cultures with varying religious backgrounds (even the Romans did it) is what would be truly intellectually dishonest.

As for extremists--they exist in all religions including Christianity. It wasn't a mob of Muslims who attacked Charlie Hedbo--it was two deranged individuals. And while some Muslims might have applauded the attack others denounced it, such as the hunderds of thousands of Chechen protestors who who were upset with the cartoons but didn't think violence was the right response (see article here).

Again, it's a complex issue that can't be boiled down to "Islam = Good/Bad." Islam as practiced by ISIS or Boko Haram? Yeah, there's some dark shit going on there. Islam as practiced by average citizens in Kuala Lumpur or Boston? Not so much.

But again, moderate statements based on reason and facts are not what sell books, generate online clicks, or fill lecture halls to capacity.

Attacking the religious text is a strawman in my opinion.

There's all sorts of outrageous (by modern standards) stuff in the Bible, Koran, Talmud, and other major religious texts. How could there not be? They were written hundreds to thousands of years ago at a time when reading and writing was limited to the wealthy or elite (i.e. priest classes). Much of that stuff is outright ignored or at the very least acknowledged by deemed less important by practitioners of those religions in modern societies.

All literature is open to interpretation and this includes religious texts. The fact that there are tens of thousands of denominations of Christianity with differing opinions about what it means to be Christian and how to behave as one gives testament to this. While there aren't as many named denominations in Islam, if you actually look at how it is practiced locally in say urban Malaysia (i.e. no Bhurka for women) compared with rural Afghanistan (i.e. full body covering required) you can see there's huge diversity there as well.

So if you want to judge the religion, then you actually have to take the time to make an informed opinion by looking at who does what and why they do it. And when you do that, you tend to find that there's this complex inter-relationship between religious teachings, economics, politics, ethnicity, history and so on which make it difficult to assign full blame to any one "thing" such as religion. The female genital mutilation example I used above makes this pretty clear.

Sticking solely with criticising the religious text puts a critic on very unsure footing, as at the end of the day all the critic is really doing is criticizing a specific interpretation of the text (i.e. their own understanding). That's why, as I said, it's something of a strawman argument since you're really arguing against an interpretation you yourself have created.

It is much better, in my opinion, to look at how specific groups are interpreting and enacting the text, and then criticizing their actions (or the effects of their actions) in the event that there is a negative effect. But in doing so I think it quickly becomes apparent that those actions are almost always enacted locally as opposed to globally. In other words, they are the actions of a specific group of people in a specific place at a specific time who have been influenced by all the factors (history, economics, etc.) I mentioned above.

And when you reach that conclusion you realize you're not criticizing Islam anymore, you're criticizing one groups' interpretation and enactment of Islam in specific context.

On the other hand, if you ask which type of criticism gets you more views on TV or more headlines in newspapers...

They didn't have any problem mocking Jesus, but they sure did shy away from blowing up the Koran in that opening sequence...