The Danger of Islam, Part 1

If you’ve ever heard about a little incident called “September 11^th,” I’d consider you acquainted with the misguided hatred that some Muslims seem to have for westerners, “infidels” and anyone who doesn’t pray to the Moon god--I mean Allah--five times a day.

I say “misguided” because the general policy of the west (towards pretty much anything) is “Live and Let Live,” although the Iraq (dare I call it) “War” seemed more about bringing America out of an economic slump than actually “getting the bad guys” and “solving the problem of Terrorism” or anything else.

And I pinned 9/11 on a band of Muslims because bin Laden’s boys have already (a long time ago, actually) taken the “credit” for the incident.

Some say that the bin Ladens of the world are the exception to the rule, in terms of “following Islam.”  (Meaning “They’re wrong, and Mohammed would lay the smack down on them if he could see what they’ve been up to in the past few years.”)

But the truth is that, while such terror-meisters are less common (numerically), and while there are seemingly more “exceptions” than rules to the theory that “Islam = Terror,” those deeply immersed in the Koranic verses must admit that the Osama bin Ladens of the world are “the rule.” Meaning “they’re the ones that Mohammed would consider shining examples of a True Muslim.”

Another “truth” is that westerners sometimes feel that 9/11 was predicated on the fact that (many) Muslims disapprove of the relative debauchery and immorality of the west, that Muslims’ hate of the west has to do with something they (the west) did, or an ideal westerners hold dear. The truth is, however, that their “distaste” for the west is based on two things: jealousy at the prosperity and relatively guiltless moral (and I used the word loosely) freedom of westerners (which they, themselves, would kill or die to have), and anger that someone had the gall to reject Islam, where “rejection” is “not accepting it,” even if the non-accepter never actually made a conscious choice against Islam.

(I just had an image of a world made up entirely of Muslims—and I do mean 100% Muslim. Would everyone get along? Would Osama and crew be happy now that they could go on with their lives, or would they get depressed that they had no real job anymore? Then again, didn’t the 4 Caliphs have some problems, even though they were, ostensibly, “on the same side” ? Ahhhh, brain freeze, I’m thinking too hard; back to the point at hand...)

You may be thinking “Well, what about the Euro Muslims, or the converts to Islam? How do you explain THEIR anger?”

Well, this anger of theirs is either inherited from their religious mentors and the “interesting” propaganda thereof, or based on a more accurate following of their religion.

Meaning, the non-Arab Whites and Blacks who get all hot and bothered if you badmouth Islam are--like Osama bin Laden--better examples of what a Muslim is… or should be.

Double Standard

Interestingly enough, some of the western ideals Muslims wish to deny infidels are freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I say “interesting” because western Muslims are using their rights TO these two freedoms to promote a “religion” that FORBIDS both  freedoms.

One can’t blame them, however, since it is to Islam that the Muslim’s loyalty is pledged. And it is to Jihad that Islam is pledged.

In fact, I was recently inspired to edit the Pledge of Allegiance. (For those who don’t know satire when you read it, be forewarned.)

I pledge allegiance to Islam, not the United States of America. And to the religion for which it slays, one people, under Allah, indivisible, no liberty or justice for non-Muslims.

Stay tuned for part 2 in this series, where I’ll expound upon this...

Sara Ghorab

Disclaimer: The articles published on this site represent the view of their writers.