…and everywhere else we can squeeze in a rig.

.
.
.
Oh, wait… the fuzzy little animals…

so suggesting a reformation of the Qur’an effectively strips Allah of his divinity. Doubtful, at best, that Muslims will undertake this. awake on July 2, 2007 at 12:42 PM

You get it. There’s not an ouce of wiggle room with Islam. It’s all in or you’re dead/enslaved. Muslims simply cannot have a dialogue about religion because they view their religion as above scrutiny. Islam has been the death of reason, thought, and conscience wherever it exists.

The requisite “reformation” of Islam, for it to be considered compatible with any and all things and people’s non-Islamic is also tenuous at best. The main reason is that unlike the “testaments” found in Christianity, testaments by men bearing witness to the times, the Qur’an is perceived to be the direct immutable words of Allah, so suggesting a reformation of the Qur’an effectively strips Allah of his divinity. Doubtful, at best, that Muslims will undertake this.

That’s excellent point and I agree with the observation that Muslim world conquered through violence. I’m merely musing that when Mohommed did it, he was able to directly put his hands on the spoils, resultant from his actions. Today, that is less direct benefit. I am inclined to think that expansion of Islam is not the number one function of terrorism.

What he is saying would not change the attitude or barbarism in Sharia law or nations ruled by Sharia law. What he is saying is that a new view of the world would include an additional acknowledgment of a land of co-existence.

If you don’t think that qualifies as a reformation (which apparently some commentors think you can only have one…ever, which I would suggest Christianity has morphed it’s entire existence) or if you conclude that Butt is saying it’s necessary to disregard the books, then perhaps one would come to that conclusion.

Islam thinks terror is moral because their Prophet Mohammed, the perfect Muslim, used terror to establish Islam: assassinating critics, robbing caravans, beheading hostages. When modern terrorists assassinate Theo Van Gogh for making a film critical of Islam, skyjack jumbo jets, and behead infidels on snuff videos, they are following the evil example of Mohammed.

Mohammed began the never-ending jihad against the world in his lifetime. Most of the Muslim world was conquered through violence, following Mohammed’s dictum to fight every man until all the world submits to Islam. That is the fight the Muslim imperialists are bringing to us.

Where is the Islamic “Luther”, the one who led the reformation?

right2bright on July 2, 2007 at 8:16 AM

That would be Osama bin Laden. He’s the one, along with other Saudi Wahhabists, who insist on a more literal reading of the texts and more separation from worldly traditions.

William Amos on July 1, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Where is the Islamic “Luther”, the one who led the reformation?

It needs to come from a powerful Islamic leader. The problem is it took them years to kill Luther, a quick suicide attack would take care of him now.

Islam has had a “Reformation”. Driven by the likes of Sayyid Qutb, the Ba’ath Party (in Iraq and Syria), and the Talibanist movement (in Afghanistan). This Reformation sought to “return Islam to its roots” in Mohammed’s original writings. And, by and large, it has been successful.

The result has been a relaunch of the Islamic campaign of world conquest, just as it was from the Eighth to the Sixteenth Centuries Anno Domini. Except this time aound, the basic weapons of martyrdom for the faith are the car-bomb and the bomb-belt, instead of the tulwar and the composite horse-bow.

And when they need something a bit more emphatic, it won’t be onagers launching Greek Fire or a huge, built-up-from-iron-staves bombard firing stone balls three feet in diameter.

The equivalent of the onager, in modern terms, was what we saw in Lower Manhattan on 11 September, 2001. The equivalent of the bombard will be even more emphatic.

Encouraging Muslims to renounce terrorism is all well and good. But until the entire faith acknowledges that other people have a right not to believe in it (to say nothing of acknowledging that people born into the faith have a right to change their minds and seek their philosophical truths elsewhere, or even to decide that the search for same is not for them), the Jihad will continue.

By the usual “any means necessary”.

cheers

eon

Seriously, though, if any individual Muslim won’t give oaths and sureties for his or her loyalty to the Crown and the British Constitution, chuck them out.

Whether he is sincere or not, perhaps remains to be seen, but if the framework which the books are interpreted through is changed, perhaps change could happen. Personally, I don’t think the anti-Semite part would ever fade. Spirit of 1776 on July 1, 2007 at 9:42 PM

That would be nice but the very words of the Koran preclude it. The Christian has the words of Christ and Christendom has BEEN the progress in the world as we know it. Muslims have Mohammad, thus their world has been backward and barbaric. The only way that I can think of for a Muslim to fit into the modern world is to simply ignore the jihad parts of the Koran in much the same way as a gay minister ignores the parts of the bible that speak about homosexuality.

Is it possible for Muslims to change? Sure. But the makeup of the Middle East would take a nuclear level event to change.

A book plagiarized by a pedophile warlord to excuse his slaveholding, whoring, rapine, terrorism and imperialism.

Butt takes too long to debunk what can be dismissed in a sentence. (See previous bold paragraph/sentence.)

Islam’s call to kill anyone who tries to leave it makes this “religion” more a form of homicidal madness than a real “faith”.

(Unless your faith is murder.)

Offhand I can’t think of anything…

halgeel84

July 1, 2007 1:43 PM

… In this sense, the Muslims can only do ineffective things such small scale terroristic activities, car bombs, etc. These activities could be easily deflected as they have been. But Muslims may receive support from other parts of the world such as Latin America. Hugo Chevez wants to have nuclear weapons; this is a good news for Muslims today than any gesture they have received from western leaders. What the Muslims need to today is the ability to defend their nations, families and resources from western aggression.

Although there may legitimate doubts aplenty for obvious reasons, I would strongly advise against berating his expressed intent as he so clearly explains.

Here’s why:
Withhold for this moment of reflection, a dogmatic view of Christianity, (which granted you are entitled to)
and view this person’s intentions as a stepping stone in the obvious evolutionary steps of progress needed in order to adjust to 21st century modernity. Considering the fact that his previous primary exposure was that of the dark ages, he has made a leap in mindset that is equal to a staunch Atheist becoming a believer in Jesus Christ!
Now, when viewed as such and all other comparison’s aside, Hassan Butt is the modern day Islamic equivalent of Martin Luther’s 95 Thesis’s. He may even still have reservations and biases about Jews as did Martin Luther.
But even as Martin Luther’s extreme Jewish biases did not evolve into extreme hatred, rather what we see today is by and large a strong support for the Jews from the very Protestant movement that resulted from Martin Luther’s convictions!

Furthermore, what is inherent in Hassan Butt’s Damascus like confessional is the realization that violence is not going to win any friends, or the World.
Since the Dark Age mindset is an instintive “fight or flight” impulse, a losing battle on the Jihadist’s front will eventually progress to them switching to a “flight” from violence. And, it will begin with those Jihadist that are the most susceptible to persuasion.
Also, remember that because “it’s a small world, and the internet world is even smaller” he could be reading your blog comments. It goes without saying that he does not need anymore uphill battles. We all have an opportunity here to bolster his confidence. IF, and this is a BIG “IF”, he shows himself to be a lier we can always topple him just like “we the people” psychologically “nuked” the Amnesty Bill. In the meantime we should support him wholeheartedly.

I’m still not clear on why Islam thinks it will expand by terror, but it does seem to work strangely when combined with the self-loathing of the certain aspects of Western Civ. Post 9.11 Muslim conversion increased even here in the US I believe.

Spirit of 1776 on July 1, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Everybody likes a winner, right? As our own media provides propaganda services for the enemy, their success becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. They can win by being perceived to have won.