I hear the apologists for Islamic terrorism state that violence and murder have “nothing to do with Islam”. That violent adherents to the extremely violent religion of peace have “hijacked” the religion for their own non-Islamic ends.
Whilst this may help Muslims appear to be moderate by way of Taqiyya, it is an argument without logic or reason.
By way of a couple of analogies, let us examine who makes a more pure or representitive or accurate example of a Muslim…
You own a nearly new BMW motor car which needs a service. You can choose between taking the car to a back-street garage which services any make or model of car, using generic parts bought cheap from a motor factors company, without any official BMW afilliation whatsoever. Or you could take your car to a genuine BMW dealership, with fully licenced BMW technicians who will strictly and only use officially licenced, genuine BMW parts, and stick to the letter of the BMW recommended proceedures to service the vehicle.
Which of those two garages is the most “BMW”?
A man who is born into a Christian family and is Christened. His father was a cleric and although he attended church regularly as a child, now only attends at Christmas and Easter. He is living with a woman, unmarried with children out of wedlock. Another man is a Bishop and lives as much as he possibly can by the Canon law upholding Christian scriptures. He opposes same gender marriage, as he considers Holy matrimony to be a holy union between a man and a woman.
Which of those two is the more Christian?
Which is the more accurate example of a good Muslim:
One identifies as a “moderate” Muslim. He is peaceful. He rarely attends Mosque, does not pray five times a day and he drinks alcohol. He opposes Jihad and wants to integrate into Western society, supports democratic human lawmaking and is a valued member of his local eclectic and secular community.
The other is an Immam who preaches that Sharia is the only law. That the punishments under Sharia law are the post perfect punishments because they are what Allah’s prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was told by Allah, and that only Allah can change Sharia law. That no man can question such law and all such punishments are not extreme or radical, but pure and beautiful. That death is the appropriate punishment for adultery, apostacy and performing homosexual acts. That Jihad is central to Islam. That the haddiths and Qu’ran specifically spell out the Islamic way as the only legitimate way to live, including these punishments and Jihad as being central to the Islamic faith.
Which of those two Muslims is the most representitive of the religion of Islam?
Now how the hell can anyone explain the logic that Islamic terrorists involved in holy Jihad against infidels are “nothing to do with Islam?” IF such terrorists are nothing to do with Islam, then neither is the Qu’ran, any Mosques, or Sharia law.
Glad to clear that up.