Ayaan Hirsi Ali on why Christians should try to convert Muslims

Maclean’s talks to writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali about living under a fatwa

Photograph by Steve Simon

Born Muslim in Somalia, Ayaan Hirsi Ali grew up in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Kenya, fleeing to the Netherlands at the age of 22 to escape an arranged marriage. Ten years later, she was elected to the Dutch parliament. A prominent feminist and critic of Islam, she received numerous death threats when she renounced her faith following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In 2004, Theo van Gogh, the director of a short film she wrote protesting Islam’s treatment of women, was murdered in Amsterdam by a Muslim extremist who threatened that she would be next. Since 2007, the bestselling author of  Infidel, a memoir, has lived in the U.S., where she is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. In her new book, Nomad, Hirsi Ali writes about her struggle to assimilate into Western society and proposes remedies to help other immigrants resist the appeal of Islamic fundamentalism.

Q: Are you, after eight years with a security detail, inured to death threats? It’s hard to imagine you could continue to function if you felt constant fear.
A: It’s not a great way of leading your life, but like everything else, you get used to it. Presidents, members of royal families, diplomats—anybody who’s subjected to live under a security protocol does function. And I’m not the only one [with a fatwa]. There’s a whole class of people who live this way. I think, look, they can kill me physically—or I could die of a heart attack or whatever. Life is short. What they cannot kill are my ideas. The fact my books have been published and are out there—there are limits to silencing.

Q: Journalists frequently comment on your courage. Is “brave” how you think of yourself?
A: No. I think of all of us as being potential victims of the jihadist threat. I mean, look at the Times Square attack that was foiled. If it had succeeded, and on that Saturday night you were going to the theatre, you would’ve been injured if not killed. It’s not a question of who’s brave and who’s not, it’s an attack we all are under. Every time you take a train, step into your car, walk into the shopping mall, go to the airport—every single time, something could happen. That’s how terrorism works.

Q: You view the West as being at war not only with terrorists but with Islam itself. Who do you think will win?
A: The West will be victorious because the ideas of life are just far superior to the ideas of death. The question is what price we want to pay to win. How many people should die before victory? How much money and resources should we spend? We’re just not being effective now because we are being nice and avoiding the subject of Islam. We need to talk about Islam, about what’s in the Quran. The debate right now among Westerners is very defensive; all people want to prove is that they’re not Islamophobes.

Q: Consequently, according to Paul Berman in his new book The Flight of the Intellectuals, you’ve received “dreadful treatment” from, and have been trivialized by, the intelligentsia. Do you agree?
A: He’s addressing a debate within liberalism. He is, just like me and I think many others, surprised—and that’s an understatement—that some liberals choose to defend ideas that are very illiberal and choose to look away from practices that are even more illiberal. Why are they excusing radical Islam? That fascinates Berman and it also fascinates me, what the presence of Islam does to the liberal psyche in the West.

Q: What does Islam do to the liberal psyche?
A: Confuses it. The liberal psyche wants to protect minorities, to apologize for imperialism, colonialism, slavery, and the appalling treatment of black people during the civil rights movement. At the same time, they want to continue to defend the rights of individuals. They’ve convinced themselves that the best way to do that in general is to defend the cultures that are non-white. But what they forget, and what they’re being confronted with, is that non-white cultures contain misogynistic, collectivist, tribal, gay-unfriendly and female-hostile traditions. And so they’re confused: on the one hand, they’re looking at minorities as groups they need to save and speak up for, and on the other hand, they’re confronted with the ideas and practices of individuals within those minorities that are very undemocratic and appalling, really.

Q: You believe there is no such thing as moderate Islam. If that’s true, why do so many Muslims in the West say they’re horrified by violence perpetrated in the name of Islam?

A: I haven’t heard anybody say they’re horrified. Just to compare, many Americans, Canadians and Europeans protested the war on Iraq; they gathered themselves, they sent lots of emails, there was a lot of activism, they marched against this war. I haven’t seen that kind of thing from Muslims saying, “We’re against the numerous terrorist attacks all over the world carried out in the name of Islam.” No marches, no organizations, nothing. There are individuals, like Irshad Manji, like me, born into Islam, who stand up and say, “Hey, we don’t like this.” But we haven’t seen any kind of institutionalized protest by Muslims. That is the big question mark: are Muslims silent because they agree with the terrorist attacks? Or because they don’t know how to express themselves?

Q: One of your arguments in Nomad is that European countries have enabled homegrown jihadists by not insisting Muslims assimilate. I assume you support the proposed burka bans in Belgium and France?
A: I think to demand to cover your face in a public place in an era of terrorism is preposterous. For the French government, and other governments, to say, “You can wear whatever you like, but we would like to see your face”—I think that’s reasonable. I’m not talking about the face covering as a manifestation of religion, just in terms of safety. Every time I go through an airport I have to remove my shoes, my belt, my coat. After the attempted underwear bombing in the name of Islam, we have to go through a machine that scans us. So for someone to come around from that religion and say, “I demand that I cover myself”—it’s unreal.

Q: Are Muslims in North America better assimilated than in Europe?
A: Yes and no. Economically and in terms of education, yes. But I haven’t seen any hard data to prove that Canadian and American Muslims are more patriotic than Dutch and German Muslims.

Q: Do you think Barack Obama has moved the U.S. forward in terms of engaging constructively with Muslim countries?
A: Muslim populations and countries don’t like us any more than they did under Bush. In Obama’s administration so far, there have been more terrorist attempts than under eight years of the Bush administration, not including the 9/11 attack. The problem is clearly growing. The argument of, “Okay, they do this because they are poor”—that doesn’t apply anymore. In Western democracies, the young men wanting to kill themselves and kill others to get to the Muslim paradise are middle-class, well-educated and have the potential for a good future. The argument that Muslims are persecuted in North America is also not true. Muslims want to be in North America; they get jobs, they can have businesses and live wherever they want. If you just look at that argument empirically, you see that Muslims lead a life that is free and they can do whatever they want. As you go through these arguments, you see it’s not really about which administration is in the White House, it’s about convictions, not just the convictions of individuals but of states like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, which have, as their constitution, the Quran.

Q: One of your more startling arguments in Nomad is that Christian churches should proselytize in immigrant communities to try to convert Muslims.
A: Look at the amount of money Saudi Arabia spends on coming into Muslim communities in America and Europe, building schools and also taking leaders and training them in Mecca and Medina, then replanting them. It’s surprising that no other group of people is targeting the same communities. If you look at Western civilization, at the institutions [and movements] that were engaged in changing people’s hearts and minds—the Christian Church, humanists, feminists—they are doing next to nothing in these Muslim communities. When I was in Holland [recently], I heard about a Christian mission that had been proselytizing in Morocco. The government kicked them out and sent them back to Holland. I thought, “You don’t have to stop proselytizing—just go to the Muslim community in Amsterdam west and carry on there.” But of course there, they’re not only going to face the radical Muslims as opponents, they’re also going to face the multicultural opponents, saying they’re not supposed to be telling people to leave their religion.

Q: So how would they do it?
A: Next to every mosque, build a Christian centre, an enlightenment centre, a feminist centre. There are tons of websites, financed with Saudi money, promoting Wahabism. We need to set up our own websites—Christian, feminist, humanist—trying to target the same people, saying, we have an alternative moral framework to Islam. We have better ideas.

Q: But you also argue that children are indoctrinated very early in Islam. How would you even get them to listen to such a message?
A: They only get indoctrinated if they go to Muslim schools. I would, if I had the power, abolish Muslim schools. Children born to Muslim parents in North America or anywhere else in the West would get Islamic teachings at home, which is fine. But when they go to school, they would get the regular education that’s going to enable them to be absorbed into our society and become law-abiding, well-established citizens.

Q: In a multicultural and democratic society, how could we ban Muslim schools?
A: It depends how we weigh this problem of jihadism and terrorism. If we think it’s a chronic disease we have to live with, and I think that is actually the dominant opinion, people will take more trouble to look at what is going on in these schools and abolish them. If we think of these children as kids who, when they finish school, will be hostile to our society, then I can compile a whole host of arguments why they can and should be abolished.

Q: Let me ask a question you once posed. You said, “Western civilization is a celebration of life—everybody’s life, even your enemy’s life. So how can you be true to that morality and at the same time defend yourself against a very powerful enemy that seeks to destroy you?”
A:
That is the big question for the open society today. We want to be distinct from closed societies, have less authoritarianism, allow people to make their own choices. And what we’re seeing now is that as far as that applies to an Islamic subset of society, there are other factors at work that are frightening. To have a whole generation of people just indoctrinated with this jidhadist mentality and for us to do nothing about it, and then every time there’s a terrorist attack, we panic—it’s not viable.




Browse

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on why Christians should try to convert Muslims

  1. I absolutely love her and admire her so much for what she has done. Brave is an understatement. Read "Infidel" if you haven't.

  2. hmmm – not worth any more.

  3. Obviously, her views have been shaped by what happened with her.. that only slightly excuses her Mark Steyn/Anne Coulter type extremist views on Islam.

    • So we should really just dismiss her ideas right? What you're saying is that the reality of her experience is invalid because she experienced it. The fact that she lived through, shall we say the "pithier" side of the Islamist world invalidates her and makes her the extremist. How relativist of you.

    • Sound like you were reading that recent attempt at character assassination piece in the Guardian recently. Suggest you actually study islam a bit.

      watch http://www.ninjavideo.net/video/22042
      or read
      The Sword of the Prophet
      by Trifkovic, Srdja

    • Scott Tribe knows Islam better than Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an apostate who grew up in the Islamic Nations of Somalia, Saudi Arabia, and Nigeria. She studied the Qu'ran everyday as a child and young adult, wore the niqab of her own accord, and was gentially mutilated at age eight.

      But Scott Tribe knows better.

    • Good thing we have you around to explain to Muslims what Muslims are like.

    • Apparently, being against extremists now qualifies you as an extremist.. Thanks for enlightening us Scott!!

    • she is under threat of death, was forced to have a clitorectomy, forced to marry an old man and abused as a women when living as a Muslim. And this "only slightly excuses her…extremist views on Islam". Compared to her what do you know about Islam you poseur? Islam is extremist not her. Have you no sense?

    • She does seem pretty tailor made for a christian audience with a strong anitpathy towards muslims, doesn't she? I'm not saying she's not sincere, but the number of muslims who don't have time for hardcore violent islam or fundamentalist christianity is pretty high – almost the norm really.

    • I just started reading Mark Steyn's new book Lights Out. I'm impressed. Funny, gutsy, and intelligent. Ann I used to be unimpressed with, but I really value what she did for Canada ! Please come back again Ann. And send your friends up. We need more people unafraid to challenge the thought police.

    • Scott,
      Obviously, your views have been shaped by what has happened to you as well. So what kind of argument is that? But from the looks of you sitting there in your easy chair, you have nothing to worry about because you've done nothing to warrant a fatwa being placed on your head. Being a "progressive" is so easy!

  4. I thought the headline was a joke or perhaps a drive by, but it appears she's serious.

    "A: Next to every mosque, build a Christian centre, an enlightenment centre, a feminist centre."

    And let's paint a happy tree beside it too, and maybe a rainbow and unicorns. An atheist, calling on Christians to convert Muslims. This is not a serious person.

    • Actually, she didn't articulate it, but I think the inference is that to make the leap she did, from devout Muslim to atheist, is not realistic in the broader sense. Offering religion on another platter is more appealing to the person who believes fiercely in a god rather than presenting "there is no god, now convert to our, uh, lack of religion."

    • Atheists and Christians both share the benefits of Christianity. It's Christianity with its "give to Caesar that which is Caesar's and God that which is God's" that has given us the separation of Church and State and the possibility of democracy — power from the people. Islam which sees no separation between mosque and state sees power emanating from above — democracy is not possible.

    • When that young girl was murdered in Toronto by her father and brother, I was moved by the thunderous outpouring of outrage by the feminists all over Canada.

    • In what way is she not serious? She surely doesn't come across as unserious, possibly you find her words so astounding to your PC attitude? Whether you find her incredulous or not, she is totally seroius.

  5. hey scott
    how does one confront extremism?
    with a better idea? or walking bombs?
    Islam says your are the infidel,and should be put to the sword
    care to stretch your neck out?

    • I think this sums up Scott and other liberals better than I ever could: "The liberal psyche wants to protect minorities, to apologize for imperialism, colonialism, slavery, and the appalling treatment of black people during the civil rights movement. At the same time, they want to continue to defend the rights of individuals. They've convinced themselves that the best way to do that in general is to defend the cultures that are non-white. But what they forget, and what they're being confronted with, is that non-white cultures contain misogynistic, collectivist, tribal, gay-unfriendly and female-hostile traditions. And so they're confused: on the one hand, they're looking at minorities as groups they need to save and speak up for, and on the other hand, they're confronted with the ideas and practices of individuals within those minorities that are very undemocratic and appalling, really."

  6. I've read her book "Infidel" and I personally think that she suffers from some psychological trauma for all that she's been put through. The palpable hatred that emanates from her book left me disturbed.

    The ignorant behaviour towards women displayed by some who profess to be disciple of Islam can also be found in the Christian Church. Just sayin'…

    • I admire her courage and totally agree. Where do you ever read or see the Muslim community denouncing the terrorist attacks. I've heard they say wait till we are in the majority and then things will run our way. If they like their way so much, why do they come here to our country where we try to live in peace.

    • Everyone I've ever talked to who read the book said they felt neutrality emanating from her narrative. She told the story full stop, and the emotional feedback was left to the reader.

    • You should be disturbed you clown.

    • "The ignorant behaviour towards women displayed by some who profess to be disciple of Islam can also be found in the Christian Church. Just sayin'…"

      I wholeheartedly agrizzle, except I would say most followers of Christianity in the US are not nearly as anti-women as most followers of Islam.

    • Yes but how many of those are found in a western democracy? How many more are even given the light of day for their beleifs? In the muslim world those people are supported and endorsed, not sidelined and persecuted.

      I find many westerners can't seem to get over their own Christian backgrounds, they seem to think that Christianity is the worst religion in the world. Newsflash, it isn't, it's only the most successful. It's similiar to backlashing against walmart because you see it a lot instead of the child labourers who work for nike who are a hell of a lot worse.

    • Yes of course. I remember all those Christians who preach and practice genital mutilation of women as part of their religion don't you PolJunkie? Yea, didn't think so. You people who hate Christianity are becoming such a bore with your same old tired arguments.

  7. I think she's very intelligent and I fully agree with her.

  8. "Next to every mosque, build a Christian centre, an enlightenment centre, a feminist centre. There are tons of websites, financed with Saudi money, promoting Wahabism. We need to set up our own websites—Christian, feminist, humanist—trying to target the same people, saying, we have an alternative moral framework to Islam. We have better ideas."

    That's strange. In her book, she openly rejects the existence of God. "God is dead" were her exact words. Now she wants to promote christianity?

    • She is not necessarily promoting Christianity. She does not see Christianity as a threat to our freedoms, which she knows Islam is.

      • So you're saying that Christian leaders like Ted Haggard, the Pope, and Fred Phelps are not a threat to the freedoms of GLBT people? How about women? Do you think the very christian sponsors of Arizona's law that discriminates against Mexicans are a threat?

        Didn't the Mormons and the Catholic bishops heavily fund the project to pass Proposition 8 in California and Question 1 in Maine? What is the only argument ever used to justify discrimination against gays? I'll tell you what it is, it's the argument that gay people offend christians, and therefore have to be removed from society.

        What about Uganda and Malawi? Or the christians in the Democratic Republic of Congo who hacks off the limbs of children that refuse to fight as child soldiers in the bloodiest war since WW2?

        What was Harper's reason for trying to repeal Equal Marriage in Canada?

        Christianity is very much a threat to our freedoms. The only question is, who do you consider to be the 'us' being attacked by them? Does it include me too? or just people like you?

        • Rofl, "Christianity is very much a threat to our freedoms." Its about as much as a threat as the lefts idea of "civil liberties" and more government. Oh and note: no I'm not a "conservative" or a "neoconservative" (not like you would know who Irving Kristol is anyways).

          • I don't care what you are, if you try to take my civil rights away, you're going to have to fight me for it.

        • "I'll tell you what it is, it's the argument that gay people offend christians, and therefore have to be removed from society. "

          What the hell are you talking about??

          • He seems to be making things up so that he can make another brain-dead relativist argument. Why bother with facts when they get in the way of your favourite argument?

        • You are essentially arguing that if someone is actively pursuing their democratic right to work for the enacting of laws which will restrict the actions of some other group then that person is a threat to freedom.

          In a free society we still need laws to restrict our freedom. In a democratic society everyone has a right to contribute to the debate about what these laws should be.

          The difference with Islam is that in Islamic states as in Communist states that free debate stops.

        • What about the human rights commission? Political Correctness? Bill 168 which applies a reverse onus "guilty until proven innocent" philosophy to our legal system? All of these encroachments into our Canadian freedoms are engineered by the liberal left. They are the product of a religious indoctrination in secular humanism. Fact is, there are extremes on both the right and the left who, according to an extremist value system, would readily sacrifice freedom and peaceful co-existence to forward their agenda. (like rhinos with blinders in a china shop)

          Then there are the majority of westerners who inhabit someplace between these two extremes who differ in this one thing; they put a premium upon freedom and peaceful co-existence. Personally, I am a christian who feels that a zero-sum culture war needs to be avoided in the west. (at all costs? well, let's get to the table and negotiate. Peace is high up on my list of values)

          Islam is almost completely extremist. While Christ teaches "love thy enemies", Muhammed had all of his beheaded. When Christians act in a violent, beligerant or uncaring way, they are opposing their own religion. When Islamists kill in the name of Jihad, they are obeying theirs. This is what Ms. Ali is saying.

          • "Islam is almost completely extremist. While Christ teaches "love thy enemies", Muhammed had all of his beheaded. When Christians act in a violent, beligerant or uncaring way, they are opposing their own religion. When Islamists kill in the name of Jihad, they are obeying theirs. This is what Ms. Ali is saying."

            And that, in a nutshell, is the important difference sailing over some people's heads.

        • Fred Phelps isn't a christian leader anymore than David Koresh was, and no, the Pope and Ted Haggard aren't threats to GLBT persons' rights, they are threats to the special privileges some GLBT persons are demanding.

        • GLBT are the biggest threat to GLBT. And they were done a favor by Prop 8. Why would they want to jeopardize their incomes by having a court now preside over their freedoms? You cannot commit adultery or leave your partner with kids without the court now having a say on it. And they will. You have more freedom if you stay away from legalizing marriage. Geez, try to keep up.

  9. Christianity isn’t any better than Islam. Christians perform acts of terrorism, like Timothy McVeigh and Eric Roberts did, which kill thousands. They target specific communities for destruction, such as Fred Phelps does. The conduct genocidal rampages like Joseph Kone is doing right now. They pass laws condemning people to death because of how they were born, like the government of Uganda has done.

    I know you want to think yourselves more civilized and somehow better than the crazies with their suicide vests. But can you, when so many of your own kind are homicidal maniacs too?

    • What are you crazy???!!!

      Look at the majority of Islamic states and then come back and tell me that they are just as 'free' as 'Christian' states.

      It looks more like you're blinded by anti-Christianity than grounded in reality.

      Here is reality – kids born into Muslim families are FORCED to be Muslim. You cannot convert out. If you do, you can be jailed, or punished LEGALLY by death in some countries.

      When was the last time you heard about some ex-Christian getting killed or having a fatwa on their head because they converted out of the religion?

      Just as free? I dare you to move to an Islamic state.

      • Look at the majority of Islamic states and then come back and tell me that they are just as 'free' as 'Christian' states.'

        Christian state,what Christian state?Anyways,we have laws that parctically dictate what you can and cannot say,they are trying to tell us what to eat,what to drive,what kind of fuel you can use,draconian gun laws.We practically live in nanny states,that`s not free is it? Lats time I checked,there are Euopeans and North Americans in the Middle east,the so-called Islamic states,so there you go,if it`s so bad,why do they work there then?

        Have you forgotten the Catholic Protestant conflict in Ireland,who`s doing that?Oh eyah,those Muslims.They have been fighting each other just on the basis of which branch of Christianity you belong to.Keep your blinders on.

        • Well, just to be "that guy"… when was the last time someone got murdered at the Holy See. Just saying.

        • "Look at the majority of Islamic states and then come back and tell me that they are just as 'free' as 'Christian' states.'

          Christian state,what Christian state?Anyways,we have laws that parctically dictate what you can and cannot say,they are trying to tell us what to eat,what to drive,what kind of fuel you can use,draconian gun laws."

          Trent H, I note that JAC has has the words "christian states" is in scare quotes and that "Islamic states" is not in scare quotes. I think that means he doesn't think there are any Christian states. I'd agree there aren't such that you can tell.

          And the laws you complain didn't happen because states were were christian, they happened because they were progressivist–leftist.

    • Sorry can't let this one slide. Islam apologists always mention McVeigh who was an anti government nutter, America is full of them. Please explain to me why so many jihadies shout "Allahu Akhbar" before blasting off to their virgins? There are two constants when dealing with large Muslim populations: violence and silent indifference to that violence. Christians do not slaughter in the name of Jesus or their God. Muslims do on a daily basis (usually to each other for some reason..not too bright I guess). Mohamed commands that Islam be spread by the sword-this is a fact that is spelled out in the Quran and Hadith. Yes buddy my society is BETTER and I'd like to keep it that way-no more Muslim immigrants please.

      • Anrti-Christian sentiment is a familiar enemy for us Westerners; we are less comfortable with criticizing another culture's traditions. But that doesn't excuse the blatant "I know Islam is, but so is Christianity" b.s. spewing out of people's mouths. There are terrorist attacks every day and counting off three or four so-called Christian extremists (the names of which we all know because there are so few) does not circumvent the fact that thousands of Muslims are killed every year on account of terrorist attacks, jihads, and fatwas, and the West is enabling if not ignoring these tragedies. Christians are now a fringe group in our society, but the Muslim population in the West is growing everyday. You will now have to deal with religious extremism, although it will no longer be Christian extremism.

      • Not just Mcveigh,who blew up the abrtion clinics?Who shoots abortion doctors?What about KuKlux Klan?Were they Muslims?They prided themslves on their Christian heritage didn`t they?Then there is Eric Rudolph ,the 1996 Olympic Bombings,who was he tied to?And Hutaree,the guys who were just indicted by a federal grand jury in Detroit on charges of seditious conspiracy ?Can`t wait for your reply.

        • KuKlux Klan? Are they even still around? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel there. Unlike you I can't rhyme off the few MODERN nutters who just happen to be Christian. Instead I'll direct you here:http://www.thereligionofpeace.com . Apparently it's a full time job keeping track of Muslim violence. Again nice try. Learn something about Islam buddy then comment..Robert Spencer is an excellent author who can walk you through the teachings of the prophet of death.

          • Yerah,the site that everyone directs you to when they can`t answer.RObert psencer is is just guy who bashes Muslims for living,nothing more.

          • Why don`t you answer the other stuff instead of asking who isn`t around?

          • Yup and the followers of Islam give him plenty to write about. Honestly he's got a pretty damn easy job since all he has to do is refer to quotes from the founder himself. I assume you know all Muslims are supposed to use Mohammed's life as the model from which to conduct their own lives, you know with all the killing, taxing and slavery of infidels and all. I honestly wonder how moderate Muslims exist knowing they are betraying the wishes of the dear prophet. How do you go on knowing your prophet is a murdering, rape condoning pedophile? I know I'd have some concerns about my religion.

          • What do you mean 'yup'?Who did all those bombings I mentioned?

          • Why do I get the impression you're more concerned about Christian extremists than you are about Islamic extremists? What tactics do you suggest we use against both? What if it becomes necessary to resort to violent means?

    • For the record, I think McVeigh was an atheist (by the time he committed the bombing ).

      But nonetheless it is certainly true that many Christians in history have done terrible things. This is human nature. The question that matters, however, is whether these deeds were done in accordance with Christianity or in spite of it. If in accordance, then Christianity is the enemy. The same question needs to be asked about atheism, Islam, and any other ideology when it is used as a justification for some terrible atrocity.

      • No, you are quite wrong. McVeigh stated in his final inetrviews with the FBI that he was a devout christian and that his religion had motivated him to perform his attack.

        It's faurly common for apologists to claim a christian terrorist was an atheist. However, this is very hard to do when the terrorist in question (here, McVeigh) was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ-Christian.

        • No he didn't. You are so full of sh!t. You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you across the face.

          McVeigh's only known political affiliations were his voter registration with the Republican Party of New York when he lived in Buffalo, New York, and a membership in the National Rifle Association while in the military.[79]

          (From the wiki)
          In a recorded interview with Time magazine[80] McVeigh professed his belief in "a god", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs." Throughout his childhood, he and his father were Roman Catholic and regularly attended daily Mass at Good Shepherd Church in Pendleton, New York. The Guardian reported that McVeigh wrote a letter to them claiming to be an agnostic and that he did not believe in a hell.[81][82] McVeigh once said that he believed the universe was guided by natural law, energized by some universal higher power that showed each person right from wrong if they paid attention to what was going on inside them. He had also said, "Science is my religion."[83]

      • many muslims also conviently say the 911 bombers were not muslims when they made the attacks.

        sorry kiddo, each side has to wear their craizies.

        • The difference is that the muslims who blow themselves up or fly airplanes into buildings are usually chanting "allahu ackbar" at the time; McVeigh claimed atheism or agnosticism as his philosophy most of the time. He also stated exactly what motivated him to action was the GOVERNMENT. Moreover, muslims are commanded to follow the example of muhammad (death be upon him), a genocidal, maniacal butcher, whereas Christians are supposed to follow the example of Jesus.

          You fail…

    • Timothy McVeigh.I 'm still laughing at that one.Very lazy argument.He was an anti Government nutter.Not many Christians blowing things up in the name of Jesus these days.Let me guess your next point will bring the Crusades into it.

    • Timothy McVeigh, motivated by politics and not religion in his actions, was nearly universally reviled by Americans. His society put him to death.

      Osama bin Ladin, on the other hand, was harbored by the government of an entire country, and even to this day enjoys approval ratings above 50% in places like Pakistan and KSA.

      Eric Rudolph (not Eric Roberts whom you libeled): "Many good people continue to send me money and books. Most of them have, of course, an agenda; mostly born-again Christians looking to save my soul. I suppose the assumption is made that because I'm in here I must be a 'sinner' in need of salvation, and they would be glad to sell me a ticket to heaven, hawking this salvation like peanuts at a ballgame. I do appreciate their charity, but I could really do without the condescension. They have been so nice I would hate to break it to them that I really prefer Nietzsche to the Bible."

      Faulty comparisons.

    • DFB, you are an idiot. McVeigh killed 168, Rudolph killed 2, Phelps hasn't killed anyone (that we know of) .

    • We can see you are delusional DFB. If you have something intelligent to say why not say it instead of making comments so easy to refute?

    • Ahhh… the classic "they are just as bad" straw man argument.

      So easily dispatched, however, with this :

      Nobody who wishes to be taken seriously can claim they were acting on the instructions of Christianity when they commit acts of violence. Everyone that commits acts of violence in Islam can, and does, claim full Koranic authority and nobody who wants to be taken seriously questions this.

    • McVeigh wasn't Christian, dolt. In fact, he surprised everyone when he asked for a priest just before he was executed. His reasons for the OK City bombing are well-chronicled: Ruby Ridge and Waco. Oh, wait…those are political reasons not religious. The fact is that 99.9999% of Christians don't promote terror, and dolts like you like to wave the flag of "McVeigh" because he happens to be a white guy. You belch about your rights, but then cast aspersions at the selfsame system of thought (Judeo-Christian) which contrived the nature of those rights in the first place?! Moreover, you then try to equivocate (pathetically, of course) that this system is no better than the barbaric system of islam–which is so retrograde that its practitioners are largely stuck in the 7th century!

      Fred Phelps and his mental gulag of morons is hardly representative of Christendom; if you were intellectually honest, you'd realize this (it's ok though, I don't expect intellect, let alone honesty from a liberal). As far as Jospeh Kony and Uganda, sub-Saharan African countries have been finding excuses to kill each other for centuries. No Christian in the world would ever hold up Kony's example as one to follow.

      Who is Eric Roberts? The actor? I wasn't aware that he was a "terrorist." Were you talking about Terry Nichol? McVeigh's accomplice? Can you get any of your facts straight?

  10. It's all too common – and counterproductive – for all Muslims to be grouped in with the fundamentalist or radical fringe of Islam.

    I've had the opportunity to work in a community that, while having a great mix cultures and religions, seems to be largely Muslim. Most of those that I've met have been friendly and approachable, active in their community and generally helpful. The children in the community are mostly well-adjusted and usually well-behaved (or at least not any more poorly-behaved than other children). These are not people who are enemies of Canada, or need to be converted from Islam to become productive residents of Canada who share our general value system.

    Obviously, the extreme views expressed by some aspects of Islam, both in Canada and abroad, need to be opposed, strongly. But we do ourselves no favours by painting moderate Muslims with the same strokes as radicals. We do need to reexamine what it means to have a multicultural society and to put more emphasis on integration rather than simply tolerance. Of critical importance, we need to make sure that new arrivals understand our laws and code of behavior, and that while they are welcome to their own values and beliefs, the customs and attitudes of their previous homes cannot override the fundamental rules of Canadian society.

    I appreciate Ayaan Hirsi Ali's concern about militant, oppressive ideologies and their potential to grow more influential here because of illogical political correctness. However, what she's suggesting leads me to believe that she has gone beyond seeing the true problem, and is now seeing some false ones as well. It would be good for her, and others, to remember that many Muslims do not hold beliefs that run so contrary to those of most Canadians, and that not all who hold destructive, oppressive ideologies are Muslim.

    • Very well put.

    • A good point, however I think you may be missing the fundamental argument about 'moderate Muslims', and that is, as Ali points out, they have never organized themselves against terrorism, or even the radical oppressive nature of their own belief system.

      It's not that all Muslims are radicals or terrorists, it's that it would seem that all Muslims, by their silence, condone the activities of the fanatics. If they don't, they should stand up and say so. If they live in a free democracy, like in Canada, there is nothing to stop them.

      • Muslim groups have denounced terrorism, radicals and fanatics – maybe not in the numbers and forcefulness you'd like, but some certainly have.

        However, lack of condemnation is not, in any way, the same as condoning. There are many things that have been done, awful things, that I haven't publicly condemned, I'm sure you can say the same. There can be a lot of reasons for silence besides support. If you'd like to know what a Muslim thinks about these matters, you can always (politely and respectfully) ask them.

        • Some out of the fastest growing religion in the world with some 1.5 billion members is not enough. They are silent on the issue of terrorism, niqabs, fatwas, and honour killings. There has been no change in shar'ia law since Islam's inception. Within the Nations of Islam, court judges sentence adulterers to stoning by death – it is Islamic law. It is state law. There is no way around it. And Ali is talking about those that want shar'ia law instituted in Canada and, in its current absence, practice it outright (honour killings, polygamy, pedophilia, incest, rape, etc).

          Also, Craig, Ali is a Muslim. She has let you know what she thinks and you've dismissed it because it doesn't suit your anecdotal experiences. It's a pity that her points about liberalism confusing the mind are being borne out in this thread.

        • "Some certainly have". Name them. What exactly did they say? I think if you can find any (it won't be easy) the full comment will be along the lines of "we condemn this violence but ……….".
          This will be true for every country that has suffered Islamic terrorist attacks. There are currently over 30 countries that applies to.

          • I've already linked one such example in a following post. The Muslim Canadian Congress has been quite vocal in opposing violence perpetrated by Muslims and about pushing gender rights.

          • One example. How compelling in a pool of nearly 2 billion.

          • I am not saying, nor have I ever said, that all Muslims are good people, or even that most Muslims are good people, though I do believe the majority are. I am saying that Muslims can live peaceably in Canada, according to our value system, in harmony with the rest of us and they can do so without giving up their religion. Perhaps they have to modify that religion, but that is part of integration and societal evolution, so provided they are willing to accept the necessary adjustments to the ways they express their faith, there is no reason that they must abandon it.

            I have given you an example to evidence my point – are you saying that these people are not Muslims living in Canada, in accordance to our laws and values?

          • I see neither you nor any other leftists have come to discuss with your Muslim brethren in this thread how wrong I and other dissenters are on this issue. In fact, there are only those that disagree with Islam confronting the extremists in this thread while they spout veiled threats (no pun intended) and evangelical garbage throughout. Once again, I fear Ali is proven right.

            All I can say is everything you've posted is conjecture — perhaps this, maybe that, it is possible this could be, etc. It is all very ethnocentric, nevermind naive. What you need to understand is Islam is not Christianity, or any other Abrahamic or Eastern religion. I would ask you to read up on the Quran, read Ali's memoir, and read the rest of this thread. Maybe engage saldim et al in why it is Islam is superior to all else and why they are "winning over [our] people" and why we "shouldn't f*ck with [them]." Also, good people? Good vs. evil are religious determinants — discuss with Gaunilon perhaps. I am only interested in human nature.

    • It's the doctrine of Islam that is the problem not all people who happen to have been brought up Islamic. Christians can be violent also but there is no encouragement in the New Testament to kill; quite the opposite. Whereas violence to unbelievers is an obligation of muslims according to the Koran.

      The extremists are not misinterpreting the Koran. They are just the more practicing muslims.

      • Religious texts can, and often are, interpreted by followers to suit whatever beliefs they have. You're right, the Koran has some very violent passages which do not exist in the New Testament (but do exist in the Bible as part of the Old Testament).

        As such, it's ultimately actions and attitudes that must be judged. "True" Christians, as you might point out, should be ignoring the parts of the Old Testament which are overridden by passages in the New Testament, but of course, the Old Testament has been used to justify many acts of violence by Christians anyway. With Islam, it's the same deal but in reverse. True Muslims perhaps should focus on the call to violence, rather than the calls for peace which exist in the Koran, but of course, those passages of peace to justify acts of non-violence by Muslims anyway.

        I've said that there are aspects of Islam which are incompatible with Canadian society, and calls to violence are one of them. I think it is worth repeating that I'm not encouraging acceptance of fundamentalist Islam, or all Muslims. Rather, I'm encouraging people not to treat all Muslims the same, so that moderate Muslims are not cast in with those who do engage in abhorrent violence, and that Muslims who have abandoned the violent aspects of Islam not be considered to be the same as those who have not, simply because their religious beliefs fall under the same loose heading.

    • Moderate Muslims. Those would be the ones marching in outrage against the "radical" Muslims, or the ones volunteering to defend Ali against those who are out to kill her. In fact their position is "we are against violence but Ali shouldn't have said what she did or left Islam". Instead we have non muslims marching and denouncing those who criticize Muslims or who defend "the moderate elements" of Hamas and the Taliban.
      Islam is not just a religion it is your whole life, political, legal and social, set out under the rules of Sharia. The Hadiths of Mohammed tell us told Muslims to be passive and obey laws in non Muslim nations so long as they do not have the numbers to impose sharia. However they are not allowed to integrate and they don't. As they grow in number they are to seek Sharia law over national law, first for themselves then for all. Britain has already allowed this and, for example, if you are a Muslim women who submits to a Sharia court you have no right to appeal in British courts to its decision. Theoretically a Muslim women can refuse to have her case held in a Sharia court. Yeh, that's going to happen.

      • "However they are not allowed to integrate and they don't."

        Then how have I met Muslims that have? If they're not allowed to integrate, then someone must have forgotten to tell a fair number of them who I've worked with and gone to school with.

    • EXCELLENT POST!

    • Did you actually read the article, moron?

    • Sam picks the side of those who oppressed her .More Western self hatred.

    • And you must be a well-known idiot.

    • From the article: "The fact that she had lied was well-known, retorted Hirsi Ali, making the point that was she was fleeing a forced marriage. Not so, said van Dongen, using testimony from her brother and husband to allege that the marriage was not made under compulsion. Nor van Dongen said, was Hirsi Ali raised in a strict Muslim family."

      Oh yeah, testimony from her brother and husband, those who oppressed her. They're a reliable source. And she wasn't raised in a strict Muslim family? Uhh, female genital mutilation is all I have to say to that.

  11. I read her book and believe her to be intelligent, honest and forthright. What she says makes sense and is corroborated by other sources. I think we should believe her and heed her words.

    • I agree. She has seen the damage done to her native country by the Muslim religion and is warning us. Why do so many Muslims want to move here: because we have it better and they are welcome if they agree to live by the rules of the land. We do see though that they would like their own set of rules after they have been here for a while. Christians or any other religion is not welcome in their country and are persecuted if they try to practice their own religion. We may get the same treatment here once they are in the majority in our country.

      • I found the parts about Amsterdam almost more disturbing than her life in any one of the Nations of Islam. It mirrors the problem in Canada, albeit as a portent.

  12. It seems to me the healthiest society is one in which I, as a Christian, have the right to do my best to persuade Muslims they are wrong while they do their best to persuade me of my error. Doing this in good humour and nature will add credibility to both our views.

  13. In my opinion there is too much converting going on. I feel religion may have it's place for some. But we MUST learn to:
    Seperate Church and Hate.

  14. Personally I think everybody should try to convert everybody. Ideas must be free to travel.

    Reason will win out in the end.

    • Unlikely that reason will win out in the end. Reason never has.

      • And that's a piss poor reason for not trying.

  15. That is a great interview. I liked this part best:
    "He is, just like me and I think many others, surprised—and that's an understatement—that some liberals choose to defend ideas that are very illiberal and choose to look away from practices that are even more illiberal."

    This is exactly right, which is why I am always careful to use the term "leftists" rather than "liberals". Classically speaking, liberals are about freedom. That is certainly not what leftists are about.

    I disagree with Ali completely regarding Muslim schools, though. In a free society one should not abolish schools based on their religion – not only is it wrong, it leads down a very dangerous path. Rather, the best approach is to allow complete freedom of speech in public regarding religion so that Muslims and Christians alike (and all others) can criticize each others' beliefs without fear of persecution or aggression (i.e. no "hate crimes" tribunals, and zero tolerance for murder or mob riots by those who feel that their religion has been insulted, for example). With this freedom and security, I am confident that the best ideology will predominate.

    • "which is why I am always careful to use the term "leftists" rather than "liberals""

      A side point here, but why even use those terms, which can both describe a wide range of viewpoints that don't necessarily line up on any given subject? Attack the arguments, not whatever ideological group you perceive a person or position to belong to. Even being careful, you always run the risk of mischaracterizing or overgeneralizing another's point of view – what's the point of that when such labels are pretty much always unnecessary?

      • It's often helpful to be able to describe an ideology and its adherents, even if there are is a spectrum among said adherents. For example in the abortion debate it is useful to refer to those who are "pro-choice" and "pro-life" even though both terms are extremely vague and both camps have wide variations within them. Nonetheless, everyone kind of knows what one means when one says "pro-choice" or "pro-life" with reference to a group of people.

        Similarly with "left" and "right". The terms are vague and originated on a tennis court, but they do have a general meaning which is useful despite their ambiguity and the wide array of viewpoints within each one.

        • Pro-life and pro-choice are vague, yes, but inherent in them is at least (generally speaking) a belief in the legality of abortion.

          I mean, where I get called a "leftist", I pretty much take it as an insult, because then I'm grouped in with Marxists and Communists (who I very much disagree with), the NDP (who I would never vote for) and Al Gore (douchebag!). A then I'm often forced to fend off views that I don't have, never have had, and don't associate with my viewpoint simply because a word is thrown out which apparently includes myself with them.

          It's utterly pointless, especially since those very general terms are often used to describe people with very specific beliefs, even if it's a mischaracterization of both the general term and the specific beliefs (liberals, as you point out yourself, in the context Ali describes, as an example).

          • Well, I can see your issue, but it stems from the common failure to distinguish between various elements of the political spectrum. Socialism is on the political left, and communism is on the political left, but clearly socialism is not communism. However, that doesn't mean that the broad categorization of "right" and "left" to divide the political spectrum in half is useless.

          • Except when there is reason to associate you with the left, then you should feel compelled to affirm or deny the beliefs of the "douchebags", because when there is reason to associate you with the left–you are helping the douchebags win.

    • Religious schools are fine — as long as they aren't being funded from the public purse. This isn't the case in Great Britain where a shari'a school was exposed as espousing anti-Semitic and anti-Christian rhetoric in its textbooks, all funded by the British taxpayers. If Muslims want religious schools they need to go about it privately like the Christians do.

      • There are parts of Canada where Christian religious schools are publicly funded. If we're going to advocate elimination of public funding for Muslim schools then we also need to eliminate it for Christian ones. In fact I would support this position.

        • I don't know where in Canada they are publically funded; I've never heard that. And yes, I agree with you on that point as well.

          I actually don't think Islamic schools are needed when they have mosques to congregate and spread their "message."

          • there are catholic public schools and school boards nearly everywhere. Protestant public funded schools as well. In my opinion religions should be kept out of public schools entirely. You want to give you child a religious upbringing? do it your home our your church and not on my dime.

          • Sorry man, s.93 of the constitution wins.

        • Well, tell you what, I'd appreciate some non-political thinking someplace out there. The left-wing people … and you can identify these quite readily … like to speak of the Nazis as "right wing nuts" (a wing nut engaged by turning to the right) ( excuse my humour) whereas everyone knows how & why the USSR & Nazi Germany made their alliance against the capitalist West; it is because both were socialist: (United Soviet "Socialist" Republic and National "Socialism") Yet the various groups on the LEFT, denying their historical relationships with both groups, castigate them as being RIGHT WING !!!

          So we think the Muslims and the Christians are extremists!!!! Come on, get real. The biggest wars ever were brought on by political persons who did at times use non-thinking religious persons as pawns … but I will keep on thinking, so no sense in trying to use me .. after all, it was thinking which made me a Christian.

    • Church & State are legally supposed to be separate. Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Mormon, Sikh, etc. … all religious schools should not receive ANY funding from governments at any level. In fact, they should not be allowed to exist.
      All Canadian children should receive the same education (including our French Canadian friends). Indoctination into any specific religion or culture should occur only at home. This is the only way to get past ignorance …

      • The fact that Church and State should be separate is exactly why it would be wrong to outlaw certain religious schools. It is also why it would be wrong to outlaw all religious schools. The State has no business dictating what religion people can choose to have their children educated in.

        However, I would definitely support the idea of removing all state funding from all religious schools. I would even go one step further and advocate eliminating the public education system.

      • Church and State are legally supposed to be separate? Where?

        In Canada we deface our currency with the wizened countenance of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

    • I agree with everything you say except I think in a free society you have to make an exception when sedition is taught.

      Children do not have developed critical minds they will believe whatever they are told.
      http://www.meforum.org/687/the-muslim-brotherhood

      "Recently, the German public was shocked to hear what is preached inside Saudi-funded mosques and schools. In the fall of 2003, a hidden camera-equipped journalist from Germany's ARD television infiltrated the Saudi-built King Fahd Academy in Bonn and taped what it taught to young Muslim children. One teacher called for jihad against the infidels"

    • I am a Christian … I believe I am a true " liberal" and am ready to protect the rights of all … I can respect all .. even when I totally reject their opinion … This just means that I think. I also evaluate ideas and retain the best of these (at least to my way of thinking) ..I guess that means I conserve some ideas and that would make me "conservative."

      Some Conservatives have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. They'd call themselves "Progressive Conservatives."
      Of course they have pretty much all been brainwashed in our "liberal thinking" universities and public school systems; so what do you want?

  16. So she's a atheist calling on Christianity as an ally. Atheists benefit from Christianity. It's Christianity with its "give to Caesar that which is Caesar's and God that which is God's" that has given us the separation of Church and State and the possibility or democracy — power from the people. Islam which sees no separation between mosque and state sees power emanating from above — democracy is not possible.

    Islam calls for the overthrow of non-believer states by any means including force. It is essentially a political doctrine with a covering of ritual. Considering the weakness of Islamic states today actual overthrow by force is only likely in the near future in backward states. Or in Europe perhaps in 20 years by immigration and a high birth rate. But Islam is always a potentially seditious element in Canada and other advanced countries.

    Qur'an (8:12) – "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

    • What does the Bible say about non-believers,Smythe?Share some of the wonderful things the Bible has to say about non-believers.

      • Trent stop being such a lazy dhimmi and do your own research.

        • Answer the question or get lost

        • What Trent H. just did is called a rhetorical question, and has been a perfectly legitimate tactic in debate since the times of the Greeks.
          Doubtless he HAS done his own research, or else he wouldn't be confident enough to ask a rhetorical question, in that it might backfire.

    • And remember a few weeks ago,who was arrested by the FBI for plotting to take 'America for Jesus'?

      • The people against whom there was so little evidence they were given liberal bail and the judge almost dismissed the charges outright?

    • Bang on.

      • Like i said,no answer as usual.

        • Trent when the comment arrows are indented beneath the root comment and not yours it means the comment was intended for the root comment. As for you I was suggesting you to do your own leg work and come up with some bloodthirsty quotes from Jesus. Can't wait.

          • But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them forth andslaughter them before me.'”Luke 19:27
            Matthew 10:34-36.Think not That I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."

            There you go

          • Luke 19:27 you are taking out of context. It's a parable. Read Luke 19:11-27. You are implying that Jesus is the king and that people should be killed for him. That is not the meaning of the parable.

            Matthew 10:34-36 is a metaphor where sword has always treated in a spiritual sense.

          • It i8s not a parable,he told that to people when he was prraching.Dop you not belive that Jesus is God,the king of Israel,huh?Now tell what context it is acceptable to slay your enemies before you.He clearly ordered people to kill for him.

            The other verse too,is not a metaphor,he clearly said he didn`t come for peace,he came to destroy and make people enemies of of each other.Turn thenm on each other,that exactly what it says.I don`t see a metaphor there.Spiritual sense my foot,that is not even in the Bible,that`s just you makiing stuff up.Also,this man of peace you call Jesus endorsed the Old testament,he didn`t have a problem with it,whatsoever.

          • He used parables and metaphors often when he was preaching.

            When you read the Bible you shouldn't come with your Islamic assumptions. In the Koran God changes his mind … or rather Mohammed finds a need for a new revelation that contradicts something he came up with in the past. i.e., most peaceful verses in the Koran are abrogated by later verses about killing.

            In Christianity God is more consistent. When Jesus says "turn the other check" it's not overruled.

          • wrong,sorry,your masn is not the perfect little angel who loved everything.I don`t even see anything you sare talking about in the Bible.There is nothing consistent about Christianity,you are trying to even tell us things that are not the Bible,pathetic.

          • Yes, Trent. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

          • Very strange choices. The first is a quote from an agressive king in a parable – not God. The second is part of a command to heal the sick – and basically says even if all you're doing is healing people, people will still disagree about it. Doesn't really support your point at all.

          • Trent H, you have no reading comprehension.

            RE Luke 19:27 Jesus had no enemies who did not want to rule over him–unless you are saying tyrants should be let alone to rule as they wish, then you are in agreement with the man.

            RE Matthew 10:34-36, he is speaking of philosophical conflict. In the like light, while he said no one should go unarmed, he did not want Peter to fight the Romans, did he?

            In contrast, when Mohammed said kill your enemies, he said it right after having killed an enemy.

            There you go.

          • Another one,
            Matthew 15:1-4
            Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"
            Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'

            Enjoy.

          • In Matthew 15:1-4 Jesus is referring to existing old testament law. He is debating legalisms with the Pharisees; not calling for anyone to kill.

          • He is not debating anything,he defended himself by criticiszing the Pharisees for not killing disobedient children according to the law of Moses when they they had asked why his disciples had not washed their hands.He did call for the killing of disobedient children.He also said he came not to destroy but to fulfill the law,that`s a solid endorsement of the Old testament(Matthew 5:17,the one I am sure you would love pretend is not in the Bible.Why don`t we discuss the Old testament,shall we?

            It`s also interesting to note that Jesus didn`t have problem with all that stuff in the old Testament.

          • I think you'll have trouble finding any expert on Christianity who interprets those passages like that.

          • I know that,because what you don`t want to hear has to be twisted to make ti sound like something you want to hear.

          • Reading the convolututed delusions from ancient myths in this thread makes me happy to be an atheist. Peaple its all BS. The Quaran and Bible are immoral and vulgar books. Religion is the cancer of humanity.

          • Yes, he was debating legalisms and their epistemological and moral underpinnings (or lack thereof). The answer to his implied question is that the Pharisees did not kill disobedient children for the same reasons they did not kill themselves when they sinned, either they were hypocrites who didn't really mean it and who enforced the elders tradition when it was convenient, or they in fact realized that the elders' traditions were at the least not appropriate in the context they were being brought up in–and probably never had anything to do with how God wanted people to behave.

            Note neither Christ at all nor even very often the Pharisees in contrast had anyone killed for their outward religious behavior.

            Very much in contrast to both, when Mohammed talked about doing something repulsively gruesome to someone for religious purposes, in order to make them ambient temperature…it was right after having done something repulsively gruesome to someone for religious purposes, in order to make them ambient temperature.

            So far you fail epically.

  17. I'm pleased that Maclean's has done this interview, which makes it stand above many other Canadian media.

    • Macleans seems to have (in general) a genuine commitment to journalism over ideological cheerleading. It's heartening to see that they're able to make a living this way.

  18. I distrust both Islam and Christianity. I find neither to be anything worth modeling a society on.

    Buddhism, Taoism, Jainism, Confucianism, Existentialism, Post-Modernism, Atheism, these ways of thinking do not have anything in their founding documents (or lack therof) that promotes hate or genocide or murder or fear. Some individual members or groups may or may not have, but the core philosophy does not. Therefore, i find them to be unobjectionable models for society.

    Christianity and Islam both have passages in their founding documents (Bible, Koran) that are profoundly disturbing, amoral at best, sadistic at the minimum, and all too often, sociopathic. I find nothing acceptable about a book that calls for infanticide, rape, murder or war. And yet, there are passages in both textsthat do just that.

    Some bank on the fact that Westerners are largely ignorant of anything other than christianity, and therefore claim that every religion or philosophy is inherently homophobic, sexist, racist, or violent. And while they can cite individual proponents of other religions or philosophies as being clearly mad, they dodge the question of how the core documents of those ways of thinking stack up against theirs. They have not bothered to read the Dharmapadda, the Tao Te Ching, The Analects, Kierkegaard, Derrida or Sartre. They are hopeful that you haven't either.

    But there are alternatives to these two paths. We should encourage people to think beyond Islam or Christianity, and consider the plethora of non-violent forms of understanding

    • Where does Christianity (the New Testament or life of Christ which replaced the old testament) promote hate, genocide, murder or fear? You clearly do not know anything about Christianity. Read the words of Christ. Compare with Mohammed. Come back when you know what you're talking about.

      • Jesus endorsed the old testament,he said he came not to deny it but to fulfill.You want to run away from your teachings?

        • He is saying the Prophets of the old testament who talked about a Saviour are being fulfilled through him. Most of the old testament is a writing down of history, the parts that set down laws were for their time but when Jesus arrived only his word on God's law is valid. This is what the old testament says so he does not deny it. He then said after his death others (false Prophets) would follow him claiming to speak for God.

          But we would know them by their actions and the falseness of their words.

          Mohammed qualifies on all counts, claiming to be the Prophet of God and the new "religion of Peace' while conducting war on his neighbours, killing, stealing and committing adultery with wives of his followers (then marrying them). Islam carried on this way for the next 800 years until pushed back by Europeans. The argument of the Taliban and Al Queda is that Islamic states are violent, poor, and ignorant because they have failed to remain under a Caliphate with Sharia law. They are correct in the sense that is what Mohammed called for and the West managed to destroy by the end of WW!.

          You might try a little reading yourself.

          • Nope,he said he came to fulfill the lkaw,meaning the old testament,nowhere did he tell you t to distance yourselves from it,the one you like pretend is not in the Bible,only to bring them out for your convenience.No this rubbish you just typed.As ffro False propohets,well,that`s what every religion calls the others isn`t it?So I couldn`t care less.As for your last sentence,idiot,you don`t know me and take your own advice.

          • Actually, "idiot," it says the "Law or the prophets." I guess you're an expert on Greek language etymology now? Does he actually go on to explain exactly what he was there to "fulfill?" Do you not understand that in correct context, Christ's law (which negated many of the legalisms of the OT) was the fulfillment of the law?

            Damn, I'm not even religious and I understood that much.

        • Yet it is certain from the entirety of his teachings he was fulfilling much of it into obviation.

    • Funny how the alternative disciplines you mention come from countries who have committed Hate,genocide ,fear and murder.

    • Buddhism, Taoism, Jainism, Confucianism, Existentialism, Post-Modernism, Atheism. And the examples of great societies under these models are? India, China, Indonesia, Japan, all of Africa? No genocide, hate, cruelty, tribalism? Great increases in human knowledge, rule of law, individual freedoms?
      You find nothing about Christianity to be worth modelling a society on? Where do you think the society you are in, the one that has produced the greatest progress of mankind in history in every area you can name, came from?

  19. Convert to Christianity ? Change one fairy tale fable for another makes no sense. Christianity , the belief that a jewish Zombie who can make you live forever in paradise if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree… yeah, I can understand why that's the world's most popular religion.

    • I agree totally, though I think you put it a tad too atheistically.

      • But I think we SHOULD be honest in our disrespect of religion. Yeah, it's fuckin' ridiculous, I'm not gonna pretend it isn't anymore.

    • Perfect!

    • HA!! A wonderful description!!

      • If by description you mean caricature.

    • So what do you propose to do about Islam?

    • At least if they become christians dont fly jets into skyscrapers or detonate themselves in a crowd of people.

  20. Most Muslims only think they are Muslims, especially those who claim to be born Muslim, and Ms Ayaan Hirsi Ali is no exception, and having renounced what she thought to have been Islam, she provides the evidence that she never knew Islam and that she has only her ancestors and their misunderstanding of the Quran to blame.
    The Quran is the Most Powerful Lecture on the Planet and neither Ms Ali nor her parents ever attempted to understand Islam but followed their ignorant ancestors who attempted to blend Islam and paganism to form their own oppressive systems.
    The Quran, like Allah, is timeless, and was before men concocted the Bible, and the Bible agrees with the Quran, although even misguided Muslims may think that the Quran came with the advent of Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be on him.
    The Quran confirms that there was a hoax at the much talked-about crucifixion in which the Messiah was not crucified, nor was he called by the name of Jesus.

    • Guess you were indoctinated into Islam at an early stage and will never be able to see anything remotely close to reality. Keep memorizing your Quran … you obviously have no other pastime.

      • Keep memorizing your Quran … you obviously have no other pastime.

        I've never understood the hands off take on religion. If a person believes that their eternal salvation comes from their belief in the teachings of their deity, why wouldn't they spend every waking moment studying those teachings? Why wouldn't they do everything in their power to fully understand those teachings?

    • If the Quran was timeless why would so many verses be abrogated? When Mohammed was weak and vulnerable he talked about "no compulsion in religion". When he became powerful verses like that were abrogated by verses calling for the killing of unbelievers. If Allah had an eternity to think about it wouldn't he have gotten his story straight ?

      These "revelations" were really just conveniences for Mohammed to build his cult and empire.

      The Quran has references to the Bible but many of them display Mohammed's flimsy understanding of the monotheism he was trying to plagiarize.

    • So how exactly do you get around the problem of bibles being carbon dated to the 4th century? Magic, I suppose?

      • Allah says in the Quran that the crucifixion was a clever hoax and all that come with the hoax are parts of the hoax, which includes Bible and Christianity and Jesus, and the Bible agrees.
        I have no problem with when the Bible was produced to promote the hoax in the form of a hoax since the Bible exposes the beautiful planning and execution of the hoax by the Messiah and his militant band of devoted jihadists.
        There is no magic, but the ultimate power of the Quran can crush mountains and the petty World leaders think they ought to stop Muslims from becoming nuclear armed as if they are not Christians who do not see what is in their own Bible, except for the washing of hands. Are you about to wash your hands?

        • Well, I sho am glad you are here to tell us little infidels the truth! Science is garbage, right, since it hasn't evolved in the Middle East since the Dark Ages. At least now we know that carbon dating is a farce.

          Where are the leftists defending you when you're here spouting the truth anyway? I wonder — they seem to pop up in your absence, but the second a faithful Muslim rears his head they retreat faster than a fat kid on cake.

          • The fact is that there is scientific knowledge in the Quran that no man would have known about at the time of the prophet Muhammad, Peace and Blessings of Allah be on him, and scientists today have used this information to further their work.
            You jump to conclusions in your haste to prove your ignorance when I have never even spoken about science and Europe depended om Islam to learn scientific research and even the music you love to hear was given to Europe by the Muslims of the Middle East and Africa. Allahuakbarr!

          • Oh, you mean scientific knowledge like the "pen of creation?" Or, do you mean, scientific knowledge like your silly "god" jerking off in mud to create mankind? Islam is a joke.

          • Mankind has taken more than 1400 years, with 20th. Century technology and University scientists and research resources, to begin to unravel the simple scientific information contained in the Quran about:
            " Human Embryonic Development,
            " Mountains,
            " The Origins of the Universe,
            " The Cerebrum,
            " Seas and Rivers,
            " Deep Seas and Internal Waves, and
            " Clouds.
            You can go tohttp://www.islam-guide.com for the information and they may even give you a copy for free.
            In 1988 I challenged Pope Joun Paul ii to prove the value of the Sroud of Turin and he had it carbon-dated to declare it a medieval hoax when the Gospels show that two shrouds were used to wrap 100 lbs of Aloes and Myrrh to fake a burial in Joseph's tomb and you can check this out too.
            Truth offends and is stranger than fiction since men prefer to be fooled with the garbage of the circus clowns wh pose as leaders. Allahuakbarr!

          • you describe yourself pretty well here.

          • I am different and can therefore be difficult and boring at times.
            I have done my homework and I therefore have the correct answers.
            I can be a good listener but I do not fall for all that others tell me, and that's where the differences begin. Am I not an easy target for envy?
            You are already turning green, aren't you?

            You will never be the same you again after meeting up with a real MUslim who's got the answers.
            Do some studies and your own research and see if you can come up with answers that make people want to attack you instead of what you write and say.
            Subhan Allah wal Hamdulillah wa Allahiakbarr!
            You cannot run and you cannot hide from Allah and to Allah we will all return!

          • i would comment and ask some questions here but the admin deleted my last set of comments and questions. apparently i have less right to state my opinions and comments than the rest. will this message make it thru!?

          • Apparently, I can speak. So, it is good that u r a good listener, however, claiming that u do not fall for all that others tell u is wrong. u did fall. TWICE. and dare i say u will fall a third time. u are still looking for yourself. i can say that because if you had found yourself u would have stayed with your original beliefs instead of looking for something else.

            i have found myself and my place in the world. i did not have to look for a third person to tell me about myself. i am totally satisfied with my beliefs (or lack thereof, as per you) and my life is full of peace and joy.

            if your faith is truly strong and clear, u will not have to beat people on the head with it all the time. it would make itself evident in how you and your fellow believers present themselves (as is happening now). it is human nature to focus on the negative, not the positive. if you can look at yourself objectively, you will understand what i am saying.

            Peace be with you.

          • I never fell for anyhting of anyone but I was guided by Allah after I selected my prayer to The Only True God (John 17:3).
            I was brought up Christian because my forefathers were forced to become Christian in British colonialism if that is what you think is my first fall and Allah guided me to His Quran by the prayer I prayed to Him, which was the first prayer I ever felt leave my presence on it's way to my Lord.
            You never looked or never did "seek" as you should so you have fooled yourself into believeing that you are a self-made God while you remain in the Devil's darkness and try to influence others with your garbage that had to be deleted by this site until you cooled your herbs and tried another angle.
            Allahukabarr!

          • You know nothing and only guess as the Quran clearly states about your type.
            I can see your green tint all over your words of envy and hate but I cannot help you so you can go cut off the hand that writes such hatred and envy, as the Messiah advised in the BIble, or pluck out the eye that blinds you, or simply try, by your own effort, yo save yourself, as no man can save you.
            You have seen my faith to be strong without compromise for truth is not compromised but you grab at straws to avoid drowning in your own vomit.
            I cant help you but you are free to admire me instead of spitting all of your venom at me. Allahuakbarr!

    • Funny how many of the murderers, and wannabe's, tended to be well educated individuals until they got jiggy with the Quran. I believe they understood the Quran, and Mohammed, very well.

      • Well, how else can you interpret "strike off their heads" or "kill the infidel when you see them"? The guy was a warrior — Jesus was a peacenik. These leftists blurring the two make me sick, and I'm not religious.

      • The murderers are those who invade Muslim countries with their Crusade for the cross of two crucified thieves named Jesus.
        You will find that the Muslims who have been made to take up the war against these murderers are students of Hadith and not Quran. If they use the Quran the war will be won in quicker than a wink.
        Hadith are tradition and not Revelation and they prove that they claim to understand Hadith when they do not understand Quran. Their false translations and misunderstanding if Quran have placed them in the position of being warriors to make up for their lack of understanding of Quran so that they gain the Promise of Allah. Allahuakbarr!

    • The qur'an is a discombobulated collection of incoherent rants, anti-Semitic diatribes, and chronicled atrocities. Islam is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the human people. I pity you and your laughable "religion."

    • @saldim5. Well, if you say Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali was never a Muslim, why the death threat against her for "renouncing" something she never was?

  21. The Bible exposes the hoax of the crucifixion in which Pilate officially ordered the crucifixion of two thieves whom he, Pilate, named each with the name of "Jesus" and had them duly hanged on the Sabbath, which brought the curse of the crucified thieves on Jerusalem with which Jerusalem remains accursed to this day, and the self-acclaimed scholars like Ms Ali missed the Message of the Scripture that does not go without the decree of Allah.
    The Age Of Reason by M A Raheem and Mervyn C Charles explores the Bible and shows the Bible delivering the Hoax of the Crucifixion by the Power of Allah and the Quran of Allah.
    Ms Ali has mistaken Somalian tradition for Islam and she is not intelligent enough to examine what she holds as scholarship.
    Ms Ali, like those who promote her misunderstanding, remains a victim of 2000 years of religious fraud.

    • Wasn't that made into a movie.Somalian Interpretation,Wahhabism,Shites,Sunni.What would be the right interpretation?
      All seem to have a common denominator of hatred of the West and Jews though.Nothing like a common hate to bring all Muslims together

    • Funny how my views got censored on the saldim5 comment on the misinterpretation of Somalian Islam.Which Islamic interpretation is correct? Wahhabism,Sunni, Shite?Are they not all full of misinterpretations and what seems to bring all Muslims together ?I wonder if this P.C. version will be allowed?

    • You are obviously not intelligent enough to understand Ms Ali.

    • Mohammed is one of the false prophets Jesus warned about. He speaks of bringing peace, yet was a war monger against others, he spoke of truth and honesty, yet was a their and liar, he spoke of morality yet committed adultery with other men's wives, then married them. He stated men could have 3 wives then married more. He had slaves, traded in slaves and killed apostates. He is a false prophet as predicted by Jesus and those who follow him have lost God.

      • He was also a pedophile, marrying a 9 year old at age 53.

        • The Bible tells us that Mary was pregnant before Joesph slept with her and we do not know at what age Mary became pregnant for the father with whom she committed adultery but this adultery was also the crime of incest since the son and the father were one, so is your God a peadophile?
          Muhammad was an honourable and not a God as the two thieves named Jesus are looked upon by your type and Muhammad did not sleep with her before he took her as wife as an adult. Your malice blinds you.
          Allahuakbarr!

          • Muhammad was a pedophile, a butcher, and an illiterate thug. He added NOTHING noteworthy to the human condition. The world would be better off if he had been stillborn.

          • WHERE DO YOU GET THIS TOTAL NONENSE FROM?
            Show me Scripture and verse where this is stated. You won't find it. The Bible events, as is, are confirmed by secular historians of the time like Josephus and others. Look, Christ claimed he was God. There are only 2 responses to that. Either True or False. If it is False. There are only 2 responses to that. Either he knew his claims were false or he didn't. If he knew, he was a lier and hypocrite and a fool because HE DID DIE for it (also verified by secular sources other than the Bible). If he didn't know his claims were false then he was deluded. But his ministry (and again secular sources confirm) shows that he taught with wisom and authority. Deluded people are subject to mood swings and cannot separate reality from their deluded world. Your are really only left to the choice to either accept him as God or reject him as God. Also the facts of archaelogy completely destroy your arguments.

    • there are catholic public schools and school boards nearly everywhere. Protestant public funded schools as well. In my opinion religions should be kept out of public schools entirely. You want to give you child a religious upbringing? do it your home our your church and not on my dime.

      • sorry, misplaced this. should be up in the funding of schools thread

        • DPY-Catholic schools aren't funded on your dime. Parents choose the school system they want their taxes to support.

      • Did you say that to your parents? Have you ever tried to reason what you think you know or do you just bray or chatter?

        • Sir, you have a reputation score of -26 at present. Your opinions, as reviewed by your peers, are worthless.

          • I have no peers in my Islam. I was guided by Allah to Islam and those you wish to call my peers consider themselves "born Muslims" when even you were born Muslim but your parents and your peers forced you into what you believe.
            Allahuakbarr!

    • I'd put her up against you any day of the week. ( with one logical hand tied behind her back) You're nothing but an Islamic Rosie O'donnell

      • Difference is that she thought she was Muslim when she never was and she therefore does not know anything about Islam or about what she claims to have learnt.
        I was brought up Christian and spent more than half of my life seeking Truth until Allah guided me to Islam and now I know Christianity and I know Islam.
        You would put up with her because she is what you love to see as a Muslim and she enjoys your following her fake scholarship.
        She is in it for the money.
        So what if she is Somalian and grew up in Saudi Arabia?
        I am not Arab and not Somalian and I do not support mainstream Arab or Somalian religion which I see as traditional and as backward as Christianity.
        I am Muslim. The first real Muslim you have met, and now you will never be the same because you have met Muhammad Abdurahim.
        I suggest you read The Age Of Reason by M A Raheem and Mervyn C Charles, if you wish to criticise. Amen and Allahuakbarr!

        • A few key points you missed:
          1. She actually isn't Muslim, not because of some false practice, but because she's an atheist.
          2. There are other (see: better) books out there. By some authors like Christopher Hitchens, Mark Steyn, Richard Dawkins.
          3. We're not debating on your terms. I'm not about to go read 300 pages of "praise allah" junk.
          4.http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_md61S_gChL0/SdfqTqtJo-I
          5. No one said you were Arabic, or Somalian, or Saudi. You self identified as Muslim (and, coincidentally, an asshole.)

          • There is a name for your lack of intelligence when you make a personal attack with your false and silly argument.
            I did not miss anything about her nut she was quickly dismissed as false and ignorant in Sydney, Australia when she introduced herself as a Muslim atheist and one interviewer who is not Muslim, showed her how ignorant she was to claim to be a Muslim atheist and now you are just as ignorantand have trapped yourself into admitting that she is not Muslim but ahteist.
            Why would an atheist bother to tackle Islam except for ignorance and hatred? Fact is she was never Muslim and does not even know what to say she was or is and you are left holding your brain between your legs instead of your ears. Got it?

          • Islam is the truth yet millions of its followers flee the Nations of Islam everyday to take up in the streets of their Western enemies all because their countries, which function under shari'a law, are perfect. That's what you're talking about, right?

            I, like Ms. Ali, will always "tackle Islam" because in this country, public discourse on any and all subjects is a civil right. You lack that on a civil and personal level and for that you have my pity.

          • The Western murderers continue their Crusades into Muslim lands to destroy and plunder and to murder innocent women and children in the name of Jesus the two thieves who were crucified on the Sabbath and who cursed the World with their breach of the Sabbath.
            Muslims flee the destruction of their lives by the Western Christian World of accursed murderers and your soldiers return home in flag-draped coffins and bags or maimed and mentally ill to spread their crusade sickness in your homeland and you will not learn because you are blind. Allahuakbarr!
            Ms Ali is making money of you suckers like Salman Rushdie and Vidia Naipaul have done and you suck on her garbage. Allahuakbarr!

          • please explain how not not accepting ur brand of blind faith means we hate you? although, to be quite honest (now there is a new term for you to check out), you make it very easy to do so.

            Also please explain how a drone would know about "facts" when all u r familiar Eis bullshit.

        • Sounds like you are like every other nut trying to find a reason to exist. Let me guess in between Jesus and Mohammed the murderer did you try crystal therapy? Scientology? Judaism?running naked through the woods and hugging a tree?Too bad you didn't check out the promise keepers so I wouldn't come across your garbage. Allahuakbarr-what every dedicated Muslim screams before killing innocent people.

          • Allahuakbarr! There is no Jesus in the Quran and no Jesus in Islam.
            You will never find Jesus in the OT and you will never find Christianity or Judaism in the entire Bible or in any genuine Scripture.
            I don't follow the ways of men and I have never experimented with the man-made religions. My parents were forced into Christianity by the Christian/Democracy oppressive system and I composed my own prayer from the prayer of the Messiah to The Only True God in John 17:3, which made me feel like i contacted the Only True God and then my friend who was also of forced Christianity and discovered Islam, came to me with a gift of the translation of the Quran by an Englishman who also was a convert to Islam. Allahukabarr!

          • Allahukabarr- Is that the one with almonds and caramel, or with peanuts and chocolate? Damn I'm hungry for a tasty Allahukabarr.

          • I am different and can therefore be difficult and boring at times.
            I have done my homework and I therefore have the correct answers.
            I can be a good listener but I do not fall for all that others tell me, and that's where the differences begin. Am I not an easy target for envy?
            You are already turning green, aren't you?

          • "Am I not an easy target for envy?"

            Um, no.

          • So you use the copy/paste function to answer people. Yes I am green with envy at your rapier-like wit.
            /sarc

          • saldim5: quick HW assignment for you, find the verses of the Koran that say anything about the theory of evolution, quantum mechanics, the germ theory of disease, string theory, the double helical structure of deoxyribonucleic acid, the materials and precise concentrations thereof that would give us composites that superconduct at room temperature, and, for a little added difficulty, how to acheive faster-than-light travel.

            I'm sure that a scholar of the Koran such as yourself would have no problem tracking down the relevant verses. Go!

          • saladim5

            This one is a live one. Religious nuts unite!

          • faster than light travel exists in Islam.

            At an "Islamic science" conference in the 80's in Pakistan, a delegate stated the same because the prophet (peace be upon him) ascended to heaven in 7 seconds. And so human progress continues!

        • So you prefer the religion of peace(s), eh!? that's ok, i guess. the weak-minded always look for a bigger name to blame for their flaws. and BOY! did you pick!! you pathetic, poor thing, you!!

    • "The Age Of Reason by M A Raheem and Mervyn C Charles explores the Bible and shows the Bible delivering the Hoax of the Crucifixion by the Power of Allah and the Quran of Allah."

      No, they don't.

  22. Yes clearly you didn't read the article or didn't understand it. You think she is to be condemned for lying to escape a forced marriage? Interesting how The Guardian doesn't allow comments on the article. I found this to be the case with their review of her new book — they didn't attack her ideas but tried to assert that she believes the way she did because of emotional problems due to her past experience (no proof or substance to that given of course).

    While the article you refer to is not quite that bad, it looks like the left-leaning Guardian is trying to spread disinformation.

  23. Funny,Muslims don't seem to have a problem getting their community's out to protest en masse against Israel and America

  24. Islam is a religion of submission. How can can muslims have the freedom to choose?

    • there is no question of "how they can…" they don't. Period.

  25. Religeon is like Politics. There are several differing viewpoints with each Convinced THEY are RIGHT!!!!….and those who dissagree??….well…they are nuts!!!

  26. Before I reply to any of that, I want you to answer one question truthfully: have you read her memoir? Yes or no answer, please.

    • No, I have not read her memoir, but I've certainly read this article where she expresses some of her points and those are the points I'm responding to.

      • I won't bother responding then other than to say it's unfortunate you would belittle her experiences and say "I know better." You don't.

        • What a wonderful way to avoid actually having a discussion. Look, if there's something she's written which addresses my point, or you'd like to contribute some independent thoughts of your own, please, provide them.

          She has had her experiences, obviously ones that have been very difficult and trying, and these experience have contributed to her opinions and viewpoints of the world. I have had my own experiences, certainly less exceptional than hers, but my experiences contradict her opinion. I have described my experiences and explained how they contradict hers, and provided examples that are more concrete for other readers to follow my logic, such as the Muslim Congress of Canada.

          I am not belittling Ali – I have neither insulted her, or her obviously difficult experience. I have disagreed with her. If you truly believe that people cannot disagree with other's opinions, or should not be free to do so, then perhaps it is best that you not bother to respond, because it is a waste of both my time and your's if you are not willing to at least listen to dissenting opinions.

  27. Marushka obviously is not intelligent enough to understand that I have used the Bible and the Quran to prove my point and I have documented this in my book.
    Marushka is not intelligent enough to accept that the Bible proves the Quran the ultimate Scripture and the Bible condemns those who are not intelligent enough to see through the Hoax of the Crucifixion and Christianity and the humiliation of the Children of Israel by Isa al Masih.

    • Mohamedans do not believe in the One God. They proclaim that they believe in a different god who is not the One God. They prove it by demanding to be excused from the singing of our anthem. "Oh Canada". They refuse to attend because our anthem includes the word "God" in it. The Toronto Public School Board accomodates them, so it must be true. So much for a book that explains apples and oranges.

    • Get with it, man. Scriptures don't bring back to life dead people, nor does it repair the wounded. We are talking life and freedom. Or are those things unimportant to you?

      • Scriptures have given you life and freedom or we would be in the caves.
        Get with it, Bro! Your prents dont deserve to be treated that way.

        • Your brethren are in caves. Those who have shaken off the chains of 8th century religion live in countries where science and technology predominates and no one lives in caves.

          Argument fail.

          • Real science is in the Quran and your universities teach what they learned from Islam.

          • don't mistake blind faith for 'real science'! i know u r ignorant like the rest of your cave-dwelling brethren so you don't have to keep re-iterating it. we are neither ignorant nor dumb.

    • Ah, so there's that famed Muslim superiority complex I've been reading about in the flesh.

      Here's an idea: if you don't like the idea of a nation pedicated upon the "hoax of the crucifixion" go back to your shari'a law nation of birth.

      • I dont know what nation you are talking about but if it is the USA you ought to be told that the USA rejected Christianity with a war for their freedom but they decided to allow freedom of worship because tha Christian Government did not. Amen!

          • I am telling you that you dont know and you are too dumb to accept that you are dumb and you continue your false line of argument that holds no substance.
            I have done my research and you are learning from me and you are an ungrateful little Bart Simpson and your parents are Homer and Marge. Allahukabarr!

          • That should be Alahua"k"bar, Saldim. And keep writing and posting these missives. You are doing the work of ten strong men in proving your opponents' point of view.

          • Yes, I would encourage saldim and others to continue "educating" infidels about their religion of peace. It makes my job a lot easier.

        • you don't know, and that is probably the first sensible thing i have seen you write so far. if u r in this country u have the freedom to worship just like everyone else here. However, u choose to abuse this freedom by attacking everyone else's beliefs. basically that means that u have no idea what FREEDOM means, but then i shouldn't blame u. after all, u r just a drone.

    • Islam is a gutter perversion of Judaism and Christianity. It was when it was created and it is now. Proof is that 90% of the practitioners have no strength / desire/ courage to fight the so-called 10% of the fanatics, which means the "religion" has NO EMPOWERING FUNCTION for men and women to transcend their violent nature as rapists, murdererers and thieves, which is what ISLAM HAS BEEN ABOUT SINCE THE DAY OF ITS FOUNDING.

      I agree with Anne Coultter, muslims should convert out or kill themselves, or at the very least, stop breeding as Islam is a cancer.

  28. Truth in the words of “Jesus” in the Bible is: “Think not that I am come to send peace on Earth. I came not to send peace but the sword” (Matthew 10:34). Terrorism began in Jerusalem 2000 years ago from where it spread World-wide and it was with their swords that the Messiah and his men staged the great Crucifixion Hoax and had two thieves named “Jesus” crucified by the Roman Governors.

    • How pathetic! If you read 10:35 to to 10:42 it shows his meaning that as the Son of God he would create divisions within families because some would deny him while others would believe. A man's foes would be in his own household. The "fight" is within each person who must decide whether he believes in Jesus. Jesus is the "sword" who divides people between non believers and believers. This is figurative and neither here nor anywhere else does he call for believers to kill others in his name. Unlike Mohammed who exhorted his followers to kill those who refused to convert as well as any who later denied Islam.
      As the follower of a false prophet you will try to be clever in denying Jesus but you will fail. The life led by Mohammed tells everyone what an evil fraud he was.

  29. Christians been trying to convert Muslims for centuries – yet Islam is the fastest growing religion. Good luck.

    • They can`t even win a debate on their own beliefs to begin with.They always lose the only thing they can do is bring up Aisha, insult you,Islam and Mohammed then ask you to join their religion.Tells you that you are the devil in flesh, 'go back to your country 'suicide bomber' 'goat f****r',sheepsh****r then complain that you are not interested in being his friend,really?

      • Come on now he had solid arguments and he didn't bring up Aisha. You did. Did anyone else in this forum bring her up?

        Did you want to talk about her … get something off your chest ?

        • Who had solid arguments?Who are you talking about?I am not talking about this forum,I am just pointing out my conversations with Christians,that they you can`t even debate your own beliefs properly and the only thing they wnat to do is insult you and then invite you to their religion.

        • Where are the solid arguments? Islam is the fastest growing religion because contraception of any kind is a mortal sin, Muslim men have as many wives as they want and impregnate them at will, and even though their own people blow them up regularly in their home countries, their population is outpacing the Western population. Even though I know Westerner's defend them out of a misguided sense of wanting to protect "minorities" I at least take comfort in the idea that Muslims will never be able to convert Canadians or any other Western peoples en masse. Their idea cannot win.

          • Listen,you get a dog and cat,mistake that for your kids,keep telling each other that having kids pollutes the environment.I will not apologize for having kids.Please,you think people will keep putting up with this rubbish of approving everything?I am just waiting until you guys legalize everything.Stay delusional.Our idea cannot win?Is that why you guys scream everyday that we are overtaking you?Is that why you have spend so much money on books,videos,''think tanks'' and 'experts' bashing Islam and yet,Islam remains intact.We are winning and we do whatever we want,you can`t stand that,which is why you spend your time whining about us,clueless as to how you can stop us,well you can`t.Better get used to it.We already are winning over your people,which is why you complain about mosques being built and you have to retreat to an internet forum to complain about it.

          • "We already are winning over your people"

            So at what point is it that your parents started telling you about your enemies — was from birth too young or did they wait until you were five?

          • What enemies idiot?And whoever said my parents are Muslim or ever were Muslim?

          • Mosques are being built due to more Muslims coming to Canada, b/c they did not like the condition of their home country (governed under Islam). Get it straight. If you look at Europe, most of the non-Muslim population is fed up with Muslims taking advantage of their kindness, and are putting a stop to Muslim rights. This is only the beginning of the end of the Muslim "era" in the west. As for the people you are winning over, I'm not concerned. Also, there is a whole lot of things in the works to put a stop to Muslim aggression, done by everyday regular people who don't care for Islam. No, I'm not telling what!

            Please don't lecture "infidels" on their beliefs. Muslims are blowing each other up right now. I would think that is worse than having an argument about what one believes.

          • everything Taho is saying is true. till the West learns that they have to FACE the enemy rather than bury their collective necks in the sand of political correctness and "protection of minorities" and their civil rights, the mullahs will keep using their rules and social weakness against them.

            Taho, u can "do what you want" in our world. in your own, you would never get the freedom for that. you can abuse the privileges you get in our society as much as you want. we gave you that right. and typical of your kind, u r just as ungrateful as you can possibly be.

    • Actually the growth of islam is more a function of a higher birth rate in poor backward islamic countries. According to stats there are actually more conversions to Christianity than to Islam.

      Is Islamic countries you can be killed or imprisoned for changing to Christianity. Christians will be imprisoned if they to convert. We would probably see mass defections if this wasn't the case.

      What really needs to be done is to cut off the flow of Islamic immigrants. Let them live in the civilization that they have created. It needs fixing. And put pressure on Islamic countries to get rid of apostate penalties.
      http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-myths-fastest-gro

  30. Was she not kicked out of Denmark because she lied about her supposed suffering? This lady lies and lies and now Macleans (in their usual anti Muslim anti Islam diatribe) is giving her a platform? Do you really want to go to war with Islam? Have you not learned by now not to f*ck with us? The fact that you put the headline as you did shows that you are unable to have a real debate with Islam – using academic proofs and logic and reason. take a look at what the likes of Shabir Ally can do to your Christian mouthpieces. No wonder Ayan Hirsi Ali and Irshad Manji do not publicly debate anyone – not on radio, not by cellphone, nothing. Because their total stupidity would be exposed right away.

    • Yup,she made up her life story to claim refuge.She was kicked out of the Dtuch Parliament after she was exposed by a Documentary for lying.She li9ed aboput her name,her age,that she witnessed four civil wars,that she came straight from Somalia,when she had lived in Kenya her entire lifeThat her father lives in Somalia,when he had lived in England the whole time.Her family,is not even religious,never was,she even slandered her own mother by saying she enver wanted her to learn how to read.Who does that?In ?the 'Zembla 'program,her brother expressed utter shock at her statements and her relatives too,none of them could confirm anything she says.But according to her,everybody but her is lying,only shje knows,only her.But her fans do not want to to hear that saying that the stuff,saying that `s what she wrote in her book,a book she wrote after she was kicked out of Holland and two years after being exposed.Do`t bvelieve anything she says.The same idiot that caused Theo Van Goh`s death with her garbage stories.She became an MP guess what she did,nothing,Shre just cashed the cheque,even the party boss said he would not miss her,Now she ius trying her luck in North America because Europeans don`t listen when speaks anymore

      • "The same idiot that caused Theo Van Goh`s death"

        Islamist 'logic' in a nutshell: don't blame the murderers, don't look at the ideology they kill for – it's always the victims' fault.

    • She lied to get out a forced marriage. Big deal.

      • She lied about that too,because the guy she was supposed to be married to,visted her in the refugee centre and she even wrote letters to to him.She even wrote letters to the same father she was fleeing from,at the same time she was making a refugeee claim.There isnt` anything she hasn`t lied about.

    • "Not to f*ck with us"?? Really? What are you going to do "Pasquale"? My, my, my, that sounds like a threat coming from the famed religion of peace.

    • "…not to f*ck with us…" – a threat from the religion of 'peace'. i love it!

      "real debate with Islam – using academic proofs and logic and reason" – u have the same academic proof as Christianity. And "logic and reason", i have yet to see either in either religion. religion is based on fear and emotional control. Logic and Reason are the farthest thought processes from religion.

      Public debate about islam leads to psychotic reactions from muslims and people turning up dead for speaking the truth about your religion. the only 'peace' you people want is everybody else in the plural form of 'piece'.

  31. Can't imagine why they would want to go from one wacko religion to another that is just as bad.

  32. The trinity is not the One God but three gods in one with each being one and three and all together being one which is not a mystery but a jigsaw that is easily solved as 13 gods, yes, thirteen gods all in one, which is Zeus the Greek Weather God and his twelve (12) months with the four (4) Gospels being the four seasons of spring and summer and autumn and winter.
    The Messiah was a Muslim and prayed to Allah and spoke Aramaic and you can find Allah in John 17:3 where the Messiah prays to The Only True God, not to a trinity.

    • You are definatly mistaken by this as the Trinity does not mean that their are 3 gods but that god can appear in three forms. One as god the creator of the heavens and the earth, Jesus who is god in a human form ( which was gods way of redeeming humanity for their sinful nature) and third the holy spirit which is gods spirit which is not seen but felt. The best way to explain this is by using the analogy of an egg. An egg is composed of three parts the yoke, the whites and the shell – But it is still only one object. I think the biggest understanding that you are missing and that us humans have a hard time understanding is that god is a supernatural being capable of anything imaginable – Their for god can be in three different forms at once. Each making up just one part of one god.

    • I am also curious as to why Mohammad was the messiah. The only thing Mohammad did was write the Qu'ran and preach to people. If that is the criteria for a messiah than I believe that there have been many messiah's. You said that you have done your research and you can use the scriptures to prove anything you think is right but it dosen't make it true. Youare obviously using what is know as a self-serving bias, which means that you are using the scriptures to prove your own theroies rather than actually reading and understanding the scriptures in the context that it was writen. Understanding the history surrounding the time it was written in would also help with the understanding of the text

  33. Although it is from last year, I think you may find this book review useful. The author comes from a Muslim perspective and reviews her works. The link is here … it is good to hear other opinions and ideas.
    http://loga-abdullah.blogspot.com/2008/11/defendi

    Hope you find it interesting.

  34. •_Zeus the Sky God and Father God speaks in a voice from the Sky at the Baptism of Jesus, “my beloved son,” while the Holy Spirit descended “like a dove.” (Matthew 3:17, Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22)__•_Jesus is described with the features of Zeus the Sky God at the Transfiguration as “his face did shine as the Sun, and his raiment as white as the light” (Matthew 17:2), “And his raiment became shining exceeding white as Snow (Mark 9:3) “And there was a cloud that overshadowed them”, (with the unmistakable voice of Zeus) “and a voice came out of the cloud saying, this is my beloved son” (Mark 9:7) “his countenance was altered and his raiment was white and glistering” (Luke 9:29), “and there came a cloud and overshadowed them” (Luke 9: 34) “and there came a voice out of the cloud” (Luke 9:35), and all of this is in a meeting with Elisha or Eliseus (Luke 4:27)

  35. Chrstians continue to make miserable excuses when responding to Islam and the fact that the Messiah was not crucified and that his name was not Jesus.
    Jesus is the name Pilate stuck on the two crucified thieves after the Messiah and his companions executed the perfect escape from crucifixion with the help of the Roman Governors and this has left Christianity with worship of the Sun God Zeus as Christianity and Christians are afraid to see what the Bible is actually saying in agreement with the Quran, that the Messiah was not crucified and his name was not Jesus.
    Read The Age Of Reason by M A Raheem and Mervyn C Charles and get into the BIble and see what your eyes refuse to see, with the help of the Quran and this Muslim.
    Amen and Allahuakbarr!

    • My, the height of Islamic thinking was really some time ago !

  36. Christians reject Islam's view on the crucifixion but they seem to accept that Jesus was a prophet of Islam who is not considered by the Muslims to be the son of God.
    The Quran is quite clear about the Messiah and the Bible actually agrees with the Quran that there was a hoax to the crucifixion and also a hoax to the name Jesus as applied to the Biblical Christ, but Christians are extremely fearful about opening the Scriptures to see this agreement as it exposes Christians as being astray from the Scriptures and from the truth.
    The Age Of Reason by M A Raheem and Mervyn C Charles examines the Scriptures and arrives at proof of the truth of the hoax of the name of Jesus and the crucifixion but Christians turn away from being faced with the reality.
    Had the Bible been other than the hoax the Quran confirms there would be no need for four accounts (Gospels) aboutthe crucifixion of two thieves who were not mentioned in any Gospel before they arrived at the Place of the Skull. Amen and Allahuakbarr!

  37. Hirsi Ali just blows me away. What a magnificent human being. She joins the brave company of Irshad Manji, Noni Darwish and Mark Steyn. I wish the Muslim world would wake up and say to their brethern "Enough yet!". And i wish the rest of the world would wake up. I am so afraid of the next catastrophe. Their are so many brainwashed jihadists just waiting for the next opportunity.

    Meanwhile we can change things starting with our schools. If we allow separate Muslim schools to continue the problem will never be solved. It can only get worse!

  38. Muhammad was illiterate and he never read and could not read the Quran.
    The Quran is The Power of Allah, your Lord and King and Master and Creator, and mine, and the Quran tells you that "none" of the verses of revelation are abrogated.
    Muhammad took 23 years of his life to receive the Quran and many of the commands deal with his situation at the time but the same logic can be applied today to respond to aggressive disbelievers.
    You will never find any error or contradiction in the Quran.
    Disbelievers will never grasp the Message of the Quran because of the mere fact that they disbelieve and Allah chooses whoever He wills to "see."
    Quran is not the words on pages between two covers. Quran is what Allah places in the hearts of Believers.
    Muhammad could not plagiarise. He was illiterate.
    Quran is the final Message of the Messages received by Musa and Isa and you will not understand.

  39. The Bible agrees with the Quran and proves the Quran the Most Powerful of Scripture because the Bible is plagariasm and a hoax with worship of Zeus the Sun God blended in to try to give credibility to the polytheism of ancient Greek muthology, and you have been outwitted by the ancients.
    Amen

    • This guy is pure comedy.

  40. Islam envisages a global political struggle where everyone is a believer or a subject community. Each muslim is obligated to follow the lead of Mohammed who in his parting words said: I was ordered to fight all men until they say "There is no god but Allah".

    As with that other doctrine of world domination, Communism, the approach should be containment. But rather than encourage people to leave these regimes, as we did in the cold war, we should be cutting off immigration, forcing them to live in these medieval islamic regimes. Canada takes the most educated people from third world countries robbing them of the people who could make a difference. For degenerate islamic regimes this outward flow of immigrants is a safety value. If the brighter people had to stick around they might start to question things. Perhaps they might even make changes.

    As it is, they come to Canada bringing the beliefs they were inculcated with as children and support the transplantation of islamic society here with all its potential for violence, mistreatment of women, and terrorism.

    In the cold war we didn't allow believers in communism as immigrants. We shouldn't now be allowing believers in Islam.

    Canada unlike the US does not need Islamic oil. We don't need to cater to corrupt islamic regimes. Or be politically correct about islam. There is nothing we need from the Middle East. Besides oil they produce nothing of value.

    Other countries will follow our lead.

    Islam is getting a shot of energy from the terrorist of Bin Laden and his ilk. This doesn't indicate regeneration of islamic culture and civilization. Islam is a parasitic civilization, dependent on the outside world for technology and other elements of the modern world. We should disengage, apply containment and let it die. Something better will come in its place.

    • you are slaves to our oil, you fool. Just remind yourself of that when you go get gas at the pump.

      • Canada is a net exporter of oil. We don't need Islamic oil.

        • It's too bad that no refinery will provide a supply of guaranteed Canadian product – and foolish, I think, since differentiation means profit in a commodity market. I'd easily pay 10% extra at the pump for a terror-free option.

      • frances townsend is a very English name. Do we get oil from the North Sea ? Usually the English are more polite.

    • Perfect argument. Don't bother responding to the Islamists in this thread — they are not capable of debate as they are not able to practice it within their faith.

    • Well said, Smythe!! Sadly, the people who get the message are not in a position to do anything about it. I would sooo like to see a politician stand up for Canada rather than take a seat for himself. Will that happen in our lifetime!?

  41. Converting anyone to Christianity will not help. How can this woman link Christianity to feminism, or modern thought. Has she ever seen the homophobic and hateful Christian anti-gay rights groups? There are positive and negative aspects of both Christianity and Islam. The problem is not which one of these religions people follow, but if they are 'fundamental' and ignorant, or 'moderate' and forward thinking. The problem with the Islamic world did not experience the Humanist renaissance and is less developed, and therefore still more connected to outdated practice. They just need time, peace, and prosperity, and religion will fade away. Ultimately, to move forward, we must leave (but not forget) religion.

    • The pillar of Islam that calls for alms is good. Hamas does combine its charity work with its suicide bombing activities. It is also good public relations, building community support for its activities. We see this pattern elsewhere.

      Like most people in this country you think religion is a private matter and no concern of someone else — "problem is not which one of these religions people follow". However Islam is different. Extremists are not misinterpreting Islam.

      I think a gay should much prefer the intolerance of some Christian groups to what they get in Islamic countries — death and imprisonment.

      If you study Muslim history and the Koran a bit you'll discover that they are not likely to have a reformation. It hasn't happened for the last 1000 years.

      What Ayaan Hirsi Ali is calling for is an intellectual and spiritual confrontation with muslims in all forms. i.e., get them out of this killer cult. Let's not be intimidated by their threats and violence.

      info on Islam history and Koran

      might need to click on helper app first http://www.ninjavideo.net/video/22042

      • If you study Muslim history and the Koran a bit you'll discover that they are not likely to have a reformation. It hasn't happened for the last 1000 years.

        Not arguing, just pointing out that it took Christianity 1400 years to have their renaissance.

        • But the renaissance took place. If it hadn't, no doubt Islamists and Christians would be lobbing atoms at one another.

          But they are not. Instead, extremists are detonating themselves in open air markets and army bases shouting Allahuakbar as salim does throughout this thread.

        • Agreed. But do you think giving these guys 400 years more will leave and people alive to reform? at least Christians don't go about blobing themselves and others up at the drop of a hat!! If they do, i have not heard of it. and if it has happened and i have not heard of it, i stand corrected. and don't give me no BS about Ireland. That is political, not religious (i think).

          • Everything is political. Religion is used by powerful people to get less powerful people to do things that they wouldn't necessarily otherwise do.

            It doesn't excuse anything, but for people who are already predisposed to suggestion (which would be most people, but especially religious people), a little bit of desperation, and a lot of indoctrination, goes a long way towards getting them to do things that the rest of us would find completely insane.

  42. Millions and millions have been spent on trying to convert Muslims…….Islam is the fastest growing religion in the West and forget about birth rates…….we're talking about the WEST where white men and women are becoming Muslims……where Jews and Christians turn to Islam in large numbers – yet there are no swords, no forcing anybody. The lies against Islam are bound to be exposed – you are only forcing people to go and learn for themselves. Thank You very very very much !!!!

    • I see you have no stats to back that up. Immigration and higher birth rates from poorer less educated people not conversion is the cause.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claims_to_be_the_fas

      Data for Islam reveal that it is the fastest growing religion in Europe due to immigration and higher birth rates.[19]. The "Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life" stated
      “ Islam is already the fastest-growing religion in Europe. Driven by immigration and high birthrates, the number of Muslims on the continent has tripled in the last 30 years. Most demographers forecast a similar or even higher rate of growth in the coming decades.[20]

      • He has no stats because it's not true. Westerners will not and do not convert to Islam. Why would we take a step 1200 years back into history?

      • the few who do convert are malcontents looking for a way to gat back at those who actually managed to get ahead of them, while they were too lazy to work hard. and islam provides, and HOW!!

  43. you are deliberately inciting the wrong people and you should be held partially responsible for any reprisals against the rest of us. shame on macleans for giving voice to this known liar – do you have any integrity at all?

    • it is integrity that allows us to speak our minds, and Macleans to print the truth.

  44. nothing new this trash. i am a convert from athiesm to Islam – this woman is just about money – she needs so much of it to pay for her protection. they all cash in and we get ripped off. what a waste of a few minutes this article is.

  45. Do the Christians posting in this board even know that Muslims believe in Jesus as Messiah and that he will return again at the Second Coming?

    before you attack everything Islamic why don't you do your faith a service and check the facts: Muslims and Christians are the only two faith groups that agree on the Second Coming. Stay true to your Christian values people………..that is how you (try to) convert Muslims. Believe me, it's not so easy as you might think – they study our books way more than most of you do that is for certain.

    • I think it's you Father who needs to hit the books. Muslims believe he was another messenger but not the Messiah (the savior) as Christians view him.

      The Messiah (Jesus), son of Mary, was no more than a Messenger before whom many Messengers have passed away; and his mother adhered wholly to truthfulness, and they both ate food (as other mortals do). See how We make Our signs clear to them; and see where they are turning away!" (Quran 5:75).

    • FatherGreg, you might want to read saldim5's comments here.

  46. Never mind reading this whole article, just reading the title, converting everybody to Muslim, provokes a feeling of brainwashing and extremism.

    • true. but i would rather be brainwashed into being a civilized, socially responsible human being than a bomber who kills innocent people in the name of religion.

  47. Interesting. At least one FACT was not mentioned. Muslim extremists have only attacked “western” countries that have first attacked Muslim countries. Spain, Britain, Israel and the US come to mind. They were attacked AFTER they had attacked Palestine an/or Afghanistan and/or Iraq. The supporters of those countries have responded. They are called terrorists.

    Not necessarily anything to do with religion. It could be simple retaliation.

    Not even mentioned in the discussion.

    Art Campbell Nepean ON

    • What about the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993?

      The attack in the Achille Lauro in 1985?

      Us embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998?

      USS Cole 2000?

      Beirut 1983?

      • They all meet the criteria, except possibly Achille Lauro in 1985. The US has been supporting Israel throughout its life; the Palestinian supporters have been attacking Israel and the other countries which have supported Israel,

      • My reply appears to have been deleted

    • The Arabs attacked Israel (who had accepted the UN plan) first. Nice try, Herr Goebbels.

      • The Jewish extremists in setting up Israel attacked Palestinians, primarily Arabs. Put another way, there was a civil war. Then the US and the Arab League became involved.

        Speaking of Goebbels – judging by the persecution and/or discrimination suffered by Jews in the US, Canada, England France and Russia up until say 1950s, Jews were not popular. Some referred to it as the Jewish problem. Note that all these countries supported the founding of Israel in Palestine, inhabited by, and surrounded by Arabs, the enemy of the Jews for millenia.

        One could speculate that those countries opted to solve the “Jewish Problem”, by supporting the founding of Israel in Palestine. Let the Arabs complete the job started by Hitler.

        Without doubt their defense industries and the defense industry of Israel gained mightily.

        Cynical? Certainly. Factual.

      • Herr Goebbels – how appropriate since this article is obviously part of a propaganda campaign.

  48. All are what I would call battles in the war between Palestinian supporters and the US. Virtually retaliation for retaliation.with US support for Israel being a constant. Except Achille Lauro in 1985.

  49. The Jewish extremists in establishing Israel took land occupied and claimed by Palestinians. Speaking of Goebbels, I would suggest that the Jewish extremists set the stage for continuing Hitler's attack on Jews. They virtually handed over the job to Arabs in setting up Israel surrounded by Arabs.

    • Hook, line, and sinker – nice of you to out yourself like that, Art.

      In the last couple months, there have been at least 11 fatal Islamist attacks in India (13 dead, 34 wounded), 6 in Nigeria (17 dead, 13 wounded), 3 in the Philippines (12 dead, 18 wounded) and 23 in Thailand (33 dead, 80 wounded). But it's probably all the Jews' fault, eh Art?

      • What is the background for those attacks?

        Returning to Palestine ….whose at fault? It appears that the Jews are at fault for opting to set up a Jewish state by force rather than working towards a multi-ethnic state. The Palestinian Arabs are at fault for refusing to share Palestine with the Jews. A civil war ensued. The US and the Arab League, as they promised, got involved.

        The Palestinian Arabs and Jews should be left to live with the situation that they created. For either to complain of being attacked is silly.

        Clearly, there is no reason for Canada to be involved. The situation screams for neutrality.

  50. Well going way back for an example to the Nazi's you can look at Mohammed that great ethnic cleanser who sounds very 1940's Germany:

    as described http://eye-on-islam.blogspot.com/2009/05/sword-of

    Ibn Ishaq describes the grizzly scene: “Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for [the men of Banu Qurayza] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches.” Ibn Ishaq puts the number of men that Muhammad beheaded in this way at “600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900.” Another Muslim biographer of Muhammad, Ibn Sa'd (d.845), also claims that “they were between six hundred and seven hundred in number”, and this mass killing is attested to in numerous hadith.

    You can also look at the Islamic Turks who in their killing of millions of Armenians are well known to have been Hitler's principal teacher.

    The basic assumption that you are making is that Islamic terrorism is just defensive. You should read this book which you can pick up at the Ottawa Library. He describes how, to quite the contrary, the Islamic world is driven by internal motivations for empire. Even Hamas has publicly stated that they don't really want a Palestinian state so much as to reconstitute the Arab/Islamic empire.

    Islamic Imperialism
    A History
    Karsh, Efraim (Book – 2006)

    • “The basic assumption that you are making is that Islamic terrorism is just defensive”

      Two tribes, the Palestinian Arabs and the Jews are fighting over the same piece of land. The only winners are the arms industries,

  51. Vivian, I know that others here have posted rather inflammatory statements, so let me be clear – using threats is unacceptable (what Pasquale posted is well beyond any sort of acceptable levels of discourse, and there are other examples). However, please recognize that while you may disagree with my stance, I have not used threats of any kind.

    I can't help but pick up on the similarity of Ali's attitude towards Muslims and your attitude towards me. Just as she can't seem to accept that there might be Muslims who are not as destructive or oppressive as the Muslims she encountered in her youth, you can't seem to accept that there might be rational people who disagree with you on this subject and are willing to have a discussion.

    You have continuously dismissed me as being naive instead of addressing my points – if ignorance is all that prevents me from understanding, then please, spell it out for me. Simply telling me to read the Quran or Ali's book is, as most of your posts have been, a way to avoid engaging in debate. If there is something in the Quran or her book that you feel is relevant, and would make your case, please post it here.

    I understand that Islam is not the other major world religions, but I also understand that most of the major world religions have had their own violent past, their own history of abuses and their own texts which encourage both. There are definitely some aspects of Islam, both from the fundamentals of the religion and the culture that has developed around it in many countries, which is incompatible with Canadian society, and Muslim immigrants here must abandon those aspects to live here, which many have. Certainly, I think we need to do a better job explaining and enforcing what is considered unacceptable, but many Muslims have managed to learn what isn't tolerated in Canada.

    As for the "good" description, that's just lazy language on my part. I'd have hoped that it would be understood that when I use the words "good" and "bad" to describe people, I am describing their actions and attitudes, and whether or not they are acceptable in Canadian society. I apologize if that wasn't clear.

    • All right, dipolomacy. Craig O, I have respect for you. I agree with you on a lot of issues.

      "There are definitely some aspects of Islam, both from the fundamentals of the religion and the culture that has developed around it in many countries, which is incompatible with Canadian society, and Muslim immigrants here must abandon those aspects to live here."

      Bingo. However, please do not assume you are talking to the uniniated when you address members here. You seem to be fighting a battle with no one on the other side; no one has alleged Muslims are incapable of being decent to non-Muslims. Of course they can, but let's get real here, and don't conflate the evils of other religions with Islam. That is the "I know you are, but what am I?" argument of cultural relativists. Islam is the issue for Ali and I. Also, don't take an invitation to learn about Islam as an insult; I meant it as help.

  52. Hers is the voice of experience. Ignore it at your peril.

    • Oh pish posh. Leftists know more about minorities than the minorities themselves! Also, she's too psychologically damaged to recount her experiences with neutrality. Islam is a religion of peace, don't you get it? Etc.

      It's just disgusting to see pampered, university grad brats saying "My next door neighbour is Muslim and she cool!" so therefore Ali's a liar. What an exercise in moral superiority.

  53. I'm not arguing with you any longer as Saldim, Pasquale, Taho, ExPriestNowMuslim, etc. have all made mine and Ali's point salient. They are citing the "relevant passages" you have asked for. This isn't a debate; you continue to hold onto a weak argument of anecdotal experience and keep yourself totally and completely BLIND to the evils that continue to be perpetrated in the name of Islam. That is your choice and your comfort. Good day.

    • I have linked sources which are not anecdotal in nature, you have dismissed them without cause. I have pointed you toward the very next article in this section, which evidences my point. You have ignored it.

      As I've said, I'm not pretending that people like Pasquale or Saldim don't exist or that they're justified in what they're saying – they're not. But their existence doesn't negate the existence of moderate Muslims. By casting all Muslims in with their lot and attacking Islam as a whole, in all its incarnations, you attack some people who have done nothing wrong and are no threat to Canadians or Canadian values.

      You are right when you say this isn't a debate. If it were, you would be responding to my points and detailing why you believe I'm wrong and, if possible, supporting it with evidence we both could easily view, as I did when I linked the MCC, or the Maclean's article on Izzeldin Abuelaish. Instead, you have simply accused me of being ignorant, blind, or whatever, avoiding a discussion.

      Perhaps most ironically, you've missed a major point of Ali's, the one take-away from her efforts against Islam that holds undeniable truth – that bad, harmful, or oppressive ideas can be removed not through force, but by showing people that there is another, better way. If I'm wrong and you're right, you should be able to show me why. Discussion is how we show each other our respective paths and through debate, we can work out which one might be better, or if there are other paths worth following. Call me blind all you want – that you refuse to engage in a discussion when I am willing to says far more about the weakness of your position than it does about mine.

      • I have told you I will not continue this exercise in moral superiority, but you want to have the last word. I'll answer what you call "data" now and then I am finished with you.

        The MCC has agreed with Quebec parliament in the abolishment of niqabs and burqas in their province. Years ago when the former attorney general of Canada drafted a shari'a court model for Family Court proceedings, the MCC lobbied fiercely against it and it was struck down. So what the MCC has and continues to do is criticize Islam and call for reforms; Ali calls for the same thing. You don't like what she stands for because Faisal and Shazina smile at your across the cafe. I hate to break it to you, Craig-O, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a university graduate, former parliamentarian, multilingual, genital mutilation survivor and fearless fatwa-banishing apostate is the one who has credibility.

        • Yes, the MCC has done pretty much what you say, which is why I presented them as moderate Muslims. Being critical of aspects Islam is more than valid – I would encourage it in many regards. But what Ali and you have put forth is not simply calling for reforms of Islam, but for others to outright abandon it. When she says to put up centers of different belief systems besides every Mosque, she's also calling to them to be put up beside the Mosques of the people in the MCC – but why? They're not engaging in abhorrent activities, why do they need to be converted or fought against?

          As for the rest of this post, it's an appeal to authority and thus completely invalid. I respect what Ali for what she has been through and admire her courage. As such, she certainly has a different perspective and I welcome that perspective as it certainly reveals the all-too-pervasive abuses that go on under Islam in the countries she's lived in, and the dangers of letting multiculturalism excuse violence. But all perspectives must be considered when discussing these things, and her experiences with Muslims don't make the conversion of all Muslims warranted or even necessary, because she hasn't met all the Muslims in the world and the ones who mistreated her don't represent all of Islam.

      • You keep asking for data — why aren't you refuting Smythe's very cogent arguments on Islam? More importantly, you've said to me salim, et al, are exhibiting unacceptable behaviour — but you keep your head down and say NOTHING! This is why I no longer wish to 'debate' with you — you cite personal experience as factum over and above a woman older and wiser than your university graduate years — the sheer arrogance is astounding. She has something to say as a woman who has lived under shari'a law in Somalia, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia, and the multiculti fairytale of the Netherlands where she rose to parliament status. She's acheived more in her life than you or I ever have so why aren't you asking the question 'Why do her views oppose mine? ' She has written three nonfictional books if you want your questions answered, although I'm not convinced you do. You'd rather place your experiences above hers and call it a day. You're arguments are lazy, arrogant, and spineless. Any respect I had for you vanishes in the face of your silence against the extremists here and now.

        • I should have responded to Smythe before – you're right to point that out, and I've rectified that. I'm not engaging salim for three reasons. First, because he isn't responding to my posts and, for the most part, I've stuck to my own little thread here. Secondly, there are plenty of people refuting his statements adequately enough (some doing a better job than others), so there's really no need for me to add my voice. On the other side, virtually none are making the points I'm making against your's and Ali's arguments, so my contribution is more meaningful to the overall discussion here. Thirdly, and most importantly, there's no point to engaging people like saldim, at least over the internet, because by the extremism of their posts, are clearly not open to other opinions. saldim himself seems borderline insane. You, on the other hand, and people who share your general view on this subject, might at least entertain other views, if presented rationally, so that's why I'm presenting them to you.

          Once again, the rest of your post is an appeal to authority, followed by a dismissal with a charge to read Ali's books. Once again, I ask, if there are relevant points from her books, please state them here.

          Lastly, I do not put my experiences above her's. On the contrary, having read her rough biography now, as well as a few reviews of her book (again, I don't have the ability to pick up and finish a full text in the time most of these Macleans-based discussions occur, and it seems the public library has the book on near-constant hold), I certainly have gained a respect for what she's been through. But I'm not pitting our experiences against each other – how could I, both occurred, they're both valid. What I am saying is that the opinions she derived from her experiences are, as far as I can tell, contradicted by my experiences, so I've tried to add a qualifier to her views to remove that contradiction. "Why do her views oppose mine?" Well, I think because I've had the benefit of hearing her experiences, but she hasn't had the benefit of hearing mine. Ali just hasn't met the Muslims I have.

          • I can't talk to my generation — "an appeal to authority." Wisdom that comes from age is just authoritarian b.s., right Friend-O?

            Also, I'm sure Ali would do a 180 once she meets your Muslims. Are you serious? This is total nonsense. I don't know why you continue to blur the issue — this is not about individuals, it is about a 7th century ideology that has not changed in centuries, but according to your crystal ball will change even after they outnumber us. You keep saying Ali was "mistreated" — she was mistreated by very few. This isn't about hurt feelings, it is about religion. Somehow I doubt you'd be defending the re-emergence of fundamentalist Christianity in the West.

            Saldim is not insane. He's telling you what he's learned and what he believes. Are you someone who thinks all suicide bombers are mentally ill? Wrong-o.

            Lastly, I'm not going to pull from "Infidel" for you for two reasons: (1) my friend is reading my copy; and (2) everything in it is important.

          • Wisdom obtained from age is not authoritarian if it is backed up with logic, but otherwise, yes it is. If everyone believed everything their elders told us, social progress would grind to a standstill. If Ali is right, a rational argument should be able to demonstrate why – drawing on her experience in that argument, sure. But saying that because she had them, she's automatically right, as you are, is an undeniable fallacy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_author

            Insane was the wrong word for saldim, you're right. Deluded, irrational, self-indoctrinated – those are better terms. Either way, others have made basically the same arguments I would have, to little effect – talking to him would, as Barney Frank put it, like trying to argue with a dining room table. This exchange hasn't been a whole lot better, but at least with you, I've made an ounce of progress (you're making some arguments now, even though you're ignoring most of what I'm posting), and I've even learned a thing or two, thanks to your prodding.

            As I've said, repeatedly (and I do tire of repeating myself), I'm not defending fundamentalist ANYTHING. I have said, again and again, that Islam cannot exist in the form it does in many Islamic countries in Canada, nor should it. You talk about a 7th century ideology that has not changed in centuries, but ignore those whose ideology has indeed advanced simply because they call themselves Muslim. If a follower of Islam has adapted their ideology to fit modern times, just as most Christians adapted their ideology away from the barbarisms of past centuries, what's the problem?

            My whole purpose of this thread has been to break that absolutist stance, that idea that people cannot be defined in such a binary way because of their religion. If nothing else, please answer this question – if a person does not engage in any of what you would consider to be acts of violence (including non-physical forms of violence), demonstrates no intention to do so, or encourage others to do so, but calls themselves Muslim, should an effort be made to convert them, and why or why not?

          • "My whole purpose of this thread has been to break that absolutist stance, that idea that people cannot be defined in such a binary way because of their religion."

            At last you have revealed yourself. You are the inverse troll, the poster who seeks not to rile others up for his own amusement, but in order to assert his false sense of moral superiority. You never had any intention of debating or learning from anyone on this thread, as evidenced by your silence on quotations from the Qur'an posted by fanatic and critic alike. More importantly, you ask for argument to your anecdotal "evidence", which is personal to you and rooted in emotion. I have been the only one to continue on this sideshow argument and you have failed in your intention to "break the absolutist stance" which exists solely in your mind. As such, I will not feed you any longer.

          • I posted non-anecdotal examples, which are not rooted in personal experiences or encounters – what of those?

            And I have learned quite a bit – for example, I dismissed Smythe's comment out of hand when I shouldn't have. After looking into it, he did make a good point – I had known about the militant passages in the Koran, and also the peaceful ones, but I didn't know, as I found out, that the militant ones seem to override the peaceful ones. I wish you had been willing to provide information like that, rather than simply calling naive, but it goes to show even horribly unproductive discussions can have some value.

            Anyway… time and time again you say that you're done talking to me, and yet time and time again, you come back. Every time I respond to your points, you come back with accusations and labels (I've gone through what – three distinct ones now?) to dismiss what I've written without addressing what I've written. Is it so hard to simply respond to what I'm saying?

            Earlier in this thread, you asked a question and said you would not respond until I did – so I answered it. I asked you a question in the post before this, at the end, and made it clear I would like an answer – are you so afraid of a challenge to your beliefs that you will not answer it?

      • Your second piece of "data" — acquaintances (I noticed the deliberate exception of the word 'friends' — how telling). Islam teaches its subjects that they are to exist in the lands of the unbelievers within their laws, but only as far as where shari'a meets them. If enslavement or conversion cannot be acheived, then colonization by breeding.

        • I never described the nature of my relationships with the Muslims I've met, partly because I respect their right to privacy (which I will not break by saying specific things about their lives over the internet) and also because the types of relationships have been quite varied. Some have been friends, other coworkers, some have been children that I've supervised, some have been grad students supervising me.

          As for their devotion to sharia law, without going inside their homes, it seems non-existent from those I've met. A few ceremonies, observance of Ramadan, an unwillingness to eat pork, and I've met a woman who will not shake my hand, but that's about it.

          I've never had a Muslim try to convert me – plenty of Christians, a Scientologist once, but no Muslims. As for breeding, then they've got their work cut out for them. Most second- or third-generation Muslims I've met do not have strong religious beliefs, just as much of the younger generation has put little focus on any religion. I mean, Ali, as I've said, gets it right in that we can show others a better path and if it is truly better, they will follow it. But through integration, it's already happening, especially for Muslim women now exposed to freedoms they would not enjoy under sharia law.

          New Muslims to Canada can try outbreeding, but not only do they have to outbreed, they have to indoctrinate their kids too, so much so that the indoctrination has to last for generations (Muslims constitute less than 3% of the population), no easy task in a society as open as Canada's. I do think we need to do more to get all people, Muslims included, out of their own little bubbles and exposed to different ideas, but frankly, I'm not worried about traditionalist Muslims taking over through breeding, because by the time there's enough of them, they won't be traditionalist Muslims anymore. All we have to do is take a few steps to prevent isolation, including rejection of any sort of religiously-derived judicial system operating outside or in addition to our own, (mostly) secular one.

  54. You know, I'm beginning to wonder if the reason why all of these fanatics have suddenly come out of the woodwork isn't because the Muslims as a group keep tabs on Ali's whereabouts. There have been plenty of articles published by Macleans about Islam but this is the only one I've seen where the comments are actually written by Muslims. A fatwa indeed.

    My thoughts and prayers are with Ms. Ali. I hope they keep her safe.

  55. We need more people like her in politics. Someone who sees what is going on, and is unafraid to voice her concerns and suggest change.

  56. Islam will continue to be a menace to humankind until it has its own Reformation and Enlightenment. Christianity in its time was just as evil as Islam is today — that's why we call it the Dark Ages. Moslems have to learn to treat their religion the way most Christians do (outside of the US, which has the same mindset as most Moslems). Religion is just a weekly social club with tea and cookies, boring sermons, and a book no one has ever actually read. In my view serious religion needs to be treated as a public health menance, like smoking. Ban it from advertising, only allow it in private, keep children away from it, and tax the sh!t out of it.

    • Well said. However, all the leftists on this site want to do is turn the argument to the past and present evils of Christianity instead of discussing the issue at hand. It's easier to dance with the devil you know — and by easier, I mean lazier.

  57. Now this is a person who should be protected AT ALL COSTS!! She is speaking the TRUTH openly and letting islam's cat out the bag!! She is treading dangerous ground and it is up to us to make sure she gets to repeat these words to the world over and over again till our politicians and other nitwits in power get the message!! The mullahs are going to go after her with every weapon they can hide in the hijabs, burkhas and beards. SHE MUST BE PROTECTED AT ALL COSTS!!!!!

  58. Christians and Muslims are afraid to examine their Scripture for the truth about the Messiah and they both follow tradition rather than their respective Scripture when having to face their differences in the name of the Messiah and whether he was crucified or not.

    Christians reject Islam's view on the crucifixion but they seem to accept that Jesus was a prophet of Islam who is not considered by the Muslims to be the son of God.

  59. The Quran is quite clear about the Messiah and the Bible actually agrees with the Quran that there was a hoax to the crucifixion and also a hoax to the name Jesus as applied to the Biblical Christ, but Muslims and Christians are extremely fearful about opening the Scriptures to see this agreement as it exposes the both sides of being astray from the Scriptures and from the truth.

  60. The Quran puts its confirmation in the words of the translation as, "That they said, we killed the Messiah Isa, the son of Mariam, the Apostle of Allah, but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for a surety they killed him not" Quran 4:157

  61. To say that Jesus was crucified would be wholly true according to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John of the New Testament of the Bible, and this would depend on the true identity of Jesus.
    To say that the Messiah or Christ was crucified would definitely be false and misleading and contrary to the claim of the Quran, and the evidence of Scripture as contained in the Bible.

  62. The name of Jesus is a New Testament name that is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament, so that the Old Testament of the Bible disagrees with, or, it cannot be said to be in total agreement with this name that is used to identify the Messiah in the New Testament, but the Quran confirms the Hoax of the crucifixion and the Bible reveals the intricacies of the Hoax for all who wish to see truth.

  63. The four Gospels are the claimants of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and they are the Gospels of the crucifixion by four, that is to say, that they are used in repetition of the alleged crucifixion, but they are certainly not the Gospels of the fulfillment of the prophecy of the child as named in the prophecy and command of the Lord God of Israel of the Book of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) of the Old Testament of the Bible.

  64. We are informed by Luke that the mother was aware that “that which was conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 1: 20), before she conceived and after she “was espoused to a man named Joseph” (Luke 1: 27), and yet Joseph was not considered until after he contemplated putting her away for being unfaithful. This confusion and scandal must be viewed as no more than a sacrilegious distortion of Scripture.

  65. Muslims and Christians conceal their misunderstanding in Yeshua and Joshua as Jesus when Yeshua or Joshua translates Yah or Jah is Salvation.
    Jesus is actually King James' alteration of JeZeus which made Jah and Zeus equal with Salvation to punish and mock the High Priest as Pilate applied the name of Jesus to the two thieves he crucified after he set the Messiah free as an innocent man.
    Luke admits that he arranged what was written about the crucifixion by many only to please his Emperor while John admits that his account was the result of much more that was written by many who wrote.
    Is this the magic of Zeus or the magic of Kings and Emperors to make suckers of those who think they acquire an education with a Hoax?

  66. finally, someone with the courage to state the obvious. Thanks Macleans for pulishing this even if our unenlightened acadamia (how's that for an oxymoron?!), will be furious at you for doing so.

  67. Good Article…and yes, liberals are very confused about Islam worldwide. Islam teaches two very clear issues in its Sharia law. First, to kill anyone who dares to leave Islam. It allows no freedom of thought, only submission on its terms. This is the basis of the blaphemy law of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. Second, it encourages child bride marriage because Muh. married Aisha when she was six years old and consumated her marriage when she was 9 and he was in his 50's. therefore, he is the "example" for all Muslims in the world to follow for one billion people? This kind of teaching finds hundreds of little girls in Nigeria dead trying to give birth too early due to their muslim forced "marriage". This is Islam in 2010.

  68. Good Article…and yes, Muslims are very confused as well about Islam worldwide. The Quran says, in Al Imran 3:55,
    And remember when Allah said, "O Isa (Jesus) I am killing/slaying you (gathering is a weak, deliberate translation of the Engish yet Slay is the Arabic) and causing you to ascend to Me." yes, this is the Korban death of Jesus on the cross in the Quran ignored my most Imans, and the resurrection of Jesus in the Quran in raising him up from the dead to be the Eternal Word of God made flesh to be the Eternal Prophet of God even to the Day of Resurrection! Therefore, Jesus remains forever, the Last and Eternal Prophet…the Eternal Straight Path and Only Way according to this and many verses.

  69. She is so amazing. I love her. Completely agree with her.

  70. To say the Bible proves the Koran and then say that the crucifixion is a hoax, is such an unbelievably deceptive and dubious statement that it is clear that even you who are saying it is deceived!

    This woman is not a Christian, it is clear, but if you say thAT the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ is a lie, then you are saying the bible is lying. And if the bible is lying and you say a lying bible proves your false Koran to be true, than how can you say the koran is true?? The same bible lied didn't it?

    All the bible talks about from first to last page is about Christ's death, and resurrection to give man an unending and interruptible eternal existing with your maker, And by the way the bible completely goes against the Koran, completely!!!!

    Ill leave you with just one point. In the bible, the God of the Jews ls the father is the Israelites and he loves them and will never allow their enemies to defeat them.

    However the false god of the Koran commands muslims to destroy the Jews!!

    Are this not two different Gods???????? Yes they are!!

    YOU HAVE NOT READ THE BIBLE Saldim5, REPENT AND STOP LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    http://buwai.blogspot.com/2010/06/about-trinity.h

  71. It was most fortuitous that I was born in a place with the culture to bring me up learning the one true religion.
    How lucky I am to not have been born to a family in a place where false religions are taught.

  72. Here's an idea that will minimize conflict.
    As a Species, lets consign ourselves to go with the least tolerant religion. That way No One will be able to offend others in the exercise of their freedom because there will be no freedom.

  73. How about next time we go to an airport, we all go in burkhas. They WILL search and scan us. If they do not, they are obstructing their own security protocols. Enough of this random profiling and special treatment given to ONE religious group.

  74. It is those who assert that men like Hitler and Mcveigh were Christians that are most dangerous, as such are either be easily deceived or seek to do so. The New Testament (covenant) makes the kingdom of God to be spiritual, and hence its means of "war" are, and forbids to the church the use of the sword to convert others or defend the faith, or the church ruling over those without. (1Cor. 5:12; 2Cor. 6:1-10; 10:4; Eph. 6:12). What the Roman church did required ignorance of the Bible among the laity, and ecclesiastical presumption to superiority over it.

    What the Bible does foster is that of souls being ruling from within, so that they need not be ruled from without.

    As for atheism, while the Bible can be manifestly misused, the objectively baseless moral foundation of atheism Islam allows anything to be justified as "reasonable" , as men like Mao and Pol Pot exampled.

    As for Islam it does indeed promote religious violence. See peacebyjesus.com

  75. This woman is ridiculous. Does she really believe that just because 2-5% of Muslims are radical extremists, Islam is bad? Does she really think people will convert out of Islam into Christianity because of the lies of the mistreatment of woman and violence? How arrogant can you possibly be? It's disturbing to see how people can call this woman "brave" and "smart". It's sad to hear about what happened to her but it's clear that she doesn't know Islam's basic principles and that's the saddest fact of all. She has no idea what religion she's preaching against.

  76. Likely he isn't going to even criticize islam because he's a leftist and (a) he's a coward who has no problem peeing on Jews or Christians but would have a heat attack if you told the local imam he thinks MoHAMhead is a pedophile murdering psychopath. (b) as a leftist he is an ALLY of jihad because the left believes in the disintegration of the Judeo-Christian West and what better way for lazy leftists to accomplish this is to let the jihadis do it and then "sweep in and promise security and a new socialist order of peace and unicorns!"

    PS – To the leftists here, yes, I am peeing in your ear, and no, it's not rain, if you don't believe me, open your mouth, as we need you drowned as badly as the jihadis.

  77. False argument against my comments remain false and weak and hull and void.
    If you try to prove me wrong using the Bible and/or the Quran you will fail miserably because you will be trying to prove the Bible and/or the Quran wrong and you will be false and null and void as your argument that is senseless.
    It is not enough to criticise me and fail to provide proof that you know anything about the topic.
    Allah says in the Quran that the crucifixion was a clever hoax and all that come with the hoax are parts of the hoax, which includes Bible and Christianity and Jesus, and the Bible agrees.
    I have no problem with when the Bible was produced to promote the hoax in the form of a hoax since the Bible exposes the beautiful planning and execution of the hoax by the Messiah and his militant band of devoted jihadists.
    There is no magic, but the ultimate power of the Quran can crush mountains and the petty World leaders think they ought to stop Muslims from becoming nuclear armed as if they are not Christians who do not see what is in their own Bible, except for the washing of hands. Are you about to wash your hands?
    Prove me wrong!
    And you know you cannot!
    Allahukabarr!

  78. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a very courageous woman! A Christian church next to every mosque! Wonderful idea! You are an outstanding thinker! God bless you and keep you!

  79. Thomas Mann, a German writer once said: “Tolerance is a crime when applied to evil.”

    At the time, Mr. Mann was referring to the rise of Nazism in Germany.

    His statement is a wake-up call to us today, it speaks the truth. We must have the courage and commitment to act against these encroachments if freedom is to survive.

    Ms Ali is right in everything she says. We need to pay attention to her message.

  80. am sure she's totally wrong and whatever plan she comes up she won't success. Everywhere in this world Muslim children know the reading and writing of Quran and no matter if church will be build next to mosque that will convert Muslims to christianity. Believing does not come from church

    • am sorry i made one mistake and the place i said no matter if church will be build next to mosque that """will not convert muslims to christianity""""""""

  81. "The West will be victorious because the ideas of life are just far superior to the ideas of death. The question is what price we want to pay to win." Militant Islamic ideology is not only religious but political in nature and seek to control all aspects of life. That needs to be acknowledged, confronted and defeated. We face a real challenge here, to have the moral clarity on what we believe, what our values are. Do we value freedom? Equality? Dignity of the individual? What do we hold sacred in our hearts? Ayaan Hirsi Ali speaks with honesty, clarity and integrity. She has my unreserved respect.

  82. Great interview, very interesting conversationalist. Keep it up.

Sign in to comment.