by Silas

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."


"Islam is the problem!" "Muhammad is the problem!" Muslim violence is becoming worse each year and throughout the world people are finally questioning if Islam is to blame. Even Muslims are doubting aspects of their faith and many are leaving it. Writers are now saying that it is Islam itself, and not a perversion of the religion, that is the real problem.

I’m going to present a sampling of various writers to show just how attitudes are changing. This is important because if the West is ever going to adequately deal with Islam it must understand Islam for what it really is: a poison in humanity’s soul. I also will discuss a key point in a dim-witted article written by a pundit who presents Islam as benign.




A few years ago writers rarely questioned Islam because they knew little about it and thought that the Muslims involved with terror or violence were an aberration. But now having witnessed Islam in action they are recognizing Islam’s dark side. Deep down inside people know that there is something wrong with a religion who’s followers daily chant "death to America, Israel, Europe, Bush, the Pope, Salman Rushdie, McDonalds, Mickey Mouse, etc." Muslims will never be at a loss to commit atrocities against non-Muslims. Listen to the facts for they are speaking: facts of terrorism, facts of murders, facts of threats and vulgarities, carried out by devout Muslims worldwide. People understand those facts.

Here is the sampling of recent articles written by a variety of people.

Suzanne Fields1 asks:

What is Islam? Is the barbarity of September 11 rooted in the preaching of Muhammad? Or are the Islamists, the Islamic fascists bent on the destruction of all who disagree with them, merely an aberration, mixing politics, religion and violence in an appeal to the lowest psychological denominators of suicide bombers?

The imperialistic impulse, rooted in the beginning of Islam, never fully retreated and is crucial today to understanding the shedding of blood now in the name of Allah. Although Muhammad forbade violence against the community of believers, it was easy in the chaos of the Middle East to initiate violence against differing sects with their different interpretations of the Koran.

The interpretation of the Islamist mentality as rooted in Muhammad's appeal to violence, and the Islamist determination for religious domination of the world, may not tell the whole story today, but it explains why, for millions of Muslims, the image of the warrior trumps the image of a prophet of peace -- if, indeed, there ever was one.

Tony Blankley2 writes:

There is a historically fairly predictable pattern to the unfolding strategies and views of great wars. They often start with a morally ambiguous view of the enemy, a more limited conception of the war's magnitude and a restrained application of violent tactics.

So, within 24 hours the pope raises the question of whether Islam is inherently violent and unreasonable, while Kissinger warns of a possible emerging nuclear clash of civilizations.

Andrew Bostom3 writes:

The ultimate source of the convulsive reaction to the Pope’s speech is the Islamic belief that spiritually and physically debauched infidels have no right to express opinions—least of all negative opinions—regarding Islam’s sacred text, the Koran, the Muslim prophet, Muhammad (Ecce Homo Arabicus), or the sacred Islamic Law (Shari’a), which includes the permanent institution of jihad war.

Yet again the mass pathology of a contemporary Islamic civilization still triumphantly devoid of any reasonable sense of perspective, or self-criticism, will be on public display.

Charles Krauthammer4 writes:

In today's world, religious sensitivity is a one-way street. The rules of the road are enforced by Islamic mobs and abjectly followed by Western media, politicians and religious leaders.

Mona Charen5 states:

What is missing from the response to all of these attacks is some attention to the Muslim spirit of the day.

Theodore Dalrymple6 writes:

From the first, Islam was a religion of pillage, violence, and compulsion, which it justified and glorified.

Thus Islam is inherently an unsettling and dangerous factor in world politics, independently of the actual conduct of many Muslims.

Commenting on Dalrymple’s article above, Lawrence Auster7 observes keenly and notes wisely:

I agree with Dalrymple that Islam itself is the problem. But that doesn’t solve OUR problem, since Islam is not about to cease to exist, nor do we have the remotest ability to make it cease to exist.

So the real question is, what do we of the non-Muslim world do to make OURSELVES safe from Islam?

And there is only one answer. We must confine Muslims to the Muslim world, where they cannot threaten us. This means stopping all Muslim immigration into the West, and initiating a set of policies leading to the steady departure, whether forcible or voluntary, of Muslims from the West. A cordon sanitaire must then be placed around the Muslim world to prevent it from having any power to endanger non-Muslim countries.

The famous comedian Jackie Mason8 asks:

How long will it take for humanity to put an end to this kind of helplessness and cowardice in the face of this inhumane behavior? Instead of cowering in fear of losing our lives from the hands of Muslims, we should immediately and firmly advise them that any act of violence against innocent people will be met with a level of aggressive response that will make them realize that acts of terror against innocent people will cause them to pay an unbearable price.

Kathleen Parker9 sees clearly:

If Islam is not the problem, what is? And are we not inviting self-defeat by refusing to recognize that Islam is at least part of the problem?

Amil Imani10 of is direct and to the point:

The terror and death inflicted on humanity is not the work of radical Islam, neither the political Islam, nor the militant Islam. It is Islam, period. Get it? And the perpetrators are not fringe elements confined to brainwashed Saudis, loony Taliban, or a know nothing Pakistanis who have hijacked Islam and are now in the business of mass murder.

All the excuses, grievances and reasons given for savagery of the jihadists and Islamofascists are side issues. It is Islam, dummy. It is Islam itself. Get it?




Unfortunately, there are still writers and journalists claiming that Islam is not a violent religion. They claim that terrorism carried out in Islam’s name "is a perversion of the religion", that "Islam has been hijacked", that "terrorists are a minority within a minority", etc. These writers are the opposite of the boy who cried "Wolf". When the wolf comes, they cry, "Sheep! All is well, Islam is not to blame!" Then the wolf destroys the flock.

I hear PM Neville Chamberlain speaking once again. "I believe it is peace for our time... Go home and get a nice quiet sleep." While England slept, Hitler prepared, and then acted. While British politicians closed their eyes and bent over backwards to shield the Muslim community from any criticism, real Muslims prepared and acted. While America’s President Bill Clinton chased women, America slept, real Muslims trained, prepared, and acted. They will act again.

Still the West is distracted and unprepared to deal with the Islamic world. More pain is the prescription capable of wakening the West, and even now it is being filled. As I write, Muslims in France are establishing their territory, defeating French police, and destroying vehicles. Soon they will begin to murder non-Muslims. Either the French will defend their homeland, flee, or convert to Islam.

I’m going to examine an opposing writer’s work and show that his argument is dim-witted. He refuses to look at the Islamic theological documents and then writes from ignorance.

The article was written by Mr. Ralph Peters11. Mr. Peters is a good American citizen who stands for his country and its values, I’d think. He knows there are decent "moderate" Muslims and supports them when their faith is criticized. He writes:

I've received no end of e-mails and letters seeking to "enlighten" me about the insidious nature of Islam. Convinced that I'm naive because I defend American Muslims and refuse to "see" that Islam is 100 percent evil, the writers warn that I'm a foolish "dhimmi," blind to the conspiratorial nature of Islam.

Web sites list no end of extracts from historical documents and Islamic jurisprudence "proving" that holy war against Christians and Jews is the alpha and omega of the Muslim faith. …

Peters acknowledges that there exists ample documentation that warrants investigation but he won’t read it. Apparently he doesn’t want to learn; he only wants his opinion to be right. I can hear Peters arguing now, "I’m right about this, and dammit, nobody is going to change my mind! To hell with what the books say, I know what I’m talkin about!" His rejection of examining the Islamic theological documents is akin to rejecting a map to find his way. His attitude on this is bollocks.

Mr. Peters was an officer in the American military intelligence! Anybody wonder why America’s Iraq effort is in such chaos? Everybody knows that the war was based upon faulty intelligence and politicians’ willfulness. Guys in cushy offices send your children to fight their selfish pride’s battles. The precious blood of your children is spilled for what? For what? Fine young men are sent in to fight a fool’s war. Young British and American men are cut down in the prime of their lives because ignorant "intelligence" guys don’t know what they’re up against or what they’ve gotten into. They talk tough and say, "Fight", but they don’t know how to fight this enemy. Building upon a foundation of ignorance, and then moving forward blindly, as Mr. Peters’ supports, gets you a confusing and bloody mess like Iraq. Just as Peters’ "intelligence" on Iraq was bad, so is his intelligence on Islam.

For the record, I’ll note that Peters is realizing the truth about the Iraqi war12. He wrote:

Last gasps in Iraq

I supported this war, but the deteriorating situation is starting to convince me that we can’t win. Those of us who hoped that the Iraqis could achieve democracy were wrong — and their failure has implications for the entire region. …

Iraq is failing. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Even six months ago, there was hope. Now the chances for a democratic, unified Iraq are dwindling fast ... Iraq could have turned out differently. It didn't. And we must be honest about it. We owe that much to our troops. They don't face the mere forfeiture of a few congressional seats but the loss of their lives. Our military is now being employed for political purposes. It's unworthy of our nation.

Give Mr. Peters credit for admitting what is plain now. He is right, the Iraqi war isn’t worthy of Britain or America. But even Barbara Streisand could see it years ago. Now let’s hope that it doesn’t take as much convincing for him to distinguish between Islam and Muslims. But I believe that good guys like Peters will come around.

The argument isn’t whether or not there are good British or American Muslims, the argument is that Islam is evil. Of course there are many good Muslims, some serving in the military. All British citizens should thank them and appreciate their service. But that does not prove, or mitigate, whether or not Islam is to blame. It only shows that there are Muslims who are not as committed, or knowledgeable, about their faith as the terrorist Muslims.

Another writer, David Yerushalmi13 has written an excellent response and deconstructed Peters’ whole article. He sums up Islam:

But, what is all of this vitriolic pontification really about? In truth, it is not so complicated. Theologically, historically, politically, and culturally, Islam is a violent religious ideology bent on world domination. At times, this core notion of Islam has been active and a threat to the civilized world, and at times the civilized world has contained it. But there simply is no getting around this one very grotesque fact of Islam.




If you want to know whether or not Islam is the problem you must listen to the data. So what is this data and where is it found? It is found in the fundamental theological texts of Islam, the Quran, Hadith, and biographical (Sira) documents, and in Muhammad’s lifestyle (Sunnah), i.e. his actions, mannerisms, and habits. These are the foundations of Islam, and all of them are rooted in Muhammad. Muhammad is the foundation of Islam.

Reading these texts is not difficult and more people are doing it. They are checking out Islam for themselves and reaching the same conclusion I’ve reached. I’ve had many a person who was considering Islam, write me and thank me for pointing out what those texts say. They had no idea that Muhammad treated non-Muslims barbarically. It’s all there in those texts. Are you willing to examine them?

Myself, and many others have written an abundance of articles, all based upon the Islamic texts that detail Islam’s dark side. I’m not going to repeat them here. But here are some links to various articles that detail Muhammad’s corrupt character.

So, why not check out the data? Do not take my word for it, check it out for yourself. All of the texts that I reference are available in English and can be purchased for a few bucks or found online for free.



For further reading on Islam being the problem:

















November 6th, 2006

Articles by Silas
Islam & Terrorism
Answering Islam Home Page