Blimp deflator: Letting out the gas

Collapse of Islam predicted

Posted in islam, new zealand by Blimp deflator on May 16, 2012

Collapse of Islam predicted
This article is from the May 3, 1990, edition of Challenge Weekly, New Zealand’s Christian newspaper. The collapse of Islam is said to be “impending”, which means “about to take place”. Well, we’re still waiting.


33 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. perceptor1 said, on July 27, 2012 at 2:15 am

    Islam is actually, quietly, unobtrusively collapsing. The internet, modern scrutiny and ideas, scholarly books on foundational Islam and the endless stupidity of Wahhabism are killing Islam. Six million Africans are leaving Islam every year according to Al Jizeera. Simple math confirms the handwriting is on the wall. Islam is losing 10% or more of its followers every 20 years. Most are leaving without fanfare, quietly. Some are writing books, articles and creating websites. This overt criticism of Islam is unprecedented and the jihadists are not unaware of the hemmorhaging. They know they are losing and so they become more violent. The violence is however counterproductive. You appear to be living in your own bubble.

  2. hourglassera said, on July 27, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    According to the Guinness Book of World Records, Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion by number of conversions each year: “Although the religion began in Arabia, by 2002 80% of all believers in Islam lived outside the Arab world. In the period 1990-2000, approximately 12.5 million more people converted to Islam than to Christianity”. – Wikipedia

    But is this just a numbers game?

    • perceptor1 said, on July 28, 2012 at 3:34 am

      No. I don’t see data as a ‘game’, but a quest for scientific analysis. The quest is not easy or simple.

      Statistics need to be interpreted and checked for false conclusions and comparisons. You have used selective data.

      The following is an article which analyzes this tendency to make poor conclusions from data:

      Excerpts: “In terms of numbers, Christians add more to their numbers every year than Islam. Multiply 2.9% times the total number of Muslims (1.3Billion) and multiply 2.3% times the total number of Christians (2.1 Billion) and you will see that every year Christians add about 11 million more people to our ranks than Islam does.”

      Time Magazine reports:

      “More surprising, though, is the boom in Christianity[in the Islamic nation of Indonesia]…..the number of Asian Christian faithful exploded to 351 million adherents in 2005, up from 101 million in 1970, according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, based in Washington, D.C.”

      The Wiki article you selectively quoted also has this important proviso:

      “The Pew report also highlights that there is insufficient data available on religious conversion from its own findings given the complexities of identity and the difficulties of obtaining data: “Statistical data on conversion to and from Islam ARE SCARCE. What little information is available suggests that there is NO SUBSTANTIAL NET GAIN OR LOSS OF MUSLIMS THROUGH CONVERSION GLOBALLY…”

      Perhaps this is because 75% of Muslim converts leave Islam in as little as 2 years.

      • hourglassera said, on July 28, 2012 at 5:48 pm

        Selective data? I just Googled “world’s fastest-growing religion”, and copied and pasted some of the info I found. I would have done more if I were into statisticuffs, but I’m not. I actually don’t care whether conversions in one direction are greater than those in the other. I sometimes wonder whether I’m counted as a Christian simply because I’m a white, European person with an Anglican background. But not even that bothers me. People can think whatever they like.

        I’ve been reading that Time article about Indonesia. I got as far as “…Christians held a Pentecostal revival, complete with faith healing and speaking in tongues. As a tropical downpour fell, believers’ tears mixed with rain — and a line of sick and disabled took to the stage to claim they had been cured…” . At that point, I gave up. I can’t stand that sort of thing. It’s pure hysteria.

      • perceptor1 said, on July 29, 2012 at 4:07 am

        Emotion and ‘attachment’ (to pet ideas) cloud scientific assessment all the time.

        My own assessment of Islam is based on my own daily observations of Muslims and my reading of what their mullahs have expressed. I try to keep emotion out of it. When I talk to secular (‘cultural’) Muslims, they usually have an emotional idea that Islam is ‘winning’…but their evidence is usually anecdotal.

        In fact, about 15% of Muslims are actually practicing, going to mosque, etc., while most are living highly secular lives, drinking alcohol, and behaving like the rest of the people in society. However, few Muslims ever lose their ‘ummah-nationalism’…their political loyalty to the Islamic family and belief in the ultimate supremacism of Islam. That remains deep down under the surface. It has been said it takes 7 years for a Muslim to leave Islam. I believe that is true and I have the feeling it is occurring to large numbers of cultural Muslims at the moment.

        Now, do the pollsters count you as ‘Christian’? They probably do.

        If you were formally initiated into a church, you were probably counted, even as non-practicing…assuming you would go to ‘your’ church for family funerals. If you have become an agnostic or atheist in the meantime, and have not been formally polled, your new designation is not recorded yet. Today people believe in all sorts of ideas and there is some overlap in what they believe…in other words, many are very inconsistant.

        Some analysts say that the ‘fastest growing religion’ is actually agnosticism. Many groups claim ‘fastest growing status’…Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, Bahai’i, Buddhists.

        It depends on the various criteria of the study and importantly how the questions in the survey are PHRASED.

        Having said that, I have worked in the survey business and I know the results are sometimes ‘fluffy’ for various reasons of human nature.

        But is Islam shrinking? I think it is, like other religions, btw. Muslim countries are undergoing a rapid education process which means 60% of college students are women. When women are getting most of the Ph.Ds and MBAs, the handwriting is on the wall for Islam. We’ll soon see a huge change in the Muslim world such as in Iran which now has one of the lowest birthrates….meaning fewer Muslims babies and fewer Muslims.

  3. hourglassera said, on August 13, 2012 at 6:22 pm

    In my observation, women don’t leave Islam because they have acquired academic qualifications but because they had parents who were too restrictive. (See: Why ARE so many modern British career women converting to Islam? at ) When I was in daily newspaper journalism, I used to work with someone who could have been Eve Ahmed’s sister. Like Eve, my colleague was the daughter of Pakistani immigrants to England, who had “laid down the law” at every turn. But when I questioned her about Islam, I found, to my surprise, that she didn’t know much about it. She even claimed she didn’t know the Surat al-Fatihah.

    • perceptor1 said, on August 14, 2012 at 1:51 am

      I appreciate your personal experience. ‘Cultural’ Muslims generally haven’t read the source texts: Koran, hadiths and Sira (biography of Mohammed). ‘Cultural’ Muslims are aware of certain rituals like washing procedures before prayers, but they have not read anything. Their mental attitude is, however, strongly Islamic in the same way as Manchester United fans support their favourite team. This is called ‘ummah nationalism’…a rather unintellectual view of the world that says ‘my community right or wrong!’

      However, when Muslims of this type DO become aware of the source texts, the xenophobia, the intrinisic misogyny, Arab racism, brutality and savagery of Mohammed as his first followers, they often feel betrayed because their mullahs never told them.

      My impression is that many Muslims today are trying to convince themselves that all the nasty stuff in the source texts is a ‘misunderstanding’…the ‘real’ Mohammed was a nice, kind-hearted man who would never send out assassins to murder people in their beds or behead hundreds of surrendered prisoners in an afternoon in order to seize their homes and property. Mohammed’s immediate followers also did such things. I believe the ‘true’ Mohammed must have been very similar to his followers. Modern day Muslims have created a ‘photoshopped’ portrait of Mohammed removing his warts, scars and sneer.

  4. hourglassera said, on August 14, 2012 at 9:32 pm

    How, then, does your thesis accommodate those Muslims who do read the source texts, and who make an academic study of Islam, yet not only remain in Islam but become enthusiastic, articulate advocates of it? If knowledge were the enemy of Islam, why would there be support from the Muslim world for, say, the schools of Islamic studies at Oxford and Cambridge universities?

    • perceptor1 said, on August 15, 2012 at 3:12 pm

      You’re suggesting to me that there is a big group of supposedly enthusiastic Muslim academics who are very liberal and teach a liberal Islam at universities. I don’t think that exists, because they’re heretics and couldn’t get a job.

      The presupposition of Muslims is that Islam is perfect, complete and eternal. The Koran is flawless and no imperfection can be found in it. The purpose of the Muslim academic is to find the perfection, rather than see what is there objectively. To be a Muslim academic is to do violence to one’s sense of critical thought.

      Muslim academics who taught heresy would be warned to stop it. The ‘Koran only’ Muslims throw out most of the hadiths and Sira and invent their own version … Islam-à-la-carte…from the snippets that remain.

  5. perceptor1 said, on August 15, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    Dear HG,

    Your supposed scenario is contradicted by the reality of Sharia. Conservative Arab money to universities would stop if they didn’t play along to prevent liberal interpretations of Islam being taught.

    Sharia law is clear that an apostate should be put to death, such as Rushdie. When there is no Islamic state, the sentence of the mullahs may be carried out by the Muslim closest to the apostate. Students in Egypt and Syria have tried to kill their profs when they mention the latest research that suggests falsehoods in the source texts. Rage isn’t the only response to questioning Islam, but the principle one, because that is the way Mohammed behaved. The other response is liberalism of the ‘Koran only’ group, i.e. the text is talking about a situation that occurred at the time of the text and is no longer happening. This group teaches the peaceful Koran of Mecca, not the violent Koran of Medina.

    There are two distinctly different parts of the Koran. The first part was written in the 13 years in Mecca when Mohammed was powerless. It tells him to be patient. The last part (25% of the total text) was written in Medina in the last ten years of Mohammed’s life when he brought together a band of ruffians to raid, rape and pillage. This portion abrogates and overwrites the first Koran according to orthodox Islam. The second Koran makes Islam a totalitarian state. Muslims have to live in denial of the violence in order to avoid being executed for apostasy. They then create their own version of Islam…an Islam-à-la-carte. They claim that any part of Islam that is objectionable to modernity is invalid. The criterion for their deletions is personal taste, rather than scholarship. They are not orthodox Muslims and they are only able to speak in the West where there is no religious censorship. They are a tiny group. They are close to losing their faith in Islam altogether.

    Being ‘articulate’ is no proof of one’s opinion. They are heretics, deviants and ‘innovators’ according to orthodox Muslims. All such are considered worse than apostates and they should also be executed. Mohammed said: ‘Far removed from mercy the one who changes the religion after me.’ Islam cannot be changed because the original Islam was perfect, complete and eternal recorded in the eternal Koran before the beginning of time.

    I encourage you read about Sven Kalisch who was going to write a book about the non-historicity of Mohammed but changed his mind when he realized how many would get killed.

  6. hourglassera said, on August 15, 2012 at 7:08 pm

    So the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, in their teaching of Islam, are essentially propaganda mills?

    The only Muslim academic institution that I have had dealings with is the Islamic Foundation in Leicester, England, for which I reviewed some history books in the early 1990s. I didn’t have any problems with them – until I wrote a review of “Saudi Arabia: The Ceaseless Quest for Security”, by Nadav Safran. They rejected this as “too hard on/critical of” the Saudis. (I can’t remember their exact words.) So I wrote another review, making all the same points but in a more diplomatic, circumspect manner, and they accepted that with profuse expressions of gratitude for my “graciousness”. They were always exceedingly polite to me, both when I corresponded with them and when I spent a day at the foundation in 1998. They told me they didn’t involve themselves in polemics: “We just monitor the situation.”

    I can’t help feeling the criticism of Muslim “intolerance” is a little hypocritical. After all, how tolerant is the secular state in the paranoid, hysterical aftermath of 9/11? One can now be prosecuted in Britain for merely possessing Sayyid Qutb’s “Milestones”, which has been described as “an important text in the development of Islamist political thinking in the 20th century”. And in the US, as we have seen, one can now be prosecuted for downloading jihadi videos from the internet and translating Islamist documents found online. How does all this sit with our paternalistic lectures to Muslims on the importance of freedom of speech and freedom of academic inquiry?

    Thanks for the links to information on Sven Kalisch. I only wish there were more than those few, skimpy details.

    • perceptor1 said, on August 16, 2012 at 7:45 am

      The ‘secular state’ in Western countries seems to be bending over backwards to court cultural Muslims by being supportive when they want something, while trying to infiltrate and learn the intentions of the jihadists who hide in the Muslim community at large. The jihadists count on the cultural Muslims not to blow their cover.

      Either way, the cultural Muslims win from jihad and from the threat of jihad.

    • perceptor1 said, on August 16, 2012 at 8:16 am

      Hello HG,
      I thoroughly agree with your comments on Qutb and ‘Milestones’.

      Equally important is the booklet ‘The Neglected Duty’ by Abd al-Salam Faraj. He was an Egyptian writer whose book, Al-Faridah al-Gha’ibah (The Neglected Duty), played an important role in the development of Islamic extremism in the modern era. According to Faraj, jihad had become a “neglected duty” among contemporary Muslims. This book was first published and distributed to students in Cairo in the early 1980s where it influenced an entire generation of youth. The Egyptian made possession of the pamphlet a crime. J.J.G. Jansen translated this pamphlet as ‘The Neglected Duty’.

      Interview with Professor Johannes J.G. Jansen
      Johannes J.G. Jansen used to be the Director of the Dutch Institute in Cairo. Since 1983, he has been an associate professor of Arabic and Islamic studies at Leiden University. His first book, The Interpretation of the Koran in Modern Egypt (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1974), has been translated into Bosnian and Turkish, and even printed recently in Indonesia. In addition to a number of articles and several books in Dutch, he has written two other books in English: The Neglected Duty: The Creed of Sadat’s Assassins and Islamic Resurgence in the Middle East (New York: Macmillan, 1986) and The Dual Nature of Islamic Fundamentalism (London: Hurst & Company, 1997). J.J.G. Jansen is also the author of a translation of the Quran in Dutch. He writes regularly for a weekly newspaper and has a weekly column on the religion page of several provincial newspapers.

      RELIGIOSCOPE – A number of authors dealing with fundamentalism claim that we should only see it as political ambitions masquerading in the guise of religion. But you emphasize that “fundamentalism is undeniably religious too” (Dual Nature, p. 2). You remark that one cannot understand fundamentalism without taking into account its theological dimension (p. 5). You also observe that there is a major difference with political mass movements, because fundamentalism is a religious dream, and the Hereafter is taken very seriously (p. 5-6). Could you please elaborate?

      (read whole interview at link above)

    • perceptor1 said, on August 16, 2012 at 8:20 am

      Read the whole booklet ‘THE NEGLECTED DUTY’ here:

    • perceptor1 said, on August 16, 2012 at 11:48 pm

      So sorry, dear friend. I am typing with one hand after a fall.

  7. perceptor1 said, on August 16, 2012 at 7:57 am

    BTW, here’s a quote from Prof. J.J.G. Jansen, an eminent Islamologist, on the ‘real’ statistics of Muslims:

    “The PENALTY THAT THE SHARIA PRESCRIBES for leaving Islam is DEATH. This sentence has preferably to be pronounced by a court, but even without a clear court decision to this effect, a religious enthusiast may mete out the death penalty informally. In such cases, according to Sharia law, payment of the usual indemnity is not required, and the act of the murderer is qualified as only iftiyaat, an ‘offense’. According to the handbooks, it is not a crime. Most serious handbooks of Islamic law will confirm this, e.g., N.H.M. Keller, The Reliance of the Traveller, Beltsville 1994, p. 596.

    It is, however, not only the books that say so. The prestigious Egyptian cleric Sheikh Muhammad al-Ghazali was consulted as an expert on Sharia law when the assassin of Farag Foda stood trial in 1993. To the amazement of many, the expert declared in court that according to Islamic law KILLING AN APOSTATE SHOULD NOT BE JUDGED TO CONSITUTE THE CRIME OF MURDER. The Egyptian writer Farag Foda had been killed informally in the summer of 1992 for his alleged apostasy from Islam, see my The Dual Nature of Islamic Fundamentalism, London 1997, p. 170-171. In his expert testimony, the learned Sheikh actually used the word iftiyaat, ‘offense’, and added that he did not believe Islam had a punishment in store for people guilty of this ‘offense’.

    All this has the effect of making Muslims who would prefer to stop presenting themselves as Muslims, extremely circumspect and careful. Many apostates would not even consider coming out of the closet. The mere existence of a prescribed ‘fixed’ punishment for apostasy from Islam makes, moreover, all statistics on the number of Muslims in a region or period unreliable. All numbers ever quoted anywhere must be too high.

    If we are allowed to pass over the semantic games about who may be called a Muslim and who may not be designated as such, and what constitutes ‘Muslim terrorism’, and what does not, it is safe to say that the world would have been a less dangerous place if the acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam by Muslims (in whatever meaning of that word) had not occurred. Millions of expenses, millions in whatever currency, could have been put to better use than guarding against destruction, robbery, murder and other acts widely seen as crimes.

    Johannes J.G. Jansen, ‘Religious Roots of Muslim Violence’, in: Gelijn MOLIER, Afshin ELLIAN & David SUURLAND, eds., Terrorism: Ideology, Law and Policy, Dordrecht 2011, pp. 165-185.

    NOTE: I have edited this comment to remove repeated material. — Alan Ireland

  8. hourglassera said, on August 16, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    Note to perceptor1: Please take more care when posting comments here. I have just had to edit one of your comments to remove repeated material. Thanks for the links.

  9. evil godless atheist said, on April 24, 2013 at 12:25 pm

    Islam is full of so many inconsistencies and flaws – the only possible outcome is a collapse, I wouldn’t expect anything else.

  10. GeertWildersForPresident said, on May 19, 2013 at 11:12 am

    I hope so. But it seems that is just shifting from Islamia (where is collapsing) to the west (where is growing)

  11. Shadaan said, on August 24, 2013 at 3:58 pm

    There is not a single claim made by religions that can be proven especially the Abrahamic religions. They cannot definitively show that a god exists or that a god ever existed. Their books are scary and troubling. They divide humans and tell you that God wants the division. They are a business with lots of money and their God is all bogus. Stupid is probably the wrong word, but misguided, ignorant, and uneducated certainly are in the ball park. There is a reason why a congregation is called a FLOCK… they are led just like sheep. It is one of the branches of the mythology of the ancient Middle East. It is highly syncretic, drawing from Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and early Arabian religions. It tends to be fairly ritualized and restrictive, and in this regard is close to its Judaic roots. In general terms, all the Abrahamic faiths are toxic and troublesome and all they have brought to this earth is evil, wars, sorrow and madness.

    • hourglassera said, on August 24, 2013 at 6:06 pm

      What people seek is wealth, power and dominance. They always have, and always will, seek these – with or without “religion”. If you look at the history of civilization, I think you will find that it was agriculture, and the mass production of food, that made warfare, i.e. conflicts between armies, a feasible proposition, as only a food surplus allows the population to increase and a parasitical military class to be created.

  12. perceptor1 said, on August 25, 2013 at 1:27 am

    hourglassera wrote: “people seek wealth, power and dominance”.

    The economic motive theory is indeed one of the explanations of the rise of Islam. The political movement for a ‘Saracen’ empire had evolved before the word ‘Arab’ was used and before there was any talk of ‘Islam’. The first religion of the ‘Saracen’ (Hagarene) caravan raiders was a combination of ‘folk religion’, charms, divination, misconstrued Judaeo-Christian terminology, Qos-Allah (the Nabataean god of hunting) and Allat (‘the goddess’ of the morning star Venus). The Islamic religion developed when the ‘Hagarenes’ became Arabs and the caliphs decided they needed a state religion. The first caliphs had no idea where or what there religion was. They were living in Damascus and Iran, rather than Arabia.

    They put together all the contradictory myths they had about the origins of their people and transposed it back in time to Mecca a two-horse town that had never ever been a ‘city’ or a place of pilgrimage. The real Mecca was likely Petra, the capital of the Nabataean kingdom. Arabs came to Petra to see the sights and worship at its many temples, especially the great temple the centre of worship of ‘Dushara’ the god of Mount Seir who was polygamously married to two or more goddesses. There was a southern pilgrimage to Dushara at Mount Seir and a northern one (in summer) at Petra. These are referred to in the Koran.

    If you follow the economic theory, Islam no longer has an economic motive to exist in a 24-hour global economy, so its political manifestation (Muslim Brotherhood) is collapsing in Egypt as I write. The MB will likely not recover from this blow and political Islam will, I predict, continue to shrivel.

    • hourglassera said, on September 4, 2013 at 5:12 pm

      “Political Islam” can’t be separated from “spiritual Islam”. They’re the two sides of the same coin. But assuming, for the sake of argument, that a separation can be established, the elite of the New World Order will certainly be hoping that “political Islam” will “continue to shrivel”. They’ve destroyed the unions, co-opted the media, and made student rebellion impossible. Political Islam is one of the few remaining obstacles to their absolute domination of society.

  13. perceptor1 said, on September 4, 2013 at 11:05 pm

    Dear Friend, ‘assuming, for the sake of argument, that a separation can be established’. To say that Islamism can stop the international elite club is like saying a crocodile can eat a whole elephant. The crocodile does it a little at a time, even over hundreds of years. Eventually, Islam wins. Look at Turkey, 30% Christian in 1900, 0.5% Christian today. Erdogan is trying to bring back the caliphate.

    With respect, we can no more assume that a separation can be established within a duck-billed platypus between its mammalian and bird characteristics. It is a platypus, and to separate its characterists is the same as dissecting a dead animal!

    Henri Boulad, SJ, of Alexandria is native Arab speaker who spent his life analysing Islam. Here are some of his explanations about the ‘indissoluble marriage’ of the political and sacred within Islam.

    “Islamism is political Islam, the bearer of a project for a model society and whose aim is to establish a theocratic state based on Sharia, the only legitimate law—since it is divine—since it was revealed and enshrined in the Koran and Sunna—it’s a law that applies to everything.

    Here is an all-inclusive and all-encompassing project, one that is total, totalising and totalitarian.

    For Islam is a whole, at the same time a faith and a cult, an outlook and a moral system, a way of life and vision of the world. Uncompromising, it offers salvation or perdition. Islam is the truth that may not be doubted and its adherents form “the best of people”.

    Islam is at once a religion, a state and a society—din wa dawla.

    And so it has been since its very distant origins.

    The journey from Mecca to Medina that marked the beginning of the Muslim Era, the Hegira of 622, meant that Islam ceased to be simply a religion and became a society and a state. The Hegira was the moment when Mohammed ceased to be simply a religious leader and became a political leader and a head of state. Religion and politics would be forever after married indissolubly.

    “Islam is politics or it is nothing!” – Khomeini.

    ‘Submission’ to God, which is the meaning of the word ‘Islam’ is also demanded of the believer towards the State.

    Political power is thus entirely devoted to a religious mission.

    Islam is the merger of politics and religion.

    What is striking about Islam is its extraordinary inclusiveness. For in Islam, there is an indiscriminate and inextricable co-mingling of the sacred and the profane, the spiritual and the temporal, the religious and the civil, of the public and the private. Islam covers and embraces all aspects of life and society. It is in this sense that I said above that Islam is all-inclusive and all-encompassing, total, totalizing and totalitarian.

    The idea of a secular Islam is heresy itself! It contradicts the very essence of Islam!

    Islam is an intense melting pot that generates a highly structured social fabric and gives a society coherence, cohesion and continuity. Hence, its extraordinary capacity to assimilate. Islam has always been the absorber, never absorbed; always the assimilator and never the assimilated.”

    • hourglassera said, on September 5, 2013 at 11:11 am

      I’m not saying that “Islamism can stop the international elite club”. What I am saying is that the elite of the New World Order – principally those who studied under Leo Strauss at the University of Chicago, and who went on to found the neoconservative movement and to set up Project for the New American Century – are determined to destroy/discredit any locus of power, political rallying point, or serious philosophical position outside their system of surveillance and control.

      Of course Turkey has fewer Christians today than it did in 1900. That’s because of the exchange of populations with Greece in 1923.

      The rest of your post is simply an elaboration of what I have already stated: That “political Islam” and “spiritual Islam” can’t be separated, that they are the two sides of the same coin. I don’t need a lesson from your Jesuit in Alexandria.

      P.S. Ironically, Challenge Weekly (the Christian newspaper that published the article headlined “Collapse of Islam predicted”), became insolvent and collapsed early this year.

      • Shadaan said, on September 5, 2013 at 12:31 pm

        Religions have divided the human race and are responsible for the following, genocides, slavery, murder; mutilation, suffering, wars and rampage. This sort of behaviour is in their religious book ordered by their God. Their God has also ordered complete lack of free thought. We are told that we have advanced but are in the brink of destroying each other. Why should the end of the world come from God when humans are already equipped and are able to destroy the earth with their weapons? Hitler’s religious view’s killed millions of Jews and gypsies. People and animals sacrificed as an offering to gods. Food destroyed because it doesn’t comply with specific religious beliefs. Women treated like second class citizens, or even slaves, based on religious teachings. Slavery condoned by religous texts. Kosher Halal food, where animals are slaughtered and left to bleed to death before there are consumed as holy meat; this is absolute cruelty to animals. Animals being slaughtered in Mecca and some and Hindu temples to appease their cruel Gods. Jesus will come to save the Christians only, what about the others and how about the animals and other creatures on Earth? There are only 124 thousand prophets of the Abrahimic religions and all other religions are going to hell. The religious wars of the Abrahamic religions are so cruel and evil that human compassion is more profound than the cruelty of their Gods. Islamic law is absurd and foolish and these people are unable to see this because they are conditioned by these evil religions and are like zombies. Religion is violence and is merely organized butchery in the name of God. We are so conditioned by organized religion to think there is truth in it that we have come to believe that by calling oneself a Hindu, Christian or Muslim one is somebody, or one will find God. How absurd, sir; to find God, to find reality, there must be virtue. Virtue is freedom, and only through freedom can truth be discovered, not when you are caught in the hands of organized religion, with its beliefs. And is there any truth in theories, in ideals, in beliefs? Why do you have beliefs? Obviously, because beliefs give you security, comfort, safety, a guide. In yourself you are frightened, you want to be protected, you want to lean on somebody, and therefore, you create the ideal, which prevents you from understanding that which is the truth.

      • hourglassera said, on September 5, 2013 at 3:29 pm

        I think the real zombies are those who don’t question the “official narratives” of 9/11, 7/7, Boston bombings, Woolwich beheading, and other such psyops.

  14. perceptor1 said, on September 6, 2013 at 12:59 am

    You have finally outted yourself as an nihilistic existentialist. Good, now we can talk.

    Misdiagnosis of Islamic politics is easy. Obama does it, Kerry does, Cameron does it. It is mostly due to a lack of knowledge of Sharia. Sharia is the life blood of Islam. A doctor is going to misdiagnose 9 times out of 10 if he is inept or negligent in haematology. Because you haven’t read Sharia law or know anything about it (except for the name), it’s almost hopeless to discuss with you. You seem more interested in showing off your political theories. Those theories are no use in understanding Islam.

    Without reading the Sira, the hadiths and Sharia law, you can be assured of misunderstanding Islam…they are Islam. The sacred prevarication (taqiyya) of the mullahs assures that people like you won’t ever clue in. A hint to you: only the out and out jihadists like Choudhary are telling the truth about Sharia, jihad and the goals of Islam. The rest of chat about Islam is uninformed opinion and political misdiagnosis based on political theories.

    Learning what I telling you you’re lacking will take you about 5 years of reading, but I don’t think you’ll believe that. You apparently don’t know American history either, or the history of Turkey. There’s more to it than ‘key points’. The ‘key points’ are only the beginning. Some of the most important facts in history are the hidden factors of sociology, religion and demographics. You are missing a lot and I’ve noticed you like jumping to conclusions and triumphantly squashing an argument. That is not wise.

    • Shadaan said, on September 6, 2013 at 9:06 am

      Why would a thousand year old religion and its shariah laws that were formulated two hundred years after the Prophet died benefit the people today? The laws were not there during the time of the prophet but were formulated for mass control, please check this out. Don’t you think that these laws have become irrelevant in our century? How will laws made for that century benefit our century? Everyone knows that people change and this is a fact that has to be considered in order to educate ourselves and facilitate human beings on earth. There is already enough suffering and pain on earth and these religious laws are nothing but made to control and butcher the poor and the vulnerable. The rich and powerful will always dodge the laws. I am sure you see this fact all over the world. There is no justice that is fair and neutral as we want it. These laws are unfair to women because the religion indicates that women are inferior and should be treated as slaves and punished because they are responsible for Adams failure. Please do not forget that great men were born of women and women populate the earth for us and they have suffered enough with our stupid religions and prejudice and they are also our mothers and sisters we love. The Malaysian politicians have made personal riches out of corruption. The police and almost all government officials are corrupted because they are able to evade justice. To add further you are also indicating that Islamic mullahs are going to be the judges and that is questionable. These religious fanatics are not human beings but they have established themselves as demi gods acting for GOD and are full of the sin called EGO and PRIDE. Humans have only brought pain and suffering to other humans and creatures and how dare you allow this mistake to be repeated. I believe that you are speaking from a conditioned self that cannot look out of the box, you should go out of your box to see things for yourself and all one should hope for is peace and tranquility on earth and we have tried religion and politics+religion in Muslim countries and we have failed. Let us go out of this box and start thinking rather than speaking from religions which are only ideas and not of God, and I hope there is a God because this God seem to be missing since the dawn of humanity.

  15. perceptor1 said, on September 6, 2013 at 12:51 pm

    Dear Shadaan, How does a detective solve a case? If you said, ‘by thinking like the criminal’, you have answered your question (‘Let us go out of this box’). I am like you trying to be the detective and ‘solve the case’ of Islam…The question we are asking is this: ‘why do they want to be so backward and brutal?’

    Without a knowledge of Sharia and the early Islamic writings, you cannot proceed…your answers will leave out central information that create the Islamic mindset. You are right, the mullahs created Sharia, not Allah. The mullahs created the Hadiths from which the Sharia is drawn.

    Your citation of ‘Malaysian politicians’ is normative in Islam…Sharia gives unlimited power to the mullahs and dictators and no one can pry it out of their hands unless they are murdered in jihad.

    You cannot fight this corruption without an understanding of the central brainwashing machine in Islam…Sharia! Defeat Sharia, discredit it, and you have destroyed Islam.

    If you don’t know anything about Sharia, you are waving your arms like Don Quixote.

    • Shadaan said, on September 7, 2013 at 9:09 am

      Sharia is a set of ideas formulated over fifteen hundred years and were believed to be divine laws to make order rather than disorder. The human being is naturally violent and chaotic and for humans to formulate a set of divine laws must be troublesome. You say that sharia is Islam and there is no Islam without sharia. I will like to ask you if Allah ever existed, of course but you have left him out of the equation. Are you indicating that sharia is more important than Allah? Why would Islam not exist without sharia? Allah should be enough for Islam to exist. The laws are simply an empire building ploy formulated by shellfish human thought. Islam is peace and love therefore Allah is peace and love which is freedom. Freedom is not choice but movement of thought is a choice. The free and intelligent mind does not choose, only the conditioned and confused ones choose. Freedom is action devoid of conditioning and contradiction. Freedom is the same as the truth, the nothingness of the mind which is empty of its psychological content, put together by thought. It is the cessation of the messy and the chaotic consciousness which is self-centred, self-contradictory and a source of sorrow. The free mind is one with the stability and order is truly religious and secular as well but it does not belong to any religion or nation, truth is its spirit and the world is its home. The free mind is full of love which is passion for all and to be one with all. Love is ‘intelligence means reading between the lines. It uses the physical or the factual knowledge for strictly the biological well-being of humanity. It understands the limitations of thought and does not allow thought to enter the realm where it has no place. Intelligence guides thought which essentially a physical and chemical process is. Intelligence is creative while thought is mechanical. Being limited, thought must inevitably create the problems. And it cannot solve the problems it creates. Intelligence is the freedom which is not the product of time and environment. It alone solves the plight brought about by thought and knowledge. I seem to be lecturing but would like to tell you that there are more in existence than simple serious Ideas. I would reemphasize that religion from its inception is chaotic and troublesome doesn’t matter how it came about. It has come from human thought otherwise it would not have measured as chaotic. Like to tell you that I like you way of thinking and am of the opinion that you are a thinker of sorts.

  16. Phyllis Mendoza said, on September 17, 2014 at 4:07 am

    I aam regular reader, how are you everybody? This article posted at this site is in fact nice.

  17. Shadaan said, on July 9, 2015 at 7:18 am

    Human consciousness is similar in all human beings, made up of fears, anxieties, pleasures, and faith. Occasionally, there is love, compassion, and kindness from a different kind, called intelligence. Thought has created wonderful things with technology. However the mystery of death is problematic with humans, the fear of an ending is scary and painful. Thought and the self feels inferior and terrified to end. They invent something sacred, beyond them, something moral and timeless like God. There comes the birth of religions and in time it is organised and becomes big and powerful. Religion and the organization is now a form of bigotry and it is time to break away with this ideology to be able to introduce a new factor into this old beast. It means that we can quietly move away from the old pattern of obedience and acceptance of fabrications using intelligence. That will be the real turning point in our lives. Man cannot go on living with dead and meaningless ideas that has lost its meaning, If you fulfil yourself, with God and miracles who cares? If you become a believer of faith, what does it matter? Whereas, if you totally move away from the old, you positively affect the whole consciousness of mankind when a new brain is born. I am saying this because of the our chaotic existence since time and maybe it is time to walk away.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: