Some Muslims are Evil – Most are not.

My own view is that it was deeply regrettable that the Prophet Muhammad ever existed. The monotheistic religions of Judaism and Christianity were really all we needed. Suddenly introducing another one was bound to cause trouble, especially as it happened at a time when it was thought that violence and bloodshed were a necessary ingredient in religion.

But there it is. We got Islam and we are definitely stuck with it.

The striking thing about Islam is that its great book, the Quran, can be easily interpreted, rather as the Old Testament can, as approving violence towards “unbelievers”. That is striking because it came into existence five hundred or more years after the New Testament, a collection of books which could never be read as approving such violence. And Muhammad, of course, asserted that Christ was a great prophet (though not quite as great as he considered himself to be).

Now, more than fifteen hundred years after the creation of Islam, the world has to contend with a religion some of whose adherents maintain that it is their duty to annihilate all who are not Muslims. That, incidentally, is a point which Mr Corbyn does not understand. His theory that Islamic terrorists only exist because the West has intervened in the Middle East is complete nonsense. The extreme Islamists think it their solemn obligation to kill Christians and Jews because they are Christians and Jews, not because some of their governments have, sometimes misguidedly, taken part in disputes which do not concern them.

But nothing is ever straight forward in this life. The Quran can also be read as being in favour of love and peace. And that is the way in which the vast majority of Muslims read it. That is why it is obviously right that we should all be careful not to assume that all Muslims are supporters of terrorism. Well over 90% of them are not.

Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that appalling atrocities are committed daily (mostly in the Middle East but often in the West) by terrorists who are convinced they are doing Allah’s will. Western politicians, almost all of whom keep asserting that Isil terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, are extraordinarily foolish. They are, all sane people would agree, entirely right to tell us not to be beastly to decent, law abiding Muslims. But their refusal to concede that the terrorists are motivated by their genuine belief that Allah requires them to commit murder on an enormous scale is not at all helpful.

It was undoubtedly true of the IRA, in the worst days of the “troubles”, that a great many of its members were motivated by a simple desire to be nasty. They were common crooks, of the worst sort. But that is not true of these Muslim terrorists. Yes, of course, they are, in our eyes, foul criminals. But they all genuinely believe they are doing what Muhammad instructed them to do. To pretend that their crimes have nothing to do with their religion is to refuse to face the truth.

Know your enemy. If you don’t, you can never hope to defeat him. I don’t pretend to have the answer to extreme Islamist terrorism. But I do understand that the answer will evade us all if we continue with this idiotic refusal to accept that the terrorists are convinced that their vile crimes will bring them eternal salvation.



14 thoughts on “Some Muslims are Evil – Most are not.

  1. One problem is that, unlike the other major faiths, Islam is not a tolerant religion. The Qur’an specifically tells believers to conquer the world and punish infidels. I’ve just been reading about the recent statue row in Bangladesh: “The country of 160 million people is ruled by secular laws, but radical Islam has been rising. In recent years dozens of atheists, liberal writers, bloggers and publishers and members of minority communities and foreigners have been targeted and killed.”

    With a growing number of Muslims in this country and the atrocities of the last few years, it’s becoming possible to imagine that happening here. That thought of our freedom and cultural values being stamped out while our leaders make excuses for the perpetrators is a deeply depressing one.


  2. Charles, with the greatest respect, you seem ignorant of the existence of two korans, or rather two korans in one. And there is the principle of ‘abrogation’ of which you appear unaware.

    You say “The Quran can also be read as being in favour of love and peace.” That is certainly true but all those verses come from what is known as the Meccan koran, or the koran that was created at a time when the number of muhammad’s followers never exceeded 150 and his new religion was weak and being discriminated against. The prophet cobbled together his new religion by mixing Talmudic scripture, Biblical tales and a pinch of Zoroastrianism. The result was a religion somewhat akin to Christianity in the way it describes a merciful and forgiving god. This was the religion of muhammad the preacher.

    After 13 years of steadily increasing harassment by the polytheistic authorities together with his failure to spread the word of allah, muhammad took his family and followers to Medina, a largely Jewish city, in the year AD 622 or the year dot for the islamic calendar, the year of the hajj.They were welcomed by the Medinans and allowed to freely preach their message. It was here that muhammad ceased being the preacher of peace and began his career as a bandit and robber of caravans. He was very successful at this and rewarded his followers with much booty and slaves, particularly sexual slaves. Not surprisingly this proved very popular and his followers began to grow greatly in numbers. Thus we find muhammad the war lord at the head of a growing army and it is here and at this time that all the verses of violence and cruelty and threats of eternal fire were coined.

    The Meccans soon discovered to their horror what exactly they had admitted to their midst but that is another, very bloodthirsty story.

    It was here that the Medinan koran was born and the principle of abrogation. This meant that all koranic verses from Mecca, where they were contradicted by later Medinan verses, were superseded. In other words, the merciful and forgiving allah became a violent, hating and unforgiving allah. And since the koran is the perfect book, immutable because it is the word of allah, that is the koran all muslims must follow if they are not to fall into apostasy and death.

    (to complicate matters the koran is not written chronologically, but in descending order of chapter, or sura, size. To ascertain the validity of any verse it is necessary to discover the time it was written. There are chronological korans available but they are of course frowned on by clerics)

    As I have attempted to explain elsewhere because the koran is immutable, and because islam permits no separation of mosque and state, it is necessarily more political than religious and should never be considered a religion like Judaism or Christianity. It recognises only believers in allah and his messenger the prophet as belonging to humanity and unbelievers must either convert or die. Everything that ISIS does in Syria, what the bomber did in Manchester, what the truck driver in Nice did can be and is justified in the sacred islamic texts. There is no ‘moderate’ islam. There are no ‘extremist’ muslims. There is only islam, there are only muslims.

    I hope you have found this enlightening.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I am learning more about Islam this week, and am beginning to understand why its adherents behave as they do. I had no idea Muhammad was a warlord. Very different from the founder of the Christian religion.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The explanation of “abrogation” does not necessarily mean the the peaceful verses are superseded by the warlike ones. In fact many Muslim scholars disagree which verses in the Koran are abrogated by others.

      Some Muslim scholars argue that instructions for interpreting the Koran are contained within, and some verses are immutable and some open to interpretation.

      So I disagree with your statement:

      “There is no ‘moderate’ islam. There are no ‘extremist’ muslims. There is only islam, there are only muslims.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • You, and pretty well everyone else other than me, have a very impressive understanding of Islam. Thank you.



      • Dr Bill Warner (Amazon, Google) makes an interesting point in several of his works regarding abrogation. He claims that part of the pluralism that is islam includes the pluralism of truth itself.

        He says that muslims are free to believe (not just employ for argument’s sake) whichever verse suits their circumstances. Truly Orwellian.

        The great majority of muslim scholars regard abrogation in the way I described it and the great majority of muslims practise it thus.


        • Badger.

          Dr Warner,and I haven’t had time to google him, makes an interesting point.
          In fact if Muslims are free to believe whichever verse of the Koran suits their circumstances it tend to support the view that they can choose the Peacemaker or the War Lord. So Islam may well in this way be capable of modernisation. As to whether this is pluralism of truth, only Allah can judge.

          As to moderate Muslims referred to in your comment below, surely they are those Muslims who choose the Peacemaker.


Add your comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: 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