Have to spend less time the forums and Facebook and devote more to writing. I'm not getting any younger and those books and articles aren't gonna write themselves, so had to refocus my priorities. Sometimes too, part of me doesn't want to write about all the negativity, about thugs and real-life monsters. Can be a bit depressing, especially when you see that they have so many defenders and fanboys who talk about them as if they were great guys. It's like how Tupac promoted the thug life, and look how many people died following his advise (including himself). Anyway, there I go again :-)

BTW, always good to see your posts.



One major difference between the OT verses and modern jihadism is that those commands were for a specific time and place. They were temporal and limited to the ancient Hebrews and early ancient Israel. In Islam, Muslims are told to follow the example of Muhammad. His example stands until the day of judgment. He's considered the ideal, the role model.

"Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah." (Quran 33:21)

Read this for more: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muhammad:_The_Example_of_Ethical_Behavior. So historical context doesn't mean as much in Islam as it does in other religions.

So from the Quran and Hadith we can gather that during the Meccan (Makka) period when Muhammad and his followers were a minority, he tried to avoid causing problems until he became vocal in condemning the other pagan gods. Then he got chased out and fled to Medina. There he increased his numbers and raided supply caravans meant for Mecca. Mecca depended on those supply caravans since it was a desert city, so those raids hurt it. Eventually, Muhammad grew an army and raided Mecca. After several battles, he conquered the city of his birth when it surrendered. (There is evidence that one of Muhammad's successors, Umar, changed a lot of the facts and that it wasn't really Mecca that Muhammad conquered, but Petra, but that's for another time.)

So in the Quran we find "peaceful verses" from the early Meccan period, and "violent verses" from the later Medinan period. So the principle that can be gathered from the verses is that when Islam is a small minority it may stay isolated and submit to the laws of the country that it's in. As it grows it can agitate and demand more rights. Ultimately the goal is to take over the country...and the world under a single caliph. For ISIS, its members believe that Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is that caliph. Most other Muslims disagree, but they do believe that someday there will be a caliph who will rule the world (for more read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate). I also suggest reading this article by a scholar: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-this-one.html. When you do, notice this line:

"All pious Muslims well-read in the Hadith (the compiled sayings of the Prophet) firmly believe in the need to establish an Islamic State headed by a Muslim Caliph. This is mentioned twice in the Holy Quran and it’s central to the Islamic faith. No Muslim scholar would debate an Islamic state and the caliphate. Muslim Sunnis claim that the caliph should hail from Meccan notability. Shiite Muslims add that he must be from Ahl al-Bayt; a member of the prophet’s family."

I disagree with the author that ISIS is misinterpreting Islam. ISIS puts out a magazine that is free to download. In English. Anyone reading it can see that everything they do is justified by the Quran, the Hadith and the life of Muhammad. EVERYTHING. Since all these sources are also online and available for anyone to read, we can see for ourselves that they are NOT taking the verses out of context.

While in reality a global caliphate wouldn't work since there would always be fighting factions, etc., the point is that most Muslims have a belief in it as their ultimate goal. Even without a caliphate, non-Muslims in official Muslim countries suffer persecution. Often they live as dhimmis, official second-class citizens with few rights.

As to colonialism, which colonialism? Usually we think of Western colonialism, such as the UK, Germany, Belgium, etc. Even the USA. Certain a lot of evils were committed by colonialists. Sometimes they made things worse, but not always. Some good things that the Brits did was to end Sati, the ritual burning of spouses in India, and the ending of slavery. Most Americans are so ignorant on slavery that they think it ended in 1865. It didn't. It ended in most of the United States in 1865 (the Native American Five Civilized Tribes, such as the Cherokee and Choctow, didn't end slavery until 1870), but it continued in the rest of the world. Brazil didn't end it until 1888. Slavery wasn't criminalized in Niger until 2003. Slavery still exists in Somalia and Iraq, and when the Muslim Brotherhood ran Egypt in 2012, it brought back slavery. Slavery is allowed in Islam because Muhammad owned slaves.

Getting back to colonialism, I agree that sometimes European colonialism made things worse. But let's not forget that the Muslim conquests themselves were colonialism, and they didn't help anyone.