"Silent Majority" Of Muslims?

At the very core of Islam there are the concepts of martyrdom and jihad. In Sunni Islam many view Jihad as the sixth pillar of Islam (although unofficially). In Twelver Shia Islam, Jihad is explicitly defined as one of ten ancillaries of the faith.

Most people are familiar with the concept of "lesser jihad" i.e. the physical "holy war" against the enemies of Islam. Other problems include followers’ believing that the Quran is the verbatim word of God and combined with the hadiths there are numerous abhorrent explicit references to how homosexuals and Jews are to be systematically slaughtered.

Many liberals who perpetuate the argument that Islamist conflicts/jihads are geo-political causes (Mehdi Hasan) and not the result (or to some degree) of religious inspiration are blindly ignorant to the unequivocal facts. Continually two arguments (that are 100% true) are offered to deflect criticism of Islam:

Terrorism - the numbers game; "It's a small minority committing acts of terror" - Islam has 1.5 billion followers, a minority of this could still be a significant number-how many of the majority support the actions of the minority without taking up arms?

The Quran/hadiths and preachers/scholars - Numerous abhorrent statements and sound bites (I won't list them - just do some research particularly into the hadiths). A "small minority" of preachers/scholars justify the murder of apostates, encourage militant jihad, promote "dhimmi" status for non-believers, murder of homosexuals, sharia law and genocide of the Jews as explicitly stated in the hadith. How large and influential is this small minority?

Journalists who display great intolerance by playing the "Islamophobia" and "numbers game" card are stifling any debate or criticism of a major world religion. All religions should be open to the same level of scrutiny as for example politics, but for some reason (mainly due to fear of offence or reprisals) religion is insulated from the awkward questions that it has a duty to answer. They force us to play a game of Muslim Roulette since we can’t tell which Muslim is going to blow himself up until he does. And their indifference about the evil being committed in the name of their religion is a big reason why their reputation is where it is.

So while I understand that most Muslims are not at war with us, they’ve proven in their silence and inaction against jihad that they’re not on our side either, and there’s nothing we can say or do to change that.

Another problem with Muslims who aren’t very Muslim is that they lead some among us to conclude that they must be practicing a more enlightened form of Islam. They’re not. They’re “practicing” life in non-Muslim countries, where they are free to live as they choose. But their “Islam” is not the Islam. There’s no separate ideology apart from Islam that’s being practiced by these Muslims in name only, there’s no such thing as “Western Islam”.

John "Babbacombe" Lee The man they could not hang

An oft-told tale

The story of how a young Devonshire man cheated the gallows not just once, nor twice, but three times, is one that has been retold many times and in many forms.

John Henry George Lee was born in August 1864 in the village of Abbotskerswell. On leaving school he was employed as a servant by Emma Keyse, a spinster who lived at The Glen in Babbacombe (or Babbicombe as it was known then), a peaceful seaside hamlet near Torquay. A few years later he enlisted in the navy at Devonport but was discharged through injury after three years. He then went into service under one Colonel Brownlow who lived at Ridge Hill in Torquay; in 1883 he was convicted of stealing silverware worth £20 from his master for which he was sentenced to six months hard labour at Exeter Prison after entering a guilty plea.

Murder most foul

Following his release from prison in 1884, Miss Keyse, who had taken a shine to Lee when he first worked in her household, decided to give him a second chance, and he was once again employed at The Glen where his half-sister Elizabeth Harris worked as a cook.

Disaster struck on the 15th November of that year when there was a fire at the house and Emma was found dead with her throat cut. It appeared that the fire had been started by the murderer to incinerate her body, so as to destroy any evidence at the scene. John Lee, then 20 years old, was thought to be the only male in the house at the time and was arrested on suspicion of murder. It was known that he held a grudge against Emma after she had recently reduced his wages, but the evidence against him was purely circumstantial. He was found to have a cut on his arm which he said happened when he broke the window of the dining room to let out the smoke. He was unable to give a satisfactory account of his movements at the time of the murder and following an inquest was sent for trial at Exeter Assizes.

Inquest and trial

An inquest was held before a jury at St Marychurch Town Hall, starting two days after the murder. Twenty-five witness statements were read including those of the cook Elizabeth Harris and the two other maidservants resident at The Glen, the elderly sisters Eliza and Jane Neck. The jury returned a verdict accusing Lee of being responsible for Emma's death and the coroner directed that Wilful murder by John Leeshould appear on her death certificate. Today this presumption of guilt before trial would be regarded as a travesty of justice, but it was normal practice at the time: even if Lee were to be acquitted at his trial, the cause of death written on the certificate would stand.

The trial was held in Exeter Guildhall beginning on February 2nd 1885. Lee was to be represented in court by Reginald Gwynne Templer, a young solicitor who was acquainted with Miss Keyse, making it perverse that he should act for the defence. However, it was claimed that he was known to the Lee family also, and it was Lee's parents who had recommended him. Two days before the trial was due to start Reginald was taken ill and was replaced by his younger brother Charles and the Liberal MP for St Ives, John St Aubyn. Reginald never fully recovered and died on 18 December 1886 from paralysis of the insane - a Victorian medical euphemism usually associated with tertiary syphilis. Adding to the intrigue surrounding Gwynne Templer, there was speculation that he was the lover of Lee's half-sister Elizabeth Harris the cook, who was pregnant by an unknown father at the time of the murder. While he has never been named publicly as the perpetrator, there is a widely held view that he was the murderer, and Lee was only guilty of the subordinate role of covering up the crime.

Lee protested his innocence throughout the trial, but his case was poorly presented with no defence witnesses being called and inadequate cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses. The prosecution case was unconvincing too, amounting to little more than that Lee, a young man with a criminal record, was the only male in the house at the time of the murder and was found with blood on his clothes after the event. It was also suggested that Lee's coat and trousers smelled of paraffin oil, but evidence from the medical practitioner cast doubt on whether this was true of the trousers when he first examined them, suggesting that this exhibit had been tampered with:

The coat smelt strongly of paraffin. I examined a pair of trousers also shown to me and there is a patch of blood on one of the legs, a little to the back. I notice now a smell of oil about them. Did not so notice it when P.C. called upon me at my Surgery. [From testimony by Herber Nicholas Chilcote at Lee's trial]

Although the evidence against Lee was little more than circumstantial, the jury took a mere 40 minutes to find him guilty and he was sentenced to death by hanging. On being asked by the judge as to why he had taken the sentence with such equanimity, Lee replied:

The reason I am so calm, is that I trust in the Lord, and he knows that I am innocent.

The aborted execution

Capital punishment in 19th century Exeter

Prior to 1868 executions in Exeter (and elsewhere in the UK) were public spectacles that drew vast crowds of morbidly curious onlookers. For example, the last public execution of a woman in Exeter was that of Mary Anne Ashford who was found guilty of the murder of her husband. Her hanging outside the County Gaol on 28 March 1866 was watched by as many as 20,000 spectators. Following passage of the Capital Punishment Amendment Act in 1868, executions had to take place inside prisons; apart from the officials responsible for carrying out the judicial killing and the prison chaplain, only accredited members of the press were allowed to witness the event.

The execution method used in Great Britain at the time of Lee's execution was known as the long drop. In this procedure, instead of letting the victim fall a standard distance, the person's height and weight were used to determine an appropriate length of rope to use to ensure that the neck was broken without decapitation occurring during the drop.

John Lee, now condemned, awaits his execution

Lee's execution was set to take place in Exeter Prison on 23 February 1885. He wrote a long letter to his half-sister Elizabeth Harris 12 days before this date in which he questioned the truthfulness of her testimony and that of the other servants at The Glen at his trial.

There is no doubt that the truth will come out after I am dead. It must be some very hard hearted persons to let me die for nothing; they have not told six words of truth, that is the servants, and that lovely stepsister, who carries her character with her.

The night before the fateful day Lee claimed to have had a vision in which an angel told him he need have no fear as he wouldn't be executed because he was innocent.

The scaffold is readied and the drop tested

The scaffold to be used was originally housed in an old prison hospital building. It was removed from this site pending its demolition, and was re-erected in the van-house in 1882. This was to be the first execution to be carried out in the new location. As was the usual practice the drop was pre-tested by the executioner, Yorkshireman James Berry in this instance. This is the procedure that was followed according to the prison governor Edwin Cowtan:

On the morning of Saturday 21st February, the apparatus was by my order thoroughly overhauled, cleaned, and tested by the engineer officer, and a warder carpenter.

On the afternoon of the same day the apparatus was again tasted by the artisan warder and Berry the executioner, the latter, after trying it twice over, reporting to me verbally that he was satisfied with it for the present use.

No further testing took place on the Sunday and the executioner Berry remained in the prison until the Monday when the execution was to begin at 8am.

The notorious execution commences

The Chief Constable of Devon, Gerald de Courcy Hamilton, describes the remarkable events that unfolded during the attempted execution of Lee:

On the prisoner reaching the place of execution he was placed by Berry, the executioner, immediately under the cross-beam, over which was carried the rope; he was faced outwards towards the door, with both feet standing transversely on the junction of the two flaps or shutters which formed the drop. The executioner, with considerable skill and rapidity (as it appears to me) strapped the culprits legs above the ankles, drew the cap over his face, adjusted the noose round his neck, stepped back and pulled the iron handle or trigger, to let fall the foot-boards, to my intense astonishment, however, these latter deflected only about a quarter of an inch and appeared to be tightly jammed together about the centre. The executioner and some of the prison officials standing by endeavoured, by stamping on the boards, to get them to move, but without avail. After some seconds the prisoner's face was uncovered, and he was led away to an adjoining cell or room in the prison.

In the meanwhile, the executioner and the prison officials did their best to ascertain the cause of the machine not working. My own impression was that, the morning being very wet and damp, the foot-boards had become swollen, and were thus unable to free themselves when their top edges came in contact. I consequently urged the use of a plane, and pointed out the spot which I considered caused the impediment. The prison engineer procured a plane and a tomahawk, and we eased the centre of the boards. A prison warder was made to stand on them, holding on by both hands to the rope; the trigger was pulled, and the boards fell. The prisoner was then brought out again, and the execution proceeded as in the first instance, but again the boards refused to fall.

Hamilton went on to say that Lee was subjected to a third unsuccessful hanging attempt, and maybe even a fourth: other eyewitness accounts contradict this, saying that Lee was strung up for the drop no more than three times. After the the flaps failed to open for the third time, following an animated discussion between the officials present the execution was abandoned and Lee was returned to his cell. The prison Medical Officer takes up the story:

That this third attempt having failed, I ordered him to be removed to a cell near, myself attempting to take him into my reception ward through which he had previously passed. That I am reported to have said to the prison officials, "You may experiment as much as you like on a sack of flour, but you shall not experiment on this man any longer".

That he was accordingly taken into a passage near; that presently the Governor informed the chaplain and myself that the apparatus would not work; that I then desired that the man should be taken back and the execution postponed; that the said condemned prisoner was returned to his cell; that I offered the Under Sheriff a certificate, which he was glad to accept. That such certificate was drawn up in my office and signed by the Governor, chaplain, and myself, for the information of Her Majesty's Secretary of State.

The cause of the failure is investigated

The scaffold platform had two sets of hinges. Those at the outer edge allowed the two halves to swing open downwards when the release mechanism was activated; the other hinges ran along the entire length where the two halves met in the middle. These hinges were held in place by draw-bolts at one end which were released by pulling a lever, allowing the hanging prisoner to drop as both halves swung down.

On the morning following the day of execution two clerks of works made a careful examination of the apparatus. Rather than jamming because the boards were too close at the centre, as had been thought at the time, in the Report on the Cause of Failure of the Machinery of the Scaffold the two men concluded that the equipment hadn't been reassembled correctly when it was moved to the van-house.

They discovered that the end of the long hinges was resting on one-eighth of an inch on the draw-bolt at the crank. They then tried to work the lever without any weight on the platform and found that when the lever was drawn quickly the platform fell. If drawn slowly, on one trial it remained fast, and on another trial it fell, but seemed to bind or grate at the end of the long hinge. They were then perfectly satisfied that the cause of the failure to act was due to the fact that one of the long hinges rested on the draw-bolt one-eighth of an inch too much. It is probable that in the re-fixing of the scaffold the two sides were placed one-eighth of an inch nearer than they had been before, or that the long hinge had been very slightly bent in some way at that time.

The aftermath

After the Home Secretary Sir William Harcourt had been informed of the circumstances of Lee's execution he immediately passed an order commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment. In answer to a question in the House of Commons on 23rd February 1885 he replied:

The under-Sheriff of Exeter came up to London afternoon to see me, and told me the facts of this painful case; and after considering them I thought that it would shock the feelings of everyone if a man had twice to incur the pangs of imminent death. I, therefore, this afternoon signed a respite in his case, to continue during Her Majesty's pleasure.

There was much disquiet in the press and in parliament over the affair and the way executioners were appointed on an add hoc basis; on 24 February 1885 The Guardian in its editorial called for more efficient executions. The Home Secretary bowed to pressure and ordered that an enquiry be held into the matter.

Lee was released from prison in 1907 after serving 22 years in Portland Prison. He became a minor celebrity, touring the country giving his own version of the story which he published in 1912 in book form as The Man They Could Not Hang. A silent film of his story was also made in this year. He married a Devon woman in January 1909 with whom he fathered two children. He abandoned his wife for another woman, travelling with her to the USA in 1911. He lived until the age of 80, dying on 19 March 1945 in Milwaukee.

Hadriani Relandi's: Palaestina ex monumentis veteribus illustrata

There exists a mountain of mis-information about the Roman named "Palestina", that could be easily cleared by Hadriani Relandi's: Palaestina ex monumentis veteribus illustrata, Volume 1, chronicling his trip in the land of Palestina in 1695/6.

The author Relandi, was fluent in, ancient Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, Latin, as well as the European languages. He was known as a noted cartographer,geographer, philologist, and scholar, Relandi surveyed approximately 2500 places where people lived, mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, Mishnah or Talmud. His research method was interesting: First, he mapped the land. Secondly, Relandi identified each of the places mentioned in the Mishnah or Talmud, along with their original source. If the source was Jewish, he listed it together with the appropriate sentence in the Hebrew Scriptures. If the source was Roman or Greek he presented the connection in Greek or Latin. Thirdly, Thirdly, he arranged a population survey and census of each community visited.

Prominent conclusions: The land was predominently, desolate, empty;its' inhabitants few, concentrated in the towns of Acco, Gaza, Jaffa, Jerusalem, Tiberius, and Tzfat. Most of the inhabitants were Jews and the rest, Christians. There were few Muslims, and a scattering of nomad Bedouins. Nablus, called Shchem, where approximately 120 people, members of the Muslim Natsha family and approximately 70 Shomronites, lived. It is interesting and worthy to mention, that Relandi referred to the Muslims as "nomad Bedouins" who arrived in the area as construction and agriculture labor reinforcement, seasonal workers.In the Galilee capital, Nazareth, lived approximately 700 Christians and in Jerusalem approximately 5000 people, mostly Jews and some Christians. Relandi learned that not one settlement in Palestina, had a name that was of Arabic origin. Settlement names originated in the Hebrew, Greek, Latin or Roman languages.

This beautifully illustrated book, contradicts any post-modern theory which claims a "Palestinian heritage," or Palestinian nation. It further strengthens and validates the connection, kinship of this country to the Jewish people, relevance, pertinence, and the absolute lack of Arab ownership, who adopted the Latin name Palestina for their own.

Richard Dawkins is Right

Richard Dawkins recent tweet stating, “All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages, though” has produced paroxysm outrage among Muslims and other defenders of Islam. Nesrine Malik fulminates, “But this, in its deliberately obtuse (say what you like, but Dawkins is not a stupid man) baiting, was a new low.” She contends that the Oxford don is really trying to say ’that Muslims as a unit throughout history have done nothing since the Middle Ages, and that is clearly attributable to their stupid religion’.

The sad truth is that since the 12th Century, scientific endeavour in the Muslim world has lacked woefully behind that of much of the rest of the world (both East and West), yet in the 300 years 800-1100AD the centre of thinking and academic endeavour in the world was Baghdad. Indeed the names of many of the stars in the night sky are testament to this period, as is algebra and many other mathematical advances. Baghdad also welcomed persons of all faiths (and non) to engage in free-thought and debate. This all ended in the 12 Century when an Imam named Hamid Al-Ghazali enforced the more rigid, orthodox and unquestioning interpretation of the Muslim faith we see globally today. This is what Dawkins was referring to in his tweets, I doubt many of those who criticise him, both Muslim and non-Muslim have ever bothered to educate themselves on this era of Islamic history, they will just engage 'offended' mode and spout the same old nonsense in Dawkins' direction about him being a bigoted angry atheist. It is pathetic. I have not seen one person offer up a rational, educated counter argument to the points he made.

This offence taking and faux-outrage has been whipped up not just by Muslims and other religious folk, but by apologists for Islam and Islamism especially on the left/liberal side of the debate. It seems like all bets are off when it comes to any debate about this single faith, that by criticising Islam (which is a man-made Idea) you are somehow being a horrid bigot, it is censorship by the back door and is a vile trait in many commentators and public figures I usually side with in public debate.

Yes, there is a certain section of the society who hate and discriminate against individual Muslims out of fear and ignorance, but it is intellectually and morally abhorrent to lump in legitimate critics of Islam/Islamism such as Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris with these actual bigots. Dawkins has often shared a stage with and spoken in support of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a female apostate from Islam who has had to go into hiding because of very credible death threats made to her and the murder of Theo Van Gogh, with whom she worked with on the film 'Submission.' Indeed I would say Dawkins writings, speeches, support and tweets have aided more people suffering under religious persecution and dogmatic intolerance than any tweet bemoaning 'Islamophobia' from the likes of Mehdi Hasan, Owen Jones or Mo Ansar.

The Story of ex-Muslim

"Leaving Islam is the greatest challenge to a Muslim".

Born and raised as a Muslim I had studied deep into religion. Muslims want to implement a seventh century system caled khilafa which did not even last for 30 years and three out of four ruler were killed by followers of each others. Muslims are not tolerant and are not open to ideas and a better system we have been brained washed into thinking that we are the only ones right on planet.

I started doubting religion sometime when I a was 17 years old.I was constantly worried that I was losing my faith (and for good reason cause I questioned everything!). I still had some faith going into college, but it was dwindling. I started considering myself as an agnostic. People who leave Islam usually do it because they had some bad experience with it, real-life experience. I have seen it destroy too many people, particularly women. I find it so interesting that Muslims cannot accept that people leave Islam. Something finally hit me and I decided that I was an atheist. The reality is that I really don’t care either way.

My philosophy is to live and let live. We don’t need an organized religion or a book telling us to be good. Good morals are something that we should be able to teach ourselves. I don’t know if god exists, nor do I go around saying that he doesn’t. I just choose to trust in science and the facts laid out before me. I won’t however go around questioning other peoples faith. That is not my place to do so.

First several weeks, there have been days when I’ve walked around with pure rage beating at my chest. I’m angry at myself for falling for an ideology that is so against my very nature. I’m angry at myself for burying my doubts under the curtain of denial and apologia. And so started a depression that would last almost 2 years. I could not allow myself to believe that Christians and unbelievers would go to hell, I kept telling myself 'No!, this can't be true!' And then I would hear the translation of the Quran and that would confirm my fears, I would cry every night, and I began to self harm. I cut myself and then proceeded to hit myself anywhere I could with a closed fist. I almost became suicidal, the only thing keeping me from it was probably the fact that I was scared and then people who commit suicide apparently will suffer in hell for eternity.I began doing this thing, I can't really explain it but I would put pressure on my chest, by squeezing my muscles when I was really hysteric in order to try and stop my heart from working, I often felt I was losing it, I lost all will to live. I would sometimes open the Quran translation and read it, and I couldn't get far because of how often God seemed to mention hell, and punishment. It was like this God of mine, was obsessed with punishment. All these years I was generally taken to a Muslim psychologist, and nothing ever changed, all my problems were still there.

At around the age of 19 I went to see a Christian psychologist and that's when my world began to turn around, he questioned everything and allowed me to feel safe in questioning, I allowed myself to feel angry to God for the first time, and found that that pent up anger was ruining me from the inside. I voiced my pain and I began to heal. Ever since then a whole new way of thought opened to me. I felt the bondage's of Islam loosen it's hold on me, and it was liberating, I have let them fall altogether, and I feel like a new person. Although no one yet knows, I have stopped praying but have chosen to be a humanist, but I still do however believe in God, not because of Islam, but because I found God myself. I may be an atheist, but I guarantee you that I donate money to charity as often as I can. I will buy lunch for a homeless man when I am able. I will go out of my way to help a stranger who is having car trouble in the middle of the road. But those people who represent Muslims will not.

Democrat Scandals

Back when the Shaw of Iran was in power, a dictator to be sure, but an ally of ours for decades, he asked Carter for help against about 500 dissidents who were threatening the stability of Iran. Carter said no, and about the next day, the Shaw was being paraded in the streets, over thrown, our people were hostages. And repression became the fact of life for Iranians, and the regime started on its path to today. The beginning of the present nightmare that is Iran. Under the Shaw, women wore western clothing, went to college, traveled freely, secret police yes, but the Shaw westernized the country. The hostages were released the day Reagan became president. Carter and his fellow democrats like to say it was to embarrass Carter, but Iranians themselves who speak up, say it was because they took Reagan's measure, and figured it would be the prudent thing to do. Think ATC strike and the Russians paying close attention to how Reagan handled that, to see how he would be in the up-coming SALT talks. Clinton took us to war to distract us from his sexual disgraces. And now we have the monster in the White House presiding over a mess he created and encouraged for five years. Allies of ours out of office in several countries, with Obama's encouragement, and radicals in place. Are we going to war, helping Al Qaeda, to save face for the narcissist? Notice how last week it was "A shot across the bow." and now this weeks it is that we need 70,000 troops on the ground. Lies, corruption, and deception surround this horror in the White House. Our enemies respected and feared Bush, and were afraid to test him. Now, the radicals know they have a friend in Obama, and the chaos in the region has his name all over it. The U.S. looks weak and vulnerable, all the while we are being disarmed by Obama, and more vulnerable to attack by the people he enrages. People need to be looking, by the way, at the long time ties between Obama, Jarrett, and the Saudis. (Remember the bow?) Hence his reluctance to go after bin Laden, and hence his lack of involvement in any way, to the attack on the compound. (Thank Panetta and Hillary for getting that done, and telling Obama once it was underway.) When do people realize what a disaster the democrats, especially as presidents, are for our country? And, twice as many troops killed under Obama's five years, that Bush's eight. Twice as many. So far. And, by the way, does anyone notice that all those Syrian weapons will have Iraq's name all over them? Hussein had six months warning, and plenty of time to hide them in Syria.

"Islam the misunderstood Religion"

People always talk about how religion is misunderstood and especially Islam, but it isn’t. When 100% or even 80% of the things coming out of Islam is what we see, then there is no misunderstanding and it was about high time we sat down and connected the dots and saw this religion (like all religions) for what they are instead of sitting here watching another atrocity be committed in the name of Islam and politely nodding out of a false sense of decorum. Islam is not misunderstood. No religion is. The things you see coming out of Islam and countires where Islam is the forced state religion is what you get. There is no grey area, no misunderstood anything, no shades of grey, no in between. Islam is what it is: a hateful, intolerant, violent and militant religion asking subservience and obedience by its followers under penalty and by employing scare tactics. Any abused individual will tell you that “obeying” someone out of fear is not love, it is fear. And there is nothing warm, divine, enticing, great and peaceful about fear and about coercing people by induction of fear. When your religion is in the habit killing those who disagree with you or exerting control over people regarding every aspect of their lives: from what they wear, what they listen to, what they watch, what they say and heck even what they think, you cannot tell me that your religion is a peaceful one that is gravely misunderstood.

A mass exodus of Christians is currently underway. Millions of Christians are being displaced from one end of the Islamic world to the other. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom recently said: “The flight of Christians out of the region is unprecedented and it’s increasing year by year.” In our lifetime alone “Christians might disappear altogether from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt.” In 2003, Iraq’s Christian population was at least one million. Today fewer than 400,000 remain—the result of an anti-Christian campaign that began with the U.S. occupation of Iraq, when countless Christian churches were bombed and countless Christians killed, including by crucifixion and beheading. The 2010 Baghdad church attack, which saw nearly 60 Christian worshipers slaughtered, is the tip of a decade-long iceberg. In Egypt, some 100,000 Christian Copts have fled their homeland soon after the “Arab Spring.” In September 2012, the Sinai’s small Christian community was attacked and evicted by Al Qaeda linked Muslims, Reuters reported. But even before that, the Coptic Orthodox Church lamented the “repeated incidents of displacement of Copts from their homes, whether by force or threat.

The problem, and it may be a News Media problem, is that we see few Muslim leaders willing to stand up in a Muslim Nation and speak out against what most of the world looks at as barbaric. Public whippings, beheadings, cutting off hands, terrorist acts, treating children as property, arranged marriages, not educating girls, women not having equal rights as men, honor killings, killing an individual who leaves their faith, killing Christians and Jews, etc., etc. The truth is people, in most of the non-Muslim nations, assume that all Muslims uphold these acts regardless of where they live. We hear Muslim Religious leaders justifying not condemning these acts.The problem for Islam is that the Quran contains countless commands that Muslims kill nonbelievers and apostates, treat women as inferior beings, and stifle free speech to anyone who is critical of this religion. At the same time, the religion teaches that Mohammad is infallible and that the Quran is the indisputable word of Allah. But then, "moderate" Muslims defy literally hundreds of passages of the Quran, so that they will not be terrorists and abusive to women. How do moderate teachers tell Muslims to deal with these contradictions? How do you tell them to ignore Allah's instructions to kill the infidels and commit other brutal and abusive acts? And once a Muslim accepts that his holy books is rife with false and unacceptable instructions, why would he want to continue in this religion?