To Marc Hill : On an alternative division of sites on Islam
Reader comment on item: Who was the Prophet Muhammad?

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Dec 26, 2005 at 17:37

Dear Marc Hill , you wrote :

> I never knew there were so many anti-Muslim sites on the internet.

You have never expected such a villainy? I know , a government employee must abide by the strict guidelines from the ministry where diversity of opinions has hardly ever been welcome . It goes without saying that all politically heretical opinions are banned from these places .
I promise to convert to Islam if I learn one day that the British Prime Minister has deigned to peruse any of these numerous 'anti-Muslim sites' , has examined the facts on his own and has encouraged a free debate on them among his ministers .

How about more sophisticated (alternative) divisions of those sites :

e.g. those which provide realistic views on Islam and those that don't ?

Unfortunately enough, it turns out that all - or almost all - pro-Islamic sites belong to the second category whereas Daniel Pipes' site is prominently in the former. Have you ever marked how many details his articles contain and how well-documented and logical his conclusions are? True , some pro-Islamic (unrealistic Islamic) sites have a great deal of details but little -if any- logic and common sense. Whatever is the Quran "is" true. If most rudimentary logic , common sense and obvious facts contradict it blatantly they are cunningly played down and suppressed and the opponent led astray or if he persists in his opinion - is intimidated and denigrated or killed . This practice is hallowed by the so called prophet himself. Remember his "discussions" with the Jews of Yathrib?
You'll say I am wrong. I don't say I might not be. But think of this. For the sake of an experiment , quote the above to some of your Muslim friends saying that you have changed your mind and now find Islam to be .... let's say ... a mortal enemy of the Western civilization. You'll see the results I am talking about immediately, I am sure.

You write further :

> Soldiers always ask me questions that parallel the information that comes from these type of websites. I can only shrug my shoulders and tell them that I don't know why that type of information is written about Islam.

How about promoting some independent thinking and inquisitiveness among our troops ? Why not encourage them to study e.g. Daniel Pipes' site and discuss openly his articles without shrugging one's shoulders but concentrating on details and logic as overriding guidelines ? In view of what is at stake here it is so useful not only for a professional orientalist but for every responsible citizen and human being .

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.