zengun

A fine demonstration by Eric Raymond, on Jihad.
When you post ‘truths’ that are merely your interpretation of a religious book, it is fair game to quote the book and back your statements. It could be argued the same things about good old Bible, but then you’d see people running in lines quoting the books like crazy, telling you it’s all about interpretation and context. The same problem lies within the motives of Al Qaeda: they are Koranic if you interpret Koran the way they do, which fortunately isn’t how most of the mulsim world does today.
Moreover, while the view of a westerner on Koran could be seen as objective, I wonder when those Koran-bashing writers will actually interview an Imam to get how today’s muslims see the Jihad. Or are they afraid the Imam will convert them by the sword ?

Fast forward to the third in that serie (link), we can read the primary threat of terrorism comes from Arabs and middle-easterners between the ages of fifteen and forty. Timothy Mac Veigh, you can rest peacefully: they already forgot there were white american terrorists.
And funnier, Apologists for mainstream Islam are systematically lying to us about Islamic doctrine in order to shield terrorists who they know are acting in strict accordance with that doctrine. This sounds like I am shielding terrorists, and I’ll dare make a parallel between this train of thought and the thought that Corsican people live under the law of omertà when they say they don’t have anything to do with terrorists. (I’m giggling at the thought that some readers not only won’t know what I’m talking about, but may very well think I support Corsican terrorists.)