The naive author believes the Muslim terrorists as if the Koran and Hadith have anything to do with the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Those books were all faked about 150 years after Muhammad's death, some even later, and have nothing to do with religion or with the real historical person of Muhammad, who neither did nor advocated any of those atrocities.

Sad to see people who out of their unrelated hate of what they perceive as "religion" (usually due to their resentment of discipline) jump onto this Islamic bandwagon. Just because someone boasts of being religious doesn't imply that their teachings and behaviours truly have anything to do with religion.

Yuyutsu - "Those books were all faked about 150 years after Muhammad's death, some even later, and have nothing to do with religion or with the real historical person of Muhammad, who neither did nor advocated any of those atrocities."

Could you please provide a link to the source of your information?

Not even most Muslims believe Muhammad wasn't a warrior.

Dear Hippie,

I base my view on the vast research of Robert Spencer. He has written several books on Islam and you can watch many of his talks on Islam in youtube, perhaps starting here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ0uV1GjyXI

Spencer himself believes that Muhammad never existed.
My modified belief, based on spiritual sources, is that indeed "such a Muhammad" as falsely described by the Hadith never existed, yet an actual saint by the name of 'Muhammad' in fact lived around that time (6th-7th century), who was the seed of rumours and came to symbolise the "ideal person".

Following, thousands of legends were invented around camp-fires to describe how the "ideal person, Muhammad" should have been, of which an evil militant cult later selected what suited its purposes (3% of the tales according to Spencer) to create what is today known as "Islam". Spencer notes how some of their selected materials were inconsistent and follows the forensic trail on how later generations attempted to cover up those inconsistencies.

Exodus 31:14: Then go read some history books.

You should use read a few news papers about christian groups operate in Africa.

You also might just caste your mind back to a little issue in Ireland...queue...it wasn't between Catholics and Protestants (which it my point.)

Some of the posters have to stop blaming the left for everything and have a look at the right. Religious fundamentalist are right wing.

Cobber the hound, "Religious fundamentalist are right wing"

Do you honestly believe that?

While all religions have had their times of shameful edicts and actions, Islam is presently the most deserving of criticism and for very obvious reasons.

How anyone can be an apologist for, to support and defend a religion that has an overriding goal of introducing Sharia, religious law, is completely beyond me.

Islam is medieval and absurd, stupidly comical if it wasn't so threatening, limiting, cruel and dangerous. Obviously dangerous because people are scared of criticising Islam, whereas other religions are fair game and rightly so.

'The similarities between Christianity and Daesh/IS/whaddyecallit are too obvious

Good try Pericles. It is secularist who insist on promoting girls as sex objects and then murder the babies when they fall pregnant. You are a little confused as usual. Then again with no moral base to draw upon its no surprise.