Perhaps the threat of Islam is true or perhaps it is not. There are many internet references which argue the case.
I particularly like this one. http://www.howardbloom.net/islam.htm

The author also proffers an interesting thesis re the functions of MEMES and their inevitable drive to endlessly expand via conflict and the conquest of ALL other memes.

That having being said the auhor of this most makes this statemet: "Allahs ultimate goal of creating a global Islamic state".

This statement is pure B-S.

Allah is the Islamic name for the formless Indivisible Divine Conscious Light which by its very nature has no goals or aims of any kind whatsoever. Other religious and Spiritual traditions use different names to describe this Formless Divine Conscious Light.

What is true however that both Islam and Christianity are now engaged in a fight to the death war for global rulership. Such a war being the INEVITABLE HIS-torical outcomes of the drive to total power and control at the root of these would be world-conquering totalitarian MEMES.

Plus both Islam and Christianity reinforce these power drives with the insistance that they (each) possess the "one true faith/way/revelation" and that their tribalistic "god" has thus given them a "divine" mandate to convert all of humankind to the "one true way"---using whatever means they can, including of course violent conquest and murder of those who will not submit.

Of course global capitalism which is an extension of, or a variant upon, Christianity is also a major player or world conquering MEME in the now deadly universal drama being played out on the world stage.

The capitalist meme of course being even MORE DEADLY than either of the two "religious" memes.
It doesnt even pretend to offer an integrated moral vision of the good life---just never-ending amoral consumerism.

Plus capitalism has a huge almost unstoppable historical momentum behind it---the momentum of over three millenia of the drive to total power and control. Lewis Mumford, in The Pentagon of Power describes the origins, developments and consequences of this global power drive.

It has already ground all Tradition based cultures to rubble.

The article neglects two aspects of Bush’s presidency. He conducted neither a war against terror nor a war against radical Islam. He used the concept of both ‘wars’ to suit his purposes.

In conducting a war against terror one must confront it wherever it appears and cooperate with other entities in such a war even though we may disagree with them in some respects.

A Cubana Airlines plane plummeted into the Caribbean Sea just before noon on Oct. 6, 1976. All 73 people on board died, including teenage members of Cuba's national fencing team. President Bush's post-Sept. 11 credo was that nations that harbor terrorists are guilty of terrorism.

Luis Posada Carriles, a main suspect in the bombing was held on immigration charges in the United States. Bush refused to send Carriles to Cuba since the Cubans might torture him. Since the Bush administration used torture this is another inconsistency. Through the cooperation of the Bush administration a terrorism suspect never was called to account.

Saddam Hussein was a horrible tyrant. However, he was secular and no threat to the United States. Iraqi schools educated women, and there were female university professors in his Iraq. For those and other reasons Al Qaeda opposed Saddam Hussein. Bush manufactured a false connection of Hussein with Al Qaeda and with other lies to justify his act invaded Iraq.

MA Khan also wrote:

“We have noticed the hypocrisy of Europeans: they overwhelmingly supported Barack Obama for his naïve but goody-goody gestures towards Islam, while a great majority of them feel uncomfortable with Muslims living among them: their attitude towards Islam is hardening, becoming unfavourable.”

Obama opposed the war against Iraq from the beginning. Far from being naïve he saw through the manipulations of the Busherei in pushing the US into an unnecessary and stupid war. Less wise politicians such as Hillary Clinton supported the war. As an American citizen I feel much safer with Obama guiding my country than I felt with Bush.

I really do not understand the point of this type of article. The premise appears to be that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the rest of humanity and that therefore we are in some sort of existential war with the entire Moslem population of the world.

There are roughly 1.3 bn Moslems worldwide. If his premise is correct, the only solution is to convert them all or kill them all.

From Australia's perspective, we are presumably supposed to see enemies in many of our nearest neighbours, including Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines. Presumably we should also be terrified of the half a million Moslems who live here. What are we supposed to do? Forcibly convert them? Throw them all in jail? Throw them out of the country? Refuse to trade with them or allow them to visit Australia? This sounds like the perfect recipe for a safer country and a safer world!

I would love to know what MA Khan's solution to this premise is. He claims: "Only by exposing Islam's design - based on its religious foundations - against the rest of humanity can this age-old menace to humanity be neutralised forever.". What exactly does he mean? Even assuming that the non-Moslem world agrees that Islam is inherently dangerous, how precisely would the menace be neutralised forever? Perhaps they would all spontaneously combust - or realise with a flash of insight that they should all become Christians instead.

I personally would rather accept that the vast majority of Moslems have absolutely no desire or intention to incorporate the rest of the world into some sort of medieval Islamic caliphate, and that we can definitely live side by side with peoples of multiple faiths and ideals. After all that is what the evidence shows, despite whatever careful selective quoting from the Koran people like MA Khan choose to use.

Thank heaven we now have a President in the White House who sees Moslems as people like him (or his grandfather!) rather than as some evil other.

Cazza writes
'Thank heaven we now have a President in the White House who sees Moslems as people like him (or his grandfather!) rather than as some evil other.'

Typical of the Islamic apologist where they clearly refuse to see that the ideology behind Islam is the problem not the people. Any President that supports abortion is just as evil as a terrorist or someone who calls themselves a Christian and still supports legalised murder. The problem is the belief system not the people entrapped in it. The reality is that Islam has kept most Muslims so backward that most can't even read or write. Many Muslims are far nicer people than many Secularist or churchgoers. That has nothing to do with what the Koran teaches. They are bad Muslims if they love infidels. Some pople refuse to get it until one of their own is blown up.

If we are to fairly judge the legacy of President George W Bush, then we need to learn the truth about the September 11 terrorist attacks.

The official explanation does not make sense and is full of gaping inconsistencies, and makes no account of a great deal of eyewitness testimony, including many of mysterious explosions in the World Trade Centres prior to their 'collapses'.

In fact, there is abundant conclusive evidence that all three 'collapses' including the third 'collapsed' tower WTC 7 which was not even hit by a plane, were controlled demolitions.

Even on the the day, news commentators commented on the striking similarity between the observed 'collapses' of all three towers and controlled demolitions.

Such engineering disasters have never occurred before and never occurred since. To have three such unprecedented engineering disasters occur on the same day is an impossible coincidence.

The reports produced by the 9/11 Commission and NIST to explain the 9/11 attacks and the WTC 'collapses' have been shown to be cover-ups rather than true investigations.

Those demanding a new and proper investigation are listed on http://patriotsquestion911.com

For further information, see "9/11 Truth" discussion at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=76, "Architects and Engineeers fo 9/11 Truth" at http://ae911truth.org http911truth.org http://pilotsfor911truth.org http://firefightersfor911truth.org http://9110z.com etc., etc., etc.

Dear runner,

Let's assume you're correct and that Islam is an evil ideology.

Please can you explain what your solution to the problem would be - a solution that is both effective and moral, of course.

Thanks

Cazza