By Peadar O’Maoileoin

People who say Islam is a religion of peace do not know what they are talking about. Whenever I hear someone utter that idiom, I instantly know that they are devoid of clue. How can a religion which is in the middle of a civil war between Sunni and Shiites be a religion of peace?

When Sunni Muslims bomb the funerals of Shiite Muslims, why are their leaders silent? There’s no condemnation, and their silence condones this violence. The next time someone tells you Islam is a religion of peace ask them about this. It’s irreconcilable. Chances are they don’t even know this takes place.

When I spoke about yesterday’s massacre in Paris I said it had been met with support for Charlie Hebdo, but also with ridicule for the magazine. I wish to address that here.

Charlie Hebdo is a magazine that not a lot of people had heard about until Islamofascist goons kicked in the doors of their headquarters and murdered their cartoonists. The magazine did not just make fun of Islam, it made fun of all religions. This is a salient fact, because the Pope’s cardinals were not the ones with semi-automatic weapons committing the massacre in France’s capital city. However, there was a time when we could not have criticized Christianity, a taboo which is now gone.

Islam is a belief system, and like all belief systems it deserves to be questioned and criticised. To demand immunity from criticism is totalitarian. Under a totalitarian regime you cannot question the dear leader. To do so could get you killed, or at least severely beaten. This is why totalitarian regimes are doomed to ultimate failure, because they try to own the thought process of those under its influence. Religion does this as well.

Questioning beliefs and the way we think is critical to the advancement of our species.  If it was not for the criticism of Christianity, we may never have developed the theory of Evolution, and science would not be where it is today.

If you wish to believe the world is flat, then you are free to do so; it’s your prerogative. However, do not try to force those beliefs on me. When you do that, we start to have problems.

The prohibition of pork, alcohol, and the picturing of the prophet are unconditional in the Muslim world. I have no qualms with this. I would personally find a life without rashers and Guinness a miserable existence; I don’t think I could do it, but I’m not Muslim so it does not relate to me. And that is the key point here: I am not a follower of the prophet Muhammad, so do not try to enforce a ban on alcohol, pork, or of drawing pictures on me. I will not accept that.

Lastly, to the people who say the cartoonists brought their demise on themselves and that they should not have annoyed Islam I have this to say: we cannot change enough about ourselves to please these barbarians. They find offense with everything we do because Islam tries to be the final solution. It tries to take care of ones diet, banking, how one conduct ones business, even sexual encounters and relationships. Therefore I submit that it is impossible for people in western societies to play nice, and not offend Islam. You cannot possibly make enough adjustments to please a totalitarian regime without succumbing to it.