(Photo above: Tina Magaard)
For three years a Danish linguist Tina Magaard analyzed the basic texts of 10 religions. Her conclusion is that the texts of Islam stand out by encouraging terrorism and violence more than other religions.
Now Tina Magaard speaks out again. Translated from Berlingske:
Tina Magaard has great knowledge about Islam, both personally and academically. She believes that Danish experts in Islam fail to disclose what is in Islam’s holy scriptures, and the extent to which extremism draws its ammunition from these scriptures. …
She studied Arabic and read both the Qur’an and the hadiths. Here she recognized many of the repressive tendencies, she had experienced [on her travels in Muslim countries].
“What is striking is not in itself that one can find murderous passages in the Islamic texts, as such passages can also be found in other religions. But it is striking how much space these passages takes up in the Islamic texts and how much they focus on a them-and-us-logic where infidels and apostates are characterized as dirty, rotten, criminal, hypocritical and dangerous. It it also striking how much these texts demands the reader to fight the infidels, both with the words and the sword. In many passages Mohammed plays a central role as one who encourages the use of violence, whether it comes to stonings, beheadings, acts of war or execution of critics and poets.”
Tina Magaard finds it particularly objectionable that so many Islamic scholars in her opinion knowingly fails to disclose this fact and use their position of power to create specific standards for what you can say. Often, they also blame Danish racism rather than objectively telling that the justifications for using violence and threats, extremists actually find in Islam’s holy scriptures. …
Asked whether it after Krudttønden (terror attack in Copenhagen, February 2015) and the attack on Charlie Hebdo is desirable for future harmony and coexistence to stop drawing Muhammed, Tina Magaards answers unequivocally:
“The only thing we get out of saying that we must not draw Mohammed, is that there will be more religiously motivated restrictions on our freedoms. Rather, we must take the bull by the horns and question whether Muhammad did the right thing when he, for example, ordered his critics murdered. The discussion we need to take with European Muslims.”
The most thought provocing things is, according to Tina Magaard that it is so difficult to find an imam who dare or want to criticize the aspects of Islam which contrast liberal freedoms…
“Instead you get a chitchat like: ‘It is not relevant to discuss in Denmark now’ or ‘this is a misunderstanding.’ But they refuse to criticise the concrete passages which terrorists use to justify their actions,” Magaard says.