Top 10 Famous People with Surprising Darksides

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

We all know that most celebrities aren’t quite what they made out to be. Whether it’s TV chefs spitting out racial slurs or actors trying to be world record drug-takers, it’s not really a surprise when they misbehave. After all, they are only human.

However, there are some people who have such a saint-like reputation that it is almost unbelievable for them to be anything other than good. But even the best of humanity can be the worst of humanity.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Now and then we like to dig back into the TopTenz.net archives and re-share some of our best content as TopTenz Classics. Please enjoy this classic list from 2014.)

10. Sir Roald Dahl

roald-dahl

Roald Dahl is one of the most popular and best selling British authors of all time, writing many classic children’s books such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Matilda. However, though he brought joy to many children with his books, he did not start out writing stories for kids. His early works include stories involving seven-foot penises, and even in the children’s books, there are themes of violence and horror.

While these tales may be surprising, they are not in any way a sign of a hidden evil. For that, Dahl’s political views should be looked at. When he was younger, Dahl held the not-uncommon-at-the-time view that Africans should be exploited for wealth. Dahl was also opposed to the creation of Israel and thought that Jews asked for what they got, claiming “There’s a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity … even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”

9. General George Patton

george-patton

General Patton was a great military leader, who won several major victories against the Axis forces. Victories come at a cost though, and there are claims that Patton ordered the killing of captive Germans and Italians.

But while those killings may be a result of the chaos of war, his treatment of his own soldiers was not. During the Campaign in Sicily, Patton visited a soldier suffering from shell shock, and his response was to slap him twice. In defense of Patton, some say PTSD was not yet recognized and in a war situation, a general has to be tough to keep order. However, that does not excuse cruel treatment of the men he had a duty to protect.

Patton also had little respect for the citizens he was fighting for. During the Bonus Marches, Patton said the deaths of a large number of First World War veterans would be “an object lesson.” The America he fought for was a pure Nordic (read Aryan) America without any disrupting Jews and blacks.

8. Abraham Lincoln

abraham-lincoln

Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the USA, and is seen by many as one of the best to ever hold the office. Preserving the Union and freeing the slaves earned Lincoln his place in history, though emancipation was little more than a political trick. Lincoln even admitted as much, saying “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it.” To him, freeing slaves would not only cause problems in the South, it would provide extra troops for the North and improve relations with Europe so as to keep the British and French out of the war.

The fact that Lincoln was not intent on freeing slaves is shown when only slaves in the South were freed, yet those in the North remained in chains. Lincoln also did not intend on making ex-slaves equal citizens, saying there was “no (reason) … to introduce equality between the white and black races.”

Lincoln did not stop with mere tricks to preserve the Union. He was willing to turn the Union into a dictatorship by revoking the Writ of Habeas Corpus, allowing him to imprison anyone deemed an enemy of the state, and hold them indefinitely, without trial.

7. Sir Winston Churchill

winston-churchill

Winston Churchill is often viewed as the best UK Prime Minister in history, and his legacy is well deserved. Many credit Churchill’s strong leadership for Britain’s continued resistance to Germany, which may have stopped them from winning World War II. However, Churchill would defeat the Nazis at any cost, and we mean any. After the British evacuation at Dunkirk, Churchill was worried that the French Fleet would fall into German hands. A joint French-German Fleet would be a serious threat to the Royal Navy, and Churchill thought the risk should be dealt with.

With that aim, he ordered the attack at Mers-el Kebir in North Africa. Over 1200 Frenchmen were killed, and the attack caused distrust between the two nations. The French troops that fought the Americans in North Africa were likely influenced by Mers-el-Kebir to fight the Allies.

Churchill was also the main advocate for an attack on the Soviet Union. This new war would have killed more people than the war in Europe, but was worth it to Churchill to stop what he saw as a worse regime than Hitler’s.

6. Nelson Mandela

Nelson-Mandela

Nelson Mandela was like the granddad of world politics. His forgiveness of Apartheid leaders and his overall peaceful outlook on life, gave the impression of a wise and caring leader. But back in the day, Mandela was the leader of the terrorist group Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation,) which was responsible for many innocent deaths. To add to that came the waves of violence committed by the black populace, which is still going on today. In fact, Mandela’s group was so bad, he was even refused a defense by Amnesty International before he went to Robben Island.

5. Steve Jobs

steve-jobs

Steve Jobs is arguably one of the greatest minds of this generation. Not only did he lead Apple in its revolution of mobile technology, but he also played a part in the growth of Pixar as a film company.

However, his image as a cool inventor who gives gifts to humanity is beyond misleading. Apple is a business and, like any business, aims to make a profit. However, unlike most businesses, Apple readily employs people in sub-human conditions. Steve Jobs didn’t see this as a problem, claiming sweatshops “aren’t that bad.”

Steve Jobs was also not known for his charitable giving. Unlike other rich people, such as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs did not donate his vast wealth to good causes, and when Jobs regained control of Apple, he shut down Apple’s charity programs.

4. Mahatma Ghandi

Mahatma-Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi is well known for his belief in non-violence resistance and his pacifist nature. However, what is less well known is his devotion to his vow of celibacy and the lengths he would go to confirm it. For Gandhi, sexual abuse of his teenage grandnieces was part of that vow. While it is not known whether or not Gandhi engaged in sexual acts with the young girls, he certainly slept naked with them, which is seen as child abuse by both the UK and US Governments.

While this act could be passed off as a difference in culture, there is another side to Gandhi which has even less in common with his popular image. Although Gandhi was famous for respecting all races — it was this respect that got him killed, after all — he was less than sympathetic towards the Jews who were being persecuted at the time. Following his belief in non-violent resistance, Gandhi claimed that the Jews would be better off killing themselves. Failing that, they should have allowed themselves to be killed.

Despite a view that, at the very least, condoned the Holocaust, Gandhi was not a Nazi and actively opposed Nazi plans. However, this didn’t stop him from praising Hitler, once describing the Fuhrer as the “defender of the Fatherland,” and saying he wasn’t as bad as people made him out to be.

3. Mohammad

Mohammed

The prophet Mohammad lived in the Middle East during the 6th and 7th centuries, and from his work grew the world’s second largest religion, Islam. However, while many Muslims today follow a peaceful brand of Islam, as practiced by Mohammad it was far from civil. During the faith’s early years, Mohammad often spread Islam by ways of force and, when not spreading the word, would often raid trade routes that other groups relied on, just to get revenge.

Mohammad was also guilty of what can only be seen as war crimes. After his group conquered a Jewish tribe, it was ordered that “all the able-bodied male persons belonging to the tribe should be killed.” But Mohammad’s orders did not end with murder. After conquering tribes, Mohammad often allowed his men to rape the women that were captured, as long as they weren’t Muslims. There are also claims that Mohammad raped a 6-year-old girl. Some may argue that it was a different time, but that is no better an excuse than “I was just following orders.”

2. Jimmy Savile

jimmy-savile

Jimmy Savile was one of Britain’s favorite and most successful radio and TV broadcasters, with a career that lasted for over 30 years. During that time, he was well known for his charity work and often raised large amounts of money, as well as hosting a TV show where kids (and some adults) could have their dreams come true. For his work, Savile received an OBE, and most people thought it was well earned.

However, what the public didn’t know was that Savile was using his influences as a celebrity for a much darker purpose. A year after he died, it was revealed that Savile had sexually abused over 100 underage victims, many times offering them a place on his show in return for sexual favors. To add to his dark nature, the UK police have looked into claims that Savile abused young patients at a hospital he was a volunteer at.

Savile was able to get away with these crimes for years because he wore the disguise of a generous carer so well that none questioned his motives, and he successfully hid his dark side from the public until after he died

1. Walt Disney*

Walt-Disney-Time-Cover-December-27-of-1954

America’s own beloved “Uncle Walt” made millions of dollars with great cartoons, animated features, and a family-focused entertainment company that continues to entertain millions to this day.  He built Disneyland as a tourist destination and laid down plans for a Florida-based theme park that many around the globe consider “the happiest place on earth”.  Why, what could possibly be wrong with Walter Disney?

Racism, for one.  At least in modern eyes, some of Walt’s decisions and comments would be considered everything from questionable to highly offensive – like referring to the dwarfs in Snow White as an n-word pile and buddying up with known anti-semites in the Motion Picture Alliance For the Preservation of American Ideals.  He even personally welcomed Nazi film director Leni Riefenstahl at his studios 1 month after Kristallnacht.  There are also rumors of sexism, mostly relating to his refusal to hire women in the creative process.

Most people who knew Walt Disney claimed that he really wasn’t aggressive in his racism, certainly in comparison with the times he lived in, but it does call into question some of his motivations for his decisions.

Shop Related Products

* Walt Disney was a replacement for the original “person” on this list. The edit was written by 5Minutes.


Share.

52 Comments

  1. Lol, the flame mail on this list gonna be epic. Not that im disagreeing with anything listed here, but you did denounce a few well respected leaders and two major religions, one of whom has a fondness for explosives and the other for inhuman amounts of annoying 😀

  2. With respect to whoever wrote this, i would like you to clarify a few points in Mohammad.
    A few references with authenticity would be in order to prove things like

    “when not spreading the word, would often raid trade routes that other groups relied on, just to get revenge.”

    “After conquering tribes, Mohammad often allowed his men to rape the women that were captured, as long as they weren’t Muslims.”

    “There are also claims that Mohammad raped a 6-year-old girl.”

    • The first 2 points are actually known historical record and are pretty much part and parcel of what any kind of 7th-century leader would do at the time. Mohammed was well-known as a military leader who performed forced conversions and behaved like… well… every other Saudi-area tribal leader of the time.

      The rape of a 6-year-old girl claim is tied to his marriage to Aisha. According to Islamic traditions, she was 6 when they got married, however, the marriage wasn’t consummated until 3 years later. If he lived in modern-day America, he’d be arrested, tried, convicted, and imprisoned for life. In the 7th century Saudi desert… the primary purpose of a family’s girls was to marry off to form family bonds and produce grandchildren – the sooner, the better because more kids = more people in your tribe that can do the things you need done. So… that statement is a bit deceiving and lacks historical context.

  3. God? Seriously? Couldn’t come up with a human being to fill that role? Say like Walt Disney? No – had to go with “God”.

    Ugh.

    • This one is on me. As the site owner I should have caught this one. I have removed it. We will try to get a replacement. If not, it will be the only list with nine items.

  4. It’s a bit silly to include God Who, in definition, is impossible to be comprehended as well as His actions. Saying He has a dark-side would suggest He isn’t fully good, despite being Goodness itself.

    Probably a bad idea to include God on a list of famous “People” just to incite a little discontent.

    • If you are referring Muhammed as God, then you are mistaken. Muhammed was not God, he was a “messenger” of God. He proclaimed himself to be the final messenger, and all his revelations to be the “final word” from God and asked people to disregard other messenger’s words (which also includes Jesus)

      All his life and actions are recorded in detail.

      One of the reason Islamic sect – Ahmediyas are not considered as Muslim in Islamic countries is because they believe that there was one more messenger after Muhammed.

      • Heavens_Joke on

        @alamelu
        The original #1 on this list was “God”. But they removed that entry and replaced it with Walt Disney instead. Logan was not referring to Mohammad as “God”.

      • Heavens_Joke on

        You cannot claim that God is not fictional. There is no observable proof of his existence. You BELIEVE he is real because a book tells you that he is. You HAVE FAITH that he is real because the book tells you that if you do not have faith, you will spend an eternity in a torturous underworld. Your entire religion is based on the idea of having faith in something that cannot be proven. That is literally the basis of ALL religion. It is humans inventing an explanation to something they do not understand. Religion was started as (what we now know as) Astronomy. Humans were trying to understand the Sun, the moon and the stars and what their effect on our world was. This is why the story of Jesus is so similar to the stories of dozens of other pagan deities. He, like all of his predecessors, is representative of the Sun. His life is a metaphor for the Sun’s influence on and interaction with our planet and the stars/other planets.

        • Faith that is only had because one fears an eternity in Hell is a forged and terrible faith that isn’t perfect before God. As St. John wrote in his epistles, “We love Him because He first loved us,” and “perfect love casts away fear.” Of course, this is faith. This is the only way for us to understand Who God is.

          But that God exists isn’t so fundamental held up solely on faith (see St. Thomas’ proofs for God, I have yet to see an adequate rebuttal of them).

          It would make no sense for Jews to invent a story, based on astronomy, because their Law forbids astronomy specifically because it was used by the pagan nations. This, of course, and the fact that Jesus, as a historical person, is accepted by historians to be true whether or not one believes what His disciples say about Him.

          What you are writing is too overly-simplistic.

        • I read Aquinas’s “proofs” and I found them to be quite counter productive to their cause. Every proof comes to the same result and therefore they are all the same argument.

          The First Way: Argument from Motion
          This states that nothing can be moved unless something moves it, therefore God must be the sole mover. (To which I ask, what moves God?)

          The Second Way: Argument from Efficient Causes
          This states that every effect has a cause and everything that exists, exists because something caused it to be. (To which I respond, what caused the effect of the existence of God?)

          The Third Way: Argument from Possibility and Necessity
          This states that every contingent being (one who lives and dies) is created by one whom is infinite. (To which I respond, if every living thing is created by something, nothing can be infinite, therefore something had to have created God.)

          The Fourth Way: Argument from Gradation of Being
          This states that everything is graded by it’s comparison the epitome of it’s genre. A good example of this is temperature. Since Absolute Zero (0 degrees Kelvin) is the absolute coldest temperature, that means that the temperature of everything is compared to how much warmer it is than Absolute Zero. So the argument is that God is the epitome of perfection in every sense and therefore God must exist otherwise we would have nothing to compare perfection to. (This is flawed because that would mean that God would nullify everything we know and have verified to be absolute, including Absolute Zero, because He is greater than that absolute.)

          The Fifth Way: Argument from Design
          This states that everything does something because something drives it to do so. Therefore, we are all marionettes with God pulling the strings. (To which I reply, who is pulling God’s strings?)

          So, as you can see, all of Aquinas’s arguments are essentially the same. He creates a rule and assigns God as the only exception to each rule, thereby proving he exists. But this is a flawed assertion. By saying that God is the exception to the rule, it fully nullifies the rule as being absolute. Therefore, if God is the exception to the rule, the rule is not a rule and therefore the rule does not exist and this list is basically void.

        • I’m quite sure you understand why St. Thomas presents God as he does, an exception to the rule. From a purely naturally logic standpoint that which was before time, before Creation, is the closest we can have at understanding what it is and the proofs of St. Thomas are a wonderful way to understand it.

          The questions you ask, for lack of a better word, childish. Why? Because if the closest we can understand the closest thing to the initiator of our Universe (God) we could never, through pure logic or anything else, understand anything before that because we could never see beyond the initial thing of causing what is, to us, above our natural universe as it is only in our natural universe our senses and minds work correctly.

          Basically, it’s not just some religious deciding God is perfect and absolute because He is God, rather it is the only logical understanding and the highest we could attain to.

        • Heavens_Joke on

          Let me start by providing a little insight into my person. My father is a minister and I was raised in the church. I spent 6 days a week at church. My entire social life was church. I attended every bible study, every event, every reach out program. I was a member of every club and group and even attended a private christian school. As such, I can say that my atheism was not born of ignorance. I understand your belief fully and have no desire to convince you to change it. However, I do not share your belief, and I do not agree with your assertions of speculation as hard evidence.

          That being said, you clearly did not understand what I was presenting with my previous comment. I was not asking questions expecting an answer. I was merely pointing out that Aquinas’s arguments (while very good and valid arguments) are not at all proof of the existence of God, but rather speculation. You can choose to contest me on that, but it is not an opinion, it is a fact. Aquinas presents questions that could have any number of answers but he chooses the answer he wants it be. The answer could be anything from God to Krishna to Gaia to Zeus to The Flying Spaghetti Monster. No one knows. So by presenting these unanswered questions as definitive evidence of the existence of God is not only wrong, it is foolish and damaging.

        • For some reason I couldn’t directly reply to your latest comment so allow me to do it here.

          Rather funny enough, my life seems to have been the complete opposite than yours. But I eventually found faith, not lost it.

          Anyhow, you argue that any number of gods should be able to fulfill the prescriptions he laid out. While even in Zeus’ mythology he isn’t made out to be the creator of the universe (I’ll forgive this oversight) the point of Aquinas’ proofs wasn’t to prove the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, it was to establish the understanding of a deistic God as a kind of flat understanding that God exists and this is how we must have the few attributes He has.

          If anyone gives you his proofs as evidence as the God understood by faith by Christianity then he is mistaken. We cannot immediately understand this same Creator-God is the same that died for our sins, that takes faith which is separate from the logic to understand that a God exists.

        • I don’t personally believe it to be any of those that I mentioned, including Zeus, I was just making a point. My allegiance is to science. I believe that there is a logical, scientific explanation for everything. Just because we do not know what it is yet, does not mean that it must be a deity. Again, not trying to sway your faith or convince you that you are wrong. Simply stating that the idea of a personification of perfection blinking everything into existence does not makes sense to ME.

        • I understand your qualms, but St. Thomas’ proofs were based on logic, of course we do not (and probably cannot) have scientific proof of the Deity. The closet we can come to that is from the initiation of Creation itself (Big Bang).

          I agree, just leaping to “God did it” will not have any good for science, miracles aside which I’m quite you don’t believe in (one of my favorites is the Miracle of Lanciano, I encourage you to look that up).

          The reason believers find the reason that God created the universe compelling by using the Big Bang is partly because science cannot truly ever know what is before Creation because all that we know and understand would be reserved to what we already participate in. Anything above or beyond this reality is incomprehensible to ever find out completely, there really cannot ever be an scientific part of “What is” outside of Creation because we could never observe and test absolute nothingness dissolute of anything.

          Anyhow, I understand your qualms. God bless.

    • Muhammad was not God, he was a real person who once walked the Earth.
      He was a “messenger” of God and insisted he’s the final messenger sent by God.

      • No, before this list was revised the number one was God Himself. If somebody thought Muhammad was God then he must have a low conception of God.

  5. Being against Israel is an uncommon pin prick of light in the darkness of modern society. Even if Dahl was against it for the wrong reasons, just being against Israel doesn’t make someone bad.

  6. This site has lost credibility.Mohammad didnt order the killing of those men.When that Jewish stronghold was captured,the Jewish tribe in question.Banu Quraiza,surrendered andagreed to accept the decision of Sa`ad bin Muaz,who had been an ally to the jews for a long time.Upon consultation with the Jews,a law from the Old testament was applied,which stated that all able bodied men were to be killed,and all women and children were taken as slaves,with the property of the Jews taken as ransom of war,as is still the norm.All of the aforementioned `killing` was done with the acceptance of the Jews.As for the `rape` of the girl,there is no such credible account of any such matter.The girl in question was Aisha,daughter of Abu Bakr,one of the Prophet`s most trusted and beloved companions.It was common practice at that time for yung girls to be wed at very young ages so as to provide ease of life to them and lessen any burden on the girl`s family.Women of all captured tribes were taken as slaves.

  7. I’ve been following this website for at least 5 years now, this is the only time I felt that I should comment. I have a problem with putting Mohammed in the light you have.
    1-ur claim is a recreation of attributing the spread of Islam to the sword and it is not new at all, ever since medieval times the different christian kingdoms had to give an explanation about how they were not able to hold the east. ill give you examples: no Muslim army went to Indonesia, neither were any of the wars or battle Mohammed engaged in a start of a war but a reaction. Even the mongols who actually invaded and brutally exterminated Muslim cities ended up accepting Islam. you should keep in mind that back then the Arab lands were Roman or Persian ruled, i.e The Muslim army fought the Roman and Persian army and never the civilians in the cities to be conquered. I am Syrian, and even though you would guess it that I am Muslim because of my name ( even though ‘Khaled’ is actually not a muslim name, many christians also carry it) but if Islam was spread by the sword, these christian Khaleds in Syria wouldnt have existed today dont you think?
    2- as for the 6 year old girl, where is your evidence? it is a misrepresentation of what you heard about Aisha. which firstly, no trusted source ever mentioned her age (guess what, it was not an important issue) but the hype around it is spread by (you guessed it) the same people who spread the islam is a warlike religion ideas. even if she was too young, it was different times you can get over it, to put it more in prespective, research how old Mary was ( an extremely revered personality in Islam) when she gave birth to Jesus, and also, how old she was when she got married ( yes she did, i know that much)

    • As for the Jews of Medina, research constitution of Medina and marvel around the fact that 1500 years old constitution in a Muslim governed city gave the Jews the freedom to be judged by their own laws. The case of the Jews of Medina is much like a modern traitor of the state case. a case which many ‘modern’ states still react to with capital punishment.

      • 5minutes, saying ‘it is a known historical record’ before a statement does not really make it a ‘known historical record’ and anyways, known by who? not me… how about this for sounding credible. it is a ‘known historical record’ that aliens live among us. refute this, i will bring you sources as credible as your sources about mohammed.

        • What I mean by “known historical record” is that it’s reported by independent groups, by those whom Mohammed conquered, and by Mohammed himself. It’s also, again, part and parcel with what a 7th century tribal leader from Arabia (or just about anywhere else) would do in order to maintain his tribe’s power and position.

        • yeah i know what u meant, u did not understand me though. I am asking for your sources, and I am challenging you that I will bring you more credible sources on aliens living among us.

        • you make it too easy… you did not give a source, you mentioned someone. Nancy Pelosi i cant say i know her opinions, however she is neither a theologist, nor muslim, nor even remotely likely to have read the quraan. in keeping with our challenge, I will counter your example with Canada’s former defence minister, Paul Hellyer. He has cred (at least more than ur example) bcuz he had control over vast Canadian land as the number one militiary man in Canada.( that includes all radars etc.), if there were any aliens that have landed on this vast piece of land called Canada and started living among us, the man who would know about it if any is him… anyways, Paul Hellyer says Aliens live among us, and he has much more credo on that matter than Nancy Pelosi on Islam

    • Islam’s sword did help it spread, that is undeniable (the Qur’an even says to kill the unbelievers [pagans] until they convert though it also says no compulsion in religion which is a bit contradictory) but they would also enforce a tax on Jews and Christians and not completely kill them as the Qur’an says they should (enforce a tax).

      Consummating a marriage with a 9 year old is outright terrible and even if they didn’t mention much against it back then that still doesn’t excuse an old man having relations with a girl not even with two digits in her age. It’s pedophilia.

      No one knows the Blessed Virgin Mary’s age as Scripture doesn’t say. It can only be speculated. And Scripture doesn’t say she ever had relations after she had birthed the Lord Jesus hence the early Christian belief of her perpetual virginity.

      • my friend Logan. where does the Quraan say such a thing. keep in mind i know in order to answer that you will look it up on google and come up with a verse taken out of context ( i know because I read my book from page to page every once in a while and i know exactly which verse you will come up with… in case you are interested, ill explain the verse further) .

        the tax issue, like in every state , civilians pay tax for the state to function, muslims paid tithe (zakaat,, a requirement in islam) others paid tax(jizya). this ‘tax’ was nothing new as it was already being paid to the previous rulers.

        spreading islam by the sword… if you would say spreading the muslim empire by the sword it would be more agreeable, nowhere was anyone held and threatened for his life if he didnt convert, if that was the case, how do you explain christian communities continiuosly existing on muslim held land?

        You are right about Virgin Marys age, it can only be speculated, but the same for Aisha(there actually are sources which claim she was 16 u know, only these sources are not interesting to the muslim hating westerner). however, the bible does say Virgin Mary was betrothed to Joseph, consummated or not ( i think it was consummated, only after Jesus birth, otherwise his birth wouldn’t be a miracle). and it is pedophelia only in yours and my own 21st century mindset.

        please man, the difference between me n u ( and muslims and christians for that matter) is that I acknowledge christianity as a great religion, we muslims do believe christianity was at one point gods law on earth, the same with judaism. however christians on the other side, dont acknowledge islam and the fact that a few prosecuted people were able in record breaking time to establish an empire surpassing in size any other empire the world has ever seen therefore cannot be attributed to divine, good, or even correct practices because it would not fit with the patriarchys version of ‘muslims are lost, and god is on our side’. therefore the result is ‘they spread religion by the sword, they are pedophiles’ and other misconceptions to satisfy the average man looking for answer on ‘doesnt it seem like they r on to something?’ so please man, these things only widen the gap between us.

        • I’ll help with your first point… but not really.

          The primary verses of the Quran that speak of killing the unbelievers and heretics and treating Christians and Jews with disdain or violence are from Quran 9, a chapter that is known both as Surah At-Tawba (“The Repentance”) or al-Bara’ah (“The Ultimatum”). It was introduced just prior to the Battle of Tabouk, a battle unrecorded anywhere except among Arab sources that… kinda just didn’t happen. Mohammed’s army marched up to fight the Byzantines and found nothing. As a result, other Arab groups felt that Mohammed’s army was more powerful than the absent Byzantines and joined up with his group, and set the stage for 350+ years of war between the Muslim tribes and the Byzantine Empire.

          This chapter is basically the pep talk from Mohammed to his armies, prior to the battle. In other words: while it is violent and merciless, it is not intended to be a general order of the Islamic faith.

          HOWEVER… this is one interpretation. Because of the lack of a central theological authority within the Islamic faith, there are many, many possible interpretations, some of which line up with Logan’s claims.

        • The verse seems to be that Muhammad had made an alliance with a group of polytheists so God charges him that once the terms of alliance are fulfilled he is to kill them until they either start believe or have a willingness to start hearing his word.

          http://quran.com/9

          The tax was mentioned to answer your question how Christians could survive the sword of Islam. Yes, I had meant the initial Islamic Empire, but if it was blessed by God then how do you understand Genghis Khan’s empire? Was it also blessed by God since it grew so large so quickly?

          It comes to my mind that the usual reports of Aisha’s age that Westerners use are also the ones Muslims generally accept as correct. Tell me, why would Muhammad consummate (have relations with) a 9 year old? It is terrible unlikely she would get pregnant which is what it is for. Muslims will contest that girls have gotten pregnant earlier but these are only exceptional and noteworthy because they far exceed what the norm is for a woman to become pregnant.

          Islam is not accepted by Christians because it is in opposition to Christians’ claims since the start as recorded by the Apostles and their disciples (the Apostolic Fathers) and their disciples and so forth. Muslims cannot satisfactorily answer why God abandoned humanity to the point that even His Word to mankind was corrupted. It presents God as uncaring.

  8. Yes, the chapter is 9 and the context seems to be Muhammad had entered into an alliance with a group of polytheists and God told him once the terms are expired they must kill their previous allies until they convert or surrender in order to hear his message.

    http://quran.com/9

    Yes, I just mentioned the tax because you wondered how Christians could survive if Islam were spread by the sword. The tax allowed them to live. I was an answering your objection.

    I had meant the initial Islamic Empire. Yes, it is very impressive what they could do. An empire’s religion spreads easily to the populace to adopt it for power and other authority or power, and I wouldn’t suggest suggesting an idyllic past where no one was forced to convert, those polytheists who trusted Muhammad might disagree.

    Yes, I know Aishia could have been older but I believe it had generally been the popular opinion by Muslims that she was a child so that was adopted by Westerners. Yes, it’s pedophilia by today’s standards but you’d have to wonder why he’d have relations with such a young girl when it’s very unlikely she’d be unable to even get pregnant. Yes, Muslims will show that even younger girls have gotten pregnant but the exceptional shouldn’t be applied to the standard.

    Obviously Christians wouldn’t accept Islam when it speaks against what Christians can trace as their belief since the Apostles of Jesus through 2000 years. Even the Apostolic Fathers and Early Church Fathrrs agree. When did Christianity get corrupted? How could God’s religion even be corrupted, did He stop caring then care again?

    The fact the Islamic Empire was founded so quickly shouldn’t let you think it was God’s Providence unless you’d think the Mongol Empire which exceeded the Islamic Empire and in a short time was also truely blessed by God.

  9. I am sure that list has been prepared by some Jew because of the the fact that list shows anti-semetism from some famous people and non-sense against Prophet Muhammad. Regarding Aisha, many scholars believe she was actually atleast 14 years old when Muhammad married her unless some can come forward with her birth certificate!. The verse from Surah Baqarah of killing the polythiests was revealed at the time of war and was applicable at that time when Muhammad and his fellow muslims returned to Mecca since the polythiests killed and tortured early muslims. The Quran was revealed in a period of 23 years..”one step at one time”. Prophet Muhammad was rediculed by the people at that time throughout his life and he escaped many death traps. God than revealed the verse in the Quran which stated that “There awaits a terrible torment for those who redicule Me and My Messenger”

    • Hakeem, “prepared by some Jew,”? The author’s religious or ethnic identity has no leaning on the contents of the article.

      On the age of Aisha it seems to me that Muslims cannot get her age correct for when she was married or when the marriage was consummated, any number seems to fly into the air but there is evidence that she was 6 at the year of her marriage and 9 at the marriage’s consummation.

      http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/childbrides.htm

      http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Aisha_Age_of_Consummation#Proof_One

      http://www.muhammadanism.com/Hadith/Topics/Marriage.htm

      As the Qu’ran is supposed to be held by Muslims as God’s Final Message to Humanity it seems silly to include topics that applied only to a specific period of Muhammad’s life and person and not just to humanity at large.

      Anyhow, all this aside, Islam paints a uncaring God Who decides to supposedly abandon humanity and lest His sole message to humanity become corrupted until He finally decides to re-introduce it to humanity through an illiterate man in the desert but this re-introduction also includes things that only apply to Muhammad and his life. It’s very nonsensical. How can God be so unjust as to deprive Scripture or let it be corrupted when that is the sole way to know God? Yet, we still have writings from the early Church since the time of the disciples of the original Apostles of Jesus Christ that confirm what is written in the Bible and the Qu’ran cannot reveal when Scripture was supposedly corrupted.

      This goes without mentioning the silliness that Muhammad promises those who follow him which includes purified spouses after death. What need would we have for spouses after death?

      http://quran.com/3/15

  10. There was nothing ‘surprising’ about Jimmy Savile’s dark side. I don’t think I knew anyone over the age of about 12 who didn’t think he was deeply creepy or didn’t suspect that there was something unpleasant going on behind that facade.

  11. As Salaamalaikum Wa Rehmatullaahi Wa Barakaatuh
    (Mean’s Peace be upon all of you and blessings).

    You had mentioned about our beloved Prophet Muhammed Messenger of Allaah (Sallallaahoalayhay Wa Sallam); Did you check your fact’s? Islam was laid on the basis of perseverance, peace, understanding and harmonious living in the society and submitting with free will to Almighty Allaah Subhana Wa Taala. Such a blasphemous accusation would create a widening rift and further be an unsuccessful attempt to tarnish Islamic history.

    The tradition’s, the time, the tribal way’s of that era; a lot of factor’s are taken into account before portraying what really would have eventualized. Freedom of speech does not acquiesce one to disregard sentiment’s etc. and carry on with whatever a single person opine’s.

Leave A Reply