58
   

Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

 
 
JTT
 
  0  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 01:08 am
@hawkeye10,
You have a queer idea what foreign aid is, Hawkeye, but you've never been the sharpest pencil in the drawer.

And yet look at how they have fucked us over....selling nuke technology to Gaddafi, Iran and North Korea,

Stop being such a ******* hypocrite. The USA is the biggest arms dealer in the world by a gigantic margin.


sabotaging our Afghanistan war,

you mean your war crimes. The USA invasion of Afghanistan was/is a massive series of war crimes.

Being partners with the Taliban,

the USA made the Taliban. The USA were partners with the worst of the worst of the Taliban. The USA wined and dined the Taliban until the Taliban refused to give American business what they demanded. Then, the Taliban became the enemy.


refusing to make peace in Kashmir, Harboring Osama, either assassinated or did not protect Benazir Bhutto even after we begged, carried out the 2008 attack on Bombay as well probably other attacks there as well.........

You are simply repeating USA propaganda. You are a typically ignorant American. Y'all wallow in ignorance like pigs in a mud bath.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  0  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 01:22 am
@hawkeye10,
Well, as it's a nice change from the Islam topic - economic aid to Pakistan has a couple of main of reasons in the interest of the US:
- the US sees it as it's (the US's) balance to Russia's influence with India (in that Geopolitical area)
- the US drastically increased it's aid when it Pakistan's aid became absolutely essential to combatting the Taliban (Afghanistan is pretty much land locked, and a foreign army needs to traverse sovereign territory, among other things, to conduct a war in afghanistan)

As it happens, the US has for a long time, been disliked/hated in Pakistan by the common people. Surprisingly (or not), the only two Presidents that have been assasinated have been anti-US presidents (even while the majority of the population dislikes the US). There's a book called 'Clash of Fundamentalisms by Tariq Ali - a very articulate muslim (unfortunately who's hatred for the US he found impossible to repress), who's book first alerted me to this little fact...and to his credit, didn't suggest the CIA had instigated the assassinations. As a side comment - oddly, there are other very similar instances involving popular, but now deceased, South American leaders with anti-US or nationalistic ideas.

It's no surprise at all that the situation in Pakistan has become even more difficult for the US.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 01:37 am
@vikorr,
I think it is the Pakistani Nukes that are most likely to be used somewhere, either by the state, Pakistan supported terrorists, or terrorists who have committed theft in Pakistan.

BTW: Even though India is more disposed to team with USA than with China I am currently executing a Russia/China/India unified effort to confront the West and to kill off and replace the post WW2 global institutions (Dollar trades, the World Bank, The IMF, Maybe the modern UN, GATT)

What say you? Is this likely? Could it work? Russia cleary has everything to gain and does not trust the west, and I am not buying the argument that the threat of losing Western markets will keep China in line. India is going nowhere, it will look at a rising China and the rot of the Western way of doing things and say " **** it", throwing in with China and Russia.
JTT
 
  0  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 02:07 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I think it is the Pakistani Nukes that are most likely to be used somewhere, either by the state, Pakistan supported terrorists, or terrorists who have committed theft in Pakistan.


So far it's only the fount of justice that has used nukes, twice, and then after Japan had surrendered that same fount of justice, the USA whipped up a last 1000 plane armada to bomb some more Japanese civilians.

0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  0  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 02:08 am
@hawkeye10,
My thought is that:
- On Russia - while Russia is a 'menace' (in a number of ways, though arguably perhaps mostly in that it's culture differs so much from ours), it doesn't have the long term projected influence to 'overpower the west', though it has ambitions. So it's ambitions find it's outlet in other ways.
- On China - it appears to be after the reserve Currency, and geopolitical supremacy in Asia (perhaps as a first step). There are theories out there that if the US lost reserve currency status, that it will slide pretty much immediately into recession. China has bought masses of US debt, and is making numerous moves to expand it's continental, and inter continental influence. I think it's projected to overtake the US economy in around 15 years. It would be plain silly of China for it to not want reserve currency status.
- On India - it has ambitions, but will never outmatch China, nor I think, Russia.

They could fall into an alliance with each other, but it would be a very uneasy alliance...one that I don't think would last too long...unless one of them became so dominant that the others followed it's coattails.

However...I don't think that China wants to cause full blown US collapse. That would trigger too many economic repercussions around the world (because Europe is in such a fragile economic state), which would then impact too heavily on China...which already has massive internal problems with the divide between rich & poor, agriculture & industry. China has been trying to grow it's way out of trouble.

Then again...a few years down the track, the economics of the situation may change.

Basically, my view is - China is the dominant power, and it will only grow moreso. Any alliance would largely be driven by their views & objectives.
JTT
 
  1  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 02:24 am
@vikorr,
Quote:
They could fall into an alliance with each other, but it would be a very uneasy alliance...one that I don't think would last too long...unless one of them became so dominant that the others followed it's coattails.


Have you not heard of BRICS?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 02:31 am
@vikorr,
Of course china would be in charge, but it could look like how France and Germany have been running the EU. the power does not need to be overt.

Anyways, pity pakistan if this happens. Japan only a little less.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  -1  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 02:44 am
@JTT,
Hi JTT, no, that is the first time I've heard of it - a relatively new forum it seems. Reading into it however - such forums aren't alliances, just as G8, G20, ASEAN, the UN etc aren't alliances. That of course doesn't mean such a forum can't help set the foundation for an alliance.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 08:53 am
@vikorr,
Links to anecdotal evidence don't prove anything other than there is anecdotal evidence. I could post links to thousands of car accidents but would you accept that as proof that no one knows how to drive? I wouldn't.

This is nonsense from you and no supporting evidence.
http://able2know.org/topic/25915-16#post-4979235

More nonsense from you where you use Libyan rebels as a proxy for all muslims in support of a claim you made then you use some answer on a answers.com that is unsourced.
http://able2know.org/topic/25915-16#post-4980785

In fact, on looking at your sources, it is you that spent less than an hour doing research. Your links are ridiculous and are not sourced with any actual data from scientific studies or polling.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 09:53 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Bigot. Look at the bible some time if you want a text book in ruthless violence.


You are ineffectual and disingenuous. The violence in the Bible is limited to a period of time. The struggle of the Hebrews is not opened commands to kill until their religion dominates the world, Islam has those open ended commands.

Your input is not needed. You are just another gutless hypocrite who insists that being a doormat is somehow going to change Islam, or its doctrine. Go spout your inane bullshit somewhere else.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 09:56 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
I consider you a disgusting and hateful bigot.


That is a good thing Vikkor. It is how modern, progressive emasculated losers respond when they lack factual rebuttal..
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:02 am
@parados,
Quote:
In fact, on looking at your sources, it is you that spent less than an hour doing research. Your links are ridiculous and are not sourced with any actual data from scientific studies or polling.

Here you go Shill.

Quote:
ICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

NOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06
http://www.webcitation.org/5xkMGAEvY

People-Press: 31% of Turks support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.
http://people-press.org/report/206/a-year-after-iraq-war

YNet: One third of Palestinians (32%) supported the slaughter of a Jewish family, including the children:
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/06/32-of-palestinians-support-infanticide/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4053251,00.html

World Public Opinion: 61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans
32% of Indonesians approve of attacks on Americans
41% of Pakistanis approve of attacks on Americans
38% of Moroccans approve of attacks on Americans
83% of Palestinians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (only 14% oppose)
62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose)
42% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (45% oppose)
A minority of Muslims disagreed entirely with terror attacks on Americans:
(Egypt 34%; Indonesia 45%; Pakistan 33%)
About half of those opposed to attacking Americans were sympathetic with al-Qaeda’s attitude toward the U.S.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

Pew Research (2010): 55% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hezbollah
30% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hezbollah
45% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hezbollah (26% negative)
43% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hezbollah (30% negative)
http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

Pew Research (2010): 60% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hamas (34% negative).
49% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hamas (48% negative)
49% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hamas (25% negative)
39% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hamas (33% negative)
http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

Pew Research (2010): 15% of Indonesians believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified.
34% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified.
http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is "acceptable".
http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/1275/Islam/article/detail/1619036/2013/04/22/Zestien-procent-moslimjongens-vindt-terrorisme-aanvaardbaar.dhtml

Populus Poll (2006): 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified. 1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops.
http://www.populuslimited.com/pdf/2006_02_07_times.pdf
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist

Pew Research (2007): 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified.
35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall).
42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).
22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall).
29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).
http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf#page=60

Pew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (81% never).
28% of Egyptian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (38% never).
http://www.people-press.org/2011/08/30/muslim-americans-no-signs-of-growth-in-alienation-or-support-for-extremism/

Pew Research (2007): Muslim-Americans who identify more strongly with their religion are three times more likely to feel that suicide bombings are justified
http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf#page=60

ICM: 5% of Muslims in Britain tell pollsters they would not report a planned Islamic terror attack to authorities.
27% do not support the deportation of Islamic extremists preaching violence and hate.
http://www.scotsman.com/?id=1956912005
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist.html

Federation of Student Islamic Societies: About 1 in 5 Muslim students in Britain (18%) would not report a fellow Muslim planning a terror attack.
http://www.fosis.org.uk/sac/FullReport.pdf
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist

ICM Poll: 25% of British Muslims disagree that a Muslim has an obligation to report terrorists to police.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Poll%20Nov%2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Nov04.asp
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist

Populus Poll (2006): 16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified.
37% believe Jews in Britain are a "legitimate target".
http://www.populuslimited.com/pdf/2006_02_07_times.pdf
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist

Pew Research (2013): At least 1 in 4 Muslims do not reject violence against civilians (study did not distinguish between those who believe it is partially justified and never justified).
http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/Muslim/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

Pew Research (2013): 15% of Muslims in Turkey support suicide bombings (also 11% in Kosovo, 26% in Malaysia and 26% in Bangladesh).
http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/Muslim/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

PCPO (2014): 89% of Palestinians support Hamas and other terrorists firing rockets at Israeli civilians.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/08/poll-89-of-palestinians-support-jihad-terror-attacks-on-israely

Pew Research (2013): Only 57% of Muslims worldwide disapprove of al-Qaeda. Only 51% disapprove of the Taliban. 13% support both groups and 1 in 4 refuse to say.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/09/10/muslim-publics-share-concerns-about-extremist-groups/
http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/09/10/muslim-publics-share-concerns-about-extremist-groups/

See also: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_(Terrorism) for further statistics on Islam.


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Opinion-Polls.htm
parados
 
  4  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:16 am
@coldjoint,
Yawn!!!.

So now 100% of muslims live in Britian? Or are you arguing that Britian, Egypt and Turkey are where all the Muslims live


But I really love this "fact" from you
Quote:
World Public Opinion: 61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans

When we read the actual report, it says this:

Quote:
Asked whether they
approved, disapproved, or had mixed
feelings about attacks on civilians in
the United States, 84 percent
disapproved of such attacks in Egypt, 73 percent in Indonesia, and 55
percent in Pakistan

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

It seems you made up your number cj. I would suggest everyone read page 7 of the report. It shows you are a liar. Do you want to present any other proof that you are a bigot coldjoint? When you feel you have to lie about the actual reports or can't even be bothered to take the 5 minutes to confirm your source is correct speaks volumes about your bigotry.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:21 am
@parados,
Quote:
volumes about your bigotry.


And that speaks volumes about your lack of facts that back you up. Go away you know nothing but excuses that just do not wash anymore, unless believed by Shills like you. You are a big part of this problem and are not capable of discussing any solution.
parados
 
  4  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:29 am
@coldjoint,
Since I am wrong please tell me where the report says this:
Quote:
61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

I am eagerly awaiting your return proving me wrong but I won't hold my breath.

Don't bring excuses or name calling when you come back coldjoint. Simply tell us the page of the report that supports that claim.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:34 am
@parados,
Quote:
Simply tell us the page of the report that supports that claim.


Here are some verses that justify attacks on all non-Muslims.

Quote:
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.



Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.



Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."



Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').



Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.



Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"



Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."



Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).



Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?



Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"



Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.



Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."



Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."



Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."



Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."



Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."



Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."



Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.



Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims.



Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.



Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.


Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"



Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.



Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).


Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.



Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."


Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?



Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."



Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).



Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)



Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"



Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.



Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.



Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."



Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"



Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.



Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.



Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.



Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.



Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm
parados
 
  3  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:43 am
@coldjoint,
So, you can't tell us the page of the report. You are left with changing the subject.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 10:49 am
@parados,
Quote:
You are left with changing the subject.


The subject hasn't changed, Blowhole. The subject is the violence and terror justified by religious leaders and the doctrine of Islam. This thread, and its subject, is not subject to your approval Shill.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 11:14 am
Quote:
Jihad - «holy war» - is one of the most central duties in Islam - sometimes to be the second duty after prayers to Allah, originally the Pagan main god al-Lah in the old Arab polytheistic religion, whom Muhammad made to the only god in his new religion. Jihad is a concept that is special for Islam today, though war religions have existed many places - the Vikings, Djingis Khan to mention just two names. Like Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth) you do not find it in any of the other world religions (but then Islam is the only one today which is a clear war religion).

In official Muslim theory and propaganda, Jihad only is permitted in self defense, and – partly because of this – Islam claims to be «The Religion of Peace».

What Muslims «forget» to mention – a case of Al-Taqiyya? - is that Jihad is said to be permitted in defense «in the widest meaning of the word» in any conflict. A hidden reason for this definition is that hardly any of Muhammad's raids and wars were in self defense in any normal use of this word – even the battles of Badr, Uhud and Medina («the Trench») were defense battles in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad's raids on Mecca's caravans etc.

The result is that there hardly has been any armed conflict throughout history between Muslims and non-Muslims where the word «Jihad» has not been used. Yes, even when Muslims fight Muslims, the warring fractions frequently claim they are fighting a Jihad.

With such a definition the word «defense» in reality has no meaning, but it sounds good in propaganda and debates.

Another «good» thing with declaring Jihad, is that then you are permitted to steal and rob as much as you want and can, not to mention to take slaves (though slavery now is forbidden – the last Muslim country to forbid it was Mauritania in unbelievable 1982, and even more unbelievable: It was not made a punishable crime until 25 years later in 2007!!) and to rape any female prisoner of war – woman or girl – which MAY be one reason why rape is so widespread among Muslim warriors even today ( f. ex. East Pakistan – now Bangladesh – and Eritrea). Muhammad accepted such raping and practiced it himself (Raihana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay at least), and then it is morally OK to rape your prisoners (!).

And «best» of all: If you are killed in something declared a Jihad, you go directly not only to Paradise, but to one of the better parts of Paradise (there are at least 4 different parts/grades of Paradise + the higher heavens).

In the old times all the 4 judicial «schools» in Islam accepted that the fact that the opposite part was non-Muslim, was reason good enough to declare Jihad. Theoretically any slave hunter in black Africa or around the Black Sea or South Europe or India or wherever (Islam has through the times had far more slaves than USA and the rest of America put together) could claim he was fighting Jihad, as his victims - «opposite parts» - were non-Muslims. Most of the raids Muslims were involved in were for economical gain, and most of the wars – at least before Europe became too strong for them – were wars of aggression.

Not until around 1920 – 1930 did some Muslim scholars start to question this point of view.


http://www.1000mistakes.com/jihad-holywar/index.php
0 Replies
 
One Eyed Mind
 
  -1  
Thu 23 Oct, 2014 12:57 pm
@hawkeye10,
Yes, but that's part of the extortion!

There's group A that has the oil.

There's Group B+ that doesn't have the oil, but has the ties to the people that do.

If Group A had no oil, Group A and Group B+ would cease to exist on the american radar. If you asked the government what a third world country is, they'd say "what's that?".
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 03:49:30