What's new

Congratulations, Mullahs - #KillAllMuslims is now trending worldwide

Status
Not open for further replies.
I respectfully disagree. Religious fanatics give more importance to holy books and paradise after this world, than the joys and sorrows of this world. That is why they can dehumanize their opponents and justify taking their lives.
We have to participate completely. That is the way will we improve. My only religion - Hinduism (I am an atheist now) says the same thing, and I disagree with it too.

Religous fanatics are slaves to their man-made beliefs and are totally caught in those beliefs. They are used by their own beliefs. Living in the world but not for the world is a philosophy of detachment. But detachment is not nihilism, no offence, it is engaging in the matters of this world but not living for them. This is what I believe some sects or schools of Buddhism teach.
 
Religous fanatics are slaves to their man-made beliefs and are totally caught in those beliefs. They are used by their own beliefs. Living in the world but not for the world is a philosophy of detachment. But detachment is not nihilism, no offence, it is engaging in the matters of this world but not living for them. This is what I believe some sects or schools of Buddhism teach.
I understand detachment, but only the wisest become successful. But detachment would also mean imperturbability to joy and pain both. Could such detachment illuminate a way for the future? What is the motivation for action then? Because progress demands action. Useful action demands planning. Planning demands motivation. But could motivation be independent of itself, or is it a reaction to felt sorrow and joy? That is a philosophical question that I do not know the answer to.
 
Last edited:
Religous fanatics are slaves to their man-made beliefs and are totally caught in those beliefs. They are used by their own beliefs. Living in the world but not for the world is a philosophy of detachment. But detachment is not nihilism, no offence, it is engaging in the matters of this world but not living for them. This is what I believe some sects or schools of Buddhism teach.
If you remove religion, people will still find themselves "totally caught in [their] beliefs." Admit it, people are stupid. They want to kill. They've killed before religion (where religion did not exist) and they'll continue to kill. Before Islam, people were killing each other over religion. During Islam, people killed. After Islam, people will still kill.

Religion has nothing to do with violence. It's part of nature. Take a look at animals. Do they seem to practice religion? No. But they still kill (I'm not talking about killing for food, but killing their own kind or trying to end another species population). Let's not forget how animals steal animal's little kids for food. It's food, sure, but killing few days old child or weeks, whatever, they kill. It's nature.

Have you yourself never slapped or hit another person? That's nature. There are many solutions to this nature, but controlling access to guns or similar weapons will vastly lower the amount of such attacks. Imagine if an animal was given TNTs or guns. Do you have any idea on how many other animals they'd kill? They cannot kill now. They've to use their body (mouth/teeth, legs etc) to kill another. Similarly, if weapons do not exists like guns, people will resort to using knives. Now let's be honest, how many people can a guy with knife kill? People won't fear him and charge at him, even if there are three vs one. But if you give someone a gun, he can be in room with 20 people but it's very likely they won't charge at him.
 
Last edited:
I understand detachment, but only the wisest become successful. But detachment would also means imperturbability to joy and pain both. Could such detachment illuminate a way for the future? What is the motivation for action then? Because progress demands action. Useful action demands planning. Planning demands motivation. But could motivation be independent of itself, or is it a reaction to felt sorrow and joy? That is a philosophical question that I do not know the answer to.

I am not advocating inaction, much less indolence. Of course action must be taken to survive and progress. The motivation for action is the action. Action is an imperative. Detachment is an attitude, a state of mind, and only those who are truly secure within themselves manage to attain it. And that security comes from exercising the will in acts and efforts of will.

I would love to continue this conversation but I have work to do. Please excuse me.

If you remove religion, people will still find themselves "totally caught in [their] beliefs." Admit it, people are stupid. They want to kill. They've killed before religion (where religion did not exist) and they'll continue to kill. Before Islam, people were killing each other over religion. During Islam, people killed. After Islam, people will still kill.

Religion has nothing to do with violence. It's part of nature. Take a look at animals. Do they seem to practice religion? No. But they still kill (I'm not talking about killing for food, but killing their own kind or trying to end another species population). Let's not forget how animals steal animal's little kids for food. It's food, sure, but killing few days old child or weeks, whatever, they kill. It's nature.

Have you yourself never slapped or hit another person? That's nature. There are many solutions to this nature, but controlling access to guns or similar weapons will vastly lower the amount of such attacks. Imagine if an animal was given TNTs or guns. Do you have any idea on how many other animals they'd kill? They cannot kill now. They've to use their body (mouth/teeth, legs etc) to kill another. Similarly, if weapons do not exists like guns, people will resort to using knives. Now let's be honest, how many people can a guy with knife kill? People won't fear him and charge at him, even if there are three vs one. But if you give someone a gun, he can be in room with 20 people but it's very likely they won't charge at him.

You make some interesting points, to be sure. And I would agree that some people are stupid and stupidly violent but not all. There are some enlightened souls still on this earth.
 
Last edited:
Dear moderate muslims. Thank you for speaking out against the terror attack in Paris.
I'm pretty sure this "#KillAllMuslims" trend is not going to be *the* trend of the future coming from the West, but rather a temporary sign of despair among westerners.. I will for sure not tolerate any actual calls for violence / deportation of muslims, as i'm sure western governments won't. Instead, i'm advocating for an all out attack on the distribution channels of islamic extremist ideology media / social media statements in western countries, but i'm not sure my western governments are willing to go that far even (given how much we value freedom of speech even if it calls for violence, which i do find very strange to be honest)..
 
Extremists are always in societies you cant get rid of them they are every where. this hate Europeans have before for Jew now muslims we are just going thru that phase of life where every one knows almost everything..
we sud find solution how to tackle or answer their geniune questions...
and eliminate Redicalization or atleast calm them down to the point they dont fight when they cant answer.
Yes, thats is absolutely correct. Christians have fought bloody wars over petty issues and differences. They hated Jews and the word Ghetto came not from extremist Muslim-run state(s) but from Italy, where Jews were confined in one corner of the city and locked up overnight. Hundreds of Scientists were burnt on alters for blasphemy not by Muslims but by the Christian Church. Millions of Jews and Gypsies (among them were Christians too) were killed in concentration camps not by Muslims nor did a Muslim state dropped nukes on Japanese cities. In not a distant past, Communists (commies) and not Muslims were the most hated people and considered enemy of the so-called free world. Now, with Jews controlling the worlds economy, and Communism gone for good, Muslims have become the new darling of Europeans who are always on look for enemies. Has somebody considered why a large part of Africa is undeveloped and burning in conflicts? Most of Africa is not Muslim then what is preventing them from getting enlightened and modern? A good number of Ethiopians are Christians and Jews so why Addis Ababa has not become Paris or London of Africa? Muslims have lots and lots of problems but they are not the only reason of world-wide unrest.
 
I understand detachment, but only the wisest become successful. But detachment would also means imperturbability to joy and pain both. Could such detachment illuminate a way for the future? What is the motivation for action then? Because progress demands action. Useful action demands planning. Planning demands motivation. But could motivation be independent of itself, or is it a reaction to felt sorrow and joy? That is a philosophical question that I do not know the answer to.

Perhaps getting a little of topic but a question that is worthy of a reply.
Not a great one just a personal one ;) Detachment or enlightenment if you wish may be the cure to pain and desire but i am a simple man i will settle for the joy of kissing my wife and the joy of holding my grandchildren and accept the pain that must eventually come with that.
If i could chose the future for the world i would rather live in one where everyoneis in love than one where everyone is enlightened.

“What is hell? I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love.”
Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov
 
The other cartoons of this magazine
705c5e06jw1eo1gn2x0k1j20c854l4qp.jpg


They against Zionism,they against Le Pon's national front,they support Palestine,but for some extremists,the only thing they found is those people insult the Islam,
 
I am not advocating inaction, much less indolence. Of course action must be taken to survive and progress. The motivation for action is the action. Action is an imperative. Detachment is an attitude, a state of mind, and only those who are truly secure withing themselves manage to attain it. And that security comes from exercising the will in acts and efforts of will.

I would love to continue this conversation but I have work to do. Please excuse me.



You make some interesting points, to be sure. And I would agree that some people are stupid and stupidly violent but not all. There are some enlightened souls still on this earth.
Indeed there are enlightened souls. But we've anger by nature. If you slap a cat, it'll slap back. If you slap a man, he isn't going to hug you back. He'll be angry. Now it depends on him that does he kill you for slap, break a bone, slap back, curse, curse under breath, go to police and it goes on.

Anger is part of human nature and even enlightened souls can't escape it. When Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had his people attacked, even He retaliated. If God gets angry, we can't escape this anger. But we can manage this anger. Sometimes we're angry for few seconds and lose ourselves enough that what we commit, we regret later. Anyway, this is different topic and i won't derail thread. The point is, violence is in human nature and religion is not at fault. People will use politics (communism vs imperialism etc), religion or other means to justify their violent nature, because we don't know why we're violent, so we rely on other excuses.
 
Is that really the example you want? The Jew was content with a verbal assault while the Muslims wanted to kill him. That "Allah's Apostle" said "no" rather than rebuke them seems to have been a matter of tactics and timing - "murderous idiocy" being to kill Jews in front of witnesses, "Islam" being to appear to forgive, then kill the Jew later in secret, cloaked by the public mantle of presumed, friendly, and forgiving innocence.

Or the fact that Islam prohibits violence, except in self defence, both verbal and physical. It was not the prophet's way to rebuke his followers but to teach them with love, caring, understanding and patience. That he (PBUH) had to format the centuries old nomadic and tribal mindsets of his followers was no easy task and could not have been performed better any other way.

Do we not hurt when you abuse us, do we not bleed when you attack us? What happened in Paris, although avoidable and maybe condemnable, would never have happened had those ******** not crossed the lines, repeatedly, that crush the Muslims sentiments! Is is fair that you get to decide on the limits and boundaries of attacks? You believe it your right to abuse Islam, Muslims may believe it their right to defend it.
 
You are confusing religious freedom with cultural freedom.
There is no restriction on any religion in Pakistan. But wearing a bikini is not religion its culture. So that is not allowed. In bible or Gita it is not asked for christian or hindu women to wear bikini and show iff half their butt in public.
So there you go. Try to diffrentiate between religion and plain culture.
I did not say anything about bikinis. My point was about religious freedom alone. Blasphemy laws are one example. In theory at least, no law can be made in Pak that contradicts the Quran. There are plenty of examples I can cite, where religious freedom is prevalent a lot more in most of the west than in Pakistan or India.
 
We are the soldiers of Islam, We are the army of Muhammad Bin Qasim, Sultan Memood Ghazanvi and Shahab Ud DIn Ghorri... These # tags are used by those who can't do anything practically. :pakistan:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom