What's new

Muslims kill more Muslims, yet blame west?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you want me to respond to that or laugh at that. What is the fictitious Caliphate that IS has proclaimed? Which religion has a Caliphate, can you tell me that? And IS doesn't use Islam. No doubt, now you will also claim that Al Qaeda, Boko Haraam, Al Shabaab, Taliban et al also don't evoke the name of Islam. Right? Is there any perverse pleasure in sounding like a lunatic that I am missing out on?
Caliph means a leader chosen by people, even the Shia belief of Caliph isn't applicable as it would mean that it has to be from the bloodline of Prophet Muhammad and that bloodline is lost. So, it's a political movement, just like "democracy" and "freedom"
What nonsense have you learnt in life? The Ba'athists, be in Iraq or in Syria, were the only secular forces standing between the citizenry and the savagery of sectarian conflict. What happened in Iraq when the Ba'athists were destroyed? What is happening in Syria now? If the Ba'athists had remained in power in Iraq, it wouldn't have gone down the drain the way it has today.
Ba'ath Party in Iraq weren't secular after the Iraq-Kuwait War. If they remained in power, most of the Saddam loyalists top commanders were killed by coalition forces or their allies. US never had full control of Iraq and a lot of regions were controlled by militia who were out for revenge.
The question is very simple - if positions were reversed and the Islamic world had recourse to M1 Abrams, Tomahawks, Grim Reapers, B-1/B-2 bombers, precision guided weaponry and a dozen aircraft carriers, where would the wold be. If you think the world is a violent place today, think about what would be if Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan had the same military might as NATO. The world castigates America, and rightly so, for the abuse of military power. But only a lunatic would doubt that if such military might was at the disposal of the Islamic world, the world would be several times worse off. You and I wouldn't be writing long tirades to each other from the safety and comfort of our homes.

But luckily for us, that will never happen. Dimwits with nothing but malice in their heart are unlikely to succeed in today's world. Today, you need technical knowledge and expertise, which a hateful cult is highly unlikely to impart.

As for AK47s and RDX, who makes them? Does the Arab world make them? The Arab world (especially GCC) subsists on the fossils of bio-forms long dead and buried under their soil. If not for that, they would be worse than savages.
Should I laugh!

Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt all have M1 Abrams tanks, tomahawk missiles and U.S and European made drones and precision guided weapons. Infact Pakistan makes their own. In fact they (Saudi) have the best Air Force in the Middle East (in terms of equipment). And yet the GCC nations are the most peaceful countries in the region. Which further proves that without NATO destabilizing a country, the whole nation can live in peace.


Blather about cattle traders, hospitals and PMs. Ignored.

Why not! Can't argue with facts. I can assure you that you can. The power of stupidity (which you posses) is extraordinary.


I thought your country was Bangladesh? First time saw an Arab false-flagging as a Bangladeshi.:lol::lol::lol:
If you don't understand such simple analogy, you further provide proof of your stupidity.
I am an atheist. I do not suffer from religious hallucinations of heaven and hell, hell fire and eternal damnation. I object to all religion. But that does not make me indifferent or blind towards the special threat posed by one religion in particular. An ulcer is not the same as a tumor.

Well, it is a world-wide known phenomena that atheists are delusional bunch in the sense that they believe that they are all knowing and always right (I myself kind of had doubts about you being a Hindu). Because only to an atheist killing in the name of religion is wrong but killing in the name of "freedom" and "democracy" is right and justifiable.

A fictitious plot set on set on basis of christian crusades, even if he believes in the red witch.


Martin invented a few religions for his book series, but they have their roots in real-life faiths. For example, the Faith of the Seven, based on seven aspects of one god, is derived from the Christian Holy Trinity and the Mother, Maiden, and Crone come from Pagan views. Or in Greek mythology, it's the Fates who embody this aspect, while the Father, Smith and Warrior come from "abrahamic" masculine elements. Meanwhile, the Lord of Light, R'hllor, is roughly based on Zoroastrianism and the Cathars (who were destroyed in the Albigensian Crusade.). The show is also run by jews- which is a double whammy for you. Then there the irony Black bangladeshi islamist wants to play a white king, lol
You do understand that your first paragraph is being ridiculed by your second.

Zoroastrianism doesn't ask for human sacrifice for all I know.

Also, sure I am inferior Mr."I am not brown but white" man. If you so desperately want to be white, I suggest rubbing bleach on your face, it might help. Fair & Lovely is a scam.
 
Caliph means a leader chosen by people, even the Shia belief of Caliph isn't applicable as it would mean that it has to be from the bloodline of Prophet Muhammad and that bloodline is lost. So, it's a political movement, just like "democracy" and "freedom"

And that derogates from the point that IS, Al Qaeda, Taliban, JeD, LeT, LeJ, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, etc, etc, use the name of Islam because?

Is there a "Caliph" in Christianity? Or in Hinduism? Or Judaism for that matter?

Ba'ath Party in Iraq weren't secular after the Iraq-Kuwait War. If they remained in power, most of the Saddam loyalists top commanders were killed by coalition forces or their allies. US never had full control of Iraq and a lot of regions were controlled by militia who were out for revenge.

Ba'ath party was as secular as they come. Saddam's first act when he came to power was to wipe out the Mullahs. The only reason they came across as sectarian is because their power base was Sunni in a Shia-majority country, which means that certain amount of Shia oppression was a given. Not that the Shia's didn't return the favour after the fall of Saddam so no point shedding tears. That's the whole game in that region - violence begets more violence in a never-ending struggle for mutual extermination. And guess why is that so?

Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt all have M1 Abrams tanks, tomahawk missiles and U.S and European made drones and precision guided weapons. Infact Pakistan makes their own. In fact they (Saudi) have the best Air Force in the Middle East (in terms of equipment). And yet the GCC nations are the most peaceful countries in the region. Which further proves that without NATO destabilizing a country, the whole nation can live in peace.

No, wait for me to laugh. KSA, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt and Iran - individually or collectively cannot take on the might of a tiny strip of land called ISRAEL. If they could have, they would have. Shameless bunch of losers they are, that's all. Best airforce in Middle East, yeah right!

If you don't understand such simple analogy, you further provide proof of your stupidity.

What exactly is the analogy in referring to NATO intervention in the Arab wasteland as "invading us"? You literally bacame an Arab in sympathy with those who treat you as a third-class Muslim. Do you know Arab racism towards people from the sub-continent, including Muslims? The combined population of South Asians in GCC is more than twice that of local Arabs, yet they pretend in public life as if Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis don't exist. Why are you standing in solidarity with those who spit on you?

Well, it is a world-wide known phenomena that atheists are delusional bunch in the sense that they believe that they are all knowing and always right (I myself kind of had doubts about you being a Hindu). Because only to an atheist killing in the name of religion is wrong but killing in the name of "freedom" and "democracy" is right and justifiable.

No point in trying to counter your accusation that I am delusional. Maybe I am, who knows? What's the point in giving myself a certificate of sanity!:lol::lol::lol:

But seriously, can you not see the difference between being a killer who happens to be atheist and someone who would kill in the name of atheism? My beef is not with killers who happen to be Muslim - it is with those who kill in the name of Islam. Are you blind that you cannot discern such a simple difference?

Muslims are also over-represented in the violent crime statistics of most countries, but that could be due to various socio-economic factors beyond their control. The issue here is not that. The issue here is - why is there so much killing in the name of Islam?
 
Nonsense.

100 million Christians were killed in WW1/2 not so far.
 
And that derogates from the point that IS, Al Qaeda, Taliban, JeD, LeT, LeJ, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, etc, etc, use the name of Islam because?

Is there a "Caliph" in Christianity? Or in Hinduism? Or Judaism for that matter?
Like I said, it's not a religious perspective but rather political.
Ba'ath party was as secular as they come. Saddam's first act when he came to power was to wipe out the Mullahs. The only reason they came across as sectarian is because their power base was Sunni in a Shia-majority country, which means that certain amount of Shia oppression was a given. Not that the Shia's didn't return the favour after the fall of Saddam so no point shedding tears. That's the whole game in that region - violence begets more violence in a never-ending struggle for mutual extermination. And guess why is that so?
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/per...08/21/Where-is-Iraq-s-Baath-party-today-.html
No, wait for me to laugh. KSA, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt and Iran - individually or collectively cannot take on the might of a tiny strip of land called ISRAEL. If they could have, they would have. Shameless bunch of losers they are, that's all. Best airforce in Middle East, yeah right!
Out of all these country you mentioned only Egypt had any direct military campaign against Israel Others supplied troops but most of them never saw the face of the battlefield and were merely cheerleaders. Infact Israel were unable to shoot down a single jet managed by Pakistani/Bangladeshi (one country back then) pilot compared to 10 of their being shot down.
As for most advanced, yes Saudi Arabia has the best in terms of equipment as I mentioned.
What exactly is the analogy in referring to NATO intervention in the Arab wasteland as "invading us"? You literally bacame an Arab in sympathy with those who treat you as a third-class Muslim. Do you know Arab racism towards people from the sub-continent, including Muslims? The combined population of South Asians in GCC is more than twice that of local Arabs, yet they pretend in public life as if Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis don't exist. Why are you standing in solidarity with those who spit on you?
My analogy was simple, it was put in from the perspective of those who suffered from the NATO campaigns.
No point in trying to counter your accusation that I am delusional. Maybe I am, who knows? What's the point in giving myself a certificate of sanity!:lol::lol::lol:

But seriously, can you not see the difference between being a killer who happens to be atheist and someone who would kill in the name of atheism? My beef is not with killers who happen to be Muslim - it is with those who kill in the name of Islam. Are you blind that you cannot discern such a simple difference?

Muslims are also over-represented in the violent crime statistics of most countries, but that could be due to various socio-economic factors beyond their control. The issue here is not that. The issue here is - why is there so much killing in the name of Islam?
You can't kill in the name of atheism, well, Pol Pot did as he wanted an atheist master race. Atheists rather go and send those who follow religion to work camps in Siberia. Lenin and Stalin were the examples. But atheist majority nations try to justify their killings in the name of freedom and democracy.
Muslims are also over-represented in the violent crime statistics of most countries, but that could be due to various socio-economic factors beyond their control. The issue here is not that. The issue here is - why is there so much killing in the name of Islam?
Country which is known as the rape capital of the World, is it Muslim, no, it's Sweden. Country with the highest gang violence in the world, is it Muslim, no, it's El Salvador. Country with the highest rate of theft, guess what, it isn't a Muslim country, it's Uruguay.

For your last statement, there is more killing in the name of freedom. Also, Africa itself has a huge rate killing but then again, people care very little about them. Killing is happening everywhere but when it is done by someone in the name of Islam, it only gets media attention.
 
was not the issue of Syria its internal issue? why the western countries interfere in it. was not the issue of Afghanistan its internal issue between taliban and govt of Afghanistan? why 58 countries of the world inter in the Afghanistan and fight and declared it as a crusade for all the christian of the world. wat did they done in Libya? what are they doing in the all over the world? you know more than us. HARAT ALI (RAZI ALLAH AANHO) HAS SAID THAT A person who become authority, his internal human being affair on his face. how much human being he was when he was power lees?
 
Like I said, it's not a religious perspective but rather political.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/per...08/21/Where-is-Iraq-s-Baath-party-today-.html

Out of all these country you mentioned only Egypt had any direct military campaign against Israel Others supplied troops but most of them never saw the face of the battlefield and were merely cheerleaders. Infact Israel were unable to shoot down a single jet managed by Pakistani/Bangladeshi (one country back then) pilot compared to 10 of their being shot down.
As for most advanced, yes Saudi Arabia has the best in terms of equipment as I mentioned.

My analogy was simple, it was put in from the perspective of those who suffered from the NATO campaigns.

You can't kill in the name of atheism, well, Pol Pot did as he wanted an atheist master race. Atheists rather go and send those who follow religion to work camps in Siberia. Lenin and Stalin were the examples. But atheist majority nations try to justify their killings in the name of freedom and democracy.

Country which is known as the rape capital of the World, is it Muslim, no, it's Sweden. Country with the highest gang violence in the world, is it Muslim, no, it's El Salvador. Country with the highest rate of theft, guess what, it isn't a Muslim country, it's Uruguay.

For your last statement, there is more killing in the name of freedom. Also, Africa itself has a huge rate killing but then again, people care very little about them. Killing is happening everywhere but when it is done by someone in the name of Islam, it only gets media attention.

You have referred to the acts of communists, who happened to be atheists. Did they kill in the name of atheism?


also regarding Sweden


An earlier report published in 1996 by the BRÅ did break down rate of rape convictions by country of origin. It found that between 1985 and 1989 individuals with a foreign background made up 61% of all rape convictions while only representing 6.3% of the population. Ethnic groups with particularly high rates of rape included individuals born in Iraq, North Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia), and Africa (excluding Uganda and the North African countries) who were convicted of rape at rates 20, 23, and 17 greater than individuals born in Sweden respectively.[
 
Last edited:
Like I said, it's not a religious perspective but rather political.

What is non-religious about claiming to be the rightful leader of the "Muslim" world?


Calling the Ba'athists in Iraq Islamists is the same as calling the Pakistani army that. Both have occasionally co-opted religious organizations for achieving their means, but Iraq was NOT rife with sectarian bloodshed when Saddam was there. Can you deny that?

Out of all these country you mentioned only Egypt had any direct military campaign against Israel Others supplied troops but most of them never saw the face of the battlefield and were merely cheerleaders. Infact Israel were unable to shoot down a single jet managed by Pakistani/Bangladeshi (one country back then) pilot compared to 10 of their being shot down.
As for most advanced, yes Saudi Arabia has the best in terms of equipment as I mentioned.

Yom Kippur War:

Belligerents

Israel

vs

Egypt
Syria

Expeditionary forces:

Iraq
Jordan
Saudi Arabia:enjoy:
Algeria
Cuba
Morocco

Supported by:

Libya

Six Day War:

Israel

vs

Egypt
Syria
Jordan
Iraq
Lebanon

Supported by

Algeria
Kuwait
Libya
Morocco
Pakistan :lol:
PLO
Saudi Arabia:enjoy:
Sudan:undecided:
Tunisia

Shameless and pathetic are understatements.

And we all know the response of "advanced" Saudi Arabia when Saddam invaded Kuwait.:coffee:

My analogy was simple, it was put in from the perspective of those who suffered from the NATO campaigns

Fair enough. But there still remains the small point as to why are you fraternizing with Arabs who look down upon you and me as sub-human? Who you fraternize with is not exactly my concern, but where is the pride in kow-towing to those who see themselves at the apex of the Islamic pyramid, and us South Asians at near the bottom. Probably the only people they ill-treat more than South Asians are the black Africans settled in Arabian lands. Their fate is truly woeful.

You can't kill in the name of atheism, well, Pol Pot did as he wanted an atheist master race. Atheists rather go and send those who follow religion to work camps in Siberia. Lenin and Stalin were the examples. But atheist majority nations try to justify their killings in the name of freedom and democracy.

Atheism was just ONE of the tenets of Khmer rouge, Stalinism, etc. The main emphasis was class-warfare. Most murder done in the name of these ideologies was directed against "class-enemies" - landlords, intellectuals, etc. Priests and religious people were last in line. Don't be so lazy, read more.

Country which is known as the rape capital of the World, is it Muslim, no, it's Sweden. Country with the highest gang violence in the world, is it Muslim, no, it's El Salvador. Country with the highest rate of theft, guess what, it isn't a Muslim country, it's Uruguay.

For your last statement, there is more killing in the name of freedom. Also, Africa itself has a huge rate killing but then again, people care very little about them. Killing is happening everywhere but when it is done by someone in the name of Islam, it only gets media attention.

A. The reason for the rape epidemic in Sweden is obvious, but you are deliberately being blind to it. Unless your aim is to get me banned from PDF yet again, I request you to do some research yourself. Google Sweden+migrants+refugees+rape.

B. El Salvador, you are right, and you can add Honduras to that list as well. And Papua New Guinea. All ultra-violent places with the highest recorded rates of homicide.

C. Uruguay - highest "reported" rate, but I will accept that.

D. In Africa, genocidal violence is almost equally divided along religious and tribal/ethnic lines. In the first part are countries such as Sudan, Chad, CAR, Nigeria, etc, in the second are countries like Rwanda, Burundi etc. Yet, much of the violence is in the name of Islam - no point denying it.

On a broader note, you are still using the "crime happens everywhere" trope. Who denied that? The point is that why does so much violence happen in the name of Islam?
 
Nature has killed most life forms than anyone else , Yet none blame Nature
446erte8.gif
 
A quick solution would be to convert all muslims to christianity.Islam is a death cult. God will never forgive what muslims are doing in name of Allah.
 
A quick solution would be to convert all muslims to christianity.Islam is a death cult. God will never forgive what muslims are doing in name of Allah.

All religious people are violent. Some more than others. But still violent. We have millions of Muslim-Americans here and are moslty not violent people.
 
What is non-religious about claiming to be the rightful leader of the "Muslim" world?
Because the Quran doesn't say about who rules the "Muslim World". If it isn't mentioned in the Quran, it isn't a religious thing.
Belligerents

Israel

vs

Egypt
Syria

Expeditionary forces:

Iraq
Jordan
Saudi Arabia:enjoy:
Algeria
Cuba
Morocco

Supported by:

Libya

Six Day War:

Israel

vs

Egypt
Syria
Jordan
Iraq
Lebanon

Supported by

Algeria
Kuwait
Libya
Morocco
Pakistan :lol:
PLO
Saudi Arabia:enjoy:
Sudan:undecided:
Tunisia

Shameless and pathetic are understatements.

And we all know the response of "advanced" Saudi Arabia when Saddam invaded Kuwait.
Instead of just copy and pasting from Wikipedia, read the damn article first. Even in the wiki page it clearly states the countries that actually took part in the war.

Whereas for Saudi Arabia, they paid their mercenary besties (U.S) to do their dirty job.
Atheism was just ONE of the tenets of Khmer rouge, Stalinism, etc. The main emphasis was class-warfare. Most murder done in the name of these ideologies was directed against "class-enemies" - landlords, intellectuals, etc. Priests and religious people were last in line. Don't be so lazy, read more.
Khemar Rouge specifically targeted religious people and so did Stalin because he thought they were a threat to establishing their atheist state.
A. The reason for the rape epidemic in Sweden is obvious, but you are deliberately being blind to it. Unless your aim is to get me banned from PDF yet again, I request you to do some research yourself. Google Sweden+migrants+refugees+rape.

B. El Salvador, you are right, and you can add Honduras to that list as well. And Papua New Guinea. All ultra-violent places with the highest recorded rates of homicide.

C. Uruguay - highest "reported" rate, but I will accept that.

D. In Africa, genocidal violence is almost equally divided along religious and tribal/ethnic lines. In the first part are countries such as Sudan, Chad, CAR, Nigeria, etc, in the second are countries like Rwanda, Burundi etc. Yet, much of the violence is in the name of Islam - no point denying it.

On a broader note, you are still using the "crime happens everywhere" trope. Who denied that? The point is that why does so much violence happen in the name of Islam?
A:- A cheap shot to avoid their own fault. Because it only makes onto the news when a migrant has committed a crime as it furthers their claim that migration is the root of their problem.

D: Rwandan genocide itself killed over a million people. Also, in Nigeria, Boko Haram only came to existence after the Christian militias from the South came to the north and started chopping of Muslims with their machetes. For Sudan, South Sudan is still at war with itself and it has over 80% Christians. Yes, those are violence in the name of Islam (sarcasm).

Go to Africa and you will see people kill in the name of Christianity, go to Europe and you will see their armies kill people in foreign countries in the name of freedom (you can't tell people to kill in the name of faith if they lack faith). In India people are killed for eating beef (Hindu religion).
Fair enough. But there still remains the small point as to why are you fraternizing with Arabs who look down upon you and me as sub-human? Who you fraternize with is not exactly my concern, but where is the pride in kow-towing to those who see themselves at the apex of the Islamic pyramid, and us South Asians at near the bottom. Probably the only people they ill-treat more than South Asians are the black Africans settled in Arabian lands. Their fate is truly woeful.
Yes, in India, Indians also look down upon other Indians too. Go to Europe, they will look down upon you for not being white.

You have referred to the acts of communists, who happened to be atheists. Did they kill in the name of atheism?


also regarding Sweden


An earlier report published in 1996 by the BRÅ did break down rate of rape convictions by country of origin. It found that between 1985 and 1989 individuals with a foreign background made up 61% of all rape convictions while only representing 6.3% of the population. Ethnic groups with particularly high rates of rape included individuals born in Iraq, North Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia), and Africa (excluding Uganda and the North African countries) who were convicted of rape at rates 20, 23, and 17 greater than individuals born in Sweden respectively.[
You can't kill in the name of atheism, but you can kill for succeeding that ideology. Thus, religious people were killed off for meeting that.

As for Sweden, you seem to have excluded the whole thing you took from wiki, so, let me post it:

A report studying 4.4 million Swedes between the ages of 15 and 51 during the period 1997-2001 found that 25% of crimes were committed by foreign-born individuals while and additional 20% were committed by individuals born to foreign-born parents. In particular, immigrants from Africa and Southern and Western Asian were more likely to be charged of a crime than individuals born to two Swedish parents by a factor of 4.5 and 3.5 respectively. Findings from a previous study published by the Swedish government in 1996 determined that between 1985 and 1989 individuals born in Iraq, North Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia), and Africa (excluding Uganda and the North African countries) were convicted of rape at rates 20, 23, and 17 greater than individuals born in Sweden respectively.[12]

In a study by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention in 1997-2001, 25% of the almost 1,520,000 offences were found to be committed by people born abroad, while almost 20% were committed by Swedish-born people with a foreign background. In the study, immigrants were found to be four times more likely to be investigated for lethal violence and robbery than ethnic Swedes. In addition, immigrants were three times more likely to be investigated for violent assault, and five times more likely to be investigated for sex crimes. Overall, North Africa and Western Asia were strongly overrepresented in the crime statistics.

The report is based on statistics for those "suspected" of offences, but Stina Holmberg of the Council for Crime Prevention said that there was "little difference" in the statistics for those suspected of crimes and those actually convicted.

"Slightly under 60 percent of the almost 1,520,000 offences ... registered during the period covered by the study can be attributed to persons who were born in Sweden to two Swedish-born parents," it said.[35]

All it clarifies is that the racism in Europe.
 
actually its the west and their zionist poodles takfiris as usual
 
@waz keep this thread on track.
Regards
 
  • Like
Reactions: waz
The thread has so many off-topic posts it is beyond saving. Most people have have given their opinion. Thank you for your contributions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom