Islam and terrorism

Who started the first world war ? Muslims ? Who started the second world war ? Muslims ? Who killed about 20 millions of Aborigines in Australia ? Muslims ?? Who sent the nuclear bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Muslims ?? Who killed more than 100 millions of Indians in North America ? Muslims ?? Who killed more than 50 millions of Indians in south America ? Muslims ?? Who took about 180 millions of African people as slaves and 88% of them died and was thrown in Atlantic ocean ? Muslims ?? No , They weren't Muslims!!! First of all, US has to define terrorism properly... If a non-Muslim do something bad..it is crime. But if a Muslim commit same..he is terrorist... So first remove this double standard...then come to the point!!

muslins didn't spread islam using sword , islam now is the Fastest Growing Religion in the world , what kind of swords we use now in US and west,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90TagDXtpNE&feature=related

did we sent armies to indonisia ?

we ruled india for 1000 years and now hindoos control it , i think if we ruled it using swords , the situation will be different now !

in egypt there are ten million christians live in peace with muslims better than muslims who live in west and attacked every day !

ahmedfire wrote:
we ruled india for 1000 years and now hindoos control it , i think if we ruled it using swords , the situation will be different now !

What do you mean by "we". Don't think Egyptians were ever in India. I know muslims like to live in the bubble of Ummah. But.... whatever

For your comment. No, muslims were simply not good enough to convert every body but they did try their best and were met with resistance where ever they went. The fact is Hindus are resilient enough and to much into themselves that Islam was always taken as alien by them. Islam is quite opposite to Indian thought on religion or Indian concept of Dharma. Some info for you:
Babur (Central Asian stock) Founder of Mughal Empire

Babar's ivasion and occupation of India impacted the life in India in all aspects. His generals forced people to be converted to Islam, his Zamindar's and other influential people bestowed lands and property on the newly converted Muslims. Babar himself became a Ghazi which in Islamic terminology is a positive epitecht and it means "a muslim who has killed a non-muslim", such a person is guaranteed heaven with "beautiful women, wine and rivers of honey." Another thing to note is that Babar destroyed several Hindu temples all over Punjab, and UP. Reason being is because founder of islam, Mohammad had done the same thing when he attacked Meeca and destroyed its temple and idolized Kaba. He made a pathway to kaaba using destroyed debree of the old temple, this tradition was continued by all the Mughal kings who invaded Indian, including Humayun, Akbar, Jahangir, Shahjahan and Aurungzeb, they destroyed temples and converted them to mosques, even though it is not allowed in islam as muslims claim but Mohammad himself had done it so they followed their leader.

The clash between Sikh and Islamic culture was inevitable and resulted in first small hostilities between Guru's followers starting with the Sixth Guru Guru Hargobind and later into full scale with Tenth Guru Guru Gobind Singh.

Source: http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/events/babar.html

The world famous historian, Will Durant has written in his Story of Civilisation that "the Mohammedan conquest of India was probably the bloodiest story in history".

India before the advent of Islamic imperialism was not exactly a zone of peace. There were plenty of wars fought by Hindu princes. But in all their wars, the Hindus had observed some time-honoured conventions sanctioned by the Sastras. The Brahmins and the Bhikshus were never molested. The cows were never killed. The temples were never touched. The chastity of women was never violated. The non-combatants were never killed or captured. A human habitation was never attacked unless it was a fort. The civil population was never plundered. War booty was an unknown item in the calculations of conquerors. The martial classes who clashed, mostly in open spaces, had a code of honor. Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death.

Islamic imperialism came with a different code--the Sunnah of the Prophet. It required its warriors to fall upon the helpless civil population after a decisive victory had been won on the battlefield. It required them to sack and burn down villages and towns after the defenders had died fighting or had fled. The cows, the Brahmins, and the Bhikshus invited their special attention in mass murders of non-combatants. The temples and monasteries were their special targets in an orgy of pillage and arson. Those whom they did not kill, they captured and sold as slaves. The magnitude of the booty looted even from the bodies of the dead, was a measure of the success of a military mission. And they did all this as mujahids (holy warriors) and ghazls (kafir-killers) in the service of Allah and his Last Prophet.

Hindus found it very hard to understand the psychology of this new invader. For the first time in their history, Hindus were witnessing a scene which was described by Kanhadade Prabandha (1456 AD) in the following words

"The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious Turks."

That was written in remembrance of Alauddin Khalji's invasion of Gujarat in the year l298 AD. But the gruesome game had started three centuries earlier when Mahmud Ghaznavi had vowed to invade India every year in order to destroy idolatry, kill the kafirs, capture prisoners of war, and plunder vast wealth for which India was well-known.

Source: http://sitaram.0catch.com/page266.htm

You can read all these pages if you are genuinely interested.

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/siii/ch7.htm
http://sitaram.0catch.com/page266.htm
http://islam-watch.org/Rizwan_Salim/What-Islamic-Invaders-Did-to-India.htm

Who killed about 20 millions of Aborigines in Australia

I very much doubt there were 20 million Aborigines in Australia to kill, and the Aboriginies certainly killed their fair share of white people (though not enough to force them to negotiate a treaty like the NZ Maori did).

Who killed more than 100 millions of Indians in North America ?

If there were 100 million native Americans then they would not have been defeated.

First of all, US has to define terrorism properly...

They have. A terrorist is the same as a communist... it is anyone acting against the interests of the US of A.

The point is that the US is self centred and the last country in the world that should be defining the meaning of words.

Their antics on the international world stage regarding spreading democracy are comical... they do more to undermine the spread of democracy than any other country on the planet because democracy for everyone else doesn't actually suit them. Saudi Arabia would be much more difficult to control for oil if it wasn't a dictatorship, and for years the US didn't care that Pakistan was a military dictatorship... they were best buddies anyway, though things there are changing because the US realises what a lucrative market those 1.2 plus billion Indians represent to the makers of jeans and coke.

in egypt there are ten million christians live in peace with muslims better than muslims who live in west and attacked every day !

Don't feel the need to defend Islam, only people who don't think for themselves believe all muslims are terrorists, and you are wasting your breath trying to convince such people of the truth.

What do you mean by "we". Don't think Egyptians were ever in India. I know muslims like to live in the bubble of Ummah. But.... whatever

I suspect he meant we muslims...

No, muslims were simply not good enough to convert every body but they did try their best and were met with resistance where ever they went.

Again, replace the word muslims with the word christians and that sentence is just as valid.

GarryB wrote:
I suspect he meant we muslims...

Yes that is what I understood as well, that is why I wrote about Ummah. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ummah

But the fact of matter is muslims are and always have been fighting among themselves. Even the princes have been killing their own brothers to get the throne. In today's world, there are clear examples of how much muslims hate each other, due to politics or some other racial reason etc. So these terms of "we muslims", is very loose and naive.

On one hand muslims believe in terms like these then when people(I am talking about ordinary people, not intellectuals) pick on them, muslims complain that muslims are not terrorists or some other term people might give them. Can't have both ways, can you.

So when somebody says we ruled this place, then you are taking a sort of responsibility, arn't you.

So Dear Ahmedfire, Who exactly are we talking about here? I am confused.

But the fact of matter is muslims are and always have been fighting among themselves.

Uncanny... the saem could be said for Christians... look at all the different Christian groups...

^^^ Yes, could be said up to certain extent IMO. But my overall point/perspective of that post is that if you believe that all muslims are one, then be prepared to take the criticisms as well if some individual commits something that is not considered good. E.g. if my hand decides to punch somebody because of muscle spasm(or double personality or my madness or me being drunk) or something, I will be held accountable by that punched person, isn't it.

What do you mean by "we". Don't think Egyptians were ever in India. I know muslims like to live in the bubble of Ummah. But.... whatever

I mean Muslims .

For your comment. No, muslims were simply not good enough to convert every body but they did try their best and were met with resistance where ever they went. The fact is Hindus are resilient enough and to much into themselves that Islam was always taken as alien by them. Islam is quite opposite to Indian thought on religion or Indian concept of Dharma. Some info for you:

Look , Quran tells us (muslims ) that if we forced anyone to convert to islam ,his islam will not be accepted from our God because he converted under force

Islam has always given respect and freedom of religion to all faiths. Freedom of religion is ordained in the Quran itself:

“There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong.” (Quran 2:256)

The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book Heroes and Hero worship, refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: “The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one; in one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and tries to propagate with that will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.”

If Islam was spread by the sword, it was the sword of intellect and convincing arguments. It is this sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Quran says in this connection:

“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” (Quran 16:125)

These are the basics of how islam see the other religions , if someone muslim did something against this ,so it's his wrong not islam one ,

About your source that i doubt it coz muslims never before forced people to convert to islam ,from BBC Mughals period in india was Prosperous

The Mughals were Muslims who ruled a country with a large Hindu majority. However for much of their empire they allowed Hindus to reach senior government or military positions.

The Mughals brought many changes to India:

Centralised government that brought together many smaller kingdoms
Delegated government with respect for human rights
Persian art and culture
Persian language mixed with Arabic and Hindi to create Urdu
Periods of great religious tolerance
A style of architecture (e.g. the Taj Mahal)
A system of education that took account of pupils' needs and culture

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/mughalempire_1.shtml


I prefer to compare the period when muslims ruled india and such period when England ruled it

britain came to india to steal indian spices and wood , and took millions of indian soldiers in the world war 1,2 (most of them killed ) ,

when muslims ruled india they give freedom to other religions to build and worship, but when britains came they killed muslims everywhere and destroyed mosques , the last muslim king bhadur , they killed his sons towards him and cooked some of them body parts towards him ,


Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim.

indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia

Muslims ruled Spain (Andalusia) for about 800 years. During this period the Christians and Jews enjoyed freedom to practice their respective religions, and this is a documented historical fact.

Christian and Jewish minorities have survived in the Muslim lands of the Middle East for centuries. Countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan all have significant Christian and Jewish populations.

Similarly, Islam spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. And likewise no Muslim army was ever dispatched to the East Coast of Africa.


An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, yearbook 1986, gives the statistics of the increase of the percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, while Christianity had increased by 47%. During this fifty-year period, there was no “Islamic conquest” yet Islam spread at an extraordinary rate.

Today the fastest growing religion in America and Europe is Islam. The Muslims in these lands are a minority. The only sword they have in their possession is the sword of truth. It is this sword that is converting thousands to Islam.

Islamic law protects the privileged status of minorities, and that is why non-Muslim places of worship have flourished all over the Islamic world. Islamic law also allows non-Muslim minorities to set up their own courts, which implement family laws drawn up by the minorities themselves. The life and property of all citizens in an Islamic state are considered sacred whether they are Muslims or not.

Islam has penetrated the Middle East, North Africa, Spain, West Africa, East Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia Minor, the Caucasus, Central Asia, Afghanistan, India, Western China, and the Malay archipelago. Islam in all these regions replaced so many other well-established religions: Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Paganism and animism. What are the reasons behind the triumph of Islam over all these religions in so many different places at so many different times?

Sir Arnold narrated the story of an Egyptian Jew who converted to Islam at the end of the 13th century mainly because of the sight of the **Juma'a** prayer. Actually, it is not only in the 13th century that people converted to Islam because of the prayers; it just happened a few years ago in Ottawa that a non-Muslim Canadian woman converted to Islam because of **Juma'a** prayers

And i tell you again , now islam is the fastest growing religion in the world although muslims now are terrorists as U..S and west propaganda said ,what kind of swords we use

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJxOdBLx0G8

I very much doubt there were 20 million Aborigines in Australia to kill, and the Aboriginies certainly killed their fair share of white people (though not enough to force them to negotiate a treaty like the NZ Maori did).

If there were 100 million native Americans then they would not have been defeated.

Sorry the numbers may be larged , i confused , native americans who killed were about 12 to 15 million people

Don't feel the need to defend Islam, only people who don't think for themselves believe all muslims are terrorists, and you are wasting your breath trying to convince such people of the truth.

I just tried to show facts ,but western media for sorry blind minds ,i'm just ask why they seperate and make hate between people from east to west !! bombing and killing and steal oil and gas and put in power aperson who obey them ! this is madness !

ahmedfire wrote:
About your source that i doubt it coz muslims never before forced people to convert to islam ,from BBC Mughals period in india was Prosperous

You can doubt all you want. I am not here to convince you about anything. If you want to have a discussion we will have one. If you are going to write bull$hit, I will simply ignore it.

However for much of their empire they allowed Hindus to reach senior government or military positions.

Centralised government that brought together many smaller kingdoms
Delegated government with respect for human rights
Persian art and culture
Persian language mixed with Arabic and Hindi to create Urdu
Periods of great religious tolerance
A style of architecture (e.g. the Taj Mahal)
A system of education that took account of pupils' needs and culture

Bull$hit...no source, no reference cited, crap written on BBC website. No wonder people in UK are pissed of at dhimmi attitude of their insitutions.

I prefer to compare the period when muslims ruled india and such period when England ruled it

Both looted, plundered, raped India. Muslims many magnitude more than British.

when muslims ruled india they give freedom to other religions to build and worship,

LOL....Did you read the links I gave you. Enjoy your bubble.

I am simply not interested in present or past of Spain, South East Asia, Middle East, Africa. They can follow any religion they want. Not my problem.

About growing religion in the world. See it is a cultural difference, typical middle eastern thinking of converting other people to follow their ways, their culture and their language. I don't think it is anything to be proud of. You will see it will cause more problems for muslims as people in these countries will grow more intolerant of muslims as their number increase and they sense threat to their way of life. Didn't we hear people banning Minarets, head scarfs etc, increase in right wing groups in these countries where Islam is spreading. Different countries will have different kinds of effects and the worst ones will have some sort of ethnic cleansing. You only need one brutal leader to emerge for $hit to hit the fan.

UK is prime example, where I think muslims will have more and more trouble as time passes by. For now watch this. Muslims Protest British Soldiers Homecoming Barking 15/june 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80ZHQedE0-c

This is a warning... keep it civil

Look , Quran tells us (muslims ) that if we forced anyone to convert to islam ,his islam will not be accepted from our God because he converted under force

Islam has always given respect and freedom of religion to all faiths. Freedom of religion is ordained in the Quran itself:

And the christian bible says forgiveness and turning the other cheek.

The problem is not the religions themselves, but the people who "enforce" it.

It is human nature to want others to think as you do, and there are many different degrees of force.

Muslims are just as human as christians, and just as flawed.

The problem with talking about history is that we really don't know the real full picture... imagine in 1,000 years time I expect mention will be made of WWII, but if we hadn't written it down properly no one would know that Hitler came to power on the strength of the unfair treatment of the germans after WWI... a war he experienced.

These extra bits of information change the picture a little and go some way to explain actions taken.

I could certainly understand a muslim force moving into a previously muslim area that had been captured and occupied for a long period by christians where conversions... forced and otherwise had taken place thinking that it was the other side who has used force to convert, so it is OK to use any means to convert them back because you are not really changing their religion, you are restoring their true religion... undoing brain washing.

After all by converting people to the true religion you are saving them from hell... you are doing them a favour.

You can doubt all you want. I am not here to convince you about anything. If you want to have a discussion we will have one. If you are going to write bull$hit, I will simply ignore it.

No, this is not bull$hit, i bring asource to you, i didn't create that source , if you want another one, u are welcome ,two sources


Under the rule of Akbar the Great, India enjoyed much cultural and economic progress as well as religious harmony. The Mughals also forged a strategic alliance with several Hindu Rajput kingdoms

the empire was marked by a highly centralized administration connecting the different regions.


Under him(Shahaabuddin Muhammad Shah Jahan), Mughal art and architecture reached their zenith; constructed the Taj Mahal, Jama Masjid, Red Fort, Jahangir mausoleum, and Shalimar Gardens in Lahore. Deposed and imprisoned by his son Aurangzeb.



A major Mughal contribution to the Indian subcontinent was their unique architecture. Many monuments were built by the Muslim emperors, especially Shahjahan, during the Mughal era including the UNESCO World Heritage Site Taj Mahal, which is known to be one of the finer examples of Mughal architecture. Other World Heritage Sites includes the Humayun's Tomb, Fatehpur Sikri, Red Fort, Agra Fort, and Lahore Fort.

The palaces, tombs, and forts built by the dynasty stands today in Agra, Aurangabad, Delhi, Dhaka, Fatehpur Sikri, Jaipur, Lahore, Kabul, Sheikhupura, and many other cities of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh.[14] With few memories of Central Asia, Babur's descendents absorbed traits and customs of the Indian Subcontinent,[15] and became more or less naturalised.

Mughal influence can be seen in cultural contributions such as[16]:

Centralised, imperialistic government which brought together many smaller kingdoms.[17]
Persian art and culture amalgamated with Indian art and culture.[18]
New trade routes to Arab and Turkic lands.
The development of Mughlai cuisine.[19]
Mughal Architecture found its way into local Indian architecture, most conspicuously in the palaces built by Rajputs and Sikh rulers.
Landscape gardening


The Indian economy remained as prosperous under the Mughals as it was, because of the creation of a road system and a uniform currency, together with the unification of the country. Manufactured goods and peasant-grown cash crops were sold throughout the world. Key industries included shipbuilding (the Indian shipbuilding industry was as advanced as the European, and Indians sold ships to European firms), textiles, and steel


The Mughals also maintained various river fleets of Dhows, which transported soldiers over rivers and fought rebels. Among its admirals were Yahya Saleh, Munnawar Khan, and Muhammad Saleh Kamboh. The Mughals also protected the Siddis of Janjira. Its sailors were renowned and often voyaged to China and the East African Swahili Coast, together with some Mughal subjects carrying out private-sector trade


Mughal astronomers continued to make advances in observational astronomy and produced nearly a hundred Zij treatises. Humayun built a personal observatory near Delhi, while Jahangir and Shah Jahan were also intending to build observatories but were unable to do so. The instruments and observational techniques used at the Mughal observatories were mainly derived from the Islamic tradition.[24][25] In particular, one of the most remarkable astronomical instruments invented in Mughal India is the seamless celestial globe



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire#Influence_on_the_Indian_subcontinent




another one ,


An astute ruler who genuinely appreciated the challenges of administering so vast an empire, Akbar introduced a policy of reconciliation and assimilation of Hindus (including Maryam al-Zamani, the Hindu Rajput mother of his son and heir, Jahangir), who represented the majority of the population. He recruited and rewarded Hindu chiefs with the highest ranks in government; encouraged intermarriages between Mughal and Rajput aristocracy; allowed new temples to be built; personally participated in celebrating Hindu festivals such as Dipavali, or Diwali, the festival of lights; and abolished the jizya (poll tax) imposed on non-Muslims. Akbar came up with his own theory of "rulership as a divine illumination," enshrined in his new religion Din-i-Ilahi (Divine Faith), incorporating the principle of acceptance of all religions and sects. He encouraged widow marriage, discouraged child marriage, outlawed the practice of sati, and persuaded Delhi merchants to set up special market days for women, who otherwise were secluded at home (see Veiling and the Seclusion of Women, ch. 5). By the end of Akbar's reign, the Mughal Empire extended throughout most of India north of the Godavari River. The exceptions were Gondwana in central India, which paid tribute to the Mughals, and Assam, in the northeast.


http://www.indianchild.com/mughal_era_india.htm

Both looted, plundered, raped India. Muslims many magnitude more than British.

Muslims didn't take millions of indian soldiers and send them to hell in wars , british took your spices and wood to their empire

i don't think you forget the Amritsar massacre that took place in the Jallianwala Bagh public garden , British Indian Army soldiers began shooting at an unarmed gathering of thousands of men, women, and children without warning,12000 died !!

I am simply not interested in present or past of Spain, South East Asia, Middle East, Africa. They can follow any religion they want. Not my problem.

I think the only reason you are not interested in those areas , that what happened there opposite your idea and prove that islam didn't spread by sword, so it's normal that you don't care about these areas:)

If islam went there by force , i think you would be very interested to talk about malysia and indonisya,,etc .

if muslims used power to enforce indians to convert to islam, we should find millions of dead people who refused to convert !! but history didn't say there were massarces muslims did there "or any other place" to enforce people to convert to islam and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim ,

About growing religion in the world. See it is a cultural difference, typical middle eastern thinking of converting other people to follow their ways, their culture and their language. I don't think it is anything to be proud of. You will see it will cause more problems for muslims as people in these countries will grow more intolerant of muslims as their number increase and they sense threat to their way of life. Didn't we hear people banning Minarets, head scarfs etc, increase in right wing groups in these countries where Islam is spreading. Different countries will have different kinds of effects and the worst ones will have some sort of ethnic cleansing. You only need one brutal leader to emerge for $hit to hit the fan.

No , we are in front of afact ,islam is the fastest growing religion in the world , europe after 50 years will be another europe that we see now , where are swords man ?

Saying that this happen because muslims convinced others to convert to islam is Unconvincing because christians has the largest number of Missionary movements around world, western nurses who go to afghanistan to help people ( as they say ) Distribute books that convince people to convert to christianity , also iraq ,africa and middle east ,

the point is as Garry said it is human nature to want others to think as you do , but the point who win ?

Although U.S and europe called muslims as terrorists and their media Incite people on muslims , we see islam spreads faster any religion in their home ( europe)

Regards.

GarryB wrote:This is a warning... keep it civil

Look , Quran tells us (muslims ) that if we forced anyone to convert to islam ,his islam will not be accepted from our God because he converted under force

Islam has always given respect and freedom of religion to all faiths. Freedom of religion is ordained in the Quran itself:

And the christian bible says forgiveness and turning the other cheek.

The problem is not the religions themselves, but the people who "enforce" it.

It is human nature to want others to think as you do, and there are many different degrees of force.

Muslims are just as human as christians, and just as flawed.

The problem with talking about history is that we really don't know the real full picture... imagine in 1,000 years time I expect mention will be made of WWII, but if we hadn't written it down properly no one would know that Hitler came to power on the strength of the unfair treatment of the germans after WWI... a war he experienced.

These extra bits of information change the picture a little and go some way to explain actions taken.

I could certainly understand a muslim force moving into a previously muslim area that had been captured and occupied for a long period by christians where conversions... forced and otherwise had taken place thinking that it was the other side who has used force to convert, so it is OK to use any means to convert them back because you are not really changing their religion, you are restoring their true religion... undoing brain washing.

After all by converting people to the true religion you are saving them from hell... you are doing them a favour.

In some western sources that i read , i found that israel defeated egypt in 1973 war , but Fortunately i'm egyptian and know my history well and i know that we took our land by force and Prime Minister of the State of Israel in that time (Golda Meir) cried and called U.S for more and more help !!

So, i took an idea that when it's something about Egypt VS israel, historian sources may be wrong ,

i agree with you , but in islam everyone choose his religion , if amuslim left islam ,ok he is free to do that ,muslims will never enforce him to come back to islam .

i agree with you , but in islam everyone choose his religion , if amuslim left islam ,ok he is free to do that ,muslims will never enforce him to come back to islam .

Sadly not everyone is as open minded and right as we are....

For every 5-10 moderates who follow their religion and treat others with respect there are one or two that think differently and do things differently and bring everyone else into disrepute.

Sadly also most media empires have an agenda and they get better ratings showing news footage of men demanding Sharia law in London, than they get showing muslim leaders condemning the actions of suicide bombers against civilian targets as being unislamic.

If there is anyone to blame in all this it is the media.

GarryB wrote:

i agree with you , but in islam everyone choose his religion , if amuslim left islam ,ok he is free to do that ,muslims will never enforce him to come back to islam .

Sadly not everyone is as open minded and right as we are....

For every 5-10 moderates who follow their religion and treat others with respect there are one or two that think differently and do things differently and bring everyone else into disrepute.

Sadly also most media empires have an agenda and they get better ratings showing news footage of men demanding Sharia law in London, than they get showing muslim leaders condemning the actions of suicide bombers against civilian targets as being unislamic.

If there is anyone to blame in all this it is the media.

In the last terror attacks in Norway. A number of news outlets and commentators initially blamed the attacks on Muslims extremists , but the attacks were carried out by a conservative Norwegian nationalist upset with multiculturalism.

When it became apparent that Muslims were not involved, and that in reality it was a right-wing nationalist with extremely anti-Muslim bigotry as part of his world view, the word ‘terrorism’ almost completely disappeared from established media discourse,he became a madman

ahmedfire wrote:
No, this is not bull$hit, i bring asource to you, i didn't create that source , if you want another one, u are welcome ,two sources

No it is bull$hit. Wikipedia and BBC of all places are the last places one would go if you want to seriously study something.

Regarding Akbar, He did some good things, no doubt especially mend the differences with Indian people. But why did he needed to do that, meaning things were not right in the first place. What are your thoughts on this particular sentence in bold letters? As He/his legacy was dead and gone, Mughals were back to what they were good at.

Muslims didn't take millions of indian soldiers and send them to hell in wars , british took your spices and wood to their empire

No they brought hell right here on the Indians.

i don't think you forget the Amritsar massacre that took place in the Jallianwala Bagh public garden , British Indian Army soldiers began shooting at an unarmed gathering of thousands of men, women, and children without warning,12000 died !!

No I didnt forget it, since I am from this region and have visited the place many times. But it is nothing compared to pyramids of human skulls if you know what that means. Not saying British were any good.

I think the only reason you are not interested in those areas , that what happened there opposite your idea and prove that islam didn't spread by sword, so it's normal that you don't care about these areas:)

The only reason I am not interested is because you will run on a tangent to what I am saying that Islam did spread by sword in the Indian sub-continent and caused some of the biggest genocide in history here in the past and maybe will cause a nuclear war one day. Ever heard of term Gazwa-E-Hind? Explain that?

if muslims used power to enforce indians to convert to islam, we should find millions of dead people who refused to convert !!

Sorry, no idea what you meant here.

but history didn't say there were massarces muslims did there "or any other place" to enforce people to convert to islam and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim ,

What history, one one was taught to you in your school in 6th standard. I am telling you again if you are genuinely interested move up from Wikipedia and other propaganda channels. I think you are smart enough to understand what i meant here. There are often communal riots in India and those feelings didnt just originate from thin air.

No , we are in front of afact ,islam is the fastest growing religion in the world , europe after 50 years will be another europe that we see now , where are swords man ?

Don't compare apples with oranges and past with present. I don't see any Sikh converting to Islam, if you know what I mean. The people who have history with you muslims.

Saying that this happen because muslims convinced others to convert to islam is Unconvincing because christians has the largest number of Missionary movements around world, western nurses who go to afghanistan to help people ( as they say ) Distribute books that convince people to convert to christianity , also iraq ,africa and middle east ,

Exactly what i said typical middle East thinking of converting others or asking them to convert. Where is the self respect? If somebody comes to me and tells me follow this book because this is the word of God, I for some reason find it offensive.

Although U.S and europe called muslims as terrorists and their media Incite people on muslims , we see islam spreads faster any religion in their home ( europe)

Regards.

Well guess what, quality matters over quantity (Not intended as offensive). The day the ruling elite(what ever that means, but you will get the point) of those countries call themselves Muslims and start doing Haj to Mecca, until then your statement is invalid.

In the last terror attacks in Norway. A number of news outlets and commentators initially blamed the attacks on Muslims extremists , but the attacks were carried out by a conservative Norwegian nationalist upset with multiculturalism.

Not only that, the first major terrorist attack in the whole world (US) was Tim McVeitch and he wasn't muslim either.

No it is bull$hit. Wikipedia and BBC of all places are the last places one would go if you want to seriously study something.

Wikipedia source has 27 references , there is athird source i put, these sources are convincing for me and you are free to believe it or not.

Regarding Akbar, He did some good things, no doubt especially mend the differences with Indian people. But why did he needed to do that, meaning things were not right in the first place. What are your thoughts on this particular sentence in bold letters? As He/his legacy was dead and gone, Mughals were back to what they were good at.

Akbar was one of Mughal emperors ,

every new king like presidents today , try to rule better than the last one ,not anew thing, not every muslim is atrue one, you can find amuslim who don't apply islam right, so if he did something wrong, don't say islam is wrong ,say this guy is wrong ,


If we see who came after Akbar , we find Muhammad Jahangir "Nooruddin" and from Wiki he didn't force anyone to convert to islam and he didn'timpose the jizya ! "

""
While Sunni Islam was the state religion, there was not widespread pressure to convert; indeed, Jahangir specifically warned his nobles that they "should not force Islam on anyone.”[20] In the first century of Islamic expansion this attitude was taken partially because of concerns that an absence of non-Muslims would deprive the state of a valuable source of revenue. However, as the jizya was not imposed by Jahangir, there might have been more behind this policy of toleration than mere economic reasoning. Jahangir was certainly willing to engage with other religions, and Edward Terry, an English chaplain in India at the time, saw a ruler under which "all Religions are tolerated and their Priests [held] in good esteem ""

"""
Jahangir was a naturalist as well; he was not only a known birdwatcher or ornithologist but a keen observer of plants and animals as well. Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri (Memoirs of Jahangir) has his recorded observations. Even until the mid-nineteenth century zoologists were unaware of the gestation period of elephants but Jahangir on the other hand had accurately estimated the gestation period of elephants to be 18 to 19 months in the early-seventeenth century itself. He gave the details of the pairing of sarus cranes and detailed descriptions of many Indian birds such as the hawk-cuckoo and animals such as the polecat. Once he was presented with a Dodo which was then depicted in a painting by his court painter. Also he used to record solar and lunar eclipses and the length of a comet's tail. He was also responsible for the cultivation of high-altitude trees on the plains. Once he conducted an experiment to show that the soil in Mahmudabad was healthier than in Ahmedabad (both in Gujarat). It was due to the efforts of Dr. Salim Ali that these contributions of Jahangir were rediscovered.[67]""""


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahangir#Religion

No they brought hell right here on the Indians.

This is your point of view , i understand you consider them a conquest, but that hate shouldn't make you to say somethings that didn't happen,

Gandhi was assissinated by Nathuram Godse,who was a Hindu nationalist who felt Gandhi was sympathetic to Muslims, so i think he is aterrorist but he isn't muslim , wow am shocked

No I didnt forget it, since I am from this region and have visited the place many times. But it is nothing compared to pyramids of human skulls if you know what that means. Not saying British were any good.

Pyramids of what ?!! lol ,i don't know what you mean ,

Read this excerpt from Will Durant's book.

""A troop of English soldiers had reached the spot, and without warning, began firing into a crowd that had women and children. Some people got as many as twenty-one bullet wounds in their bodies.

A young Sikh boy stood in front of a soldier and asked him to fire at him, which the soldier unhesitatingly did.

Similarly, an old woman came forward, was shot, and fell down wounded. The police snatch off the men's garments, twist and squeeze the testicles, and even batter them until the victims foam at the mouth and become unconscious."

Madeline Slade, an eyewitness, says: "And so we went on from this house to another.

Lathi blows on head chest, stomach and joints, thrusts with lathis in private parts, tearing off loin cloths and thrusting of sticks into anus, dragging of wounded by legs and arms, beating them, throwing of wounded men into thorn hedges or salt water, thrusting of pins and thorns into men's bodies..."

This was done by the British "using your own Hindus" ,but you see them not terrorists because they are not muslims , great !

The point is that there was no History of Ancient India properly recorded. The British wrote the History of India, exploiting it to create the divide, which was the policy of Divide and Rule, on which they pitted one against the other, in order to keep control.

I have read the entire History of India by Indians and none talks about millions of Hindus being killed by Muslims ,

Hindu Kush??

Talking about 80 million Hindus being slaughtered is laughable. It is like saying, "Move over, Jews! Here we Hindus come with a bigger hoax!"

The population of India was 239 million in 1901, 1095 million in 2001 and you can see that the breeding was the fastest in the last 100 years.

In the 10th-12th Century period, the population was about 35 million against the world population of 170 million.

The claim that Muslims killed 80 million shows that the Hindus had no balls at all. If it were true, all the renowned Historians would have said the same.


Kush means range. Koh-e-Hindu-Kush means Hindu mountain ranges. If the Muslims could have killed 80 million Hindus, they did not need to take the slaves to go through the silly tough route. They could have shipped them on dhows plying between Gujrat, Muscat and Bahrain

And nobody has found any Hindu skull hills or even a single Hindu skull on the mountain ranges. This is just like the idiotic claim of Christians that the Romans had crucified thousands at Golgotha in Jerusalem and so far archaeologists have found only one heel bone!

The only reason I am not interested is because you will run on a tangent to what I am saying that Islam did spread by sword in the Indian sub-continent and caused some of the biggest genocide in history here in the past and maybe will cause a nuclear war one day. Ever heard of term Gazwa-E-Hind? Explain that?

If islam spreads by force here and there in indonisya ,malisya ,middle east ,south africa etc ,, you will be interested to write this as aprove on your allegations

and don't try to predict future , every reliogion has it's secnario to the end of the world , Gazwa-E-Hind is aweak hadeeth , and if it's right, did it mention anuclear war ?!! the last war on the earth will happen using old equipments

only two nuclear explotions happened and it wasn't religious war , even muslims were not apart on this war

Sorry, no idea what you meant here.

I mean when i came you and enforce you to convert to another reliogion , if you refused i think i'll use force and you might be dead , muslims ruled india for 1000 years , if they use force to make people convert to islam , i think indians now would be non existed or we should find adesert or ajungle full of skulls !!

What history, one one was taught to you in your school in 6th standard. I am telling you again if you are genuinely interested move up from Wikipedia and other propaganda channels. I think you are smart enough to understand what i meant here. There are often communal riots in India and those feelings didnt just originate from thin air.

I didn't study indian history , i'm just a web reader

Don't compare apples with oranges and past with present. I don't see any Sikh converting to Islam, if you know what I mean. The people who have history with you muslims.

this link would be good,just asample

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_converts_to_Islam

Exactly what i said typical middle East thinking of converting others or asking them to convert. Where is the self respect? If somebody comes to me and tells me follow this book because this is the word of God, I for some reason find it offensive.

If the idea about Missionary , christians has the largest number of Missionary movements around world, but christians numbers decreased , most of christians now in europe are not christians, they are Seculars not christians

Did you think muslims go through europe streets and start to convince people to convert to islam ?!!

your country contains 200 million muslim , did anyone came to your home to argue with you to make you convert ?

i'm amuslim , did you ever imagine i could try to convince anyone in this forum to make him convert ?

this is silly , most of cases that convert in europe were a self search and read books to understand islam well, then they converted ,


, who the hill has time and mind to convince those to convert to islam

20000 Americans Convert To ISLAM Each Year

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfx4glTU5JQ


Thousands of Danish Converts to Islam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kru6XQ8CT48&feature=related


Uk London,Young People Converts to Islam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bVV5m--CdM&feature=related


Thousands of European Youths Embraced Islam in Holland Holland TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaF6lvHXL3o&feature=related


Hamza young american convert to islam crying when performing hajj
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Le-bkMevLw&feature=related

I can't count all videos

Well guess what, quality matters over quantity (Not intended as offensive). The day the ruling elite(what ever that means, but you will get the point) of those countries call themselves Muslims and start doing Haj to Mecca, until then your statement is invalid.

Muslims in europe already doing Haj to Mecca,
I don't care if muslims rule europe or not, what i do care with is that people convert to islam with no swords as some people say , what i do care with is giving muslims there rights in europe just as christians take their right in M.E .

Regards ..

ahmedfire wrote:every new king like presidents today , try to rule better than the last one ,not anew thing, not every muslim is atrue one, you can find amuslim who don't apply islam right, so if he did something wrong, don't say islam is wrong ,say this guy is wrong ,

So now we are talking about “true muslim”? Where is “we muslims” gone now….LOL

If we see who came after Akbar , we find Muhammad Jahangir "Nooruddin" and from Wiki he didn't force anyone to convert to islam and he didn'timpose the jizya ! "

Sorry, but who are you kidding? From your Jahangir's account in "Tuzuk-i-Jahagiri"

"In Gobindwal, which is on the river Beas, a Hindu named Arjan used to live in the garb of a spiritual master and mystic guide, under the influence of which he had induced a large number of simple-minded Hindus and some ignorant and silly Muslims, to become attached to his ways and customs. He had the drum of his spiritual leadership and sainthood loudly beaten. They called him Guru. From all sides and directions ignorant ones and dervish-grab worshippers inclined towards him and reposed full faith in him. For three or four generations they (he and his precursors) had kept his business brisk. For a long time the thought kept coming to me of either putting an end to that shop of falsehood or to bring him into the fold of Islam."

"It happened now that Khusrau was passing by that route. This useless man let wished to attend on him, Khusrau halted at the place where he had his seat and residence. He saw him and conveyed to him some far-fetched things and on his forehead put a finger-mark in saffron, which in the usage of Hindus is called qaashqa (Persian for tika) and is held to be auspicious. When this matter was brought to the notice of this glorious court and I realized the full extent of his false conduct, I ordered that he be brought to my presence (at Lahore). I gave over his homes and houses and children to Murtza Khan (Jahangirs Mir-i-Bakhshi), confiscated his goods and ordered him to be capitally punished."

Translated from Tuzuk - i -Jahangiri, Persian text, (Photocopy available in CAS in History Library, AMU, Aligarh), relevant part relating to Guru Arjans martyrdom, translated into English by Shireen Moosvi, in J.S. Grewal and Irfan Habib (ed), op, cit, p, 57. For religious policy of Emperor Jahangir see, Beni Prasad, History of Jahangir (London, 1922) and Sri Ram Sharma, Religious Policy of the Moghul Emperors, Calcutta, 1940.

Guess what who this person was? He was 5th Sikh Guru. Murdered by Mughals. Until this point Sikhs were a saints only religion and this started militarization, which was complete with Birth of Khalsa. Where Sikhs were baptised and were trained to fight till death and thus defeat mighty Mughal armies and their allies.

This is your point of view , i understand you consider them a conquest, but that hate shouldn't make you to say somethings that didn't happen,

No you are saying things that you have no clue about and taking references from sources which are dodgy at best in order to promote a certain religion. I know Islam's history here in this part of the world very well, Thankyou.

Gandhi was assissinated by Nathuram Godse,who was a Hindu nationalist who felt Gandhi was sympathetic to Muslims, so i think he is aterrorist but he isn't muslim , wow am shocked

You can call him terrorist. I have no problem. I don’t call Muslmis terrorists BTW. You can read my first sentence in this thread. He was a nationalist to be exact and much more intelligent than an average suicide bomber. You can read his speech at his trial here in the first post of this thread on this forum: http://www.jatland.com/forums/showthread.php?7324-Nathu-Ram-Godse-s-Speech-At-The-Trial

Pyramids of what ?!! lol ,i don't know what you mean ,

I know your knowledge is limited.

Read this excerpt from Will Durant's book.

I know about this incident and frankly speaking don’t need an Egyptian to tell me about my history.

This was done by the British "using your own Hindus" ,but you see them not terrorists because they are not muslims , great !

Where did I say that. Quote me, then point finger at me.

The point is that there was no History of Ancient India properly recorded.

Who told you that?

The British wrote the History of India, exploiting it to create the divide, which was the policy of Divide and Rule, on which they pitted one against the other, in order to keep control.

No doubt they wrote their version of History of India.

I have read the entire History of India by Indians and none talks about millions of Hindus being killed by Muslims ,

Come back with some proof, from your posts all I can say is your opinions are based on ignorance.

Talking about 80 million Hindus being slaughtered is laughable. It is like saying, "Move over, Jews! Here we Hindus come with a bigger hoax!"

So you don’t belive in something, fair enough your opinion.

The claim that Muslims killed 80 million shows that the Hindus had no balls at all.

I will still Indians(Hindus?) overall have no balls. We would have taken out Pakistan long time ago if we had balls and announced that Mecca will be glassed as well if ever a nuke goes off in India.

Kush means range. Koh-e-Hindu-Kush means Hindu mountain ranges. If the Muslims could have killed 80 million Hindus, they did not need to take the slaves to go through the silly tough route. They could have shipped them on dhows plying between Gujrat, Muscat and Bahrain

Your knowledge is quite limited to be honest with you. Read more.

And nobody has found any Hindu skull hills or even a single Hindu skull on the mountain ranges. This is just like the idiotic claim of Christians that the Romans had crucified thousands at Golgotha in Jerusalem and so far archaeologists have found only one heel bone!

Yeah right LOL if even they found one that wouldn’t prove a thing anyway.

every reliogion has it's secnario to the end of the world

Talk about your religion as you don’t know anything about other religions so don’t say every religion. World is much bigger than you think, buddy.

Gazwa-E-Hind is aweak hadeeth , and if it's right, did it mention anuclear war ?!! the last war on the earth will happen using old equipments

Yeah whatever …LOL

I mean when i came you and enforce you to convert to another reliogion , if you refused i think i'll use force and you might be dead

I might be dead but another person like me might see that and kill you or tell others what you are going to do to them as well…so you have a fear of death as well and you wont be pushing other ones like me so much. But you will try your best overtly or covertly and keep on doing that. Why do you think people in these parts of the world or like these places such as Yoguslavia hate muslims so much. Why not you do some research and come with some answers. Lets see if Wikipedia helps you…LOL

, muslims ruled india for 1000 years , if they use force to make people convert to islam , i think indians now would be non existed or we should find adesert or ajungle full of skulls !!

Mughals ruled parts of India and it was changing all the time. At some points of history they only ruled Delhi with total control.

I didn't study indian history , i'm just a web reader

I know that from your posts.

this link would be good,just asample

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_converts_to_Islam

Ok fair enough. I don’t think Bushs or Sarkozys or Browns of West are muslims yet.

If the idea about Missionary , christians has the largest number of Missionary movements around world, but christians numbers decreased , most of christians now in europe are not christians, they are Seculars not christians

That is why I said typical Middle East thinking…I take Christianity to be part of same thought process.

Did you think muslims go through europe streets and start to convince people to convert to islam ?!!

I don’t know what goes on in Europe. Never been there and I wont make my opinions about them. Although I can assume based on my thinking that it will be happening, not in the streets but there are other places.

your country contains 200 million muslim , did anyone came to your home to argue with you to make you convert ?

They wont do that, they know we have historical problems with them. But having said that most Muslims in India mind their own business as many others communities do. India is a multicultural country where there are muslim laws governing Muslims in certain areas of Law. But there are problems no doubt. I would put most muslims in India in moderate category and not in converting types.

i'm amuslim , did you ever imagine i could try to convince anyone in this forum to make him convert ?

I don’t generalize, all I said was there are people in the world who don’t like muslims and they have good reasons for that.

Muslims in Europe already doing Haj to Mecca,
I don't care if Muslims rule Europe or not, what i do care with is that people convert to Islam with no swords as some people say , what i do care with is giving Muslims there rights in Europe just as Christians take their right in M.E .

How about you guys starting with letting Hindus build their temples, Christians their Churches, Jews their temples in Mecca-Medina. BTW don’t take my advice seriously and try to convince people in charge of these cities as this could mean trouble for your moderate @$$ and you will find it hard way how peaceful some of the people who follow your religion actually are.

BTW Regards to yo as well and stay safe.

I am not here to disrespect Muslims. But will say this if Muslims want to get respect then you have to realize your own mistakes and also respect others.

So , let's conclude points ,

# No evidence on the "mountains of skulls " you mentioned ,

# No evidence that muslims forced millions of non muslims to convert to islam and if some muslims go out of the line and forced some others, this not represent all muslims ( as example Indian Christians have alleged that radical Hindu groups in Orissa, India have forced Christian converts from Hinduism to "revert" to Hinduism,) but i can't say that all Hinduism forcing others to convert ! , no group of people are perfect

Radical Hindus step up attacks on Christians

But not all Hindus are radical hindus , so there is a bad part and it is small compared to the good one .


If you want another sources instead ones you refused, try to read to Sir Thomas W. Arnold in his book, "The Preaching of Islam". Also there is Marshall G. Hodgson in his book, "The Venture of Islam", Albert Hourani in his book, "A History of the Arab People", Ira Lapidus in his book, "History of Islamic Societies", L.S. Starorianos in his book, "A Global Hisotry, the Human Heritage" ,


A conference of Christian missionaries in 1887 was discussing why Islam has almost swept away Crhistianity from the Middle East. What did Islam offer these people to forsake Christianity for good? One of the missionaries was insightful enough to say the following: "Islam brought out the fundamental dogmas of the Unity and Greatness of God, that He is mindful and Righteous. It proclaimed the responsibility of man, a future life, a Day of Judgement and stern retribution to fall upon the wicked, and enforced the duties of prayer, alms-giving and fasting. It replaced monkishness by manliness, it gave hope to the slave, brotherhood to mankind and recognition to the fundamental facts of human nature."


Islam is so strong and so self-assured that it does not need to use force to attract others to it. The moral and intellectual superiority of Islam over all other religions has manifested itself so clearly throughout the history of Islam. Despite all of the ills of Muslims everywhere, Islam continues to be the fastest growing religion on earth. Professor Huston Smith of the MIT in his book, "The Religions of Man" says, "In some areas where Islam and Christianity are competing for converts, Islam is gaining at a rate of 10 to 1."

Ambassador Herman Ellis, in a testimony in front of the committee on Foreign Affirs of the House of Represntatives of the United States Congress on June 24th, 1985, said, "The Muslim community of the globe today is in the neighbourhood of one billion. That is an impressive figure. But what to me is equally impressive is that Islam today is the fastest growing monotheistic religion. This is something we have to take into account. Something is right about Islam. It is attracting a good many people."

Yes, something is right about Islam and that's why it has attracted so many people throughout its 1400 years of history.
In the old age, people who accepted Islam were beheaded by non muslims. In fact, the prophet PBUH, sent Huraculus, and others, a letter because the governing bodies to accept Islam otherwise they wouldn't allow muslims to spread Islamic knowledge.

This is why when you read Islamic History, from the muslims books, the term Fat-h, is used: which means opening. As you know no one can be forced to be Muslim, it is in Ayah 256, Surah Baqara(2). So when the muslims opened(Fat-h) of an area, they removed the barriers on the people to freely believe in the religion that they choose.

You must keep in mind that rulers of the past don't allow you believe in anything you want to. The reason the America was a destination of people from southern Europe, was because they were able to practice religion without the binds that Europe imposed on its citizens. So in the USA, what is pounded in the heads of all children who learn in public schools is that Islam was spread by the sword. When in fact, they invaded the America and almost wiped out the native American Indians.

Regards and respect .

There is no real evidence of any Mughals coming to India ever, either. Anybody can argue about the written stuff as it is only ink on paper.

Look, I don't think you are understanding what i am trying to say. You might not believe anything I say and I don't have time to read your long paragraphs. When you will answer my questions that put in my posts, we will move forward, and Be precise. Until then....

The Qur'an gives reproof and condemnation to the "Yahudis", meaning the Jews (or the more accurate term Judeans), and specifically the miltiant inhabitants of Medina.

Ignominy shall be their portion [the Jews'] wheresoever they are found... They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them... because they disbelieve the revelations of Allah and slew the Prophets wrongfully... because they were rebellious and used to transgress. [Surah 111, v. 112]

And thou wilt find them [the Jews] the greediest of mankind....[Surah 11, v. 96]

Evil is that for which they sell their souls... For disbelievers is a terrible doom.[Surah II, v. 90]

Taste ye [Jews] the punishment of burning.[Surah III, v. 18 1]

Proclaim a woeful punishment to those that hoard up gold and silver.... Their treasures shall be heated in the dres of Hell, and their foreheads, sides and backs branded with them. . . . 'Taste then the punishment which is your due. [Surah IX, v. 35]

"They [the Jews] are the heirs of Hell.... They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say ... When evil befalls you they rejoice." Ibid. [Surah 111, v. 117-120]

Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment.[Surah IV, v. 56]

Because of the wrongdoing of the Jews.... And of their taking usury ... and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretenses. We have prepared for those of them who disbelieve a painful doom.[Surah IV, v. 160, 161]

Allah hath cursed them [the Jews] for their disbelief.[Surah IV, v. 46]

They [the Jews] will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say, but more violent is the hatred which their breasts conceal.[Surah III, v. 117-120]




Religion of peace... wait, what?

Back on topic... I know I am the biggest off topic hypocrite here, but I think the theme of the original post was not that Muslims are victims and pure and innocent and perfect and why is everyone picking on them.

I think the topic is more akin to perhaps something milky_candy_sugar might be familiar with... in the US Muslim = terrorist, just like Vietnam = a war the US fought and lost.

A muslim is a member of a faith called Islam and while some certainly are very bad people that does not mean all muslims are evil.

The religion itself is not inherently evil, though like most religions it was born in a less informed less liberal, less liberated time.

In the same way the Vietnam is a growing and vibrant growing country that still feels some of the effects of war, but should be seen as rather more than just a conflict or several.

The problem with throwing mud at Islam is that it tends to stick to everyone... most of the comments about the mistakes of the followers of Islam can be directly applied to the followers of most other religions.

This thread is not about the faults of Islam or any other religion for there are plenty, though most derive from the flawed human interpretation of the system for conducting your own life.

It is about the propaganda campaign by the west against Muslims.

I can appreciate the issues as my niece married a very nice young man who fits an American profile for a terrorist, not because of his history, but because of the colour of his skin and his last name. She has taken his last name and walks through airport security with no problems... he is always taken aside and questioned for a few hours.

I personally would not put up with that sort of rubbish, but he is smarter than that and realises such a reaction would likely lead to rather more trouble and more time wasted.

GarryB wrote:A muslim is a member of a faith called Islam and while some certainly are very bad people that does not mean all muslims are evil.

Offcourse not, most are not bad in any way. Regarding media, there are news channels, then their are news channels where news readers show emotions along with their opinions. In the age of internet, hate spreads faster.

My question to muslim countries will be.... Why do they put "Islamic republic" in front of the names of their countries. I dont see any body else do that. Why make your religion big target for things that country will commit, commits or have committed in the past. All these so called little things matter when one looks at bigger picture.

Why does the US put "In god we trust" on all its money?

Most western countries are largely christian and white... in fact that is the definition of a western country, which is ironic because most christian churches fought against democracy tooth and nail...

Yes I agree and that is why Muslims around the world don't really like Christian Americans in general. All I meant was Why not look at yourself first. And think about why do others call you a terrorist. Of course you cant change others opinions especially who are hell bent on calling you terrorists, but you can certainly change those who are unsure about Muslims and I would put most world population in that bracket. Muslims or people who call them selves Muslims are even picking up enemies in as far as Argentina. Now ofcourse... others around the world are free to call Americans terrorists. I would put easily put Iraqis, Afghans, North Koreans, Cubans, Venezuelans, Serbians etc. in that and I would agree with them.