The Truth Behind Islam

Discuss religion and spirituality topics.
Post Reply
Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 6193
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 2:37 pm

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Adama »

Wolfeye wrote:MrPeabody: Seriously? Islam, that says to kill nonbelievers, is tolerant. It emphasizes community, alright- the kind of destructive community that's every bit as likely to flip out on random strangers as it is to flip out on it's own members. The political structure it provides is nowhere near just- I don't even know where to begin with that. There's seemingly no justice in that philosophy that isn't to pave the way for something unjust.
Yes, this is obvious to all. If a person can't accept this, I believe they have left rationality and objectivity behind. It's just in your face about Islam, if you just open your eyes to see it. It is NOT a religion of peace, but one of war and jihad and murder.

And they may say they believe that Jesus is a prophet, but if you say to them that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, they will tell you that God can't have a Son. And do even the Jews threaten Christians with violence or death for saying that Jesus is the Messiah?
User avatar
MrPeabody
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1802
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 11:53 am

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by MrPeabody »

Meet the Ahmadiyya Muslims fighting Islamist extremism and Islamophobia

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk ... lamophobia
User avatar
MrPeabody
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1802
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 11:53 am

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by MrPeabody »

Muslims save lives in London fire.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3s2k0QnX8M
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Mr S »

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

The Muslim Issue

Post by Mr S »

https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/20 ... n-history/

The Muslim Issue
"Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there."


Islamic Invasion Of India: The Greatest Genocide In History
Posted on August 31, 2015 by Admin 244 Comments

Muslim historian Firishta [full name Muhammad Qasim Hindu Shah, born in 1560 and died in 1620], the author of the Tarikh-i Firishta and the Gulshan-i Ibrahim, was the first to give an idea to the medieval bloodbath that was India during Muslim rule, when he declared that over 400 million Hindus got slaughtered during Muslim invasion and occupation of India. Survivors got enslaved and castrated. India’s population is said to have been around 600 million at the time of Muslim invasion. By the mid 1500’s the Hindu population was 200 million.
By the time the British arrived to the shores of India and after centuries of Islamic law ruling India, the Hindu population was not behaving like their normal self; they were behaving like Muslims. There are many witness reports from the British archives of horrendous Hindu incidents that were shocking in cruelty to the British – and they therefore sometimes referred to the people as “savages”. Yes, anyone who gets contaminated by the association with Islamic ‘culture’ truly gets tainted and savaged. That is exactly why it is so detrimental and dangerous.
Today, like other cultures with a soul massacred by Islam, India is not truly a Hindu nation. India is a shadow of Islam, a Hindufied version of Islam, where every human atrocity has been emulated and adopted into a culture previously alien to such brutality. And in association with it’s foreign mohamedan pest, these Islamic habits have become adopted and accepted as a “normal” part of Indian culture. But if we look at pre-Islamic Indian culture it was a in general a benevolent culture of knowledge and learning, much more so than it is today.
From the time of the Umayyad Dynasty (711AD) to the last Mughal, Bahadur Shah Zafar (1858), so widely praised as great leaders by Indian historians themselves, entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. “Hindu slaughter.”

Image
.
The_Mughal_Empire

The Mughal Empire’s spread and occupation of India.

The genocide suffered by the Hindus and Sikhs of India at the hands of Arab, Turkish, Mughal and Afghan occupying forces for a period of 800 years is as yet formally unrecognised by the World.

The only similar genocide in the recent past was that of the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazis.

The holocaust of the Hindus in India was of even greater proportions, the only difference was that it continued for 800 years, till the brutal regimes were effectively overpowered in a life and death struggle by the Sikhs in the Punjab and the Hindu Maratha armies in other parts of India in the late 1700’s.

We have elaborate literary evidence of the World’s biggest holocaust from existing historical contemporary eyewitness accounts. The historians and biographers of the invading armies and subsequent rulers of India have left quite detailed records of the atrocities they committed in their day-to-day encounters with India’s Hindus.

Image
Paintings by Edwin Lord Weeks.

These contemporary records boasted about and glorified the crimes that were committed – and the genocide of tens of millions of Hindus, mass rapes of Hindu women and the destruction of thousands of ancient Hindu / Buddhist temples and libraries have been well documented and provide solid proof of the World’s biggest holocaust.

Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:

“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.

The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).”

Image

He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:

“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”

Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):

“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”

Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:

“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”

Image

Writer Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilisations (1995), that Islamic rule in India as a “colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm – burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”

Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:

“From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”

Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes:

“While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster.

“Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”

A sample of contemporary eyewitness accounts of the invaders and rulers, during the Indian conquests.

Image

Islam in India

The Afghan ruler Mahmud al-Ghazni invaded India no less than seventeen times between 1001 – 1026 AD. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Yamini’ – written by his secretary documents several episodes of his bloody military campaigns :

“The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at the Indian city of Thanesar] that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it…the infidels deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river…but many of them were slain, taken or drowned… Nearly fifty thousand men were killed.”

In the contemporary record – ‘ Taj-ul-Ma’asir’ by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (of Turko – Afghan origin and the First Sultan of Delhi 1194-1210 AD) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites. In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.

Image

The Persian historian Wassaf writes in his book ‘Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar’ that when the Alaul-Din Khilji (An Afghan of Turkish origin and second ruler of the Khilji Dynasty in India 1295-1316 AD) captured the city of Kambayat at the head of the gulf of Cambay, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twentv thousand Hindu maidens his private slaves.

India has a deep, long cultural history. Hinduism began there around 1,500 BC and Buddhism around the 6th century BC. This culture had evolved impressive intellectual, religious and artistic pursuits. Pre and post the early days of Islam, Indian scholars took their works in science, maths (zero, algebra, geometry, the decimal system, so-called ‘Arabic’ numbers are actually Hindu ones!), medicine, philosophy etc to the courts of others (including Muslims eg Baghdad).

Others came to study in India’s established universities. Indian children (boys and girls) were educated in the relatively widespread education system in a wide variety of subjects eg science, medicine and philosophy. India’s art and architecture was magnificent. They were a prosperous people. Then came Islam – slaughter, slavery, rape, violence, pillage; destruction of religious sites, art and architecture; poverty, exploitation, humiliation, famine, forced conversion, decline in intellectual pursuits, social destruction and a worsening of social ills. To Islam, anything that is not Islamic is from a time of ignorance –Jahiliyya- and must be destroyed (or appropriated and called Islam’s!). The onslaught created the Roma (gypsies), destroyed ‘Hindu’ Afghanistan and formed Pakistan (Kashmir) and Bangladesh .

The cost of the Muslim invasions is massive in lives, wealth and culture. Estimates suggest that 60-80 MILLION died at the hands of Muslim invaders and rulers between 1000 and 1525 alone (ie over 500 years-the population FELL). (Lal cited in Khan p 216) Impossible you think? In the war of Independence of Bangladesh, 1971, the Muslim Pakistani army killed 1.5-3 million people (mainly Muslims …) in just 9 MONTHS. (Khan p 216). The world looked the other way—but don’t we always when it’s Muslims committing the violence! [*The actual number of Hindus brutally slaughtered by Muslims were around 400 million, not 60-80 million, according to Firishta [1560-1620], the author of the Tarikh-i Firishta and the Gulshan-i Ibrahim].

Image

Based on the figures that are available, the number of Indians enslaved is enormous!

The Muslim conquest of India was probably the bloodiest in history:

The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with utmost glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave-markets, and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by the sword in this period” (historian Durant cited in Khan p 201)

And Rizwan Salim (1997) writes what the Arab invaders really did:

‘ savages at a very low level of civilisation and no culture worth the name, from Arabia and West Asia, began entering India from the early century onwards. Islamic invaders demolished countless Hindu temples, shattered uncountable sculpture and idols, plundered innumerable forts and palaces of Hindu kings, killed vast numbers of Hindu men and carried off Hindu women. ………but many Indians do not seem to recognize that the alien Muslim marauders destroyed the historical evolution of the earth’s most mentally advanced civilisation, the most richly imaginative culture, and the most vigorously creative society.” (cited in Khan p 179)

Of course Indians pre-Islam, fought, but it was NOT the practice to enslave or ravage, or massacre, or destroy religious sites, or damage crops and farmers. Battles were usually conducted on open soil between military personnel. (Khan p 205-207) There was no concept of ‘booty’ so Indians were unprepared for Islam’s onslaught. Indigenous Indians were forced to flee to jungles and mountains, or face gruelling exploitation and taxes, slaughter or enslavement while their society was demeaned and destroyed. Muslims constantly attacked the indigenous, idolatrous population and also fought against each other in ceaseless revolts by generals, chiefs and princes during the entire time of Islamic rule (Khan p 205).

Image

Slavery: Initially ‘India’ included part of today’s Pakistan (Sindh), Bangladesh/Bengal and Kashmir. Hinduism and Buddhism flourished in Afghanistan pre the Islamic takeover (7th century). In the 16th century Afghanistan was divided between the Muslim Mogul (Mughal) Empire of India and the Safavids of Persia.

Initially the godless Umayyads, allowed Hindus dhimmi status – possibly because of their large numbers, resistance to Islam and their value as a source of tax income. This violates Islamic text and law which demands death or conversion for idolaters and polytheists. When Sultan Iltutmish (d 1236) was asked why Hindus weren’t given the choice between death and Islam, he replied:

“but at the moment in India…the Muslims are so few that they are like salt (in a large dish) …however after a few years when in the capital and the regions and all the small towns, when the Muslims are well established and the troops are larger….it would be possible to give Hindus the choice of death or Islam” (cited in Lal [c] p 538) (Can we learn anything from this)

Despite their supposed ‘dhimmi’ status, mass slaughter, mass forced conversion and mass enslavement with the resulting forced conversion to Islam were practised throughout Islamic rule and into the 20th century as many demanded the idolaters/polytheists convert or die. Hindu fighters and males were slaughtered with women and children enslaved. Eunuch slavery was practised on young boys.

Image

Often actual numbers aren’t given, just comments like ‘countless captives/slaves,’ or ‘all the women and children were taken.’ Where numbers are recorded, they are terrifying. Along with people, the Muslims took everything they could—coins, jewels, cloths, clothes, furniture, idols, animals, grain etc or destroyed it.

Muslim rulers were foreigners. Until the 13th century, most slaves were sent out of India but following the Sultanate of Delhi (1206) they were retained to work for the sultanate, sold in India or sent elsewhere. Slaves from elsewhere were imported and Muslim armies were composed of a wide array of foreign slave groups ‘converted’ to Islam and ‘Hindus’ and Indian ‘converts.’

Slaves were the promised booty from Allah and obtaining them was a strong motivation for jihad.

“slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap; men…were degraded….but this is the goodness of Allah, who bestows honours on his own religion and degrades infidelity”. (Muslim chronicler Utbi on Sultan Subuktigin of Ghazni’s slave raid [942-997] in Sookdheo p166)

In Sindh (first area attacked successfully) the early ‘Muslim’ community was composed mainly of slaves forced into Islam and a small number of Arab masters (Khan p 299). Initially slaves were forced out of India eg Qasim (Arab), the conquerer of Sindh sent by Hajjaj bin Yusuf Sakifi in the caliphate of Walid I, took 300,000 from a 3 year campaign in 712-715 (Khan p 299, Trifkovic p 109). Muslim fighters came from everywhere to partake in this ‘jihad.’ Qasim was suddenly recalled and executed (possibly by being sown in an animal’s hide) for supposedly violating 2 Sindhi princesses destined for the caliph’s harem!! (Lal [c] p 439)

The Ghaznivids-Turks from Ghazni, Afghanistan (997-1206) who subdued the Punjab.

From 17 raids (997-1030) Sultan Muhmud Ghazni (Turk from Afghanistan, 997-1030) sent hundreds of thousands of slaves to Ghanzi (Afghanistan) resulting in a loss of about 2 million people via slaughter or enslavement and sale outside India (Khan p 315). Chroniclers (eg Utbi, the sultan’s secretary) provide some numbers eg -from Thanesar, the Muslim army brought 200,000 captives back to Ghazni (Afghanistan). In 1019, 53,000 were taken. At one time the caliph’s 1/5th share was 150,000 suggesting 750,000 captives. 500,000 were taken in one campaign (at Waihind)(Lal [c] p 551) Mahmud’s secretary al-Utbi records:

“Swords flashed like lightening amid the blackness of clouds, and fountains of blood flowed like the fall of setting star. The friends of god defeated their opponents….the Musalmans wreaked their vengeance on the infidel enemies of god killing 15,000 of them…making them food of the beasts and birds of prey….god also bestowed on his friends such an amount of booty as was beyond all bounds and calculations, including 500,000 slaves beautiful men and women” (Khan p 191)

The Ghaznivid’s ruled in the ‘Islamic sultanate of the Punjab’ till 1186. Attacks in Kashmir, Hansi, and districts of the Punjab resulted in mass slaughter and enslavement eg 100,000 in a 1079 attack in the Punjab (Tarik –i-Alfi in Khan p 276-7, Lal [d] p 553

Image

Under the Ghaurivid rulers (Turks) eg Muhammad Ghauri (Afghani) and his military commander then ruler, Qutbuddin Aibak (r1206-1210), the Delhi sultanate was set up. Mass beheadings, enslavements, forced conversions, plunder and the destruction of temples continued. Slaves were incredibly plentiful. In 1195, Aibak took 20,000 slaves from Raja Bhim and 50,000 at Kalinjar (1202) (Lal [c] p 536).

“even the poor (Muslim) householder became owner of numerous slaves.’ (Khan 103, Lal [c] p 537).

Through the 13/14th century ruled by the Khilji (Khaljis) and Tughlaq’s, slavery grew as Islam spread. Thousands of slaves were sold at a low price everyday (Khan p 280). Alauddin Khilji’s (r 1296-1316) capture of slaves was stupendous and he shackled, chained and humiliated slaves (Lal [c] p 540). In the sack of Somnath alone he:

“took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000 and children of both sexes ..more than the pen can enumerate. The Mohammadan army brought the country to utter ruin, destroyed the lives of inhabitants, and plundered the cities and captured their offspring.” (historian cited in Bostom p 641, Lal [c] p 540)

Many thousands were massacred. Alauddin Khilji (r 1296-1316) had 50,000 slave BOYS in his personal service and 70,000 slaves worked continuously on his buildings.(Lal [c] p 541)

Women practised Jauhar (burning or killing oneself to avoid enslavement and rape) and sati.

The Sufi Amir Khusrau notes “the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu” (Lal [c] p 541)

Image

Enslaved and Castrated

Eunuchs: All over the Islamic world, the conquered were castrated, including in India. This was done so men could guard harems, provide carnal indulgence for rulers, give devotion to the ruler as they had no hope of a family of their own and of course, this quickly reduced the breeding stock of the conquered. Castration was a common practice throughout Muslim rule possibly contributing to the DECLINE in India’s population from 200 million in 1000 CE to 170 million in 1500 CE (Khan p 314)

Once Sultan Bakhtiyar Khilji conquered Bengal in 1205, it became a leading supplier of castrated slaves. This remained the case into the Mogul period (1526-1857).

Akbar the Great (1556-1605) owned eunuchs. Said Khan Chaghtai owned 1,200 eunuchs (an official of Akbar’s son Jahangir)! In Aurangzeb’s reign, in 1659 at Golkunda (Hyderabad), 22,000 boys were emasculated and given to Muslim rulers and governors or sold. (Khan 313).

Sultan Alauddin Khilji (r 1296-1316) had 50,000 boys in his personal service; Sultan Muhammad Tughlaq (r 1325-51) had 20,000 and Sultan Firoz Tughlaq (r 1351-1388) had 40,000 (Firoz Tulghlaq liked to collect boys in any way and had 180,000 slaves in total (Lal [c] p 542). Several commanders under various sultans were eunuchs. Muslim historians record the ‘infatuation’ of sultans Mahmud Ghazni, Qutbuddin Aibak, and Sikandar Lodi –for handsome young boys! Sultan Mahmud was infatuated by his Hindu commander Tilak (Khan p 314)

Image
Eunuch guard

Conclusion: The inhuman behaviour applied to the whole Indian population by Muslims was the same whether the Muslims were Sufis, Arabs, Afghanis, Turks, or Mogul as all followed Islam’s laws, text and the fine example of Mohammad. It should also be noted that the violence and enslavement continued even after they had virtual control over India because the aim was not merely to conquer but to force all into Islam. Muslims did not come to join Indian society, they came to wipe it out and replace it with Islam—which tells them that they own everything because it’s the booty promised by allah. The pagans/idolaters, polytheists had to convert or die and only then could there be (Islamic) peace! Slaves were the just reward for Islam’s fighters–part of the booty promised by allah.

References:

1) Bostom, A. G. ‘The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic holy war and the fate of the non-Muslims.’ Prometheus Books. New York. 2005.
2) Khan, M. A. ‘Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery.’ iUniverse, Bloomington, IN. 2009. (An Indian ex-Muslim) – FULL PDF BOOK HERE
3) Lal [a], K.S. Muslims invade India p 433-455 in Bostom (1) above.
4) Lal , K.S. Jihad under the Turks and jihad under the Mughals p 456-461 in Bostom (1) above.
5) Lal [c], K.S. Slave-taking during Muslim rule p535-548 in Bostom (1) above.
6) Lal [d], K.S. Enslavement of Hindus by Arab and Turkish invaders p 549-554 in bostom (1) above.
7) Lal [e], K.S. The Origins of Muslim slave system p 529-534 in bostom (1) above.
8) Reliance of the Traveller: A classic manual of Islamic sacred law. In Arabic with facing English Text, commentary and appendices edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller Al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib; Amana publications Maryland USA 1994.
9) Sookhdeo, P. ‘Global Jihad: The future in the face of Militant Islam.’ Isaac Publishing. 2007.
10) Trifkovic, S. ‘The sword of the prophet.’ Regina Orthodox Press, Inc. 2002.
11) Ye’or, Bat. ‘Islam and Dhimmitude: Where civilisations collide’ translated from the French by Miriam Kochan and David Littman. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press 2002, reprint 2005.
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
MrPeabody
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1802
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 11:53 am

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by MrPeabody »

India is an interesting example.

Mahatma Gandhi's eldest son converted to Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harilal_Gandhi
Jonny Law
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1186
Joined: May 13th, 2014, 1:14 pm

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Jonny Law »

Winston wrote:Is this true? This webpage defends Islam as being a non-violent and pro-Christian religion.

https://blindlight.org/

"The Quran

I decided to post this because there is so much disinfo on the web about the Koran that needs to be corrected.

FIRST FACT: The Quran is a very short scripture that is shorter than the New Testament. It is not lengthy enough to hide "bad secrets". I have read several different translations of the quran cover to cover. It is a very short religious text. How short? The Quran is SO SHORT it will fit on 22 pages of 8.5X11 paper divided into 4 columns both sides printed with reasonable margins and a few sparse footnotes. I have seen the quran in Word Perfect, the entire thing there, the ENTIRE Yusuf Ali translation to English (the most recognized version, it would be equal to the King James version) and the entire file in 8 point text was 4 columns, 44 pages arranged to present as 88 half sized pages with two columns per page with the binding. It takes 22 sheets of 8.5X11 paper printed on both sides to do that. Obviously if you get a translation that includes the Arabic text, detailed footnotes, a glossary, dictionary, and uses 12 point text it will look like a big book but absent that it can be presented as a large pamphlet. So you can forget about anyone who lies and says it is a huge and secret writing, that's pure B.S, the full KJV Bible absolutely dwarfs it.

SECOND FACT: If you took all the violent statements and passages out of the old testament and removed the equivalent amount of text from the Quran, you'd have to delete about 25 percent of the Quran to do it. Yet in the Quran itself, there are at most 5 lines that might be construed as violent, but most of what is there pertaining to war is instruction on how to pray in battle and other mundane items, and all war related topics would not fill a single page if they were all scraped up and put together. It is a simple and easily observable fact once you have read the Quran that war is simply not a major topic.

THIRD FACT: The Quran gives very brief summaries of many of, if not all all of the old testament Bible texts, and if you want more detail, you need to read the Bible. However, Muslims will say that the Bible is corrupted, so Muslims believe you need to be careful about what you take seriously when reading the Bible. But obviously stories like Exodus and Jonah and Noah are not a significant cause for concern in the way a particular bible is translated.

FOURTH FACT: The Quran is to a large extent a book of law. And if you read the texts the founding fathers wrote, there is little, if anything in the Quran that is not compatible. All this talk about Shariah being horrible is either the product of a spewing fool or an outright lie, if Shariah was actually put in place in America and America actually followed it, the biggest thing people would notice is that the swamp got drained. And the Federal Reserve would be gone and replaced with a financial system that did not bleed the people dry. And income tax would only be 2%. Absent corruption, 2 percent is really all you need to run a government. In divorce, the woman would automatically get the children until age 12, and then the man would automatically get them. The woman automatically gets the house for 2 years.

FIFTH FACT: Muslims believe Jesus was the messiah, but that his word got corrupted when the New Testament was put together. The Quran fully recognizes the legitimacy of Jesus. It does not agree with how the crucifixion happened but that is a relative detail when Muslims do not believe Mohammed will return to rule them, they await the return of Jesus, to rule for 1000 years the same way Christians do."
Dear Sir Winston,

Christians, Jews and Muslims! HAVE THE SAME GOD (At least on paper, technically)
YES GOD IS A VIOLENT! IF YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE, TORAH or QURAN!
"If you took all the violent statements and passages out of the old testament and removed the equivalent amount of text from the Quran."

NEWSFLASH!
MUSLIM WOMEN ARE THE ONLY WOMEN WHO ARE NOT FEMINST!
MUSLIM WOMEN ARE THE ONLY WOMEN WHO ARE FAMILY ORIENTATED!
MUSLIM WOMEN ARE THE ONLY WOMEN WITH MORALS!
THAT IS A FACT JACK!
Mostly because they are afraid of being honor killed! Voilence does have its benefits!!!
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Mr S »

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/06/jesu ... on-muslims

Jesuit scholar: “Islam is an open-ended declaration of war against non-Muslims”

JUNE 16, 2017 2:08 PM BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

Father Boulad said that “Islam is an open-ended declaration of war against non-Muslims” and those who carry out violent jihad are true Muslims who are applying exactly what their creed demands.

This well-known Jesuit, Henri Boulad, who is former Provincial of the Jesuits in Egypt and director of the Jesuit Cultural Center in Alexandria, has set himself apart from other Jesuit and Melkite leaders. He slammed Pope Francis (also a Jesuit) in a warning letter, saying that “on the pretext of openness, tolerance and Christian charity — the Catholic Church has fallen into the trap of the liberal left ideology which is destroying the West.” Yes.

Pope Francis has declared that Muslim terrorism does not exist, and went on a trip to Egypt following jihad massacres on two churches on Palm Sunday 2017, not to bring comfort to the innocent Christian flock, but to “mend ties” with Islamic leaders.

Another influential leader who resigned in May, Gregory III Laham, the Patriarch of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, became notorious for calling the Melkite Greek Catholic Church the “Church of Islam.” Robert Spencer wrote about him:

He also claimed that Islamic jihad attacks against Middle Eastern Christians were a “Zionist conspiracy against Islam,” and exclaimed that “no one defends Islam like Arab Christians.”

That was certainly true of himself, but Gregory III Laham was not alone: the close relationship between some Middle Eastern Catholic bishops, including Melkites, to the “Palestinian” jihadis and other Muslims in the Middle East should be an embarrassment to the entire Catholic Church, but of course it isn’t. Melkite Archbishop Hilarion Capucci, who died on January 1, 2017, was such a stooge for the “Palestinians” that he was known as the “Chaplain of the PLO.”

Given such dreary realities, Henri Boulad represents an astonishing return to the truth: jihadists routinely quote from Islamic texts and have announced repeatedly that their war is a religious one against “disbelievers.”

Boulad also accepted Hungarian citizenship, in a recent affirmation of Hungarian leader Viktor Orban’s restrictive immigration policy of keeping out Muslim migrants to protect his country from jihad attacks and the skyrocketing crime that other European nations have been plagued with due to vast Muslim migration. Boulad stated that he “would like to…..fight for the future and for the Christian values on the side of Hungary and Viktor Orbán.”

“Jesuit Scholar: Islamic Extremists Are the True Muslims”, by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, June 16, 2017:

Islamic extremists who carry out acts of terror are simply applying what their faith requires of them, according to Jesuit Father Henri Boulad, an Islamic scholar of the Egyptian Greek Melkite rite.

In an interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Boulad said that “Islam is an open-ended declaration of war against non-Muslims” and those who carry out violent jihad are true Muslims who are applying exactly what their creed demands.

Those who fail to recognize the real threat posed by Islam are naïve and ignorant of history, he said, and unfortunately many in the Church fall into this category.

Citing a letter he wrote last August to Pope Francis, Father Boulad said that “on the pretext of openness, tolerance and Christian charity — the Catholic Church has fallen into the trap of the liberal left ideology which is destroying the West.”

“Anything that does not espouse this ideology is immediately stigmatized in the name of ‘political correctness,’” he said.

The priest went so far as to chastise Pope Francis himself—a fellow Jesuit—suggesting that he has fallen into this trap as well.

“Many think that a certain number of your positions are aligned with this ideology and that, from complacency, you go from concessions to concessions and compromises in compromises at the expense of the truth,” the priest wrote to Francis.

Christians in the West and in the East, he wrote the Pope, “are expecting something from you other than vague and harmless declarations that may obscure reality.”

“It is high time to emerge from a shameful and embarrassed silence in the face of this Islamism that attacks the West and the rest of the world. A systematically conciliatory attitude is interpreted by the majority of Muslims as a sign of fear and weakness,” he said.

“If Jesus said to us: Blessed are the peacemakers, he did not say to us: Blessed are the pacifists. Peace is peace at any cost, at any price. Such an attitude is a pure and simple betrayal of truth,” he said.

The priest also stated his belief that the West is in an ethical and moral debacle, and its defense of Islam is a denial of truth.

“By defending at all costs Islam and seeking to exonerate it from the horrors committed every day in its name, one ends up betraying the truth,” he wrote.

To back up his argument, Father Boulad enumerated a number of texts from the Koran that call on Muslims to employ violence in their conquest of the world for Allah.

The many passages he cited included: “Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Koran 2:191), “Make war on the infidels living in your neighbourhood” (Koran 9:123), “When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them” (Koran 9:5), “Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam” (Koran 5:33), “Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies” (Koran 22:19), and “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an” Koran 8:12.

Father Boulad is not the first Jesuit scholar to criticize the West for its naivete in dealing with Islam. Last year, Georgetown scholar Father James V. Schall contended that decades of students have been given a “sanitized education” that systematically excludes an honest portrayal of the history and theology of Islam, which limits their ability to assess what is going on in the world.

In his essay titled “Realism and Islam,” Father Schall argued that Islam “is actually and potentially violent throughout its entire history” and the basic reason for this method is religious in nature: “obedience to the Law of Allah.”

Therefore, he wrote, the Western tendency to simply call Muslim violence “terrorism” is insulting to believing Muslims who “see themselves carrying out the will of Allah, even sometimes to their own death in doing so.” Rather than terrorism, he insists, Muslims see their violence as “a religious endeavor to conquer the world,” which they understand to be “an act of piety.”

Because of this gaping educational void, “most citizens are simply not equipped to face the forces now reappearing in the world,” he wrote.

“And while it may be politically incorrect to state these things, they need to be stated……
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Mr S »

http://www.dailywire.com/news/17453/ric ... el-qazvini#

Image

Richard Dawkins: Islam Is ‘The Most Evil Religion In The World’

Evolutionary biologist and popular new atheist figure Richard Dawkins doesn’t mince words when it comes to the threat Islam poses to Western civilization. In a speech at the Cheltenham Science Festival in the U.K., Dawkins slammed the moral idiocy of cultural relativism, arguing against the ill-conceived notion that all religions are more or less the same.

“It’s tempting to say all religions are bad, and I do say all religions are bad, but it’s a worse temptation to say all religions are equally bad because they’re not,” he stated.

Refusing to submit to de facto blasphemy laws, Dawkins then dropped the bomb.

“If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam,” he said in no uncertain terms.

The fact that Dawkins will likely require a round-the-clock security detail to protect him against retribution by religious fanatics is testament to just how bold such a public declaration can be in the West.

At the time, Dawkins was promoting his new book, Science in the Soul. The popular new atheist figure has courted controversy before, angering Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike. Nevertheless, it’s his critiques of Islam that have attracted the attention of the Islalmophobia industry, with “tolerant” progressives and professional Muslim grievance mongers labeling him as a “bigot.”

The problem, of course, is that Dawkins is as liberal as they come; contrary to his detractors characterizations, his denouncements are far from “racist.” In fact, Dawkins makes a point of separating race from religion, arguing that all ideas, all beliefs should be debated in an open and honest public forum.

“It’s terribly important to modify [Islam] because of course that doesn’t mean all Muslims are evil, very far from it. Individual Muslims suffer more from Islam than anyone else,” Dawkins noted during his speech. “They suffer from the homophobia, the misogyny, the joylessness which is preached by extreme Islam, ISIS and the Iranian regime.”

“So it is a major evil in the world, we do have to combat it, but we don’t do what Trump did and say all Muslims should be shut out of the country,” he added. “That’s draconian, that’s illiberal, inhumane and wicked. I am against Islam not least because of the unpleasant effects it has on the lives of Muslims.”
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Why the Odds Favor Islam

Post by Mr S »

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2017/odds-favor-islam
JUNE 12, 2017
Why the Odds Favor Islam
WILLIAM KILPATRICK

On May 22, an Islamic suicide bomber detonated himself outside a pop concert in Manchester, England, killing and wounding dozens, many of them young children.

The terrorist was a 22-year-old named Salman Abedi. A few days after the attack, I was reading an article about the mosque he attended—the Didsbury Mosque. “That’s funny,” I thought looking at the accompanying photo, “that doesn’t look like a mosque, it looks like a church.”

Sure enough, as I discovered, the Didsbury Mosque was once the Albert Park Methodist Chapel. It had been bought by the local Syrian Muslim community and transformed into a Muslim place of worship.

Similar transformations have been taking place in other parts of the UK. St. Mark’s Church in London is now the New Peckham Mosque, St. Peter’s Church in Cobridge was sold to the Madina Mosque. The Brick Lane Mosque in London was originally a Methodist church. But church-to-mosque conversions are only part of a larger story. There are now 423 mosques in London, and the number is expected to grow. Meanwhile, 500 London churches have closed since 2001, and in all of England 10,000 churches have closed since 1960.

The transformation of the Albert Park Methodist Church to the Didsbury Mosque is emblematic of one of the most significant shifts in history: the transformation of Europe from a largely Christian continent to a largely Islamic one. The transformation is far from complete, and there’s an outside chance the process can be reversed, but time and demographics favor Islam.

In several of Europe’s cities, the Muslim population now hovers around the thirty percent mark. In ten years’ time, that will be forty percent. Of course that doesn’t mean 40 percent of highly committed Muslims facing 60 percent of deeply devout Christians. Both faiths have their share of half-hearted “nominals” for whom religion is more a cultural inheritance than a deeply held conviction. Still, the “nominal” problem is a much greater problem for European Christians than for European Muslims. In many European countries, Sunday church attendance is the 5-10 percent range whereas mosque attendance is very high in relation to the size of the Muslim population. In England, there are already more Muslims attending Friday prayers than there are Christians attending Anglican services on Sundays. A study by Christian Research predicts that by 2020 the number of Muslims attending prayer service in England and Wales will exceed the number of Catholics attending weekly Mass.

It’s also noteworthy that the expanding Muslim population in Europe is relatively young, whereas the declining “Christian” population is an aging one. Sixty-forty seems like good odds until you realize that the average age of the 60 percenters will be around 55 while the average age of the 40 percenters will be around 25.

You may object that if there is any fighting to be done, most of the fighting on the “Christian” side will be done by the army, not by citizens in walkers and wheelchairs. But keep in mind that the military draws its recruits from the ranks of the young. As the population of the people that Islamists refer to as “crusaders” ages, European governments will be forced to draw more of their new recruits from the Muslim population. The same goes for the police forces. Many Muslims will serve their country or their city faithfully, but many will have divided loyalties, and some will have signed up in the first place with mutiny in mind.

Most likely, however, the transformation will be effected without major battles. It won’t be a matter of numbers or of military strength, but of strength of belief. Those with the strongest beliefs will prevail. Those who are not sure what to believe will submit without a fight.

Will Europe Defend its “Values”?
That’s the theme of Michel Houellebecq’s Submission, a novel about the gradual Islamization of France. The protagonist, a middle-aged professor, has a number of qualms about the Islamic takeover of the university system, but nothing sufficient to resist it. The things he values most—literature, good food, and sex—are, in the end, no impediment to accepting Islam. True, he is offered several inducements to convert—career advancement, plenty of money, and several “wives”—but one gets the impression that, even without these incentives, he would still eventually convert. At one point prior to his submission, he thinks about joining a monastic order as his literary hero, J.K. Huysmans, had done, but he soon realizes that he lacks the necessary Christian conviction. Indeed, he has no strong convictions.

His plight is the plight of contemporary Europe in a nutshell. Many Europeans see no sense in resisting Islamization because they have nothing worth defending. To be sure, European leaders still talk about “our values,” but they can’t seem to specify what those values are, beyond appeals to “diversity” and “pluralism.” For example, after the Manchester massacre, British Prime Minister Theresa May stated that “our values—the liberal, pluralistic values of Britain—will always prevail over the hateful ideology of the terrorists.”

I’m not so sure of that. In an earlier era, Brits would have connected their values to God, country, family, and honor. In other words, things worth fighting for. But “liberal, pluralistic values”? That’s not very solid ground on which to take your stand. Who wants to die for diversity? Indeed, it can be argued that the worship of diversity for its own sake is what allowed terrorists to get a foothold in England in the first place. No one wanted to question all those diverse preachers spreading their diverse message about Jews, infidels, and homosexuals. The trouble is, unless there are higher values than diversity, there’s no way of judging between good diversities and bad diversities—between, say, honoring your wife and honor-killing her if she displeases you.

The same is true of freedom. Freedom is a fundamental right, but what you do with your freedom is also important. There has to be some higher objective value that directs our choices to good ends rather than bad ones. Otherwise, freedom becomes a license to do anything one pleases.

An Attack on Childhood
Here we touch on a very touchy subject. I would not like to be in Theresa May’s shoes when, after a horrifying attack, she has to come up with just the right words. But one thing she said struck me as not quite right. She said: “We struggle to comprehend the warped and twisted mind that sees a room packed with young children not as a scene to cherish, but as an opportunity for carnage.”

It’s possible to fully agree with May’s sentiments while, at the same time, noting that there once was a time when a room full of children watching an Ariana Grande concert would not be considered “a scene to cherish.” “Her dress, dancing, and song lyrics,” wrote one columnist, “are deliberately decadent and immodest.” And, after watching some YouTube clips of her performances, I would have to agree. I’m pretty sure that most of the parents I know would not want their children to attend one of her concerts.

While the world was justly outraged at Salman Abedi’s attack on innocent children, no one seems to notice the attack on childhood innocence that the typical pop concert represents. The two “attacks” should not be equated, of course. The producers of pop concerts are not the moral equivalents of a suicide bomber. Still, the fact that so many parents saw nothing wrong with dropping their children off at the Manchester concert suggests a great deal of moral confusion in the West.

Unfortunately, such moral confusion leaves people vulnerable to those who are absolutely certain about their beliefs. The moral relativism of the West is one of the chief reasons why the Islamic cultural jihad has been so successful. People who can’t see that the soft-porn style of Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, and Ariana Grande is not good for children will have difficulty seeing the problem with polygamy, child marriage, and other aspects of sharia law. In a relativistic society, the safest default position is “who’s to judge?”

Relativism Leads to Islamic Dominance
Earlier I said that Europe is being transformed from a Christian culture to an Islamic culture, but that’s not quite accurate because it’s actually a three-stage transformation. Much of Europe has already transitioned out of its Christian stage and into a post-Christian or secular stage. There are still many Christians in Europe, but Europe’s Christian consciousness has been largely lost. The next stage is the transition from secularism to Islam. That’s not inevitable, but it’s likely because without a framework of Judeo-Christian beliefs, secularism becomes relativism and relativism can’t offer much resistance to determined true believers.

Back in 2014, Theresa May said “we celebrate different ways of life, we value diversity, and we cherish our freedom to lead our lives as we choose.” But if your culture stands for nothing more than the freedom to shop for different lifestyles, it won’t last long. The contemporary Western fascination with pop culture highlights the problem. Pop culture is by its very nature a transient phenomenon. What is pop today won’t be pop tomorrow. Indeed, the popular culture of tomorrow may very well favor burqas, multiple wives, and male supremacy. There may still be a place for singer-dancers like Ariana Grande and Miley Cyrus, but that place would most likely be as a harem dancer in a Sultan’s palace or as entertainment for a Saudi prince who has bought up a country estate in Oxfordshire.

It’s hard to beat transcendent values with transient values. That’s especially the case when the transcendent crowd are willing to die (and kill you in the process) for their values. Most Brits, on the other hand, are not willing to lay down their lives for the sake of keeping bacon on the menu or porn on the telly.

Christianity vs. Two Forms of Totalitarianism
When I use the word “transcendent,” I refer only to a belief in an eternal life beyond this worldly existence. Quite obviously, as in the case of Salman Abedi, transcendent values can be twisted. The idea that God will reward you for murdering innocent young women in Manchester by furnishing you with virginal young women in paradise is a truly twisted concept. But apparently it is widely shared in the Muslim world. When, during a World Cup qualifier in Australia, a minute of silence was called to commemorate the London terror victims, the whole Saudi soccer team refused to observe it. As Sheik Mohammad Tawhidi later explained:

In their eyes the attackers are martyrs who are going to paradise. And if they stand for a minute of silence they are against their Muslim brothers who fought for jihad and fought the infidels.

As twisted as these values may be, it’s beginning to look as though secular values aren’t up to the job of opposing them. The trouble with secular values when they are cut off from their Judeo-Christian roots is that they are arbitrary. Autonomy? Dignity? Equality? Says who?

“If there is no God,” wrote Dostoevsky, “everything is permitted.” Secularism has no God and, therefore, no ultimate standard of judgment. The end result is that each man becomes his own god and does his own thing—even if that “thing” involves the exploitation of childhood innocence. Islam, on the other hand, does believe in God, but not the God Dostoevsky had in mind. The God of Islam is an arbitrary despot whose commands are not rooted in reason, love, or justice.

So we have two arbitrary systems vying for control of the West—the soft totalitarianism of secularism and the hard totalitarianism of Islam. Both are really forms of slavery. Muslims are slaves of a tyrannical God, and secular man becomes the slave of his own desires and addictions. It may seem unthinkable that the West will ever submit to Islam, but many Western citizens are already in submission mode. Submission to their desires has put them in a bad spot. As a result, they are looking for something bigger to submit to—something outside and above their own fragile selves. Some have already turned to Islam. Many more will unless…

Unless, that is, there is a recovery of the Judeo-Christian belief that God is a God of love, justice, reason, and goodness—and that we are made in his image (a concept which does not exist in Islam). In the context of that vision, belief in human dignity and the rights of man is thoroughly justified.

People who believe that they and their neighbor are made in the image of God will generally have a strong sense of their responsibility to act accordingly. Such people will be far from perfect, but they will at least realize that it is wrong to submit both to Islam’s warped image of God and to secularism’s degraded image of man.

In the end, the choice for the West is not between Islam and pluralistic secularism. A rootless secularism will almost certainly submit to Islam. The only real hope for the West is the recovery of the faith that once inspired Christians to build a beautiful church near Albert Park in West Didsbury, England.


By William Kilpatrick
William Kilpatrick taught for many years at Boston College. He is the author of several books about cultural and religious issues, including Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong; and Christianity, Islam and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad. His articles have appeared in numerous publications, including Catholic World Report, National Catholic Register, Aleteia, Saint Austin Review, Investor’s Business Daily, and First Things. His work is supported in part by the Shillman Foundation. For more on his work and writings, visit his website, turningpointproject.com
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
Adama
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 6193
Joined: August 23rd, 2009, 2:37 pm

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Adama »

Christianity does not share God with Islam or Judaism. Christianity is clear, that Jesus is the only way to God and that Jesus is God. You can't have God without Jesus. Islam believes that God cannot have a Son, and Judaism is still waiting for their messiah. Therefore they do not have the same God, seeing as they don't believe Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah, the Christ. They both reject Him. Therefore they are not from God.

Also, it is clear in the Old Testament God is Jesus, even though He isn't named by name. The same characteristics that God has in the OT, Christ has in the NT.

Islam is certainly not a religion of peace. Anyone who opens their eyes can see that. Muslims are just relatively well behaved until society reaches a certain saturation point of them in the population. After there are enough Muslims in a country, the non-Muslims will face oppression and possible murder. At the very least they will be silenced and sent into hiding.

And the astonishing thing is that people hate Christ and God's Law, yet they want to live under Sharia Law. Sharia Law is outright oppressive to women AND men. If you don't like living under God's rules, I doubt you'd like living under Sharia Law because it is far stricter than what God has said.
Last edited by Adama on June 19th, 2017, 1:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Over 670 million non-Muslims massacred since Islam

Post by Mr S »

https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/20 ... ohammed/[b]

Over 670 million non-Muslims massacred since the birth of Islam[/b]
Posted on June 15, 2015 by ADMIN

These numbers keep increasing all the time when more forgotten figures from history keeps being added.

To the total numbers we have updated over 80 million Christians killed by Muslims in 500 years in the Balkan states, Hungary, Ukraine, Russia.

We are missing numbers on the Islamic genocide of Jews, a continuous goal in Islam for 1,400 years.

Then we have India. The official estimate number of Muslim slaughters of Hindus is 80 million. However, Muslim historian Firistha (b. 1570) wrote (in either Tarikh-i Firishta or the Gulshan-i Ibrahim) that Muslims slaughtered over 400 million Hindus up to the peak of Islamic rule of India, bringing the Hindu population down from 600 mil to 200 million at the time.

With these new additions the Muslim genocide of non-Muslims since the birth of Mohammed would be over 669 million murders.

Islam: The Religion of Genocide

Perspective: Think the Spanish inquisition was bad?

More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition* combined.
The Spanish inquisition (Tribunal del Santo Oficio de la Inquisición) from 1478 to 1834 was established due to muslim invasions. It was the war and battle to try and end Islamic infiltration, Arab fascism and conquest. It’s quite interesting how similar to muslims their methodology was. Was it habit by long association under muslim rule or a strategy?
Note: The Spanish Inquisition was an answer to the multi-religious nature of Spanish society following the reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Muslim Moors.

After invading in 711, large areas of the Iberian Peninsula were ruled by Muslims until 1250, when they were restricted to Granada, which fell in 1492. However, the Reconquista did not result in the total expulsion of Muslims from Spain, since they, along with the enslaved Jews, were tolerated by the ruling Christian elite. Large cities, especially Seville, Valladolid and Barcelona, had significant Jewish populations centered in Juderia. Muslims tried to take control throughout the entire country and expand into France to install an islamic state wherever they went.
To expel the vicious Islamic parasite from the nation the Tribunal killed anyone and everyone who were suspected of being contaminated by Islam, even those enslaved by the muslims.

The Inquisition not only hunted for Protestants and for false converts from Judaism among the conversos, but also searched for false or relapsed converts among the Moriscos [moors], forced converts from Islam. Many Moriscos were suspected of practising Islam in secret. They killed anyone suspected of being traitors or disguised moles. No one was spared.
So successful was the enterprise in 1609, in the space of months, Spain was emptied of its Moriscos. Expelled were the Moriscos of Aragon, Murcia, Catalonia, Castile, Mancha and Extremadura.
In other words, the Spanish inquisition saved the entire region from being taken over by Islamic rule. It was a brutal but quintessentially heroic act in history that saw the sacrifice of millions of people to exterminate Islam fully and completely from the land. It took them nearly 400 years. Imagine the sheer volume of muslims in the country for it to take almost four centuries to get rid of them.
Think the KKK has been bad since 1950?

Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years
Think the KKK was bad from 1865-1965?

Islamists killed more Buddhists in Thailand since 9/11 than the KKK killed in the 100 YEARS from 1865 to 9165.
Think the IRA’s terror campaign and the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland was bad?

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland
Think capital punishment in the USA is barbaric?

The 19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.
It’s actually much worse than that: MORE PERSPECTIVE: Tears of Jihad

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa

Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East.

For every slave captured many others died.

Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.

[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888]

Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved.

So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

120 million Africans

Christians

The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] .

A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad.

So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:

59 million Christians in Asia Minor

80 million Christians killed by Muslims during 500 years in the Balkan states, Hungary, Ukraine, Russia.

[This calculation does not include the Arab biological warfare of the middle ages where enslaved and infected Jews, riddled with plague, were dumped across Europe in regions that had no Jewish origin or settlers. They carried the disease from the brutal Arab slave trade and were part of the enslaved blacks, Christians and Jews who managed to survive by paying jizya. These diseased people were then spread into Europe during muslim efforts to conquer the Italian coast (Venice), Greece, Spain, etc. The plague ended up killing half of the entire population of Europe]

Hindus

Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.]

The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

80 million Hindus + adjusted 320 million = 400 million Hindus

[UPDATE: According to reports from the 1899 in a statement made by Indian religious leader Swami Vivekananda quoting Muslim historian Firistha, Muslims slaughtered over 400 million Hindus during an 800 year Muslim rule, bringing a population down from 600 mil to 200 million at the time. Firishta wrote the Tarikh-i Firishta and the Gulshan-i Ibrahim. If Muslims indeed slaughtered over 400 million people in India, the Muslim genocide around the world would exceed 890 million victims.

“When the Mohammedans first came we were said – I think on the authority of Ferishta, the oldest Mohammedan historian – to have been six hundred millions of Hindus. Now we are about two hundred millions.

— An interview of Swami Vivekananda, published in Prabuddha Bharat. April, 1899 and compiled under heading ‘On the Bounds of Hinduism’.]

400 million Hindus

Buddhists

Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die.

Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India.

The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]

10 million Buddhists

Jews

Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions.

After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 669+ million killed by jihad.

Missing Data

Persians.

Muslims invaded and occupied the peace-loving Persians, the followers of Zorohaustra.

Christians in the Middle East.

Chinese during the mongul invasions.

Plus Muslims have slaughtered 11 million other Muslims since 1948 in addition to the 669million+ non-Muslims they have murdered over the centuries. How many Muslims they have murdered over 1,400 years is unknown.


590,000,000: THAT’S WAY MORE THAN STALIN, HITLER, MAO, POL POT, IDI AMIN (a Sunni Muslim), AND THE REST OF THE 20TH CENTURY’S GENOCIDAL SOCIALISTS! AND IT DOESN’T STOP THERE. THE KILLING BY MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD CONTINUES TO THIS DAY.


FOR GOOD REASONS, THE LEFT LOVES TO HATE THE SPANISH INQUISITION, THE KKK, AND THERE ARE EVEN GOOD ARGUMENTS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE USA (THOUGH I SUPPORT IT!).
THE LEFT HAS NO PROBLEM CALLING THE SPANISH INQUISITION AND THE KKK AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT BARBARIC.
SO WHY DON’T THEY CRITICIZE ISLAM – WHICH IS DEMONSTRABLY WORSE THAN ALL THREE COMBINED!?!?
IN FACT, NO IDEOLOGY HAS BEEN AS GENOCIDAL AS ISLAM…
NOR HAS ANY IDEOLOGY BEEN SO BLOODTHIRSTY FOR SO LONG. FOR CENTURIES…
NOR HAS ANY IDEOLOGY EVER BEEN AS ANTI-LIBERTY, ANTI-DEMOCRACY – OR AS ANTI-WOMAN.
IT’S TIME IT WAS STOPPED. FOR GOOD.


Image

Muslim decapitation of 1.5-2 million Christians in Armenia. genocide was marketed by the Grand Mufti al-Hussaini to Hitler and the Nazi’s and adapted for the Jews – which ended up creating the holocaust. Prior to being associated with al-Husseini Hitler had not committed arrests or persecution of the Jewish people. The genocide was initiated after Hitler’s association and collaboration with muslims and their jihad army offered as Nazi collaborators.
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
Mr S
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2409
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by Mr S »

I prefer not to get into long diatribes regarding religion as it takes too much time and there are already numerous well written articles about the Islam problem already out there to read from individuals with far more credential than I. I do a lot of research on various religions around the world and the three 'suppposed' related Abrahamic religions are not the same, not even close. If one truly studies the literature out there you will come to terms with this if you understand symbolically what is being discussed rather than literal.

In simple layman's terms, early Christianity was really just another sect of Judaism that tried to reintegrate jewish practices that were discarded or had been modified from their original intent and practice, which generally happens to all religions over time. Yeshua attempted to reestablish the original and correct practices while integrating and introducing new ones for humans to truly know and become one with God. Of course, over time, Christianity degraded and morphed into something else, but if one studies the scriptures, as well as the ones that were thrown out by Constantine, one can have a true idea of how to instruct oneself in the knowing of the lord. It can also be said that no matter how much a religion degenerates by humans thereafter the original teachings, if it is true to the source (God) it will eventually recover it's true form or allow itself to be discovered by seekers of it's true wisdom and form. Islam is irredeemable as it is misleading in of itself to lead humanity astray to a lower form of animalistic humans, basically animal soul inhabiting a human body.

Islam is a degenerative bastardization of Judaism and Christianity along with some of the other minor religions dominating Mohammad's area at the time. Any religion that attempts to dominate humanity by fear, death, suffering, lying, materialism, etc is EVIL, or degenerative in nature. Actually, Islam is not really a religion but more of a political ideology masquerading as a religion. Any human practicing Islam will never know how to transmute their souls above the animal nature and become a fully realized human soul. It's impossible with Islamic scripture in of itself. The Sufi's and some minor offshoot Islamic branches have attempted to reintroduce metaphysical teachings into Islam to try to bring it more in alignment with higher hidden esoteric teachings as equally found in other TRUE religions, however the results are limited and they are actually considered apostates by many Islamic practitioners. If they were to try to openly practice those forms of Islam and attempt to convert other Islamists to them, their lives wouldn't be staying on Earth much longer.

If one wants to see what the future will most likely be like in the West moving forward maybe 50 years from now, a perfect example is Malaysia. Malaysia on the the surface appears to be the perfect integrated example of how an Asian multicultural society can appear to be successful, but it is largely a mirage. I've been there and it's soft Sharia law for the most part. The government pretends Malays, Chinese and Indians has some harmonious brotherly love and tolerance for each other but it's a gimmick. The government openly discriminates against Chinese and Indians because they tend to be more successful and driven than native Muslim Malay's. There are all these propaganda signs reminding citizens to be tolerant to each other (like why would you need reminders everywhere if Islam was a tolerant religion/political theology). I don't think the government will openly allow a Malay to convert to Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism or Sikhism as a Malaysian citizen. It's against the law. I also saw no dogs there hardly, which of course are illegal to own in Islam. Alcohol is allowed in certain areas but is triple the cost in comparison to other countries because of the high tax imposed on it. Thus, if you're not wealthy, a night out in the city will be quite expensive. Malaysia is basically a modern example of what Western countries will look like in the future and how they will have a soft big brother government regulating citizens and telling them what they can and can't do to make sure every one goes along and gets along. This form of government, in which appeasing Islam over a long period of time slowly converts the native born and culture to be a bastardization of it's previous one while creating pockets of separation, pretends all citizens are one and in agreement with each other. Most of humanity doesn't care or understand what rights they have or don't have so this slow subversion and losing of their original culture means little to them as they have no clear cut ideals of their own, they are spoon-fed daily propaganda from the media and government and have no real individual thinking and rationalization skills to begin with. This is how anti-nationalism, pro-globalism, socialism, technocracy and Islamic ideals creep into our modern societies and cultures nowadays. If one were to look at all predominate Muslim governed countries, they are all heavily reliant on the West for their initial creation, survival and current appearance of a successful nation. Yes, some of these countries appear to be more successful than some Western countries but this is due to such things as subsidies or the oil market, which will be in ongoing diminishment and thus these countries heavily reliant on the oil trade will not maintain their current prominence. Some of these countries are attempting to diversify their economies but if you look at the real citizens there versus the imported workers that are used to really run these countries, they are failed states that cannot be productive in the long-term. Islam creates lazy citizens that attempt to enslave others to do their work for them, whether as a true or paid slave, but a slave none the less. I don't think Arabs and North Africans are smart enough or have enough motivation to take over the jobs and careers that are currently being done by imported labor. Almost all the North African countries are failed states or in serious economic decline and many of the once oil rich countries will be following down the road. There may be a few pockets such as UAE, Oman and Qatar that survive, but the main issue still exists because Islam still runs the show there and creates degeneracy for the most part wherever it is dominant.

For the most part Adama is correct from an Orthodox Christianity point of view. I don't adhere to any specific religion (although I grew up as a Catholic) as I don't feel any of them contain the complete truth since most exoteric teachings for the masses have distorted the true meanings of scripture. I study the esoteric side of all the main religions that have a form of the truth and the true way to self-realization as they know it. However, I'd say I'm closest to how a Gnostic would be defined. I respect the roots of all religions and their attempt to lead humanity to God with their own knowledge and resources related to said culture; however after studying what Islam is I can honestly say it is a religion that masquerades as a positive, generative religion but it is just a clever ruse to lead humanity astray to degeneracy and an inverted form of humanism, inevitably what is defined as EVIL. All those who follow it will at best be reincarnated into a lower form of the human social order, at the worst they will be sent to hell, basically to be completely recycled as a soul and once again start the climb of ascendency but having lost all that they experienced in their previous lifetimes. A heavy price to pay indeed for their willful ignorance. Ignorance in the name of Islam is no excuse for ones actions towards other humans, and ones soul will pay the price for sure. Teachings of the truth have now been given to humanity and individuals can choose to study them or continue being led astray to their spiritual doom. No where in human history has this much hidden knowledge been disseminated for those who want it. Thus, judgement day is nigh whether we want to believe it or not. Actually, Revelations describes what's going on now and in the near future on Earth, it's symbolic of course but it's revealing what humanity is struggling with nowadays. When I was younger I used to think much of the Bible was BS, but it's actually very high wisdom but heavily symbolic so one has to know a lot of background esoteric symbolism to truly understand it's intended message. It can be read of course esoterically and much one can get out of it but when read esoterically, it really comes alive. The Koran is a poorly written action adventure comic book next to the Bible.
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
User avatar
MrPeabody
Experienced Poster
Posts: 1802
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 11:53 am

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by MrPeabody »

When you compare Islam objectively to other religions, Islam is probably the most peaceful religion on Earth. If over a billion people weren't overwhelmingly peaceful, we would know about it. It's strange that Islam gets pegged as the violent religion. Christianity is far more violent, but the violence is censored from public view. The public doesn't see the half million children killed in Iraq from the embargo from the West, or the drones that kill women and children, since they regularly miss their targets. Christianity is far more violent.

Also, all the ancient texts contain violence. This isn't a persuasive argument against Islam. In the Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna demands that the warrior Arjuna kill his own family and relatives because it is his duty. This is considered the highest text of Hinduism. Thus, the Hare Krishnas must be the most violent of all.
gsjackson
Elite Upper Class Poster
Posts: 3801
Joined: June 12th, 2010, 7:08 am
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Contact:

Re: The Truth Behind Islam

Post by gsjackson »

My understanding is that the violence in Islam is almost entirely within the strain of Sunni Wahabbism originating in Saudi Arabia. You know, the people the U.S. likes to use as proxies in attaining our geopolitical objectives. Shiites, such as Hesbollah, who have been branded terrorists in the U.S. and Israel, are simply people resisting those objectives, and not inherently violent, as the Wahabbis are.

Stupid Americans make no distinctions between the various sects.
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Religion and Spirituality”