Topic: Are terrorists only muslim in religion? - page 14. (Read 42412 times)
they are not only muslims... there are alot of terrorist activities.
why are all terror activities carried out in the world are by people of muslim religion?Why cant muslims let peace be there in the world?Are people of only muslim origins terrorist?so trumps decision by banning muslim is 100% correct?
When can't really conclude that most terrorists are muslims. Maybe most of them are muslims. I'm not quite sure what the reason is, but maybe it's because of cultural differences and religious beliefs. That's one of the main reason why there is terrorism, each individual has their own belief, and maybe it's part of muslim's culture to stand on what they believe in. I also observed that muslims have a strong bond, it's just like when you're up against one muslim you're against all muslims.
Terrorists exist in any religion, but there are many more Muslims. I think it all depends on the upbringing of children. If Muslims teach children to be good, they will not commit a terrorist attack.
The Muslims commit terror attacks, because their holy book urges them to wage Jihad against the infidels. Also, the sexually frustrated Muslim men are attracted by the offer of 72 virgins in heaven.
Terrorists exist in any religion, but there are many more Muslims. I think it all depends on the upbringing of children. If Muslims teach children to be good, they will not commit a terrorist attack.
A Muslim is not a terrorist, the terrorist itself is created not a Muslim. THE TERRORISTS ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE RELIGION AND FEELING, they are not tauh what love is. So Muslims are not terrorists, because we are Muslims peace loving is not destruction.
Yeah sure... the same old argument. If the terrorists are not Muslims, then why do they quote the verses of Quran as a justification for their terror acts? Do the other "peace-loving" Muslims condemn these verses, which encourage terrorism?
The answer is very clear. None of the Muslims will condemn the verses in the Quran and the hadiths, which encourage Jihad against the infidels (i.e the non-Muslims). if a Muslim condemn the verses, then he will be singled out as an apostate, or he will be accused of blasphemy. In most of the Islamic nations, apostasy and blasphemy is punishable by death.
A Muslim is not a terrorist, the terrorist itself is created not a Muslim. THE TERRORISTS ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE RELIGION AND FEELING, they are not tauh what love is. So Muslims are not terrorists, because we are Muslims peace loving is not destruction.
Yeah sure... the same old argument. If the terrorists are not Muslims, then why do they quote the verses of Quran as a justification for their terror acts? Do the other "peace-loving" Muslims condemn these verses, which encourage terrorism?
A Muslim is not a terrorist, the terrorist itself is created not a Muslim. THE TERRORISTS ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE RELIGION AND FEELING, they are not tauh what love is. So Muslims are not terrorists, because we are Muslims peace loving is not destruction.
Yeah sure... the same old argument. If the terrorists are not Muslims, then why do they quote the verses of Quran as a justification for their terror acts? Do the other "peace-loving" Muslims condemn these verses, which encourage terrorism?
A Muslim is not a terrorist, the terrorist itself is created not a Muslim. THE TERRORISTS ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE RELIGION AND FEELING, they are not tauh what love is. So Muslims are not terrorists, because we are Muslims peace loving is not destruction.
In my knowledge, not all muslims are terrorist because theyre every religion has good and bad people in it so we cant blame muslims. Terrorist are the one who are againts the government and cruelty is the way they move. I think every religion has a terrorist group in it.
Unfortunately terrorism spans religions and ideologies.
I wrote about some of the factors that drive this stupidity here: https://medium.com/ananas-blog/extremism-and-mount-stupid-5afa0eec7d4e, an excerpt from our whitepaper
Those who undertake terror in the name of Islam claim to do so due to a particular mutation in their belief system.
We have started modelling this, but in particular it appears to be a combination of two things -
i) a removal of reasonable doubt (shubha) doctrine from their jurisprudence vs the majority of Muslims/orthodoxy
ii) conflation of religious (Shariah) and secular (siyasa) law, something which didn't happen for a thousand years but has in the last century
iii) post-hoc retrofitting of actions to selective evidence
To allow everyone to explore this better we are actually launching the first counter-extremism ICO, with the pre-sale just opened here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2035149.new#new/, trying to create a solution to some of the issues I described in this reuters op-ed: http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/16/islamic-state-and-the-management-of-savagery/
We will be putting some interesting new details up there and activating the bounties from Tuesday, happy to have any feedback.
I wrote about some of the factors that drive this stupidity here: https://medium.com/ananas-blog/extremism-and-mount-stupid-5afa0eec7d4e, an excerpt from our whitepaper
Those who undertake terror in the name of Islam claim to do so due to a particular mutation in their belief system.
We have started modelling this, but in particular it appears to be a combination of two things -
i) a removal of reasonable doubt (shubha) doctrine from their jurisprudence vs the majority of Muslims/orthodoxy
ii) conflation of religious (Shariah) and secular (siyasa) law, something which didn't happen for a thousand years but has in the last century
iii) post-hoc retrofitting of actions to selective evidence
To allow everyone to explore this better we are actually launching the first counter-extremism ICO, with the pre-sale just opened here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2035149.new#new/, trying to create a solution to some of the issues I described in this reuters op-ed: http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/16/islamic-state-and-the-management-of-savagery/
We will be putting some interesting new details up there and activating the bounties from Tuesday, happy to have any feedback.
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
What? No, that's nonsense.
This is why we have phrases such as "Islamic extremist terrorist."
Other issues are described differently.
Words matter.
So absolutely, it's not "how the media reports on it."
What part of that is nonsense? .....
Look at what I said. I suggested using words that are accurately descriptive.
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
What? No, that's nonsense.
This is why we have phrases such as "Islamic extremist terrorist."
Other issues are described differently.
Words matter.
So absolutely, it's not "how the media reports on it."
What part of that is nonsense? You have a country that goes into foreign soil with their military, kills combatants and civilians, secures resources, sells arms for profit, and when there's a retaliation it's terrorism. This is in no defense of Muslim attacks, but understand that they are being attacked.
How would you feel if drones were sent into your country and bombs were dropped to kill your family off while they sleep? You'd be at peace with it right? Good man.
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
Can you give proof of any American shooting schoolchildren, just because in his holy book there were verses encouraging him to kill the infidels? School shootings are different from Islamist terrorist attacks. Because the reasons are different. The former mostly happen as a result of personal issues. But the later is purely religious in nature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States
Have fun scrolling through it. I have no mention of a holy book. Mass civilian deaths are mass civilian deaths. You have a different label for them sure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio
There are tens of thousands of civilian deaths by the "good guys" on foreign soil.
Stereotyping is the worst mistake that has happened on planet earth. Human beings are used to relating things to experience and that is why the stereotyping of Muslims to terrorism is rampant. When one fruit gets rotten, it doesn't mean that the whole lot is rotten. Similarly, when a few Muslims have expressed their displeasure against something, it doesn't mean that every Muslim is of a similar opinion. Therefore, not all Muslims are terrorists.
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
What? No, that's nonsense.
This is why we have phrases such as "Islamic extremist terrorist."
Other issues are described differently.
Words matter.
So absolutely, it's not "how the media reports on it."
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
Can you give proof of any American shooting schoolchildren, just because in his holy book there were verses encouraging him to kill the infidels? School shootings are different from Islamist terrorist attacks. Because the reasons are different. The former mostly happen as a result of personal issues. But the later is purely religious in nature.
It just depends on how the media reports on it. Muslim attacks are categorized as terrorism. American attacks when someone shoots up a school or theatre is categorized as mentally unstable. American military attacks on foreign soil is categorized as defense.
In many religions there are terrorists and petty criminals, but among Muslims there are more terrorist groups that do a lot of harm to civilians. In general, because of religion, there are many murders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Prevalence_relative_to_other_forms_of_terrorism
One ideology that plays a role in terrorism by using the name of Islam, is Wahabism.[40][41][42][43][44] Wahabism and its allies including Salafism (Salafi jihadism) supports war against any one and every one who is not like them. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, al-Qaeda, Al-Shabaab (militant group), Boko Haram, Indonesian Mujahedeen Council, Taliban, Sipah Sahaba, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Hizbul Mujahideen follow intolerant Wahabi or Salafi ideology which is opposed by other Muslims.[44][45][46] Non-Muslims, Sufis, and Shias are attacked by hard-core Wahhabis, Deobandis, and jamaatis in the same way that socialists and other leftist proletarians were assaulted by Mussolini's bandits, Jews and others by the Nazis, and "bourgeois," "kulak," intellectual, Jewish, "Menshevik," and "Trotskyist" dissenters were assaulted by Stalinists.[47] In India, Wahabism was spread in the name of Deobandi movement,[48] which was opposed by more tolerant Sufi oriented Indian Muslims.
Transnational Islamist ideology, specifically of the militant Islamists, assert that Western policies and society are actively anti-Islamic, or as it is sometimes described, waging a "war against Islam". Islamists often identify what they see as a historical struggle between Christianity and Islam, dating back as far as the Crusades, among other historical conflicts between practitioners of the two respective religions. Osama bin Laden, for example, almost invariably described his enemy as aggressive and his call for action against them as defensive. Defensive jihad differs from offensive jihad in being "fard al-ayn," or a personal obligation of all Muslims, rather than "fard al-kifaya", a communal obligation, that is, some Muslims may perform it but it is not required from others. Hence, framing a fight as defensive has the advantage of both appearing to be a victim rather than an aggressor, and of giving the struggle the very highest religious priority for all good Muslims.
I've always been curious. So, muslim terrorists are told they get 99 virgins when they kill themselves and go to 'heaven'. What happens after they have sex with them all ? Do they get 99 new virgins? Does god reconstruct their hymen? Or are they then stuck with 99 non virgins?
It is not 99 virgins. The shahids (martyrs) get only 72 virgins apiece. And it is an one time allotment. These virgins will not be replaced, unless it is later found that they suffer from HIV or syphilis. But I think it is possible to exchange your virgins with someone else's.
I've always been curious. So, muslim terrorists are told they get 99 virgins when they kill themselves and go to 'heaven'. What happens after they have sex with them all ? Do they get 99 new virgins? Does god reconstruct their hymen? Or are they then stuck with 99 non virgins?
Jump to: