just curious but why is being a Muslim seen as being...

Post Reply New Topic

37/83= 44.6% of terrorist groups are Muslim. That is rather high compared to (how many other religions and political ideologies exist?)

Depends on how you view these "terrorist groups". One man's hero is another's terrorist. Most Muslims view the American army and Israeli defense forces as terrorist groups. For example, Iran has recognised the American army and the CIA as terrorist organisations. That just happens to be a list of terrorist groups as recognized by the UN, EU, USA, UK, etc, a purely pro-western outlook.

Btw, only around half of those 37 terrorist groups are Islamic in ideology, the rest are communists, pan-Arab nationalists, and a few Arab Christian terrorist groups.

I suppose, but shouldn't the nations do their own recruiting if they wish to do this? So that these "terrorists" aren't considered civilians who commit murder? A soldier kills because it is his/her job to, but these people are freelance more or less (kind of like a mafia.)

Terrorism is terrorism.

Ok, let's look at the Tamil Tigers. By 2007, Tamil Eelam had it's own standing army, navy, and air force. Tamil Eelam was a nation, with the difference, that it's an unrecognised state. Aren't the Tamil Tigers recognised internationally as a terrorist outfit? They were almost successful at forming their nation, and would've succeeded if it wasn't for Karuna's betrayal. A decade from now, no doubt, at least a few countries would've recognied Tamil Eelam, thus making the Tamil Tigers a somewhat legitimate standing army. As far as all Tamils are concerned, whether they live in India, Sri Lanka, or Malaysia, the Tigers are heroes to them.

Also, the USA recognises Iran's revolutionary guards as a terrorist outfit. The revolutionary guards is an official military force of Iran.

Having a navy and an air force is quite a financial feat.

-Is amused how democracy only applies to the people who make them and no one else-

The navy was just some boats and the air force a couple of small planes. No specific data however. Their army is still a little strong however.

009.005
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

People wanting more democracy in states where free speech isn't allowed are terrorists. East Germany anyone?

The forbidden months are the 10th, 11th, 12th, and 1st. This Aya, according to many Islamic scholars, generally gives permission to kill pagans if they haven't surrendered either in a seige or ongoing conflict after this period has gone by (and this complete period must go by). Killing and pillage was very common, and is still practised till this day (Rwandan genocide), With this aya, if an enemy pagan army surrendered within the four month period, and converted, no punishment can be enforced on them. Generally, mass-slaying in post-Islamic history was very uncommon, to my knowledge, 2 cities in Iran, and one Jewish tribe (sentenced by another Jewish tribe, approved by Muhammed) in Medina. Both cities had revolted thrice, and the Jewish tribe broke their alliance in the thick of battle.

hmm..I can't recall the name of the city, but the Alawite rulers in Syria killed tens of thousands of Sunni in an attack on the city. I think it was some time during the 70s/80s. Saddam Hussein al Tikriti...well we know about him... Important thing, these were acts of a government, not a religion.

There's a big difference in culture, which makes it hard to understand each other. Case in point (illustration only, just don't get it myself)

During one of the journeys of the original Muslims (including Mohammed Al Quraesh (sp?), a daughter was left in the desert, and the fact was not discovered until much later. One of the men went back for her, and brought her back to the group. Since this was overnight, it was considered a horribly shameful act on his part. We don't see a problem with that, because of Western ethics. But it wasn't 'right'.

Also, what does 'Ahlan Wusalan'? Is it Shi'a or Sunni greeting?

There is no need for war and conversion anymore, but how many of the "mujahideen" care though? They are mentally disturbed into thinking that by forcing a people to convert they are doing a service to their religion when in fact it contradicts it.

There has been many cases by Muslim tribes which killed/converted inhabitants of a city. It was the way back then.





Hama Massacre. It was against the Muslim Brotherhood who hid inside the city after an assassination attempt of President Assad.

I didn't know the mujahideen were forcing people to convert. That's news to me. There are always cases of forced conversion, no doubt about that, but never on a massive scale.

you are aware that there are many streams in the islam, just like in christianity. all these streams have somewhat different interprentation of their religion, also might there not be the possibility that some groups consist out of muslim members but fight for because of political ideals.

Well if Muslims owned and ran 98% of the media we would all be encouraged to want to hate and round up Jews, 911 would be reported as being carried out by 16 members of Mossad, and we wouldnt be horrified at an illegal occupation of Israel by American and British troops.

Best thing tod od with propogander is to ignore it and think for yourself.