Wow a guy from the country where the genocide of Jews occurred is now trying to tell Muslims that they are barbaric individuals. LOL
your country is the reason Jews had to move to the Palestine in the first place.If only your country didn't do that "barbaric" act then there would be no war in Palestine.Your country's Nazis killed countless of innocent people and half a century ago your country played a major role in the world war.You don't have a right to write a single thing on these kind of matters
As Yasir arafat said "Whoever stands by a just cause cannot possibly be called a terrorist".The actions by Palestine is just a retaliation in response to Israel's actions.You should have to clear the shit out of your mind otherwise you won't get anything.
Do you really believe that because he lives in a country in which many jews were killed he should not be allowed to express his opinion? btw many Arabs were in favor of Nazi Germany...
btw. Jews started to migrate long before the Nazi Party in Germany was founded... and about a Million were expelled from "Arab-Countries" the Arab League decided in 1946 to boycott all Jewish citizens living in Arab countries. With the United Nations adopting the Partition Plan (November 1947) riots broke across the Arab world against Jewish communities. Jewish shops and synagogues were ransacked and burned, hundreds of Jews were killed and thousands were imprisoned.
With the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, the Arab League's Political Committee convened and formulated recommendations for all Arab and Muslim countries which specified how to treat Jews in those countries. Among other things the document stated the Jews should be deprived of their citizenship as they were considered citizens of the newly established Jewish state. Assets were seized, bank accounts were frozen and property worth millions of dollars was nationalized. Jews were excluded from government ministries, restricted entry to public service causing many to lose their means of subsistence.
The anti-Jewish trend only increased over time, and an organized plan of oppression and persecution was implemented against the Jews in Arab countries. Between 1948 and 1951, about 850,000 Jews were expelled or, as explained above, forced out of Arab countries, and became refugees. In fact, a two-way migration of populations began, along with the creation of two different refugee groups. The Arab nations, led by the Arab League, were responsible for causing both groups of refugees, Jews and Palestinians.
The ratio between the two refugee groups was 2:3, with the Palestinian group numbering around 600,000 as opposed to the Jewish refugees, which numbered about 850,000 (up until 1968), and their descendents now account for about one half of the population of the State of Israel.
Another important aspect of this subject is that of lost property. A 2008 study estimated that the ratio of lost property stands at almost 1:2; the Palestinian refugees lost property totaling roughly 450 million dollars (in today's prices around $3.9 billion) whereas the Jewish refugees lost property totaling 700 million dollars (around $6 billion dollars).
there are 10% christians in most countries of the middle east??:
Algeria: 98 % Muslims
Comoros: 98 % Muslims
Djibouti: 94 % Muslims
Egypt: 90 % Muslims
Iraq: 95 % Muslims
Jordan: 93 % Muslims
... I am tired of looking it up, but be my guest and tell me in which Arab Countries or Countries of the Middle East the Christian population is over 10 %... and then go on and tell me in which of those countries the Christian population hasnt decreased monumentally during the last 100 Years... Why do you think this happened? Did you know that in many "muslim" countries you are put into prison if you want to leave "islam"... young children are indoctrinated with hatred against non muslims...
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
in Saudi-Arabia like in many other muslim-countries Christians arent allowed to practice their religion openly, and are treated like criminals...
@Strict
You dont know anything about Islam because that means peace you dumb ass. Also no one is sick of Islam maybe ignorant ****s like you. Anyways your arguments are complete garbage and I think a rock would have more use for a brain then you. Enough said.
really? Islam means peace? I always thought it translates into submission... but maybe the dicionary is broken... And well insulting other ppl - is this the way u were raised or does it come from "the religion of peace" and why do you think Muslims always have to empathize on "the religion of peace" shouldn't the ppl who believe in Allah show with their acions that they are peaceful?
obviously there are terrorists and they should all be killed
do you really think that all terrorists should be killed? I guess Israel is doing a great job, isnt it... maybe the solution could be an education free of islamistic bullshit..
Yes I know about Islam more than you. And no where Islam or its religious scholars support the killings of Non-Muslims. During the time os Prophet Muhammad(sm) It was the non-muslims who started the wars. If you don't believe me, go check the history. Muslims only fought them for self defence
relly have u been there? How do you know that? and even if that were true what about the invasion into spain and france... or eastern europe... India was attacked over a long period of time... Persians were attacked... so I guess u just believe what u are told without using ur own brain.
if a woman in Pakistan is raped why is it the fault of the woman? and why are they stoned to death... which is true for many other states of the "the religion of peace"
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
Show me where Islamic scholars supported the killings of non-muslim. And don;t give me the reference of Iran
How could that be if Islam says that Christians whose lands are invaded by Muslims and conquered by force are not allowed to build new churches or even to renovate the destroyed ones? This was what Islam said, and this was the verdict of Umar Ibn al-Khattab who was known as the Just Caliph, as he was called by Muslims.
Tell us where equality is if a non-Muslim’s testimony is not acceptable or even allowed in court against Muslims or even against other non-Muslims, as the most famous Muslim scholars indicate? And of course, non-Muslims do not have the right to assume leading jobs in the state.
Tell us where the justice and equality is in Islam when a Muslim’s life is spared even if he kills a Christian intentionally while a Muslim may only be required to die if he assassinates another Muslim. The reason, as Muhammad said is that "only Muslims’ blood is regarded equal." Thus, no Muslim should be killed for murdering a non-Muslim. If Muhammad says–according to all scholars–that "only Muslims’ blood is equal" (have the same value), we have the right to ask, "Where, then, is equality?" Muhammad says to us, "I meant the equality between a Muslim and another Muslim and not between a Muslim and a non-Muslim."
On the other hand, we will see that if a non-Muslim merely curses a Muslim, he must either be sentenced to death or be converted to Islam! However, if a Muslim murders a non-Muslim, he will only pay a fine.
Abu Al-Ala Al-Mawdudi’s View: Discrimination is Necessary!
In his book, "Rights of Non-Muslims in Islamic States" which has been translated into many languages, this great scholar asserts that we should distinguish between the rights of non-Muslims and the rights of Muslims. On pp. 2-3, Abu Ala al-Mawdudi says:
"An Islamic state ... is by its very nature bound to distinguish between Muslims and non-Muslims, and, in an honest and upright manner, not only publicly declares this state of affairs but also precisely states what rights will be conferred upon its non-Muslim citizens and which of them will not be enjoyed by them."
Now let us analyze the rights which are not supposed to be conferred on non-Muslims We will witness the worst practices of racial discrimination and religious segregation.
A Muslim Must Not Be Sentenced To Death For Murdering A Non Believer
Muhammad himself gives justification for this. He says only Muslims’ have blood that is alike; thus a Muslim should not be put to death for murdering a non-Muslim but must pay a blood feud to the family of the murdered man. As expected, the great Muslim legists and scholars such as Ibn Timiyya, Ibn Hazm, Al-Shafii, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Al-Jalalan, Al-Bukhari and Muslim agree on this important point.
Ibn Timiyya
Ibn Timiyya emphasizes forcefully in Volume 14,
"Nothing in the law of Muhammad states that the blood of the disbeliever is equal to the blood of the Muslim because faith is necessary for equality. The people of the Covenant (Jews or Christians) do not believe in Muhammad and Islam, thus their blood and the Muslim’s blood cannot be equal. These are distinctive texts which indicate that a Muslim is not to be put to death for (murdering) one of the people of the covenant or an unbeliever, but a free Muslim must be killed for a free Muslim, regardless of the race" (Vol. 14, p. 85).
He reiterates the same statement (Vol. 20, p. 282) that a Muslim must not be killed for one of the people of the covenant; that is, a Christian or a Jew
The Imam al-Shafii
In section one of "Ahkam al-Qur’an" ("The Ordinances of the Qur’an", page 275), he says: "A Muslim is not to be killed for an unbeliever". Then he says (page 284),
"If a believer murders an unbeliever, he has to pay blood feud to the Jew or Christian which is one-third of the blood feud of the believer, though Malik says it must be one half."
Ibn Timiyya inclines towards Malik’s opinion and indicates (Vol. 20, p. 385) that:
"The blood feud should be one half because this is what was transmitted by tradition about the prophet Muhammad and as the Sunnis said also."
Whether the blood feud is one third or one half is not important. What really matters is that a Muslim is not to be put to death for a non-Muslim. Despite the disagreement among the Muslim scholars about the actual amount of the blood feud to be paid, the important thing is that the blood feud of the unbeliever is less than the blood feud of the believer, and that a Muslim is not to be put to death for a non-Muslim.
Of course, if a Muslim murders another Muslim, the murderer must be sentenced to death because he assassinated another Muslim. According to al-Shafii, in this case the victim’s relatives have the option either to accept a blood feud or to kill the criminal. However, if the murdered is non-Muslim, his relatives have no choice but to accept the blood feud ("The Ordinances of the Qur’an", Sect. I, pp. 180, 279).
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya
In his book, "Zad-al-Maad" (Sec. III, p.124), he says:
"Muslim blood is alike (has the same value). A Muslim is not to be put to death for killing an unbeliever."
"Sahih" of Al-Bukhari and" Sahih of Muslim"
These are two authorized books acknowledged by all Islam scholars pertaining to Muhammad’s sayings. We read in Part 9 of al-Bukhari’s book (p. 16,) "A Muslim is not to be sentenced to death for an unbeliever." He stresses that this is also the opinion of Ali Ibn Abi Talib.
In "Sahih of Muslim" interpreted by Nawawi (Part 4, p. 244), we read,
"A Muslim is not to be sentenced to death for one of the people of the covenant nor for a free man or a slave."
Hamas wouldn't stop but people wouldn't mind israel as much as now, i don't hate jews and im pretty sure a lot of people don't there's always people who will hate on a race or a religion if they cooperated from the start rather than stalling negotiations and bombing palestine, the situation would've been totally different, the only reason lots of people hate jews now is because of Israel.
How would you react if ppl would shoot rockets at you, try to drive you over or try to stab you with a knife?
People hate Israel because they are indoctrinated to hate Jews. I bet most of the Jew-Haters havent even met one or given a chance to get to know him...