Bomb explosions at Brusselrs airport - 17 dead, 2 wounded

[Hawker]

Nope, I'm not saying it's biased, I'm just saying what those muslims believe isn't correct. Sure, You can say "but it's their interpretation", and you would be right ... BUT, the verses of the Quran are basically examplified in the life of the Prophet and his close companions, and yet they never did anything you or those statistics claim they did and/or supported, EI raping woman to humiliate them or abusing woman.

So Mohammed wasn't a child molester (married a 6-year old) and didn't decapitate hundreds of people?

 

[CrimsonReaper]

I explicitly used statistics from non-Islamic countries such as France, England, Germany etc. The issues I adressed are much worse in the Islamic countries.

But no matter what poll or research I post, no matter how credible it is, you label it as unreliable and biased. That's a really one sided view if anything. You don't accept any critisism nor do you admit the problems. Therefore there's no point in these discussions so please stay inside your bubble.

rape is high in islamic countries?? holy shit you're absolutely ignorant

 

[Made in Heaven]

Actually you are wrong:

10. Muslims must hate non-believers

Quran 3:32 – “Obey Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad); but if they turn away, then indeed, Allah does not love the disbelievers.”

Doesn't say that anywhere here. It says that God doesn't like disbelievers. You blind or something?

9. Muslims must discriminate against unbelievers

Quran 48:29 – “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful amongst themselves.”

Forceful is a bad translation. the word used is Ashidda, which is more close to Firm or Strong. As for context, which you seem to get a turn on when ignoring; this refers to the non-muslims who were persecuting and harming the muslims, so therefore, it fits within that context.

8. Muslims can rape women, so long as they take them as wives or slaves

Quran 4:24 – “And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hand possess.”

I cannot express how baffled I am that you actually, whole-heartedly, genuinely, for real, seriously believe this to be true. *** without consent is not a thing. Whether it be one's wife or slave. A man can't have *** with a woman without consent.

7. Muslims must persecute those who are against the establishment of an Islamic State

Quran 5:33 – “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruptin is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”

No where in the verse does it mention establishing an islamic state of persecution, as it clearly only mentions fighting those who cause corruption. Again, are you blind?

6. Muslims must slaughter anyone who won’t convert to Islam

Quran 9:5 – “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

Wow, you're still trying to convince yourself Islam forces Muslims to kill those who don't convert despite the numerous times I've proven you wrong with numerous examples? You're really something special.

The verse, again, put into context, that you love to ignore, is in a time where the non-muslims broke a treaty they had made with the muslims. of course, this is a very brief and simple explanation, as I honestly don't want to waste much time with you, since I'm certain most of what I'm writing will fall on deaf ears anyways.

I also love how you blatantly ignore (or rather, I should say are unaware of, given your lack of knowledge on the subject) the following verse that clearly states that if a non-muslims doesn't want to fight, then don't fight them, and instead take them to a safe place.

5. Muslims can be merciful by forcing Jews and Christians to pay fines and live in apartheid

Quran 9:29 – “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.”

The Muslims have to pay taxes (which is 2.5 percent of their annual income) under the name of "Zakah" to the "Muslim Financial Institute" which all goes to provide welfare to the poor and the needy citizens; from both Muslims and non-Muslims.

The non-Muslims have to pay a varying amount under the name of "Jizyah", which is taxes that don't go to help poor and needy Muslims, but instead, it goes to the government to provide protection for them since they are a minority and as a means for them to practice their religions freely by building Temples or Churches for them.

4. Muslims may slaughter other Muslims

Qruan 9:73 – “O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination.”

WTF You're honestly too much to bare!! XD You'd have to be a lunatic to believe any sort of belief system could thrive for 1400 years with such a law!!! Seriously, I can't express how dumb this is, even for you standards.

3. Muslims must not be peaceful or moderate, but war for Allah

Quran 9:111 – “Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed.”

As shown, this verse is 9:111, same chapter as 9:5, which I already explained was none sense on your part.

2. Muslims should not seek peace unless they have rid their community of unbelievers

Quran 47:35 – “So do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior; and Allah is with you and will never deprive you of [the reward of] your deeds.”

Where does it say that ANYWHERE here? Third time; Are you blind?

1. Peaceful quranic verses were before Allah’s commands of slaughter, and are therefore annulled

Quran 2:106 – “We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?”

Coming from the guy who doesn't even know an iota of the Prophet's life? Yet you're trying to act like you know what verses were or weren't abrogated? TF??? Please don't dip your filthy hands into topics you don't understand. For real.

So Mohammed wasn't a child molester (married a 6-year old) and didn't decapitate hundreds of people?

Nah, my guy. As a matter of fact, I recall explaining these two points to you greatly a couple months back, yet here you are, still insisting what you are saying is right. Which just proves my point; You don't want to learn, you just want to win, and any explanation given to you falls out your ears.

 

[NarutoKage2]

Just leave it Hawker. Please.
They won't understand. They can see the twistable statements with their own eyes and don't understand where the problem is. They just cherry-pick what they want to believe in and claim it to be the "true meaning", while ISIS and other extremists do the exact same thing. You are arguing with walls. :/

And where is the problem, konan x? A book written more than a millennia ago, or people who use it to justify imposing a way of life they deem fit ? The very fact that you and hawker, as atheists would prescribe blame on an ancient fable instead of the actors and everything that(really) causes them to act, is ludicrous. I would imagine that you wouldn't want to give the Quran that much credit.

 

[Hawker]

And where is the problem, konan x? A book written more than a millennia ago, or people who use it to justify imposing a way of life they deem fit ? The very fact that you and hawker, as atheists would prescribe blame on an ancient fable instead of the actors and everything that(really) causes them to act, is ludicrous. I would imagine that you wouldn't want to give the Quran that much credit.

Problem is in both. But without that book good people wouldn't turn evil. If 30% of world's conflicts are about religion, then do we deal with the source of the problems or the people individually?

I also realise that poverty and lack of education are huge factors, but these things do not exist in Europe where refugee flow is focusing on, like they do in developing countries. So we only have the problem of religion here basically.

 

[DominiqueX]

And where is the problem, konan x? A book written more than a millennia ago, or people who use it to justify imposing a way of life they deem fit ? The very fact that you and hawker, as atheists would prescribe blame on an ancient fable instead of the actors and everything that(really) causes them to act, is ludicrous. I would imagine that you wouldn't want to give the Quran that much credit.

As Hawker said, both.
Take away the fuel/the root/ or whatever you want to call it and the barbarians loose their tool to manipulate foolish people that don't have a perspective. Of course the bad things won't dissapear within a day, but the amount of people who do bad things would drastically decrease. It's like a disease, you wouldn't just give medicine to the sick people, the key to get rid of the problem is to eliminate the source.

 

[Hawker]

Spoiler

Doesn't say that anywhere here. It says that God doesn't like disbelievers. You blind or something?



Forceful is a bad translation. the word used is Ashidda, which is more close to Firm or Strong. As for context, which you seem to get a turn on when ignoring; this refers to the non-muslims who were persecuting and harming the muslims, so therefore, it fits within that context.



I cannot express how baffled I am that you actually, whole-heartedly, genuinely, for real, seriously believe this to be true. *** without consent is not a thing. Whether it be one's wife or slave. A man can't have *** with a woman without consent.



No where in the verse does it mention establishing an islamic state of persecution, as it clearly only mentions fighting those who cause corruption. Again, are you blind?


Wow, you're still trying to convince yourself Islam forces Muslims to kill those who don't convert despite the numerous times I've proven you wrong with numerous examples? You're really something special.

The verse, again, put into context, that you love to ignore, is in a time where the non-muslims broke a treaty they had made with the muslims. of course, this is a very brief and simple explanation, as I honestly don't want to waste much time with you, since I'm certain most of what I'm writing will fall on deaf ears anyways.

I also love how you blatantly ignore (or rather, I should say are unaware of, given your lack of knowledge on the subject) the following verse that clearly states that if a non-muslims doesn't want to fight, then don't fight them, and instead take them to a safe place.



The Muslims have to pay taxes (which is 2.5 percent of their annual income) under the name of "Zakah" to the "Muslim Financial Institute" which all goes to provide welfare to the poor and the needy citizens; from both Muslims and non-Muslims.

The non-Muslims have to pay a varying amount under the name of "Jizyah", which is taxes that don't go to help poor and needy Muslims, but instead, it goes to the government to provide protection for them since they are a minority and as a means for them to practice their religions freely by building Temples or Churches for them.



WTF You're honestly too much to bare!! XD You'd have to be a lunatic to believe any sort of belief system could thrive for 1400 years with such a law!!! Seriously, I can't express how dumb this is, even for you standards.



As shown, this verse is 9:111, same chapter as 9:5, which I already explained was none sense on your part.


Where does it say that ANYWHERE here? Third time; Are you blind?



Coming from the guy who doesn't even know an iota of the Prophet's life? Yet you're trying to act like you know what verses were or weren't abrogated? TF??? Please don't dip your filthy hands into topics you don't understand. For real.



Nah, my guy. As a matter of fact, I recall explaining these two points to you greatly a couple months back, yet here you are, still insisting what you are saying is right. Which just proves my point; You don't want to learn, you just want to win, and any explanation given to you falls out your ears.

So you are focusing on semantics here (the titles) when the passages are what's important.

If you say: Forceful --> strong then that is not a big deal and doesn't change the message in that passage.

Part 8,4 and 3 aren't true then?

"kill the polytheists wherever you find them " you didn't refute this.

"fight those who do not believe in Allah" you didn't refute this.

"o do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior" You did not refute this.

So you didn't refute the most violent and oppressive passages, but you focused on irrelevant stuff and ad hominems. If those are true then that's enough for me to condemn Koran.

 

[shelke]

I left, like, a long post two pages back. I would advise people to read it.

 

[Made in Heaven]

So you are focusing on semantics here (the titles) when the passages are what's important.

You must be really special in the head if you're trying to imply those titles weren't supposed to reference the verses.

If you say: Forceful --> strong then that is not a big deal and doesn't change the message in that passage.

Forceful and Strong/Firm have very different connotations. Not to mention I already gave you the context.

Part 8,4 and 3 aren't true then?

Isn't that what I was aiming to prove?

"kill the polytheists wherever you find them " you didn't refute this.

They broke a treaty. Very basic explanation, so try reading up more on an actual Islamic site.

"fight those who do not believe in Allah" you didn't refute this.

You must be registered for see links

"o do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior" You did not refute this.

Simply , this means if a person attacks you first in war , you should fire back . And if you edge close to win the war and they asked for peace - after they started attacking you ! - then you shouldn't accept it . You should keep going until they surrender . That makes sense doesn't it ? Would you just pull your forces back after they declared war on you just to have them start attacking you as soon as your back is turned again?

 

[Filosoofis]

The world is turning to shit. RIP everyone. There was also a terrorist attack in Turkey a couple days ago, wheres the thread about that?

I made a thread so stop crying

 

[NarutoKage2]

Problem is in both. But without that book good people wouldn't turn evil. If 30% of world's conflicts are about religion, then do we deal with the source of the problems or the people individually?

I also realise that poverty and lack of education are huge factors, but these things do not exist in Europe where refugee flow is focusing on, like they do in developing countries. So we only have the problem of religion here basically.

However when the refugees/Muslims/w.e come from those countries (as fully grown ADULTS no less) then the condition of things like education over 'there' has to be a part of your discourse. Because its what shaped their attitudes, its the real 'root of evil', so to speak. W/o putting it into that context your making invalid and irrelevant connections, and furthermore the problem never gets solved.

As Hawker said, both.
Take away the fuel/the root/ or whatever you want to call it and the barbarians loose their tool to manipulate foolish people that don't have a perspective. Of course the bad things won't dissapear within a day, but the amount of people who do bad things would drastically decrease. It's like a disease, you wouldn't just give medicine to the sick people, the key to get rid of the problem is to eliminate the source.

So if the religion of Islam disappeared from the face of the earth , suicide bombings and bigoted attitudes would as well? Too bad we have the suicide bombing Tamil tigers in sri Lanka, and Burma's ethnic cleansing junta still.

You're picking on a beggar on the street, and beating him to death for stinking w.o realizing that his poverty is why he can't afford to not stink. Bigotry doesn't need a holy book, it needs socio economic conditions, just read up Germany pre world war 2 for instance.

 

[Yatori]

So you are focusing on semantics here (the titles) when the passages are what's important.

If you say: Forceful --> strong then that is not a big deal and doesn't change the message in that passage.

Part 8,4 and 3 aren't true then?

"kill the polytheists wherever you find them " you didn't refute this.

"fight those who do not believe in Allah" you didn't refute this.

"o do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior" You did not refute this.

So you didn't refute the most violent and oppressive passages, but you focused on irrelevant stuff and ad hominems. If those are true then that's enough for me to condemn Koran.

Every message in Quran didnt comes only in 1 verse. You need to read whole book to grasp the meaning of it. Now what you doing is like there is 1 page of essay but you only emphasize of certain sentence which is not right I think(means the meaning of it can be manipulated). You need to read whole surahs(chapter) to understand the whole meaning of it.

 

[paratise]

Spoiler

Incidents like these bring out the xenophobes out of the woodworks. Europe is creating the cycle of hate itself. This is what happens with you start an arms race and spread conflict and unrest, leaving millions dead to elevate your economy. Such things always find their way back home, and people not responsible, end up suffering.

P.s: Oh look, Haker back to promoting his nauseating Eurocentrism with his head too far up his behind to see the reality of the Extremism and the hideously ugly and true face of this civilized Man behind the mask of “democratic peace;” Pinker’s true philosophy for world’s progress. Am I right, man?



Right ... let's forget about the deliberate hanging and mass killings of the knights at the Curch's hands that cleaned up the whole deal. You might want to brush up on that history, as it's all over the place.

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

You must be registered for see links

And these are just for Christians. There have been mass slaughters of Muslims elsewhere as well:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Spoiler

China’s leading News Agency Xinhua has reportedly unmarked graves in Poonch, in the Indian occupied Kashmir.

Let us observe some political niceties of Indian troops:

Latest PDF Report on the provision of rights in J&K, along with victims accounts and legal difficultis and political propaganda of Indian government to brush such crimes under the rug:

Title: Failures in accountability for
human rights violations by
security force personnel in
Jammu and Kashmir

(It can be easily downloaded by typing the exact title on google search engine.)

You must be registered for see links

Then we have this:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Yeah, I have the wikileaks news as well:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

This has been confirmed by several others. I will highlight two of them:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Yeah, clearly this doesn't fit into the mold of ethnic cleansing at all. I was out of my mind when I so 'lightly and off-handedly' use the term, when I have yet to even remotely touch upon those people who ran from J&K, forcefully evicted from their homes by the morally up-right Indian troops. There are hundreds of reports on this issue, if only you take off your Indian blinders and look at the facts. Bu they seem to be glued on pretty firmly.

Try to accept the atrocities done at the hands of your own country, and move on. I won't be taking apart in this pointless discussion, but your pro-Indian mentality is clearly all over the place. Don't try to shuffle it off, if called out on it. Before you bring Pakistan into this, then I am well aware of their despicable and heinous war crimes against innocent people in now what is named Bangladesh. I am not that intentionally ignorant or woefully presumptuous.

Chechnya ... Russia ... what the ****, man?

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

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Let us look at more western peace initiatives in other regions:

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Oh look, the peaceful humanity making billions by shipping weapons to fuel more blood shed and keep the flames of war burning:

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

Your Eurocentrism and western exceptionalism is ****ing despicable. Russia deliberately used its VETO rights to thwart the recognition of these crimes as genocides and ethnic cleanings. Few people die in Europe and all hell breaks loose. Millions upon millions are systematically slaughtered by these regimes and no one bats an eye. You people will never garner any sympathy with such a disgusting attitude and lopsided, hypocritical humanity.

How many has west killed in the name of its disgusting political policies in the last ten years alone? It has killed millions, and count continues to rise because of the conflict it has deliberately created to horde the natural resources. If you know basic mathematics or even stats, then this number you are accusing of presenting a “barbaric” picture of a group of individuals is literally worthless.

This gauge clearly shows that western, European and white supremacists are infinitely more barbaric, heinous and uncultured that you would have believe yourself. Take off those blinders … for the love of god, this thread …

I also love the fact how you have restricted extremism to religion, when western politics are their own brand of heinous extremism that known no equal. But alas, a common man isn’t bright enough to connect the dots here or isn’t bright enough to let go of the garb of exceptionalism and jingoistic adoration. I feel like spiting at the corner of my room; this thread is that disgusting.

Thank you. Tbh Chechenya massacares and deportations is brink of crimes under Russia, Soviets in particular.

You must be registered for see links

.

Majority of British people think British empire is soemthing to be proud of:

You must be registered for see links

Majority of Westerns think this way regards to attacks in East:

You must be registered for see images

72% percent of Americans supported war against Iraq...in which 1,5 millon people died:

You must be registered for see links

Middle East was chopped up by colonial powers 100 years ago, Syria would be French territory, Iraq would be British. Yeap that was what mattered:

You must be registered for see images

If you want to blabber about "stats" and "facts" we can bring everything to the table. That way we can see how ubiquitous barbarism is.

 

[Dark Sonic]

The world is turning to shit.

ain't that the truth U_U

Thank you. Tbh Chechenya massacares and deportations is brink of crimes under Russia, Soviets in particular.

You must be registered for see links

.

Majority of British people think British empire is soemthing to be proud of:

You must be registered for see links

Majority of Westerns think this way regards to attacks in East:

You must be registered for see images

72% percent of Americans supported war against Iraq...in which 1,5 millon people died:

You must be registered for see links

Middle East was chopped up by colonial powers 100 years ago, Syria would be French territory, Iraq would be British. Yeap that was what mattered:

You must be registered for see images

If you want to blabber about "stats" and "facts" we can bring everything to the table.

Yeah that Ottoman Empire couldn't magically disappear lol

 

[DominiqueX]

So if the religion of Islam disappeared from the face of the earth , suicide bombings and bigoted attitudes would as well? Too bad we have the suicide bombing Tamil tigers in sri Lanka, and Burma's ethnic cleansing junta still.

You're picking on a beggar on the street, and beating him to death for stinking w.o realizing that his poverty is why he can't afford to not stink. Bigotry doesn't need a holy book, it needs socio economic conditions, just read up Germany pre world war 2 for instance.

Uhm..

[...]Of course the bad things won't dissapear within a day, but the amount of people who do bad things would drastically decrease.[...]

I never said this sh!t would completely vanish if religion, especially Islam, would change or if it was gone forever. But that would be still a great first step. Like I said in one of my earlier posts in this thread, the integration of immigrants has to improve a lot as well. And these unstable people without a perspective (who get manipulated by the barbaric creatures of terrorism) in their lives need to get a perspective, as soon as possible. They have to get education and a well-payed job, and must not live in ghettos together with other immigrants.

 

[Hawker]

Spoiler

You must be really special in the head if you're trying to imply those titles weren't supposed to reference the verses.


Forceful and Strong/Firm have very different connotations. Not to mention I already gave you the context.


Ofcourse the titles were meant to reference to the verses, but you didn't quite get them.


They broke a treaty. Very basic explanation, so try reading up more on an actual Islamic site.

You must be registered for see links

Simply , this means if a person attacks you first in war , you should fire back . And if you edge close to win the war and they asked for peace - after they started attacking you ! - then you shouldn't accept it . You should keep going until they surrender . That makes sense doesn't it ? Would you just pull your forces back after they declared war on you just to have them start attacking you as soon as your back is turned again?

"10. Muslims must hate non-believers
Quran 3:32 – “Obey Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad); but if they turn away, then indeed, Allah does not love the disbelievers.”

You say it doesn't say muslims must hate non-believers, but this is where you are intentionally misunderstanding this. If it is said that Allah does not love disbelievers then it is also implied that muslims must not also love them because of their faith. <-- anyway you look at this it's a shitty morality because it teaches you that people who are not part of your religion do not deserve your affection.

7. Muslims must persecute those who are against the establishment of an Islamic State
Quran 5:33 – “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption s none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”

If one of muslims main objects is to form an Islamic state then wouldn't striving corruption go against that agenda? And you are right cutting limbs isn't persectution, it's WORSE, it's torture and murder. Again you intentionally misinterpreted that part.

2. Muslims should not seek peace unless they have rid their community of unbelievers
Quran 47:35 – “So do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior; and Allah is with you and will never deprive you of [the reward of] your deeds.”

You ask where does it say that? The passage implies that as long as you a believer of Allar are superior, don't strive for peace. Superior meaning you have someone to compare yourself to, meaning a disbeliever. Again you misinterpeted this.

These are all really shitty passages. And my point was from the beginning that jihadists are using these shitty passages as an excuse. You didn't refute this point.

Let me put it this way: If I actually start digging and finding verses from Koran then are you saying that I won't find any controversial or barbaric verses there that the Islamists and fundamentalists are using to justify their actions? Answer me yes or no.

 

[demon of the leaf]

ain't that the truth U_U



Yeah that Ottoman Empire couldn't magically disappear lol

The ottoman empire was already dying due to bad campains and civil wars they joined world war 1 intent on regaining territory lost to russia in a war prior to ww1 during that time the ottoman was known as the sick man of Europe

 

[sasukesworld]

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Can't wait till people like this get what they deserve.

Christians made crusades, Jews are killing everybody around their borders (I mean Israel borders), Atheists made gulags and massive deportations/executions. In every religion/ideology there are ggod and smart persons and *******s

But you know why they made them right?
Muslims invaded Europe, so Christians striked back, it's the most understandable thing. I hope it will happen again.

OT: It's really sad, but it will help people to wake up and see what (Muslim) "refugees" really are.

 

[Waindo]

Let's hope he's fine.

Yeah he called in.

 

[Υαmí]

Sigh. ****in' barbarians. Why the hell are these people driven to the point were they commit these atrociates.