Islam Sri Lankan Massacre Revenge

[JosephZ]

I am suggesting in general, prevention is always better than cure. What China is doing is resorting to the most optimal strategy to deal with the inherent potential of evil and violence from any Muslim community and more evidently from that part of the country.

Sad to see you believe rounding up millions and putting them into concentration camps because of their religion is acceptable.

Note again, the emphasis is ALL evil and violence must be addressed down to the individual acts.

Note again, I am interested in the whole gamut and range of evil and violent acts of various degrees. The mentioned of terrorist attacks is only because they are more visible and posed a more obvious immediate greater threat.

Once again, what we are seeing today with the rise in Islamic violence is a recent phenomenon. Prior to 9/11 terrorism in the name of Islam made up only a small percentage of the attacks worldwide (Around 10%). Today most attacks take place in Muslim majority countries where just twenty years ago most took place in majority Christian countries (See image below).

https://cidcm.umd.edu/sites/cidcm.umd.edu/files/exec_sum_2012.pdf

These thousands of attacks were being carried out by people who proclaim Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Muslim countries where most terrorism takes place today like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria rarely experienced terrorism prior to 9/11.

Let's look at the evil the is taking place today in Latin America.

• 51 Dead, 15 beheaded in Acapulco
• Gunmen in western Mexico have killed 12 policemen investigating the beheadings of 10 people.
• ELN Car bomb kills 20 in Columbia
• Latin America is the region with the most female murders on earth
• Mexican drug cartels are worse than ISIL

There is terrorism, beheadings, rape, oppression of women, slavery, and massacres taking place in these predominantly Christian countries. Murder rates are more than ten times higher in these countries than any Muslim country on the planet.

There is also a religious undertone to many of these atrocities taking place in this part of the world as many who carrying them out are followers of a perverted and growing sect of Catholicism.

Over the past 17 years veneration of a Mexican folk saint that personifies death has become the fastest-growing new religious movement in the West. At this point there are no systematic surveys of the precise number of Santa Muerte devotees, but based on 10 years of research in Mexico and the US, we estimate there are some 10 to 12 million followers, with a large majority in Mexico and a significant presence in the United States and Central America.

from the FBI:

Santa Muerte: Inspired and Ritualistic Killings

Historically, Muslim majority regions of the world have been more peaceful than non-Muslim. Europe has had a bloodier history than the Middle East. Violent crime rates are lower today in Muslim majority countries than Christian majority countries.

All the things you claim are unique to Islam have and continue to take place in other societies and religions. Violence, terrorism, forced conversions, etc...

While you believe Islam condones these things, it doesn't, and the vast majority of Muslims agree and will tell you this. In fact tens of thousands have come forward to do this (See my previous posts), but you choose to ignore them and believe what the extremists and anti-Islamic propagandists claim instead. Why is that? Is that even rational?

The fact is, as long as there is Islam and Muslims, there will be evil and violent committed by SOME [ a pool of 300 million!!!] in compliance with the covenanted terms within the ideology of Islam.

It does not matter which more of which group are killed. What is critical here is the ideology of Islam is driving Muslims to kill innocent human beings for being regardless they are 'Muslims' or non-Muslims.

Islam doesn't condone the use of violence against the innocent. What you are describing is not part of the Islamic ideology.

Note my counter argument, appx 80 millions of Hindus and others were killed in India within the 1000 years of Muslim occupation in India. This is very reasonable and I have also provided a list of massarces [wiki] committed by Muslims in India.

First, even the author of the book you get the 80 million from admits that its just an estimate based on census data. There is no way of knowing how the people died during that 1,000 year period. Many were killed at the hands of Islamic imperialist armies and many died from those armies that were countering the imperialists. Most of the deaths during that time period were probably the result of disease and famine.

In addition, what the Islamic imperialists were doing during that period in no different than what Christian and other colonizers were doing. There are also countless massacres recorded that were carried out by European colonizers in their efforts to "Christianize" people in many parts of the world during that same 1,000 year period. What you describe isn't unique to Islam.

I have already provided a pew poll where on average 17% of Muslims [with a range up to 40-50%] supported evil and violent acts on innocent non-Muslims.

And I have provided polls that show more Christians in the US support terrorist attacks against innocent civilians than do Muslims, and Israelis support terror attacks against innocent civilians than do Palestinians.

Since you claim that the 26 to 27% of Christians in America are not true Christians, but the 11% of Muslim polls are true Muslims, then we will never get anywhere with this. You are not using the same measure of judgement against the two groups.

as I had argued many time, they were not wearing their true Christian hats at that time and they are likely be ticked off by God on Judgment Day and you have to leave God to make the wise judgment on this affair.
But note because it is not a true covenant terms of Christianity, those evil and violent acts will not be repeated by other Christians as a Christian doctrine to kill millions as condone by Jesus and God.

But these Christian terrorists are justifying their actions by taking verses from the Bible just as Islamic terrorist justify their actions by taking verses from the Qur'an.

Muslims say that Islam doesn't condone violence and those who carry out acts of terrorism do not represent Islam yet some non-Muslims would disagree with that statement.

Christians say that Christianity doesn't condone violence and those who carry out acts of terrorism are not Christians, yet some non-Christians would disagree with that statement.

Once again you are not using a fair measure of judgement.

On the other hand, Muslims as covenanted will continue to kill non-Muslims in God's name as a divine duty to gain greater security for salvation.

There is no such teaching in Islam. Only extremists teach this way.

All the well known Ahadiths compiler and scholars of the past expounded and interpret the Quran in a very literal sense.
Note sunna.com -&nbspSunna Resources and Information.
It is only in modern times where evil and violent acts are commonly condemned that some scholars have given their own spin that the Quran is positive and contain no evil and violent elements. But their opinions are not objective in alignment with the verses in the Quran.

You are even misinterpreting what the Islamic scholars of the past and the hadiths teach. Muslims historically have always rejected the violent teachings of extremists.

I have argued, no humans on earth can insist what is right or wrong in the interpretation of the Quranic verses.

Then again, why do you choose to reject the words and actions of the vast Majority of Muslims in world including those of leading scholars and clerics and choose to accept the words and actions of the fewer than 1% of those who are considered to be Islamic extremists by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike?

I have already provided listing and videos of the history of terror committed by Islamists throughout the 1400++ years history of Islam.

You have provided content and material from well known anti-Islamic propagandists based on an intentionally distorted view of history.

 

[Joyousperson]

Sad to see you believe rounding up millions and putting them into concentration camps because of their religion is acceptable.

The term 'concentration camp' was used as if the treatments of the Muslims were like the concentration camps of the Nazi and Japanese as in WWW II. I would not agree with such tactics. It is sad you're are so blind in believing in what is reported in the media.
In this case, SOME of the Muslims were sent for training to equip them with skills so they are not jobless and be easy targets for extremist recruitment. In addition, these mainly youths are educated to be mindful of extremist ideas and this is to counter the influence of the very active extremists present within the county and outside China. As I had stated this is the most optimal strategy.

Once again, what we are seeing today with the rise in Islamic violence is a recent phenomenon. Prior to 9/11 terrorism in the name of Islam made up only a small percentage of the attacks worldwide (Around 10%). Today most attacks take place in Muslim majority countries where just twenty years ago most took place in majority Christian countries (See image below).

You agreed every act of evil and violence act must be addressed.
If you know Islamic evil and violence is on the rise at present why are you not giving it attention, but rather shift the focus to Christians and Christianity?
Are you suggesting we ignore these evil and violent acts by Islamist but instead focus on Christians and Christianity.

Note what is critical is to address every types and each act of evil and violence. To be effective, we must trace these evil and violence to their root cause.

In this case of the OP, it is the Sri Lanka terrorist attacks by Islamists.
You are GOING OFF topic by introducing Christians and Christianity.

View attachment 256788
https://cidcm.umd.edu/sites/cidcm.umd.edu/files/exec_sum_2012.pdf

These thousands of attacks were being carried out by people who proclaim Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Muslim countries where most terrorism takes place today like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria rarely experienced terrorism prior to 9/11.

Let's look at the evil the is taking place today in Latin America.

• 51 Dead, 15 beheaded in Acapulco
• Gunmen in western Mexico have killed 12 policemen investigating the beheadings of 10 people.
• ELN Car bomb kills 20 in Columbia
• Latin America is the region with the most female murders on earth
• Mexican drug cartels are worse than ISIL

There is terrorism, beheadings, rape, oppression of women, slavery, and massacres taking place in these predominantly Christian countries. Murder rates are more than ten times higher in these countries than any Muslim country on the planet.

There is also a religious undertone to many of these atrocities taking place in this part of the world as many who carrying them out are followers of a perverted and growing sect of Catholicism.

Over the past 17 years veneration of a Mexican folk saint that personifies death has become the fastest-growing new religious movement in the West. At this point there are no systematic surveys of the precise number of Santa Muerte devotees, but based on 10 years of research in Mexico and the US, we estimate there are some 10 to 12 million followers, with a large majority in Mexico and a significant presence in the United States and Central America.

from the FBI:

Santa Muerte: Inspired and Ritualistic Killings

Note bring in Christians and Christianity is OFF TOPIC.

In any case, I have argued, evil and violent acts committed by Christians has nothing to do with Christianity and these people were not wearing the Christian hats as Christian-proper in the instance they committed the evil and violent acts.

Historically, Muslim majority regions of the world have been more peaceful than non-Muslim. Europe has had a bloodier history than the Middle East. Violent crime rates are lower today in Muslim majority countries than Christian majority countries.

All the things you claim are unique to Islam have and continue to take place in other societies and religions. Violence, terrorism, forced conversions, etc...

While you believe Islam condones these things, it doesn't, and the vast majority of Muslims agree and will tell you this. In fact tens of thousands have come forward to do this (See my previous posts), but you choose to ignore them and believe what the extremists and anti-Islamic propagandists claim instead. Why is that? Is that even rational?

All evils and violent acts must be addressed but note this OP [thread] is about attacks by Islamists only. The concern here is to find out the root causes.

Yes, I have argued the attacks by Islamists are influenced and compelled by the ideology of Islam itself as obligated by the covenanted terms of their covenant with Allah. You are ignoring this critical point.
The covenanted terms contains loads of evil and violent element which Muslims are obliged to comply with to earn salvation.
I have presented objective and rational supporting evidences from the Quran.

Islam doesn't condone the use of violence against the innocent. What you are describing is not part of the Islamic ideology.

I have provided rational arguments with empirical evidences.

First, even the author of the book you get the 80 million from admits that its just an estimate based on census data. There is no way of knowing how the people died during that 1,000 year period.

You are lost here.
80 million is a conservation estimates based on the list of massacres provided and many killings are not recorded.
If say, the 80 million is not accurate, even if it is one million, that is a also a critical quantum of concern.
The root cause of the evil and violence is from the ideology of Islam and as long as the ideology of Islam is active, the evil and violence will be repeated by SOME Muslims till eternity.

Many were killed at the hands of Islamic imperialist armies and many died from those armies that were countering the imperialists. Most of the deaths during that time period were probably the result of disease and famine.

In addition, what the Islamic imperialists were doing during that period in no different than what Christian and other colonizers were doing. There are also countless massacres recorded that were carried out by European colonizers in their efforts to "Christianize" people in many parts of the world during that same 1,000 year period. What you describe isn't unique to Islam.

And I have provided polls that show more Christians in the US support terrorist attacks against innocent civilians than do Muslims, and Israelis support terror attacks against innocent civilians than do Palestinians.

What is unique to Islam is its inherent ideology that contains loads of evil and violent elements did contribute to the killing of non-Muslims under various other reasons.

You are so desperate in comparing with other types of killings which is not relevant to the topic.
Note this is a "to quoque" fallacy which reflect your intellectual honesty.
Tu quoque - Wikipedia

Since you claim that the 26 to 27% of Christians in America are not true Christians, but the 11% of Muslim polls are true Muslims, then we will never get anywhere with this. You are not using the same measure of judgement against the two groups.

But these Christian terrorists are justifying their actions by taking verses from the Bible just as Islamic terrorist justify their actions by taking verses from the Qur'an.

I have argued this point extensively in this thread,
Who is a Christian
Who is a Christian?

My argument is grounded and objective and I have applied the same principles and rationale to both Christianity-Christian and Islam-Muslims.

Muslims say that Islam doesn't condone violence and those who carry out acts of terrorism do not represent Islam yet some non-Muslims would disagree with that statement.

It is not what the majority Muslims said that count.
What counts is whether the arguments and evidences are objective or not.

Note the past, the majority of the Abrahamic believers has claimed the Sun Goes Round the Earth [geocentrism] as opposed to heliocentric with the Earth as the orbitting the Sun.
Subsequently 99.99% of the Abrahamic believers would accept the objective truth, it is the earth that orbit the Sun and not the other way round.
So it is objective evidence that counts not what the majority believes.​

In this case of Islamic driven evil and violence, my approach is objective based on what is in the holy texts of each religion in relation to the acts of the believers.

Christians say that Christianity doesn't condone violence and those who carry out acts of terrorism are not Christians, yet some non-Christians would disagree with that statement.

Why do you rely so much on the views of non-Christians?
What is critical is the views and conclusion must be objective and supported by empirical evidence of texts from the holy books.

Once again you are not using a fair measure of judgement.

Show me where I am not objective in my comparison, i.e. Islam is inherently evil and Christianity is inherently good in this perspective.

There is no such teaching in Islam. Only extremists teach this way.

Again, I have presented evidences that are objective.

You are even misinterpreting what the Islamic scholars of the past and the hadiths teach. Muslims historically have always rejected the violent teachings of extremists.

Are you sure?
I have to say you are very ignorant of the truths surrounding the evil and violence condoned by most Islamic scholars. I suggest you read widely on this matter from all angles to gather the truths of the matter.
Note this one [among many] article with supporting evidences;
Facing Jihad in the <i>Shari'ah</i>

Then again, why do you choose to reject the words and actions of the vast Majority of Muslims in world including those of leading scholars and clerics and choose to accept the words and actions of the fewer than 1% of those who are considered to be Islamic extremists by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike?

Then again, my argument is very objective as supported by relevant evidence any one can read and verify.

You have provided content and material from well known anti-Islamic propagandists based on an intentionally distorted view of history.

Again you are very intellectually dishonest. As a Christian I presume you have to be truthful and honest.
But in this case you are merely brushing off the issue with wild unsubstantiated allegations.
The conclusions provided from the site is based on relevant evidences from the Quran and Ahadiths and not invented by the author.
Note you yourself can read and verify to provide counter arguments to the authors views. To merely brush it off a 'know anti-Islamic propagandists' is very irresponsible and dishonest.

 

[JosephZ]

If you know Islamic evil and violence is on the rise at present why are you not giving it attention,

What source do you have showing that Islamic related violence is currently on the rise?

why are you not giving it attention, but rather shift the focus to Christians and Christianity?
Are you suggesting we ignore these evil and violent acts by Islamist but instead focus on Christians and Christianity.

My point in showing you examples of so called Christians and "Christian" terrorists groups committing atrocities is to show you that extremists can hijack any religion and use its holy scriptures to justify their actions. I'm not suggesting we ignore any type of extremism and we need to address all forms of extremism regardless of the ideology behind it. You seem to be the one who is singling out Islamic extremism and ignoring the other types of religious extremism.

Note what is critical is to address every types and each act of evil and violence. To be effective, we must trace these evil and violence to their root cause.

If you would take the time to do some research, you will find that religion is rarely the root cause of violence and extremism. There usually many other factors that go into the equation.

Why do you rely so much on the views of non-Christians?
What is critical is the views and conclusion must be objective and supported by empirical evidence of texts from the holy books.

I look at both the words and actions of people to come to my conclusions regardless of their religious affiliation of lack there of. I see no support for your position about Islam based on the words and actions of the vast majority of the world's 1.8+ billion Muslims in the world, nor from the Qur'an and other Islamic texts available.

Then again, my argument is very objective as supported by relevant evidence any one can read and verify.

Your evidence all comes from notorious anti-Islamic propagandists. You have even used websites like religionofpeace(dot)com to support your arguement. Of course these sources will support your position.

Again you are very intellectually dishonest. As a Christian I presume you have to be truthful and honest.
But in this case you are merely brushing off the issue with wild unsubstantiated allegations.

Yes, I am a Christian, an ambassador of Christ, the Truth. I take honesty and integrity seriously. It's one of the reasons I don't hide behind an anonymous screen name and provide information about myself in my profile. I would never intentionally deceive others on a public forum or anywhere else for that matter. My purpose for sharing what I know about Islam and Muslims is primarily so my brothers and sisters in Christ will not fear this religion and those who follow it. I'm just trying to counter the false narrative the anti-Islamic propagandists are spreading. Their motivations are self serving, divisive, and fuel hatred for others. My motivations are the opposite and are motivated by love for my brothers and sisters in Christ and for all of those who do not know Him yet.

Note you yourself can read and verify to provide counter arguments to the authors views. To merely brush it off a 'know anti-Islamic propagandists' is very irresponsible and dishonest.

Here's a word of truth, those anti-Islamic propagandists don't care about you, me, or anyone else, much less the truth. They are the ones who have no support for their position on Islam and are only parroting what Islamic terrorists and extremists preach. They know this is what sells and they have made lucrative careers out of exploiting the west's ignorance of Islam and what real Muslims actually believe.

Once again I will ask, why do you choose to reject the words and actions of the vast Majority of Muslims in world including those of leading scholars and clerics and choose to accept the words and actions of the fewer than 1% of those who are considered to be Islamic extremists by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike?

Even the anti-Islamic propagandists, who have little to no background in Islam or religious studies, exist in very small numbers and their opinions are rejected by not only Islamic scholars, but also historians and religious scholars from all backgrounds. Why do you choose to believe them over the overwhelming consensus?

 

[JosephZ]

The term 'concentration camp' was used as if the treatments of the Muslims were like the concentration camps of the Nazi and Japanese as in WWW II. I would not agree with such tactics. It is sad you're are so blind in believing in what is reported in the media.
In this case, SOME of the Muslims were sent for training to equip them with skills so they are not jobless and be easy targets for extremist recruitment. In addition, these mainly youths are educated to be mindful of extremist ideas and this is to counter the influence of the very active extremists present within the county and outside China.

Concentration camp: a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution.

Randall Schriver, the US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security, was asked by a reporter to explain why he used "concentration camp terminology." He answered that "given what we understand to be the magnitude of the detention - [with] at least a million but likely closer to three million citizens out of a population of about ten million, so a very significant portion of the population - what's happening there, what the goals are of the Chinese government and their own public comments make that a very, I think, appropriate description."

Former prisoners told us of physical as well as psychological torture in the camps. Entire families had disappeared, and we were told detainees were tortured physically and mentally. We also saw evidence of almost a complete surveillance state in Xinjiang.

Uighur people in particular are subject to intense surveillance and are made to give DNA and biometric samples. Those with relatives in 26 "sensitive" countries have reportedly been rounded up, and up to a million detained. Rights groups say people in camps are made to learn Mandarin Chinese and criticise or renounce their faith.

Members of the Uighur ethnic group want their adopted homeland to take action over China’s internment camps, into which many of their loved ones seem to have disappeared.

Up to 30% of the Muslim population in China is far from being "SOME" Muslims. Also, entire families, women children and the elderly are being rounded up and disappearing in China.

As I had stated this is the most optimal strategy.

It's sad that you would think this is the best option and approve of people being forced against their will into camps where they are brainwashed, tortured, and forced to denounce their faith.

They are also persecuting Christians as well: In China, they’re closing churches, jailing pastors – and even rewriting scripture


Western forces are trying to use Christianity to influence China’s society and even “subvert” the government, a senior official said, warning that Chinese Christians needed to follow a Chinese model of the religion.

“Anti-China forces in the West are trying to continue to influence China’s social stability and even subvert our country’s political power through Christianity, and it is doomed to fail,” he said, speaking to parliament’s largely ceremonial advisory body.

“For individual black sheep who, under the banner of Christianity, participate in subverting national security, we firmly support the country to bring them to justice.”

 

[Joyousperson]

What source do you have showing that Islamic related violence is currently on the rise?

Btw, YOU are the one who stated Islamic related violence is currently on the rise is a recent phenomenon which I agree;

JosephZ said:
Once again, what we are seeing today with the rise in Islamic violence is a recent phenomenon.
Prior to 9/11 terrorism in the name of Islam made up only a small percentage of the attacks worldwide (Around 10%). Today most attacks take place in Muslim majority countries where just twenty years ago most took place in majority Christian countries (See image below]
Islam - Sri Lankan Massacre Revenge​

My point in showing you examples of so called Christians and "Christian" terrorists groups committing atrocities is to show you that extremists can hijack any religion and use its holy scriptures to justify their actions. I'm not suggesting we ignore any type of extremism and we need to address all forms of extremism regardless of the ideology behind it. You seem to be the one who is singling out Islamic extremism and ignoring the other types of religious extremism.

Point is your critical thinking is very wanting.

Your view that "extremists can hijack any religion and use its holy scriptures to justify their actions" reflect bad critical thinking and in a way insults your own religion.

You are not applying critical thinking to separate the believers from the ideology which in this sense must be independent.
Christianity's ultimate moral maxim is to love all, even one enemies, meaning no killing of even enemies.
If so called Christians interpret and do whatever evil and violence, it has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

It is sad you are not defending your own Christianity which ultimate pacifist maxim do not permit any killing and violence even to one's enemies.

On the other hand, SOME Muslims do not hijack their religion to commit evil and violent acts. What they are doing is carrying out their divine duty as dictated by the covenanted terms within the covenant they have entered with Allah. This very objective as supported by verses that reflect the overall ethos of Islam within the whole Quran.

What is worrying is the current trend of the increasing number of terror, violent and the range of evil acts of increasing intensity where more Muslims are being aware of the truth of their religion in gaining a more secure path to salvation as promised by Allah.

It is so easy to influence the vulnerable majority of Muslim toward the more objective version of Islam based on what is explicitly in the verses of the Quran.

All the preacher is to question the moderate Muslim in the following suggestions'

Preacher to moderate Muslims:
Are you really saved in with your current Muslim belief and practices.
If you want greater assurances of going to paradise with eternal life [and a bonus of virgins for some] then you have to obey these so and so verses.​

To the moderate Muslims, salvation is a matter of immortal life or burnt in hell forever, so they will be easily influenced by those charismatic preachers who introduce the more assuring verses as their divine duty.
These assuring verses are conditioned with killing, oppressing and committing a range of evil on non-Muslims.
The consequences is there will be Muslims killing and commit a range of evil on non-Muslim as a divine duty to please God so as to secure a passage to paradise with eternal life.

The point is, no humans on earth can judge they are wrong, thus these Muslims will continue to acts in the sincere beliefs they are acting per God's command and pleasing god.

This is a serious dilemma and that is the reason why we need to do objective research into Islam and its inherent ethos of evil and violence.

If you would take the time to do some research, you will find that religion is rarely the root cause of violence and extremism. There usually many other factors that go into the equation.

You are blinded by the false belief that 'a religion by default must be peaceful'.

I have mentioned many times before, I spent 3 years full time researching the Quran and Islam in alignment withe acts of SOME [pool of 300 Muslims]. I have scrutinzed each word by word of the verses in the context of the verse, the paragraph, the chapter and the whole context of the Quran including the neuroscience and psychology of Muhammad and the people who compile the Quran.

It is you who have to do the same research along the approach I and other objective critiques had done.

I look at both the words and actions of people to come to my conclusions regardless of their religious affiliation of lack there of. I see no support for your position about Islam based on the words and actions of the vast majority of the world's 1.8+ billion Muslims in the world, nor from the Qur'an and other Islamic texts available.

You have to apply very serious and refine critical thinking and logic on such a sensitive subject matter like Islam and religions.

You keep referring to the 1.8+ billion Muslims.
I have highlighted to rely on this total as this a fallacious and false thinking, i.e. the fallacy of ad populum. Perhaps you should take a course in basic logical and critical thinking.

Re the 1.8 billion Muslims I have taken into consideration their actions and thinking based empirical evidence and general principles.
Note I applied the general principle, 20% of ALL people thus all Muslims are unfortunately born with an active evil (& violent) tendency of a range of degrees.
The empirical evidence of the actions, i.e. good and evil are well reported in the media and internet.
My conclusions are objectively abstracted from the evil and violent laden elements in the Quran together with the knowledge above.

How can your conclusions be objective when they are based on fallacies, e.g. ad populum and lack of deeper refined research of Islam.

Your evidence all comes from notorious anti-Islamic propagandists. You have even used websites like religionofpeace(dot)com to support your arguement. Of course these sources will support your position.

There you go again.
I have repeated many times I did and is still doing my own research by analyzing the whole 6236 verses of the Quran in detail, i.e. word and word scrutiny within the whole context of Islam, the psychology of Muhammad et al, the philosophy of religions and spirituality, plus many fields of advance knowledge.

I only rely on secondary sources as a side reference.

Yes, I am a Christian, an ambassador of Christ, the Truth. I take honesty and integrity seriously. It's one of the reasons I don't hide behind an anonymous screen name and provide information about myself in my profile. I would never intentionally deceive others on a public forum or anywhere else for that matter. My purpose for sharing what I know about Islam and Muslims is primarily so my brothers and sisters in Christ will not fear this religion and those who follow it. I'm just trying to counter the false narrative the anti-Islamic propagandists are spreading. Their motivations are self serving, divisive, and fuel hatred for others. My motivations are the opposite and are motivated by love for my brothers and sisters in Christ and for all of those who do not know Him yet.

In these days of the internet, it would be very foolhardy to reveal oneself openly especially when one critique Islam to expose the truths of its inherent evil and violent elements objectively.
It is so evident so many innocent critiques had been killed for criticizing Islam where Islam condone such killing because critiques are identified in the Quran to be a threat to the religion of Islam.
Note the fatwa on Salman Rushdie and many others who had been killed in their objective critique of Islam.

IMO, ignorantly and blindly you are an insult to your own religion in not contrasting the perfect moral of Christianity against the inherent evil and violent ethos of Islam as proven objectively.

I am suggesting you take a more objective look and research into the Quran and Islam to understand the inherent evil and violent ethos of the religion.

Here's a word of truth, those anti-Islamic propagandists don't care about you, me, or anyone else, much less the truth. They are the ones who have no support for their position on Islam and are only parroting what Islamic terrorists and extremists preach. They know this is what sells and they have made lucrative careers out of exploiting the west's ignorance of Islam and what real Muslims actually believe.

I don't see them as anti-Islamic propagandists in the derogatory sense.
As I had stated MANY TIMES I do not rely on their views blindly. I did and is still doing my own research to arrive at my own conclusions objectively, which happen to agree with those anti-Islamic propagandists in a derogat

Once again I will ask, why do you choose to reject the words and actions of the vast Majority of Muslims in world including those of leading scholars and clerics and choose to accept the words and actions of the fewer than 1% of those who are considered to be Islamic extremists by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike?

Once again, I am reminding you, your intelligence, critical thinking and logical skill is very wanting in this particular case.
Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latinfor "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."​

Read this and don't repeat your toothless Majority of Muslim argument to keep insulting your own thinking skills.

It is insulting to your own intelligence to insist on the views of the majority, the fallacy of ad populum

Even the anti-Islamic propagandists, who have little to no background in Islam or religious studies, exist in very small numbers and their opinions are rejected by not only Islamic scholars, but also historians and religious scholars from all backgrounds. Why do you choose to believe them over the overwhelming consensus?

Note again, I have stated MANY TIMES I do rely on others to arrive at my own objective conclusions based on my own detailed research.

Note the 3400++ verses of 6236 verses in the Quran that contain the term 'kafir' and non-believers.
I have provided links from Bill Warner [not exactly like mine but similar] as a convenience because I have not posted my own online.
Since this issue of the evil and violent ethos is critical you'll need to review the whole 3400++ verses their degrees of severity in the whole context of the Quran and Islam.

The first striking clue is why is a supposedly religion of peace having 3400/6236 verses or 55% that is directly antagonistically [from mild to the worst degree] toward the kafir, infidels or non-Muslims.
If you are morally wise and objective you would definitely want to research more into this point objectively.

In contrast, I don't think the Gospels contain such a ridiculous high number of verses that are in a sense negative to non-believers.
Regardless of the number of evil and violent element in the Gospels, they are overriden with a pacifist maxim of love all, even one's enemies and the Christian is contracted [covenanted] to comply with the overriding maxim.
Thus those negative elements if any in the Gospels are never directed to harm non-believers at all.

 

[Joyousperson]

Concentration camp: a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution.

Randall Schriver, the US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security, was asked by a reporter to explain why he used "concentration camp terminology." He answered that "given what we understand to be the magnitude of the detention - [with] at least a million but likely closer to three million citizens out of a population of about ten million, so a very significant portion of the population - what's happening there, what the goals are of the Chinese government and their own public comments make that a very, I think, appropriate description."

Former prisoners told us of physical as well as psychological torture in the camps. Entire families had disappeared, and we were told detainees were tortured physically and mentally. We also saw evidence of almost a complete surveillance state in Xinjiang.

Uighur people in particular are subject to intense surveillance and are made to give DNA and biometric samples. Those with relatives in 26 "sensitive" countries have reportedly been rounded up, and up to a million detained. Rights groups say people in camps are made to learn Mandarin Chinese and criticise or renounce their faith.

Members of the Uighur ethnic group want their adopted homeland to take action over China’s internment camps, into which many of their loved ones seem to have disappeared.

Up to 30% of the Muslim population in China is far from being "SOME" Muslims. Also, entire families, women children and the elderly are being rounded up and disappearing in China.


It's sad that you would think this is the best option and approve of people being forced against their will into camps where they are brainwashed, tortured, and forced to denounce their faith.

They are also persecuting Christians as well: In China, they’re closing churches, jailing pastors – and even rewriting scripture


Western forces are trying to use Christianity to influence China’s society and even “subvert” the government, a senior official said, warning that Chinese Christians needed to follow a Chinese model of the religion.

“Anti-China forces in the West are trying to continue to influence China’s social stability and even subvert our country’s political power through Christianity, and it is doomed to fail,” he said, speaking to parliament’s largely ceremonial advisory body.

“For individual black sheep who, under the banner of Christianity, participate in subverting national security, we firmly support the country to bring them to justice.”

Taking into account all circumstances, pros and cons, I believe that is the optimal strategy.

In the course of the optimal strategies, there may be some bad apples as with any situations and I believe the Chinese government will take into account the criticisms of others and take possible corrective actions.

The point is there is an intrinsic and underlying ethos of evil and violent within the ideology of Islam. Not all Muslims will be influenced by this evil and violent element but naturally there will be a percentile of zealous Muslims will do what is permitted to please God to be assured of salvation and a place in paradise with eternal life.
The population of Xinjang is appx 22 million, if 10 million are Muslims, then 10% is 1 million of very zealous Muslims who are hardcore to obey whatever their God commanded including the evil and violent elements therein.

It is empirically proven where there are Muslims there is always trouble with the non-Muslim population and the non-Muslim government because Islam inherently deemed non-Muslims as a threat, enemy of Islam to be subdued or eliminated. All all these are driven by the ideology of Islam.
In contrast, non-Muslims who commit evil and violence are not driven by the ideology of their respective religion.

Therefore the Chinese government upon its own bad experience and happening elsewhere, the optimal strategy is to educate the Muslims against radical ideas and train them with skill for employment.

Personally, I think the strategy adopted by the government may mitigate and prevent the rise in terror attacks but it will not resolve it effectively in the long run. It is not easy to change or modify the belief of those who are hardcore will be triggered by the inherent underlying ethos of the ideology of Islam whenever there is a lapse or an opportunity arises for them to do so.

Theoretically [theory not practical] if possible is to show the religious inclined the contrasting ideology between good Christianity and the inherent evil ethos within Islam on an objective basis [not OBJECTIVE not subjective] and influence all the religious incline to Christianity-proper where Christians will have to love even their enemies.

 

[JosephZ]

Your response below goes a long way in explaining why you are having such a difficult time understanding what Islam teaches and what Muslims believe. Just as you take quotes from the Qur'an out of context to make them say what you want them to, you are doing the same in this thread with what I have written. Let's take a look.

What source do you have showing that Islamic related violence is currently on the rise?

Btw, YOU are the one who stated Islamic related violence is currently on the rise is a recent phenomenon which I agree;

JosephZ said:
Once again, what we are seeing today with the rise in Islamic violence is a recent phenomenon.
Prior to 9/11 terrorism in the name of Islam made up only a small percentage of the attacks worldwide (Around 10%). Today most attacks take place in Muslim majority countries where just twenty years ago most took place in majority Christian countries (See image below]
Islam - Sri Lankan Massacre Revenge

What you did here is take a single comment I made out of the context of the conversation taking place in this thread to make it appear that I have said something that I didn't. In fact, I have said the exact opposite.

Prior to 2010, only around 10% of terrorist attacks were carried out by Islamic extremists. Between 2012 and today that percentage grew to greater than 50%. Since 2014 when acts of terrorism reached an historic high, there has been a steady and significant drop in terrorism each year since (60 to 70%).
Based on the above, what leads you to believe that things are going to get worse when the trend shows things are getting better? History tells us that Islamic terrorism at the levels we are seeing today is a recent phenomenon.

you will find that support for violence against civilians is on the decline.
More than a decade after the 9/11 attacks and after hundreds of high profile attacks on civilians, the percentage of Muslims who say suicide bombing is often or sometimes justified has fallen in many of the countries surveyed. For instance, in 2002, 74% of Lebanese Muslims said suicide bombing was often or sometimes justified. But in the wake of well-publicized attacks, such as the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, support has fallen to just 29% today.
In Jordan, which experienced a devastating sequence of terrorist attacks on three hotels in Amman in 2005, support for the tactic among Muslims has fallen from 57% before those attacks to 15% today. A similar trend is found in Pakistan, where suicide bombing was falling out of favor with Muslims even before the attack on former Benazir Bhutto which ended her life in 2007. A decade ago, 41% of Pakistani Muslims said attacks on civilians were justified, but that has fallen to just 3% today.
As recent as last year, 62% of Palestinian Muslims said that suicide bombing was at least sometimes justified, but that support has fallen 16 percentage points since 2013. This tracks with increased negative opinions toward extremist groups among Palestinians in the last year. Concerns about Islamic Extremism on the Rise in Middle East

It's also important to note that terrorism has been dropping significantly since 2014. This is primarily because of the larger groups being degraded in recent years, but since there are no signs of any other jihadist organizations filling the void, it shows that your fear of Islamic extremism encompassing the globe and bringing chaos to a global scale is unwarranted.

In 2015 total terrorist attacks decreased by 11.5 percent and total terrorism-related deaths by 12.7 percent.

In 2016, we saw a further 9.2 percent decrease in attacks and 10.2 percent decline in total terrorism-related deaths.

The downward trend continued in 2017, the most recent data available, with a 19.8 percent drop in attacks and a 24.2 percent decline in fatalities.

In Western Europe and the United States, total terrorist attacks are down sharply from the 1970s. In 2017, Western Europe accounted for only 2.7 percent of worldwide attacks and the United States for less than 1 percent of attacks.

Taken together, these 36 months have witnessed the single largest three-year decline in attacks and fatalities since the Global Terrorism Database began in 1970 – nearly a half century ago.

This trend continued into 2018:

A new study by a defense analysis company indicates there was a 33 percent drop in global terror attacks in 2018, and terrorism fatalities fell to a 10-year low. Jane's has been issuing its reports since 2009. It said the 2018 study showed the lowest fatality numbers since it began issuing the report 10 years ago.

Since 2014, there has been a 60 to 70% decline in terrorist attacks worldwide in just the past 4 years. There has also been fewer attacks in the first quarter of 2019 than there were in the first quarter of 2018, so it appears this trend is continuing.

You can clearly see that I have said many times in this thread that terrorism is on the decline, so why did you take that comment out of context to make it appear as if I didn't?

You could take that one comment by me and lead others to believe that I suggested that Islamic terrorism is on the rise, and that quote from me would be pretty convincing that this is what I actually said and believe; but if someone reads the entire thread, it becomes obvious that this is not the meaning or the intent behind what I said.

I wasn't saying that Islamic terror is currently on the rise, I was pointing out that the rise in Islamic terrorism post 9/11 is a recent phenomenon.

You are apparently reading the Qur'an in the same way you are reading this thread. You are cherry picking individual verses from the Qur'an to support your position in the same way you cherry picked a comment I made to support your position in this thread. You always have to look at the surrounding context to get a true understanding of what is actually being said.

So I will ask you again since I obviously don't support your position, what source do you have showing that Islamic related violence is currently on the rise?

What is worrying is the current trend of the increasing number of terror, violent and the range of evil acts of increasing intensity where more Muslims are being aware of the truth of their religion in gaining a more secure path to salvation as promised by Allah.

As seen above and in several other posts I have made in this thread, acts of terrorism are on the decline, and the sharpest declines are taking place in Muslim majority countries.

There is no Islamic doctrine that violence, hostilities towards, or killing of non-Muslims is a more secure path to salvation as promised by Allah. That is complete non-sense. In all of the links I have provided from Islamic scholars, clerics, and ordinary Muslims condemn that line of thinking.

The UK's domestic counter-intelligence and security agency the MI5 has come to the opposite conclusion than you present. They say that the more a person follows their religion the less likely they are to become violent.

Far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.

Despite what you believe, Islam doesn't teach violence towards non-Muslims. If this were true, there would be total and utter chaos in every corner of the globe.

All the preacher is to question the moderate Muslim in the following suggestions'

Preacher to moderate Muslims:
Are you really saved in with your current Muslim belief and practices.
If you want greater assurances of going to paradise with eternal life [and a bonus of virgins for some] then you have to obey these so and so verses.
To the moderate Muslims, salvation is a matter of immortal life or burnt in hell forever, so they will be easily influenced by those charismatic preachers who introduce the more assuring verses as their divine duty.

Extremist teachers and preachers of Islam have been around since time immemorial, yet less than 1% of Muslims buy what they are preaching. Those type of misguided teachings have been rejected by the vast majority of Muslims since the religion was founded. With the higher level and better quality of education available in the world today, even fewer Muslims will be falling for this kind of nonsense in the future.

I have mentioned many times before, I spent 3 years full time researching the Quran and Islam in alignment withe acts of SOME [pool of 300 Muslims]. I have scrutinzed each word by word of the verses in the context of the verse, the paragraph, the chapter and the whole context of the Quran including the neuroscience and psychology of Muhammad and the people who compile the Quran... I have repeated many times I did and is still doing my own research by analyzing the whole 6236 verses of the Quran in detail, i.e. word and word scrutiny within the whole context of Islam, the psychology of Muhammad et al, the philosophy of religions and spirituality, plus many fields of advance knowledge.

Can you upload some of your research so I can see what led you to the conclusions you have on what Islam teaches and these verses you feel command that Muslims commit acts of aggression and violence against non-Muslims or that lead Muslims to hate non-Muslims. There are many free resources like WordPress where you can upload this research for free.

In these days of the internet, it would be very foolhardy to reveal oneself openly

If you love others as you love yourself and show respect to all people, then there's no reason to hide from anyone whether it be the virtual world or the real world.

 

[Joyousperson]

Your response below goes a long way in explaining why you are having such a difficult time understanding what Islam teaches and what Muslims believe. Just as you take quotes from the Qur'an out of context to make them say what you want them to, you are doing the same in this thread with what I have written. Let's take a look.



What you did here is take a single comment I made out of the context of the conversation taking place in this thread to make it appear that I have said something that I didn't. In fact, I have said the exact opposite.





You can clearly see that I have said many times in this thread that terrorism is on the decline, so why did you take that comment out of context to make it appear as if I didn't?

You could take that one comment by me and lead others to believe that I suggested that Islamic terrorism is on the rise, and that quote from me would be pretty convincing that this is what I actually said and believe; but if someone reads the entire thread, it becomes obvious that this is not the meaning or the intent behind what I said.

I wasn't saying that Islamic terror is currently on the rise, I was pointing out that the rise in Islamic terrorism post 9/11 is a recent phenomenon.

You are apparently reading the Qur'an in the same way you are reading this thread. You are cherry picking individual verses from the Qur'an to support your position in the same way you cherry picked a comment I made to support your position in this thread. You always have to look at the surrounding context to get a true understanding of what is actually being said.

So I will ask you again since I obviously don't support your position, what source do you have showing that Islamic related violence is currently on the rise?


As seen above and in several other posts I have made in this thread, acts of terrorism are on the decline, and the sharpest declines are taking place in Muslim majority countries.

The point is if you agree 'the rise in Islamic terrorism post 9/11 is a recent phenomenon' then we must take note of this as trending towards the future which is true, i.e. note,

The above need some refinement but the acts and trend are accurate.

Btw, the concern here is not only related to terrorism which is natural more visible rather, what is of overall concern is the whole gamut and range of evil and violent acts committed by SOME Muslims and governments under the influence and compulsion of being a true Muslims to comply with the evil and violent elements within the ideology of Islam.
Note the highlighted phrase above, which includes, threats, rapes, violent attacks, oppression, infringement of basic human rights, misogynism, and the likes.

There is no Islamic doctrine that violence, hostilities towards, or killing of non-Muslims is a more secure path to salvation as promised by Allah. That is complete non-sense. In all of the links I have provided from Islamic scholars, clerics, and ordinary Muslims condemn that line of thinking.

There are thousands of verses 3400++ that need to be taken in the whole context, that is why it is difficult to get the message across.
This is why I suggested you read the whole of the Quran thoroughly to form your own conclusions.

The UK's domestic counter-intelligence and security agency the MI5 has come to the opposite conclusion than you present. They say that the more a person follows their religion the less likely they are to become violent.

Far from being religious zealots, a large number of those involved in terrorism do not practise their faith regularly. Many lack religious literacy and could actually be regarded as religious novices. Very few have been brought up in strongly religious households, and there is a higher than average proportion of converts. Some are involved in drug-taking, drinking alcohol and visiting prostitutes. MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.

Note there were loads of past beliefs by the majority which had been proven wrong when supported by real evidence.

Note the current trend of female Muslims covering their hair. 30 years ago, I believe only 10% of female Muslims were covering their hair [the hijab], but now it is 90% of female Muslims covering their hair and more are covering their whole face except for a slit [burga].
This is obviously an indication of their zealousness to please Allah and be more assured of a place in paradise with eternal life.
There is a trend of greater zealousness to please Allah and fulfilment of the evil and violent elements within the verses of the Quran are rewarded with 10 fold the rewards as compare to the ordinary compliances of the covenanted terms.

When the stake of salvation to paradise with eternal life is highlighted to Muslims many will be willing to execute actions that will please Allah most which happened to the the evil and violent ones.

Note the Muslims do not view their acts as evil and violent, but rather to them they are doing their divine duty and these acts are good to please Allah.

That is the current trend as reflected in the following stats;

Despite what you believe, Islam doesn't teach violence towards non-Muslims. If this were true, there would be total and utter chaos in every corner of the globe.

Note there is already utter chaos and terrible evil and violent acts committed by SOME Muslim around the world but it is fortunate not at the worst only because the majority of Muslims are good human beings and the clerics dare not openly preach the true Islam.
But as I had highlighted there is an increasing trend of the majority of Muslims being more zealous to please Allah especially if the evil and violent laden elements are tied to a greater 10 fold rewards than ordinary compliances.

Extremist teachers and preachers of Islam have been around since time immemorial, yet less than 1% of Muslims buy what they are preaching. Those type of misguided teachings have been rejected by the vast majority of Muslims since the religion was founded. With the higher level and better quality of education available in the world today, even fewer Muslims will be falling for this kind of nonsense in the future.

The point is the general impulses of the majority thrust of humanity is greater than their impulse toward their own salvation.
However, the preachers are now emphasizing on the point 'how save are you?' to Muslims and the threat is amplified because of the internet.

Can you upload some of your research so I can see what led you to the conclusions you have on what Islam teaches and these verses you feel command that Muslims commit acts of aggression and violence against non-Muslims or that lead Muslims to hate non-Muslims. There are many free resources like WordPress where you can upload this research for free.

I am looking for similar researchers and critiques of Islam in USA [where there is still freedom of speech] to share my research findings.

[/quote]If you love others as you love yourself and show respect to all people, then there's no reason to hide from anyone whether it be the virtual world or the real world.[/QUOTE]
Love, yes but not so blind to risk one's life given the threat is so great as supported by evidence. I have to admit I am a wise and small coward on this issue.

 

[JosephZ]

The point is if you agree 'the rise in Islamic terrorism post 9/11 is a recent phenomenon' then we must take note of this as trending towards the future which is true, i.e. note,

The above need some refinement but the acts and trend are accurate.

What do you feel lead to the increase in Islamic terrorism following 9/11? Do you really believe it's because Muslims all of a sudden started following the Qur'an?

The rise in Islamic terrorism directly coincided with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and after 2011 with the "Arab Spring" and the civil war in Syria. Islamic terrorists exploited these conflicts to push their agendas. The rise in terrorism had nothing at all to do with Muslims suddenly getting religion.

Since 2014 there has been a significant (60-70%) drop in terrorism, so there are no indications that things will get worse than what we have seen over the past decade.

I posted this earlier, but here it is again:

There has been a steady decline in terrorism since 2014. When the final numbers are in for 2018, I will update these charts. 2018 from the preliminary information has had the sharpest decline so far.

There are thousands of verses 3400++ that need to be taken in the whole context, that is why it is difficult to get the message across.
This is why I suggested you read the whole of the Quran thoroughly to form your own conclusions.

I have read the Qur'an, I even have an app for it on my phone, and have in fact come to my own conclusion. The message you are trying to get across has no support from the Qur'an.

Note there were loads of past beliefs by the majority which had been proven wrong when supported by real evidence.

There is no way that less than 1% of the Muslim population has been right about what Islam teaches for the pat 1,400+ years, while the better than 99% have been wrong. If the minority was correct in this case, it would have come to light long before now.

Note the current trend of female Muslims covering their hair. 30 years ago, I believe only 10% of female Muslims were covering their hair [the hijab], but now it is 90% of female Muslims covering their hair and more are covering their whole face except for a slit [burga].
This is obviously an indication of their zealousness to please Allah and be more assured of a place in paradise with eternal life.

I have no idea how you would come to such a conclusion. Do you have any kind of source to support this claim? I travel a lot, and I haven't noticed any difference in the number of Muslim women who choose to wear head coverings and those who don't.

Note the Muslims do not view their acts as evil and violent, but rather to them they are doing their divine duty and these acts are good to please Allah.

That is the current trend as reflected in the following stats;

Once again, the trend has been for a decrease in Islamic related violence since 2014. There is also no divine duty for Muslims to carry out acts of violence to be good or to please Allah. The only place you hear talk like this is from terrorists and anti-Islamic propagandist.

 

[mindlight]

How is that possible if more than 99% of the more than 1.6 billion Muslims in the world aren't engaging in violent jihad? If violence is the religious duty of Muslims, then why is it that nearly every Muslim on the planet lives in harmony with their neighbors? This would be impossible if Islam taught violence as a religious duty.


Let's put the crusades aside, what about the European conquistadors and explorers establishing new territories and "Christianizing" the native populations in North and South America, the Caribbean, Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific Islands. The United States and Manifest Destiny all of which resulted in mass atrocities such as rape, torture, slavery, mass murders, and the deaths of millions?

Christianity was spread by the sword in just about every corner of the globe. This is a historical fact that can't be denied. In fact, when we try to defend our bloody past by saying those responsible were not Christian or that they weren't following what Christianity teaches, it makes us look silly. If you say these explorers and crews that followed them into new lands didn't represent the teachings of Christ and are therefore not Christian, then you have to also apply this same method of judgment to Islamic terrorist groups since the vast majority of Muslims in the world do not adhere to or support the ideology of extremist.

The Bible teaches when we judge others our judgment must be in righteousness. It also teaches against hypocritical judgement.

The Conquistadors sword cleared away the opposition and Imperial spain guarded the borders of the new dominium, But it was priests and missionaries that converted South America. The crusades stopped the advance of Islam in its tracks and reversed it in Spain.

The biggest tragedy of Sri Lanka is that the bombers sent themselves to hell in the name of a false religion. The Christians who died just got to meet Jesus quicker.

 

[JosephZ]

The Conquistadors sword cleared away the opposition and Imperial spain guarded the borders of the new dominium, But it was priests and missionaries that converted South America.

The natives really weren't given much of an option.

When the conquistadors made initial contact with natives they would read a proclamation called the “Requerimiento” in Spanish (A language the natives could not understand and without translators). This proclamation informed them that they must accept Christian rule and the authority of the Pope, as well the Spanish monarchy which the Pope had granted their land to without any input from the natives, and that the natives must also accept missionaries sent to preach to them or they would be considered hostile and would be killed and/or enslaved.

Below is some of the content from the Requerimiento:

The Lord our God, Living and Eternal, created the Heaven and the Earth, and one man and one woman, of whom you and we, all the men of the world, were and are descendants, and all those who come after us. But, on account of the multitude which has sprung from this man and woman in the five thousand years since the world was created, it was necessary that some men should go one way and some another, and that they should be divided into many kingdoms and provinces, for in one alone they could not be sustained.

Of all these nations God our Lord gave charge to one man, called St. Peter, that he should be Lord and Superior of all the men in the world, that all should obey him, and that he should be the head of the whole human race, wherever men should live, and under whatever law, sect, or belief they should be; and he gave him the world for his kingdom and jurisdiction.

And he commanded him to place his seat in Rome, as the spot most fitting to rule the world from; but also he permitted him to have his seat in any other part of the world, and to judge and govern all Christians, Moors, Jews, Gentiles, and all other sects. This man was called Pope, as if to say, Admirable Great Father and Governor of men. The men who lived in that time obeyed that St. Peter, and took him for Lord, King, and Superior of the universe; so also they have regarded the others who after him have been elected to the pontificate, and so has it been continued even till now, and will continue till the end of the world...

...We ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as the Ruler and Superior of the whole world, and the high priest called Pope, and in his name the King and Queen Dona Juana our lords, in his place, as superiors and lords and kings of these islands and this Tierra-firme by virtue of the said donation, and that you consent and give place that these religious fathers should declare and preach to you the aforesaid.

...if you do not do this, and maliciously make delay in it, I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of their Highnesses; we shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey, and refuse to receive their lord, and resist and contradict him; and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault, and not that of their Highnesses, or ours, nor of these cavaliers who come with us.

Under "The Doctrine of Discovery" and "Manifest Destiny." The Bible was used to justify the conquering of non-Christian lands and Christianizing the native populations.

This is one of the primary verses used in support of Christian Imperialism:

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth. (Genesis 1:28)

Notice its similarity to the statement below:

“free and ample faculty…to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens [Muslims] and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit." (Romanus Pontifex, 1455)

This was also sited in the US Supreme Court:

We maintain that the principle declared in the fifteenth century as the law of Christendom, that discovery gave title to assume sovereignty [a right of domination] over and to govern the unconverted [infidel] natives of Africa, Asia, and North and South America, has been recognized as a part of the national law [law of nations], for nearly four centuries, and it is now so recognized by every Christian power in its political department and its judicial….Our claim is based on the right to coerce obedience. (State v. Foreman, Supreme Court of Tennessee, 1835)

The above doctrine lead to the deaths of countless millions throughout the world and the suffering of even more.

Just one example of this would be the United States and it's policy of "Manifest Destiny" at the end of the 19th century and continuing into the 20th century where Christianity was spread outside the US borders and into the islands of the Pacific.

Here's a quote from President William McKinley concerning the Philippines:

"I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came...

...that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died..." --

In the United States' attempt to "Civilize and Christianize" Filipinos, tens of thousands were slaughtered including women and children, rape and pillaging was widespread, and hundreds of thousands (Some estimates put the death toll between one and three million) died from disease and famine.

The main reason for me bringing this up was to show that the Islamic imperialists weren't doing anything that was out of the ordinary during the point in history that they colonized India. What happened to India was a common occurrence in many parts of the world and all of the imperial nations, regardless of their ideologies, were guilty of committing atrocities during their conquests of foreign lands.

The biggest tragedy of Sri Lanka is that the bombers sent themselves to hell in the name of a false religion. The Christians who died just got to meet Jesus quicker.

I agree.

 

[Joyousperson]

What do you feel lead to the increase in Islamic terrorism following 9/11? Do you really believe it's because Muslims all of a sudden started following the Qur'an?

The whole 1400 history of Islam is loaded with evil and violent acts with peaks and low over various periods. This is driven by the inherent evil and violent elements within the ideology of Islam.
The increasing trend since 911 is merely one of those peaks and the rise has been maintained since to the present.

The rise in Islamic terrorism directly coincided with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and after 2011 with the "Arab Spring" and the civil war in Syria. Islamic terrorists exploited these conflicts to push their agendas. The rise in terrorism had nothing at all to do with Muslims suddenly getting religion.

The drive to dominate with permission to commit terror, evil and violence is inherent within the ideology of Islam.
To achieve its objective, the Islamists will use and exploit all sorts of excuses, even the drawing of cartoons.

Since 2014 there has been a significant (60-70%) drop in terrorism, so there are no indications that things will get worse than what we have seen over the past decade.



I posted this earlier, but here it is again:

View attachment 256992
There has been a steady decline in terrorism since 2014. When the final numbers are in for 2018, I will update these charts. 2018 from the preliminary information has had the sharpest decline so far.

Note I have stated many times, even a single act of evil and violence must be addressed.
Therefore a drop in % do not count especially of there is a drop of say 10,000 to 9,000 of attacks of various degree.

Are you saying because there is a drop in % [I am disputing] we must ignore the recent terrorist attacks in Sri Lanka and any other attacks that will happened in the future?

That is very irresponsible!
The effective attitude in approaching the problem of similar past and present is to research the root causes of this specific category of evil and violent from Islamists which I had traced to the tons of evil and violent elements within the Quran, i.e. the core of the ideology of Islam.
This is in combination with the naturally effects that 20% of human beings are unfortunately born with an active evil tendency thus will feast on whatever evil and violent elements they are exposed to.

I have read the Qur'an, I even have an app for it on my phone, and have in fact come to my own conclusion. The message you are trying to get across has no support from the Qur'an.

There is no way that less than 1% of the Muslim population has been right about what Islam teaches for the pat 1,400+ years, while the better than 99% have been wrong. If the minority was correct in this case, it would have come to light long before now.

I have already proven the majority's beliefs had been proven wrong many times. This is part of human nature in progress.

Note the majority focus is salvation to get to paradise with eternal life and to avoid hell.
Most of the time the majority act on faith and thus do not have the ability and time to verify the truths of an ideology.

With the internet, many are getting more and more truth about their religion, that is why there are more ex-Muslims than before.

At the same time, there are more zealous Muslims at present with an increasing trend in terrible evil and violent acts from all segment of the Muslim community.

I have no idea how you would come to such a conclusion. Do you have any kind of source to support this claim? I travel a lot, and I haven't noticed any difference in the number of Muslim women who choose to wear head coverings and those who don't.

I am surprise you are so ignorant and blind to reality.
There are loads of images comparing female dressings in Muslim majority countries between the past 40 years and the present.

Note: e.g. Iraq past and present

You can google to verify what is happening in our countries, even Western countries there is an increasing trend.

This is one obvious evidence for the increasing trend of zealousness of Islamic ideology.

Once again, the trend has been for a decrease in Islamic related violence since 2014. There is also no divine duty for Muslims to carry out acts of violence to be good or to please Allah. The only place you hear talk like this is from terrorists and anti-Islamic propagandist.

The evidence of the above is traceable from the evil and violent acts of SOME Muslims who claimed they are doing their divine duty to please Allah to gain greater merit to paradise and eternal life.
This promise is supported covenanted terms in the Quran within their covenant with Allah.

It is not by the terrorists attacks that is critical, it is the inherent ideology of evil and violent elements that can trigger any vulnerable to commit those heinous acts against non-Muslims and other Muslims they deemed as hypocrites and apostates.

There is a pool of 300 million evil prone Muslims at any one time and any of them can be triggered to become evil and violent elements in the Quran and other texts as a divine duty in order to please Allah.

Your insistence on a decreasing trend [disputed] is toothless when the fact is the present quantum of evil and violent acts at present are a critical and significant total.

 

[JosephZ]

Note I have stated many times, even a single act of evil and violence must be addressed.
Therefore a drop in % do not count especially of there is a drop of say 10,000 to 9,000 of attacks of various degree.

Are you saying because there is a drop in % [I am disputing] we must ignore the recent terrorist attacks in Sri Lanka and any other attacks that will happened in the future?

Your insistence on a decreasing trend [disputed] is toothless when the fact is the present quantum of evil and violent acts at present are a critical and significant total.

Going from averaging close to 1,800 terrorist attacks per month in 2014 worldwide to around 600 per month is a very significant drop. The steady decline in global terrorism since 2014 is unable to be challenged or denied.

Are you saying because there is a drop in % [I am disputing] we must ignore the recent terrorist attacks in Sri Lanka and any other attacks that will happened in the future?

Of course we can't ignore the attacks that continue and those that are going to happen in the future. This is why I suggested in the other thread that rather than trying to convince 1.8 billion Muslims and the rest of the world that their religion is to blame, maybe it would be better to address the political conditions and injustices that terrorist groups exploit instead.

The effective attitude in approaching the problem of similar past and present is to research the root causes of this specific category of evil and violent from Islamists which I had traced to the tons of evil and violent elements within the Quran, i.e. the core of the ideology of Islam.

The research has already been done by experts in the field of terrorism and counter terrorism and it has been found that the countries that experience high levels of terrorism also share one or more of the following characteristics: occupation, authoritarianism, repression, tyranny, and/or corruption and when it comes to terrorism and violent extremism, it's historical and political factors, not religious or even militant religious ideologies that are the primary driving forces.

I have already proven the majority's beliefs had been proven wrong many times. This is part of human nature in progress.

Believing that 99% of Muslims have been wrong about their religion and what it teaches for more than 1,400 years isn't even logical. How could a religion that promotes violence and the killing of innocent civilians even survive in a civilized society? It can't. Since Islam is the second largest religion in the world, it's quite obvious that it's true teachings are non-violent.

I am surprise you are so ignorant and blind to reality.
There are loads of images comparing female dressings in Muslim majority countries between the past 40 years and the present.

Note: e.g. Iraq past and present

You can google to verify what is happening in our countries, even Western countries there is an increasing trend.

This is one obvious evidence for the increasing trend of zealousness of Islamic ideology.

Those pictures are from Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

The example in the picture you used is not because Muslim women have become more Zealous to please Allah, it was because the Taliban (An Extremist group) took control of the country and forced women to cover up. The Taliban and it's ideology is rejected by the vast majority of the Muslim world. Here are some recent pictures from the same city (Kabul) now that the Taliban is no longer in control.

Rights for woman still have a long way to go in that country, but they are not anywhere near as oppressed as they were under Taliban rule or as that picture you shared would lead people to believe.

Once again, there is no evidence that shows there has been an increase in Muslim women covering their hair, and certainly no evidence to support your claim that 30 years ago "only 10% of female Muslims were covering their hair [the hijab], but now it is 90% of female Muslims covering their hair and more are covering their whole face except for a slit [burga]."

 

[Joyousperson]

Going from averaging close to 1,800 terrorist attacks per month in 2014 worldwide to around 600 per month is a very significant drop. The steady decline in global terrorism since 2014 is unable to be challenged or denied.

Note the following critical points;

1. 20% or appx 300 million of Muslims with an active evil tendency.

2. The loads of evil and violent elements [of a range of degrees] in the Quran, 3400+ or 55% of the 6236 verses of the Quran

3. The stalemate I argued in the other thread. Note I have raised a new thread to discuss the point;
The Critical Stalemate re Violence in Islam​

As long as the above conditions continue to exists, there will always be evil and violent acts from the evil prone Muslims.

Note the increasing numbers of terror attacks re the stats below [subject to refinement.

If you visit the www.thereligionofPeace.com site, you will note the have a stats of the number of terror attacks during this month of ramadhan,
In 18 days of fasting there are 95 terror attacks with 488 killed [nb: subject to refinement] compared to 1 killed by Sri Lankan non-Muslims.

On the right side of www.thereligionofPeace.com , you will note a listing of a range of negative acts on a daily basis around the world that related to Muslims in-general. This list is rough but when taken in total, it is also evidence of the evil and violent nature inherent in Islam.

Of course we can't ignore the attacks that continue and those that are going to happen in the future. This is why I suggested in the other thread that rather than trying to convince 1.8 billion Muslims and the rest of the world that their religion is to blame, maybe it would be better to address the political conditions and injustices that terrorist groups exploit instead.

I agree the political and other conditions must be addressed. However these factors are secondary to the stalemate and dilemma I presented above.

The killing related to cartoons has nothing to do with political or poverty. The rapes of non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran has nothing to do with political conditions. The killing of atheists, homosexuals has nothing to do with political or social factors. Blasphemy laws imposed by Islam is not due to political intervention.

There are many other reason why evil prone Muslims will kill and spread violence and terror due solely to their Islamic doctrine.

In addition Islam is such that it a way of life that encompass every aspects of their life, unlike Christianity which has accepted politics in separated from their theology.

Plus note my reference and link where the extremists declared political interventions and other are not the primary reason why they kill non-Muslims. The insist the primary reason they kill non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran is because they disbelieved Islam, Allah and Muhammad.

The research has already been done by experts in the field of terrorism and counter terrorism and it has been found that the countries that experience high levels of terrorism also share one or more of the following characteristics: occupation, authoritarianism, repression, tyranny, and/or corruption and when it comes to terrorism and violent extremism, it's historical and political factors, not religious or even militant religious ideologies that are the primary driving forces.

Note my point and reference from the horses' mouth, i.e.

Plus note my reference and link where the extremists declared political interventions and other are not the primary reason why they kill non-Muslims. The insist the primary reason they kill non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran is because they disbelieved Islam, Allah and Muhammad.​

Believing that 99% of Muslims have been wrong about their religion and what it teaches for more than 1,400 years isn't even logical. How could a religion that promotes violence and the killing of innocent civilians even survive in a civilized society? It can't. Since Islam is the second largest religion in the world, it's quite obvious that it's true teachings are non-violent.

Your above is bad logic.
Where did I say, 99% of Muslim are wrong about their religion.
I stated 80% do not comply with the terms of their covenant with Allah fully to the best of their ability. 20% of Muslim who are evil prone are would interpret the Quranic verses with a bias towards their inclinations, i.e. evil and violent.

The test and inference whether a religion is inherently evil and violent is to review the contents of the covenanted terms objectively.
As I had argued 3400++ or 55% of the 6236 verses are loaded with antagonistic, evil and violent elements [of various degrees] directed at non-believers. This is justified objectively.

Those pictures are from Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

The example in the picture you used is not because Muslim women have become more Zealous to please Allah, it was because the Taliban (An Extremist group) took control of the country and forced women to cover up. The Taliban and it's ideology is rejected by the vast majority of the Muslim world. Here are some recent pictures from the same city (Kabul) now that the Taliban is no longer in control.

View attachment 257047
Rights for woman still have a long way to go in that country, but they are not anywhere near as oppressed as they were under Taliban rule or as that picture you shared would lead people to believe.

Once again, there is no evidence that shows there has been an increase in Muslim women covering their hair, and certainly no evidence to support your claim that 30 years ago "only 10% of female Muslims were covering their hair [the hijab], but now it is 90% of female Muslims covering their hair and more are covering their whole face except for a slit [burga]."

I agree the Taliban imposed a 100% compliance to the burga.
What you show is likely to be 10% who do not wear the hijab and burga.
There is still a large % of females wearing the hijab and burga in Afghanistan.
Do you dare to claim 90% of females Muslims revert back to what was their general dressing 40 years ago?

As compared to 40 years ago there is an increased in Muslim females wearing the hijab all over the world which is obvious in Indonesia, Brunei, even southern Philippines, southern Thailand and even Western countries.

Even if it is imposed by Talibans, Boko Haram, Iranian regime, and elsewhere, this is evident of the growing zeal of Islamization.

 

[JosephZ]

Note the increasing numbers of terror attacks re the stats below [subject to refinement.

That number doesn't support an increase in terrorism today. Those are all attacks since 9/11. Since July 2014 there has been a significant and steady decline in terrorist attacks.

If you visit the www.thereligionofPeace.com site, you will note the have a stats of the number of terror attacks during this month of ramadhan,
In 18 days of fasting there are 95 terror attacks with 488 killed [nb: subject to refinement] compared to 1 killed by Sri Lankan non-Muslims.

That page is very misleading. Every year during Ramadan it says there are no terror attacks in the name of any other religion.

Let's start with this year.

Here's two attacks that occurred during Ramadan (May 18 & 21) by Christian terrorists in India, yet the religionofpeace scorecard says there have been no attacks by other religions as of today:

Christian Terror Outfit NSCN (IM) Kills Arunachal MLA And 11 Others After Ambushing Convoy

Aurnachal Pradesh legislator from Khonsa West assembly seat Tirong Aboh along with ten others who were part of his convoy of four vehicles were shot dead by suspected terrorists of National Socialist Council of Nagaland Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) on Tuesday (21 May) in Tirap district of the state, reports Times of India.

NSCN-IM is a radical christian outfit which sports the slogan “Nagaland for Christ” and has been responsible for killing Indian Army soldiers. As per the manifesto of NSCN, it stands for, ”the faith in God and the salvation of mankind in Jesus, the Christ, alone, that is Nagaland for Christ”.

The organisation has in the past also threatened to convert Buddhists to Christianity or face dire consequences.

New Delhi: A day after at least 11 persons, including Arunachal Pradesh legislator Tirong Aboh, were killed in an ambush by suspected Naga militants in Tirap district of Arunachal Pradesh, reports emerged that as many as 500 masked men attacked election officials in the state on Sunday.

The scorecard on that website always shows zero for other religions, when that's not true.

I didn't go through the entire Global Terrorism Database to fact check the claims of religionofpeace on their scorecards, but here are some terrorist attacks by Christian extremist groups that took place during Ramadan in 2013 and 214.

Global Terrorism Database

I already know you're going to say that these are not real Christians and these are not Christian terrorist groups, but they are recognized as such, and I can guarantee you that if these were groups claiming to be Muslims or using the Qur'an as a reference, you and religionofpeace wouldn't hesitate to label them as Islamic extremists groups.

I posted this earlier, but I will post it again as a reminder of the ideologies the groups in the lists above follow.

The NLFT

The NLFT manifesto says that they want to expand the kingdom of God and Christ in Tripura. They have been accused of funding terrorism and forcing local tribals to convert to Christianity at gunpoint.

The government in India's north-eastern state of Tripura says it has evidence that the state's Baptist Church is involved in backing separatist rebels.

At least 20 Hindus in Tripura have been killed by the NLFT in two years for resisting forced conversion to Christianity. A leader of the Jamatia tribe, Rampada Jamatia, said that armed NLFT militants were forcibly converting tribal villagers to Christianity, which he said was a serious threat to Hinduism. It is believed that as many as 5,000 tribal villagers were forcibly converted from 1999 to 2001. These forcible conversions to Christianity, sometimes including the use of "rape as a means of intimidation,"

The NSCN

Equally disturbing is the NSCN faction’s dubious claim of being the torch bearers of Christ’s gospel. Isak Chishi Swu the NSCN-IM chairman has on records said that Nagalim will send out 10,000 missionaries around the world when it achieves independence. “Our intention is that Nagalim is for Christ. We have proclaimed it. Nagalim is for Christ. God has got his plan for Nagalim,” he said. “We were evangelized by the American Baptist missionaries back in 1839, and we don’t have the adequate words to thank the American missionaries.”

There have been reports from North east region that the Naga insurgents have used threats and intimidation in areas where they operate all the name of Lord Jesus Christ...

The LRA, which has killed and maimed as many people as ISIS, claimed it was fighting for the establishment of the rule of the Ten Commandments in a theocratic Uganda. Their activities covered a large swath of Africa committing atrocities in not only Uganda, but also South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Central African Republic.

"The LRA is fighting in the name of God. God is the one helping us in the bush. That’s why we created this name, Lord’s Resistance Army. And people always ask us, are we fighting for the Biblical Ten Commandments of God. That is true because the Ten Commandments of God is the constitution that God has given to the people of the world. All people. If you go to the constitution, nobody will accept people who steal, nobody could accept to go and take somebody’s wife, nobody could accept to innocently kill, or whatever. The Ten Commandments carries all this.” -- Vincent Otti, LRA Commander

So as you can clearly see, religionofpeace isn't honest in how they report on terrorism.

Earlier you were claiming that Islamic violence is on the rise and that you disputed the fact that it's declining. I will now use your own source to show that it is.

Let's look at the religionofpeace scorecards for 2013-14 again:

Now look at 2019 as of today:

Ramadan is 2/3rds of the way through and according to this chart there have been an average of 5.4 attacks per day. At the current rate, 2019 will end up with somewhere between 160 and 165 attacks by the end of Ramadan. Even using their stats, that would be around a 45% drop in terror attacks since 2013-14.

The killing related to cartoons has nothing to do with political or poverty. The rapes of non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran has nothing to do with political conditions. The killing of atheists, homosexuals has nothing to do with political or social factors.

Rapes condoned by the Qur'an?

Who are the Muslims that are killing because of cartoons, raping women, killing non-believers and homosexuals? Where do they live, and where are they from?

Blasphemy laws imposed by Islam is not due to political intervention.

Blasphemy laws are made by state governments, that's about as political as you can get.

Plus note my reference and link where the extremists declared political interventions and other are not the primary reason why they kill non-Muslims. The insist the primary reason they kill non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran is because they disbelieved Islam, Allah and Muhammad.

Note my point and reference from the horses' mouth, i.e.
Plus note my reference and link where the extremists declared political interventions and other are not the primary reason why they kill non-Muslims. The insist the primary reason they kill non-Muslims as condoned in the Quran is because they disbelieved Islam, Allah and Muhammad.

The key word in those quotes is "Extremists." Who cares what extremists say? So what if they say the reason they do what they do isn't because of political conditions and injustices? They can say this all they want, but they are still exploiting these situations and they hide behind the veil of religion in an effort to gain support and push their agendas.

Your above is bad logic.
Where did I say, 99% of Muslim are wrong about their religion.

You didn't, I'm the one who said the 1% of the Islamic extremists are wrong in their interpretation of Islam. You are the one who keeps saying groups like ISIS (The extremists) are correctly following Islam. You even quote them to support your position.

I stated 80% do not comply with the terms of their covenant with Allah fully to the best of their ability. 20% of Muslim who are evil prone are would interpret the Quranic verses with a bias towards their inclinations, i.e. evil and violent.

This means nothing without supporting evidence. These percentages are just your opinion.

As I had argued 3400++ or 55% of the 6236 verses are loaded with antagonistic, evil and violent elements [of various degrees] directed at non-believers. This is justified objectively.

I will wait until you upload your research before commenting on this.

What you show is likely to be 10% who do not wear the hijab and burga.
There is still a large % of females wearing the hijab and burga in Afghanistan.

Yes, the majority of women do wear head coverings in Afghanistan, but the reasons vary. Some do it to please Allah, some out of fear since there is still the presence of the Taliban in the country, some are pressured by family members, and others do it for cultural reasons. Women in Afghanistan were wearing those blue burkas in the picture you posted long before Muhammad or Islam even existed. The increase in the wearing of hajibs and burkas in Afghanistan was a direct response to the Taliban's occupation of that country, so it may be quite a while before things return to pre-Taliban days if they ever do.

As compared to 40 years ago there is an increased in Muslim females wearing the hijab all over the world which is obvious in Indonesia, Brunei, even southern Philippines, southern Thailand and even Western countries.

OK, for the sake of argument, let's say there has been an increase in the number of women wearing a hajib or a burka in an effort to be more religious. How does this relate to violence in Islam?

 

[Joyousperson]

That number doesn't support an increase in terrorism today. Those are all attacks since 9/11. Since July 2014 there has been a significant and steady decline in terrorist attacks.

I don't have details numbers of the yearly trend.
What is critical in this case is the total, which is still in thousands per year.
There is a factual reduction from 10,000 to 9000 but it would be dumb and irrational to ignore the problem just because there is reduction and ignoring the still existing problem.

That page is very misleading. Every year during Ramadan it says there are no terror attacks in the name of any other religion.

Let's start with this year.

View attachment 257107

Here's two attacks that occurred during Ramadan (May 18 & 21) by Christian terrorists in India, yet the religionofpeace scorecard says there have been no attacks by other religions as of today:

Christian Terror Outfit NSCN (IM) Kills Arunachal MLA And 11 Others After Ambushing Convoy

Aurnachal Pradesh legislator from Khonsa West assembly seat Tirong Aboh along with ten others who were part of his convoy of four vehicles were shot dead by suspected terrorists of National Socialist Council of Nagaland Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) on Tuesday (21 May) in Tirap district of the state, reports Times of India.

NSCN-IM is a radical christian outfit which sports the slogan “Nagaland for Christ” and has been responsible for killing Indian Army soldiers. As per the manifesto of NSCN, it stands for, ”the faith in God and the salvation of mankind in Jesus, the Christ, alone, that is Nagaland for Christ”.

The organisation has in the past also threatened to convert Buddhists to Christianity or face dire consequences.

New Delhi: A day after at least 11 persons, including Arunachal Pradesh legislator Tirong Aboh, were killed in an ambush by suspected Naga militants in Tirap district of Arunachal Pradesh, reports emerged that as many as 500 masked men attacked election officials in the state on Sunday.

The scorecard on that website always shows zero for other religions, when that's not true.

View attachment 257108
I didn't go through the entire Global Terrorism Database to fact check the claims of religionofpeace on their scorecards, but here are some terrorist attacks by Christian extremist groups that took place during Ramadan in 2013 and 214.

View attachment 257105
View attachment 257106
Global Terrorism Database

I already know you're going to say that these are not real Christians and these are not Christian terrorist groups, but they are recognized as such, and I can guarantee you that if these were groups claiming to be Muslims or using the Qur'an as a reference, you and religionofpeace wouldn't hesitate to label them as Islamic extremists groups.

I posted this earlier, but I will post it again as a reminder of the ideologies the groups in the lists above follow.

The NLFT

The NLFT manifesto says that they want to expand the kingdom of God and Christ in Tripura. They have been accused of funding terrorism and forcing local tribals to convert to Christianity at gunpoint.

The government in India's north-eastern state of Tripura says it has evidence that the state's Baptist Church is involved in backing separatist rebels.

At least 20 Hindus in Tripura have been killed by the NLFT in two years for resisting forced conversion to Christianity. A leader of the Jamatia tribe, Rampada Jamatia, said that armed NLFT militants were forcibly converting tribal villagers to Christianity, which he said was a serious threat to Hinduism. It is believed that as many as 5,000 tribal villagers were forcibly converted from 1999 to 2001. These forcible conversions to Christianity, sometimes including the use of "rape as a means of intimidation,"

The NSCN

View attachment 257110
Equally disturbing is the NSCN faction’s dubious claim of being the torch bearers of Christ’s gospel. Isak Chishi Swu the NSCN-IM chairman has on records said that Nagalim will send out 10,000 missionaries around the world when it achieves independence. “Our intention is that Nagalim is for Christ. We have proclaimed it. Nagalim is for Christ. God has got his plan for Nagalim,” he said. “We were evangelized by the American Baptist missionaries back in 1839, and we don’t have the adequate words to thank the American missionaries.”

There have been reports from North east region that the Naga insurgents have used threats and intimidation in areas where they operate all the name of Lord Jesus Christ...

The LRA, which has killed and maimed as many people as ISIS, claimed it was fighting for the establishment of the rule of the Ten Commandments in a theocratic Uganda. Their activities covered a large swath of Africa committing atrocities in not only Uganda, but also South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Central African Republic.

"The LRA is fighting in the name of God. God is the one helping us in the bush. That’s why we created this name, Lord’s Resistance Army. And people always ask us, are we fighting for the Biblical Ten Commandments of God. That is true because the Ten Commandments of God is the constitution that God has given to the people of the world. All people. If you go to the constitution, nobody will accept people who steal, nobody could accept to go and take somebody’s wife, nobody could accept to innocently kill, or whatever. The Ten Commandments carries all this.” -- Vincent Otti, LRA Commander

So as you can clearly see, religionofpeace isn't honest in how they report on terrorism.

Yes, I have argued the so called 'Christians' you mentioned above are not committing the crimes in the name of Christianity and as Christian-proper at the point of the crimes.

Christianity has an overriding pacifist maxim of love all, even enemies imposed on all Christians within the covenant with God.

Earlier you were claiming that Islamic violence is on the rise and that you disputed the fact that it's declining. I will now use your own source to show that it is.

Let's look at the religionofpeace scorecards for 2013-14 again:

View attachment 257108

Now look at 2019 as of today:

View attachment 257107

Ramadan is 2/3rds of the way through and according to this chart there have been an average of 5.4 attacks per day. At the current rate, 2019 will end up with somewhere between 160 and 165 attacks by the end of Ramadan. Even using their stats, that would be around a 45% drop in terror attacks since 2013-14.

As I had stated I don't have the annual details thus I have not made any objective claim on this matter.
What is objective is the numbers of non-Muslims killed by Muslims in the name of the religions are still in the thousands annually.
The reality is the unresolvable STALEMENT is still existing and hovering where we are certain non-Muslims will be killed by SOME from a pool of 320 evil prone Muslims.

Rapes condoned by the Qur'an?

There is no equivalent term for ‘rape’ in the Qur'an. Likewise, there is not a single verse in the Qur'an which even remotely discourages forced sex. In contrast, there are several verses in this book which give the green light to rape and other sexual crimes against captured and enslaved women.
Rape in Islam - WikiIslam

There are loads of articles discussing the issue of 'rape' as being condoned in the Quran.
Note re the grooming and raping of thousands of innocent young girls highlighted in the UK and brought to court. The Muslim rapists referred to their crimes as permitted by their religion!

Note the STALEMATE dilemma is also effected in the case of rapes within Islam.

Who are the Muslims that are killing because of cartoons, raping women, killing non-believers and homosexuals? Where do they live, and where are they from?

Where have you been?

Note:

Charlie Hebdo shooting - Wikipedia
On 7 January 2015 at about 11:30 local time, two brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, forced their way into the offices of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Armed with rifles and other weapons, they killed 12 people and injured 11 others. The gunmen identified themselves as belonging to the Islamist terrorist group Al-Qaeda's branch in Yemen, which took responsibility for the attack. Several related attacks followed in the Île-de-France region on 7–9 January 2015, including the Hypercacher kosher supermarket siege where a terrorist held 19 hostages, of whom he murdered 4 Jews.​

There are many other killing and riots related to the above cartoons.

Here is one Arab Killed for his cartoons;

There are countless such cases.

Re killing of homosexuals:
https://clarionproject.org/muslim-extremist-arrested-murder-gays-seattle/
There are many other incidents of the killing of homosexuals, the threats and oppression of the LBGT community.

Blasphemy laws are made by state governments, that's about as political as you can get.

Yes, by state government but they have to rely on verses from the Quran, Ahadiths and the scholars.
In many cases, the blasphemy accusations and killings are done by mobs of Muslims.

The key word in those quotes is "Extremists." Who cares what extremists say? So what if they say the reason they do what they do isn't because of political conditions and injustices? They can say this all they want, but they are still exploiting these situations and they hide behind the veil of religion in an effort to gain support and push their agendas.

The point is, if the religion do not exists, then the politicians will not the additional opportunity to exploit and kill in the name of that religion. Politicians will exploit whatever opportunity they can get their hands on.

So the solution is, humanity must get rid of those religions that do not prohibit evil and violent absolutely, thus enabling it to be exploited by politicians and other interest parties.

You didn't, I'm the one who said the 1% of the Islamic extremists are wrong in their interpretation of Islam. You are the one who keeps saying groups like ISIS (The extremists) are correctly following Islam. You even quote them to support your position.

The extremists who are definitely >1% are complying with the covenanted term within the Quran and Ahadiths and note the STALEMATE where no humans can judge they are wrong.

Yes, the majority of women do wear head coverings in Afghanistan, but the reasons vary. Some do it to please Allah, some out of fear since there is still the presence of the Taliban in the country, some are pressured by family members, and others do it for cultural reasons. Women in Afghanistan were wearing those blue burkas in the picture you posted long before Muhammad or Islam even existed. The increase in the wearing of hajibs and burkas in Afghanistan was a direct response to the Taliban's occupation of that country, so it may be quite a while before things return to pre-Taliban days if they ever do.

OK, for the sake of argument, let's say there has been an increase in the number of women wearing a hajib or a burka in an effort to be more religious. How does this relate to violence in Islam?

The increase in the number of women wearing a jihab or burga is an indication of the trend of the increasing trend of the zeal and fervor Muslims are striving with the inherent ethos of the ideology of Islam. This is obviously influenced by the clergy and support by the majority of male Muslims.

The increase in zeal and fervor means the greater urge and impulse to comply with more of the covenanted terms within the Quran and Ahadith.

More compliance in general means more compliance with the evil and violent terms within the Quran and Ahadith.

Where there is a greater proclivity towards the more evil and violent elements which attract greater merits and tagwa, there is a greater potential threat of evil and violence toward non-Muslims given the STALEMATE where no humans nor Muslims has any doctrinal principles to counter the evil elements ideology.

 

[JosephZ]

I don't have details numbers of the yearly trend.

I provided you with the data earlier that shows the trend.

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/

In 2015 total terrorist attacks decreased by 11.5 percent and total terrorism-related deaths by 12.7 percent.

In 2016, we saw a further 9.2 percent decrease in attacks and 10.2 percent decline in total terrorism-related deaths.

The downward trend continued in 2017, the most recent data available, with a 19.8 percent drop in attacks and a 24.2 percent decline in fatalities.

In Western Europe and the United States, total terrorist attacks are down sharply from the 1970s. In 2017, Western Europe accounted for only 2.7 percent of worldwide attacks and the United States for less than 1 percent of attacks.

Taken together, these 36 months have witnessed the single largest three-year decline in attacks and fatalities since the Global Terrorism Database began in 1970 – nearly a half century ago.

This trend continued into 2018:

A new study by a defense analysis company indicates there was a 33 percent drop in global terror attacks in 2018, and terrorism fatalities fell to a 10-year low. Jane's has been issuing its reports since 2009. It said the 2018 study showed the lowest fatality numbers since it began issuing the report 10 years ago.

Since 2014, there has been a 60 to 70% decline in terrorist attacks worldwide in just the past 4 years. There has also been fewer attacks in the first quarter of 2019 than there were in the first quarter of 2018, so it appears this trend is continuing.

The above information comes from the Global Terrorism Database hosted by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. It's the most comprehensive and respected database on terrorism in the world. It is
recognized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and has been used by the US Department of State to provide data and information for its annual reports on terrorism.

What is critical in this case is the total, which is still in thousands per year. There is a factual reduction from 10,000 to 9000 but it would be dumb and irrational to ignore the problem just because there is reduction and ignoring the still existing problem.

There has always been terrorism in the world and there always will be coming from all types of ideologies. Islamic terrorism just happens to be the flavor of the day. You seem to be downplaying the drop in terrorism in recent years with your "10,000 to 9,000" (10%) remark. All available data shows there has been a 60 to 70% drop in terrorist incidents since 2014. That is a significant drop and hopefully this trend will continue. This also disproves your theory about Islamic violence becoming worse, since about 85% of terrorist incidents occur in Muslim majority countries.

Yes, I have argued the so called 'Christians' you mentioned above are not committing the crimes in the name of Christianity and as Christian-proper at the point of the crimes. Christianity has an overriding pacifist maxim of love all, even enemies imposed on all Christians within the covenant with God.

Regardless, those are Christian terrorist groups and the religionofpeace website intentionally misleads its readers by not reporting those attacks.

Speaking of religionofpeace misleading its readers, did they ever answer your inquiry into the story from here in Mindanao?

In case they haven't you can write them about these two mistakes I found on their site as well:

There has been no motive mentioned or any suspects named on the incident here in the Philippines. It could have been anyone, for any number of reasons.

“The unidentified suspects shot the victim several times hitting his left shoulder and right forehead that cause his instantaneous death. The suspects hurriedly fled away to the hinterlands,” she said.
Abubakar’s family did not give any statement on the murder and no individual or group claimed responsibility for the killing.

The religionofpeace site claims the incident in India was a bombing by Islamic separatists, but it was a training exercise that went wrong.

An Army man was killed and seven others were injured in a blast during a training activity along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir's Poonch district on Wednesday, officials said.
"On Wednesday at 0915 hours, during a training activity on a military post in Mendhar sector, one soldier was critically injured and later succumbed to injuries", a Defence public relation officer said.
Seven others suffered minor injuries and two of them were taken to the nearest milita.

That is a garbage site when it comes to reporting. If they are misleading people about these reports, you can guarantee they are misleading people about many more.

This is a website that promotes anti-Muslim propaganda through only posting negative information about Islam, such as crimes that may not be related to ones religion such as this where they link to a Mixed factual source. In general, this source links to other media that has a right wing bias or is otherwise questionable by our methodology. The Religion of Peace also sources Robert Spencer in articles, who is on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate list. Overall, we rate The Religion of Peace as Questionable for having an extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy/propaganda and hate group tendencies. (D. Van Zandt 9/15/2017)

What is objective is the numbers of non-Muslims killed by Muslims in the name of the religions are still in the thousands annually.

There are not "thousands" of non-Muslims being killed by Muslims in the name of religion each year.

When it comes to terrorism, most attacks occur in Muslim majoriy countries, and most of the victims are Muslims.

There were 658 deaths in Europe and all of the Americas between January 1, 2015 and July 16, 2016. There were 28,031 or 43 times more deaths in other regions most of them consisting of largely Islamic countries. Almost all of the human impact of extremist attacks is Muslims killing or injuring fellow Muslims.

There were 18,814 deaths in 2017 and over 99 per cent of all deaths from terrorism occurred in countries involved in a violent conflict or with high levels of political terror. Most of the terrorist deaths in Europe and the Americas came at the hands of non-Muslims.

There were likely fewer than 1,000 non-Muslims killed by Muslims in terror attacks in 2017.

If you want to count murders, yes, there probably were quite a few additional deaths you could count, but most, if not all of them, would have been unrelated to religion.

There is no equivalent term for ‘rape’ in the Qur'an. Likewise, there is not a single verse in the Qur'an which even remotely discourages forced sex. In contrast, there are several verses in this book which give the green light to rape and other sexual crimes against captured and enslaved women.
Rape in Islam - WikiIslam

There are loads of articles discussing the issue of 'rape' as being condoned in the Quran.
Note re the grooming and raping of thousands of innocent young girls highlighted in the UK and brought to court. The Muslim rapists referred to their crimes as permitted by their religion!

WikiIslam is an anti-Islamic propaganda site and is not a reliable source for getting information about Islam.

WikiIslam was founded in 2006 by Ali Sina and Faith Freedom International. Essentially, WikiIslam is an anti-Islam wiki that purports to have 2893 articles/pages about Islam as of today.

In review, most information on this wiki paints a negative picture of Islam. It also favors other non-Islamic religions over Islam. Another aspect of this Wiki that is Questionable is that anyone can edit the contents. Therefore, it may not be trustworthy for factual information. While there is some very factual and in-depth information about the Quran on this wiki, there is also many opinion pieces that are not based in fact, but rather conjecture. On the other hand, because WikiIslam can be edited by anyone there are also many pro-Islam refutations that may not be rooted in fact.

Rape is forbidden in Islam and is punishable by death.

Where have you been?

Note:
Charlie Hebdo shooting - Wikipedia

I know there are terrorist attacks taking place, but my point for asking who are the Muslims that are killing because of cartoons, raping women, and killing non-believers and homosexuals was to show that those committing these acts are extremists.

Re killing of homosexuals:
https://clarionproject.org/muslim-extremist-arrested-murder-gays-seattle/
There are many other incidents of the killing of homosexuals, the threats and oppression of the LBGT community.

This information is also from an anti-Islamic propaganda site so they're going to twist the story a bit.

The Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund Inc.) is a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit organization founded in 2006. The Clarion Project states its mission as “exposing the dangers of Islamic extremism while providing a platform for the voices of moderation and promoting grassroots activism.” The Clarion Project has an extreme right wing bias in reporting and wording. They are classified as an active anti-Muslim hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Has a false claim according to a fact checker. (D. Van Zandt 4/15/2017)

Here is why the perpetrator said he killed these men:

Ali Muhammad Brown, 29, told investigators he killed a gay couple in Seattle, another man in Skyway, Wash. and a New Jersey college student as part of a plot to gain revenge against the U.S. for military actions in the Middle East, according to court filings made public on Wednesday.

Brown described a just kill as a target that was an adult male, and not a woman, child or elderly person nor in the company of any women, children or elderly persons.

"My mission is vengeance. For the lives, millions of lives are lost every day. Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, being taken every single day. All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life."

The extremists who are definitely >1% are complying with the covenanted term within the Quran and Ahadiths and note the STALEMATE where no humans can judge they are wrong.

ISIS is wrong.

The increase in the number of women wearing a jihab or burga is an indication of the trend of the increasing trend of the zeal and fervor Muslims are striving with the inherent ethos of the ideology of Islam. This is obviously influenced by the clergy and support by the majority of male Muslims. The increase in zeal and fervor means the greater urge and impulse to comply with more of the covenanted terms within the Quran and Ahadith. More compliance in general means more compliance with the evil and violent terms within the Quran and Ahadith.

Where there is a greater proclivity towards the more evil and violent elements which attract greater merits and tagwa, there is a greater potential threat of evil and violence toward non-Muslims given the STALEMATE where no humans nor Muslims has any doctrinal principles to counter the evil elements ideology.

Muslims have an opposite opinion of what following Islam brings out in a person.

...its [Islam's] principles call for justice, kindness, fairness, freedom of faith and coexistence.” -- Iyad Ameen Madani, the Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the group representing 57 countries, and 1.4 billion Muslims.

Counter terrorism experts also feel that being more religious can prevent radicalization.

MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.

Once again, religion is not the root cause of violent extremism:

Conflict remains the primary driver of terrorism in most countries throughout the world. The ten countries with the highest impact of terrorism are all engaged in at least one conflict. These ten countries accounted for 84 per cent of all deaths from terrorism in 2017. When combined with countries with high levels of political terror the number jumps to over 99 per cent. Political terror involves extra-judicial killings, torture and imprisonment without trial.

In countries with high levels of economic development, factors other than conflict and human rights abuses are more strongly correlated with the impact of terrorism. Social alienation, lack of economic opportunity, and involvement in an external conflict are the major factors associated with terrorist activity in Western Europe, North America, and other highly economically-developed regions. (PDF)

Ninety-three per cent of all terrorist attacks between 1989 and 2014 occurred in countries with high levels of state sponsored terror – extra-judicial deaths, torture and imprisonment without trial.

Over 90 per cent of all terrorism attacks occurred in countries engaged in violent conflicts.

Only 0.5 per cent of terrorist attacks occurred in countries that did not suffer from conflict or political terror.

Terrorism is more likely to occur in OECD member countries with poorer performance on socio-economic factors such as opportunities for youth, belief in the electoral system, levels of criminality and access to weapons. (PDF)

 

[Joyousperson]

I provided you with the data earlier that shows the trend.

That was the trend re attacks during Ramadhan not the total.
Note I stated the total [minimum and average] is more important than the trend as triggered by the malignant ethos.

The above information comes from the Global Terrorism Database hosted by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. It's the most comprehensive and respected database on terrorism in the world. It is
recognized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and has been used by the US Department of State to provide data and information for its annual reports on terrorism.

The topic of this OP is related to Islamic attacks to all terrorist attacks.

There has always been terrorism in the world and there always will be coming from all types of ideologies. Islamic terrorism just happens to be the flavor of the day. You seem to be downplaying the drop in terrorism in recent years with your "10,000 to 9,000" (10%) remark. All available data shows there has been a 60 to 70% drop in terrorist incidents since 2014. That is a significant drop and hopefully this trend will continue. This also disproves your theory about Islamic violence becoming worse, since about 85% of terrorist incidents occur in Muslim majority countries.

I state again, this OP is not related to all types of terrorist attacks, but only Islamic ones.
Note I stated the total [minimum and average] is more important than the trend as triggered by the malignant ethos.

Regardless, those are Christian terrorist groups and the religionofpeace website intentionally misleads its readers by not reporting those attacks.

I had stated there is a need for refinement and there is always a margin of error.
This is a case of overlooking 2 incidents, and even if it is up to 5, the number of attacks 103 by Muslims during Ramadhan is a still serious. quantum that must be addressed.
Note the total is more critical than the highlight during Ramadhan.

Speaking of religionofpeace misleading its readers, did they ever answer your inquiry into the story from here in Mindanao?

In case they haven't you can write them about these two mistakes I found on their site as well:

View attachment 257190

There has been no motive mentioned or any suspects named on the incident here in the Philippines. It could have been anyone, for any number of reasons.

“The unidentified suspects shot the victim several times hitting his left shoulder and right forehead that cause his instantaneous death. The suspects hurriedly fled away to the hinterlands,” she said.
Abubakar’s family did not give any statement on the murder and no individual or group claimed responsibility for the killing.

The religionofpeace site claims the incident in India was a bombing by Islamic separatists, but it was a training exercise that went wrong.

An Army man was killed and seven others were injured in a blast during a training activity along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir's Poonch district on Wednesday, officials said.
"On Wednesday at 0915 hours, during a training activity on a military post in Mendhar sector, one soldier was critically injured and later succumbed to injuries", a Defence public relation officer said.
Seven others suffered minor injuries and two of them were taken to the nearest milita.

That is a garbage site when it comes to reporting. If they are misleading people about these reports, you can guarantee they are misleading people about many more.

This is a website that promotes anti-Muslim propaganda through only posting negative information about Islam, such as crimes that may not be related to ones religion such as this where they link to a Mixed factual source. In general, this source links to other media that has a right wing bias or is otherwise questionable by our methodology. The Religion of Peace also sources Robert Spencer in articles, who is on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate list. Overall, we rate The Religion of Peace as Questionable for having an extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy/propaganda and hate group tendencies. (D. Van Zandt 9/15/2017)

I have stated the stats need refinement and has a margin of error.
If you can produce 10% of errors within a year of the whole total [3,500], then I will review my approach to use this stats.

There are not "thousands" of non-Muslims being killed by Muslims in the name of religion each year.

When it comes to terrorism, most attacks occur in Muslim majoriy countries, and most of the victims are Muslims.

There were 658 deaths in Europe and all of the Americas between January 1, 2015 and July 16, 2016. There were 28,031 or 43 times more deaths in other regions most of them consisting of largely Islamic countries. Almost all of the human impact of extremist attacks is Muslims killing or injuring fellow Muslims.

There were 18,814 deaths in 2017 and over 99 per cent of all deaths from terrorism occurred in countries involved in a violent conflict or with high levels of political terror. Most of the terrorist deaths in Europe and the Americas came at the hands of non-Muslims.

There were likely fewer than 1,000 non-Muslims killed by Muslims in terror attacks in 2017.

If you want to count murders, yes, there probably were quite a few additional deaths you could count, but most, if not all of them, would have been unrelated to religion.

Regardless of whether Muslims or non-Muslims are killed in this case, what is critical is whether we can trace these killing to the ideology of Islam via the Quran or Ahadith.
Note many Muslims are killed for being accused as hypocrites, apostates, traitors such as the Ahmadiyahs, the Sufis, the Sunni vs Shia divide, etc.

WikiIslam is an anti-Islamic propaganda site and is not a reliable source for getting information about Islam.

WikiIslam was founded in 2006 by Ali Sina and Faith Freedom International. Essentially, WikiIslam is an anti-Islam wiki that purports to have 2893 articles/pages about Islam as of today.

In review, most information on this wiki paints a negative picture of Islam. It also favors other non-Islamic religions over Islam. Another aspect of this Wiki that is Questionable is that anyone can edit the contents. Therefore, it may not be trustworthy for factual information. While there is some very factual and in-depth information about the Quran on this wiki, there is also many opinion pieces that are not based in fact, but rather conjecture. On the other hand, because WikiIslam can be edited by anyone there are also many pro-Islam refutations that may not be rooted in fact.

It is very typical of the left and apologists to condemn others who critique Islam due to emotional and psychological reasons.

I will say again, what is critical and objective is whether these sites quote references from original Islamic resources or not.

Don't simply make sweeping statements and brush off their arguments simply because of bias negative branding as anti-Muslims, etc.

To ensure you have intellectual integrity, provide counter arguments based on the original sources of Islam!

Rape is forbidden in Islam and is punishable by death.

Note the STALEMATE dilemma, I have provided evidence where Muslims interpret they are allow to "rape" [as defined] within Islam.
Who are you or any other human or Muslim to insist they are wrong???
The fault lies in the ideology of Islam in producing verses that are so grey.

I know there are terrorist attacks taking place, but my point for asking who are the Muslims that are killing because of cartoons, raping women, and killing non-believers and homosexuals was to show that those committing these acts are extremists.

If does not matter whether they are extremist or not.
The fact is the evil and violent acts are committed based on the ideology of islam based of very frivolous issues.

This information is also from an anti-Islamic propaganda site so they're going to twist the story a bit.

The Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund Inc.) is a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit organization founded in 2006. The Clarion Project states its mission as “exposing the dangers of Islamic extremism while providing a platform for the voices of moderation and promoting grassroots activism.” The Clarion Project has an extreme right wing bias in reporting and wording. They are classified as an active anti-Muslim hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Has a false claim according to a fact checker. (D. Van Zandt 4/15/2017)

Here is why the perpetrator said he killed these men:

Ali Muhammad Brown, 29, told investigators he killed a gay couple in Seattle, another man in Skyway, Wash. and a New Jersey college student as part of a plot to gain revenge against the U.S. for military actions in the Middle East, according to court filings made public on Wednesday.

Brown described a just kill as a target that was an adult male, and not a woman, child or elderly person nor in the company of any women, children or elderly persons.

"My mission is vengeance. For the lives, millions of lives are lost every day. Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, being taken every single day. All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life."

If it not directly for homosexuality, it is still related to the ideology of Islam in this case.

I did a quick search, but it is so common to hear of Muslim killing homosexuals.

ISIS is wrong.

Note my point in the other threat,
Moderates = 40% Islamic based on compliance with the 6236 verses in the Quran and verses in the Ahadith.
Saudi = 75% Islamic
I.S.I.S = 90% Islamic based on ideology of Islam.

The above hypothesis can be tested objectively.

Muslims have an opposite opinion of what following Islam brings out in a person.

...its [Islam's] principles call for justice, kindness, fairness, freedom of faith and coexistence.” -- Iyad Ameen Madani, the Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the group representing 57 countries, and 1.4 billion Muslims.

Counter terrorism experts also feel that being more religious can prevent radicalization.

MI5 says there is evidence that a well-established religious identity actually protects against violent radicalisation.

Once again, religion is not the root cause of violent extremism:

Conflict remains the primary driver of terrorism in most countries throughout the world. The ten countries with the highest impact of terrorism are all engaged in at least one conflict. These ten countries accounted for 84 per cent of all deaths from terrorism in 2017. When combined with countries with high levels of political terror the number jumps to over 99 per cent. Political terror involves extra-judicial killings, torture and imprisonment without trial.

In countries with high levels of economic development, factors other than conflict and human rights abuses are more strongly correlated with the impact of terrorism. Social alienation, lack of economic opportunity, and involvement in an external conflict are the major factors associated with terrorist activity in Western Europe, North America, and other highly economically-developed regions. (PDF)

Ninety-three per cent of all terrorist attacks between 1989 and 2014 occurred in countries with high levels of state sponsored terror – extra-judicial deaths, torture and imprisonment without trial.

Over 90 per cent of all terrorism attacks occurred in countries engaged in violent conflicts.

Only 0.5 per cent of terrorist attacks occurred in countries that did not suffer from conflict or political terror.

Terrorism is more likely to occur in OECD member countries with poorer performance on socio-economic factors such as opportunities for youth, belief in the electoral system, levels of criminality and access to weapons. (PDF)

The above views are not objective.
Note my approach to how to objectively rate the Islam-ness of the moderates, Saudi and I.S.I.S.

Note the quote from the horses mouth where I.S.I.S. declared the main and primary reason they killed non-believers is because they disbelieved Islam, all other reasons [political, poverty, etc.] mentioned are secondary.

 

[JosephZ]

.

 

[Joyousperson]

.

Joyousperson
Note terrorist groups of all ideologies is irrelevant in this argument which is specifically applicable to Islamic terrorism. Your 1% is ridiculous. Show me the reference and link again.

.
Note it is reported; Your 160,000 is a ridiculous number.
160,000 is being generous, there's probably less than that. Here is one of the posts where I gave the link to the source.

If you add up all the members of ISIS, al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Hamas, Jemaah Islamiya, and even the lesser known groups like Gama’a al-Islamiyya and Jaysh Rijal Al-Tariq Al-Naqshabandi from the US Department of State Country Reports on Terrorism 2017; there are less than 200,000 Islamic terrorists in the world. Even if you double that number to 400,000 just to be sure every single terrorist is counted like lone wolves, etc., it still doesn't add up to 1% of the Muslim population. And if you really want to make sure you got them all and say there's 4,000,000 Islamic terrorists in the world, which would be ridiculous, guess what, It still doesn't add up to 1% of the Muslim population.

I searched that report,
Country Reports on Terrorism 2017 - United States Department of State
there is no mentioned of less than 200,000 Islamic terrorists in the world.

Note I have argued what is more concerning is the the pool of 320 million [20% of 1.6b] evil prone Muslim as a whole. If 10% of these are aggressive in fighting for the religion, that is 32 million.

And this is evident in the above report which show there are thousands of incidents of terrorist attacks [appx. 2100] by Islamists.
See the section;
Table 3: Five perpetrator groups with the most attacks worldwide, 2017

So based on the facts above, when someone says that Islam teaches that the quickest pathway to salvation comes from martyrdom, aka being killed in Jihad, or that Islam teaches violence. How is that possible if more than 99% of the more than 1.6 billion Muslims in the world aren't engaging in violent jihad? If Islam really taught things like that, common sense should tell us that if less than 1% of the followers of that religion are engaging in violence, then this must not be what Islam teaches.

I have already demonstrated and show, it is always a minority [1-5%] within any violent ideology who commit actual violence acts.

What is more critical are the following;

1. the evil and violence ethos/essence of the ideology
2. the evil prone supporters of the ideology - 20 - 40%​

In the case of Islam, the natural 20% of evil prone Muslims is 320 milions.

Joyousperson
I challenge you to the following; If you believe there are only 1% of terrorists, I dare you to go to a square in the main city of Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and start condemning Islam and prophet Muhammad. If you insist 1% then only 1 or two from the crowd will threatened you with death. I am very certain it is very likely a large percentage >80% of the people present will mob and kill you.

Why would I as a Christian go into a Muslim community and condemn the religion of the people that live there? How would that be showing love to my Muslim neighbor? What good would come from taking such an approach? Why would I intentionally want to damage my person witness to Christ in doing such a thing?
In another thread you told me I should teach Muslims here that they can't be friends with non-Muslims by showing them verses in the Qur'an out of context. Why would I teach something or behave in a way that would would create discord and division? Why would I as a Christian teach Muslims an extremist ideology?

Muslims don't interpret the Islamic texts like you do and neither do I as a Christian missionary. If I were to go into a Muslim community and start teaching counter to what they have been been taught by their religious leaders and what they believe, I would come across as just some ignorant fool.

Obviously I do not expect you or any one to do that in reality because I know the true nature of Islam and its influence on SOME Muslims.

That was a challenge to show the true colors of the evil and violent nature of Islam that inspire and compel SOME Muslims to commit evil and violent.

If you insist Islam is so peaceful, that you can do that to prove my assertions are wrong.

If you are not willing to do that, then someone else, e.g. a critique of Muslims can do that.

Note it has already been proven in many places, where the slightest offense against Islam or the Prophet Muhammad is likely to bring death to the critique.