D, I’m an atheist, I support NONE of the regressive religions on this planet.
which is the worst??? are they all the same show me how impartial you are
You seem to be happy to make factless excuses for the barbaric “religion of permanent offence” all the time, something the liberals do all the time
Said the person ignorant of “history” even tho it happens last week and someone always posts an article but he wont read it anyway, while saying “History doesn’t always repeat itself…”.
Ignorance is bliss.
Oh they’re not excused for their barbaric behavior, do you know the difference between consequences and excuses??
Oh yeah. We know about consequences alright.
That’s patently false, I support balanced budgets and paying down the national debt. I think that instead of borrowing money to wage our useless wars we should exact a special tax, what conservatives support any of that??
So what pathetic excuse have you got for the fact that most terror attacks in the World are “Muslim on Muslim” attacks? What are these murders the consequence of, apart from being the wrong version of Islam?
Those are just baselines for both sides…
Both parties are responsible for the useless wars yet some people think it’s republicans yet all the previous wars originated during democrat control of the presidency.
Tears of Jihad
Mar 3 2008 | by Bill Warner
These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture , BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone , p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
120 million Africans
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200 , William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
60 million Christians
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India , Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”
80 million Hindus
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam) everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200 , William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.] 10 million Buddhists
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.
This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.
Turkey still refuses to admit the Armenian genocide.
Every flavour of the political divide have involved in the Middle East, but it doesn’t explain the vast number of Muslim on Muslim murders in the regions. I put it down to the barbaric teachings in Islam
Appreciate the facts Jimsouth, but I sure some of our libtard contributors will utter such nonsense as “YES, but, NO, but, YES, but, No” , all of which Jim, are libtards facts you will not be able to deny
Could it be that muslim on muslim murders are high becase the majority are muslims?
I was speaking in context of terror attacks, not just “one on one” street crap and honour killings, my spreadsheets are not up to handling that volume as well. Muslim on Muslim terror attacks, you know the type, truck bombs, suicide vests, bombs left in Mosques
you are one of these people that have never live around Muslim’s obviously Muslims are more likely to commit crimes against one other because they are living together in a Muslim majority country or a segregated community in a non Muslim majority country the some thing can be said about any group whites blacks Asians Christians Sikhs Buddhists or Hindus but all these other groups do not kill each other for nit being proper Christians Muslims do.
i can not remember the amount of times i have seen Muslims arguing about who is a real Muslim and if your are not a real Muslim you are justifiable to kill according to extremists
also many people never believe how many Muslims celebrating 9/11 publicly even school kids
Why would you feign concern that Muslims are attacking Muslims. You know that you hope they do so until there are no Muslims left.
There are 2 different sects within the religion:
The Sunni are so called because they believe that only the Sunna is authoritative for Islam. They accept Qur’anic Law–the “orthodox” foundations of Qur’an and Hadith and the Shari’a based on them. They accept no line of visible representatives in the line of Muhammad. Government is based on current interpretation and application of the Sunna. For the Sunnis, the term Imam is used for any prayer/worship leader in a local mosque. This may be any Muslim, not a hereditary leader.
Shi’a. This name comes from the phrase shi’at ¢ Ali, meaning “the party of 'Ali.” This was the group who supported’ Ali as the Fourth Caliph (successor of Muhammad), and believed that it should be his descendants that succeeded as Caliphs after his death. Those who came to be known as the Sunni supported Mu’awiya of the Ummayad clan, who had opposed’ Ali during his life, and who seized power at Ali’s death, then declared that his son would be his successor. The Shi’a consider the Imams to be the visible representatives of Muhammad, who are supposed to be descendants of ’ Ali.
They do to get along.
you and your trolling