Islam is not the problem, it's the West...

Islam is not the problem, it's the West. It's developed countries fault for causing problems in peaceful traditional nations.

There was no Islamic Terrorism 20 or so years ago! There's the bloody proof! Fascism is for beta males seeking power trips.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Rijeka_bombing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostar_car_bombing
i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>There was no Islamic Terrorism 20 or so years ago!

The koran says differently.

Sources? Proof?

Fucking idiot

It's the jews

yeh fuck off

>what is PLO

Islam is the problem.

How do we know that Muslims actually invaded Europe and raided people though? Most couldn't read or write, the only sources we have are from you guessed it! White people.

>No Islamic terrorism 20 years ago

There was 800 years ago

>bait

Islam took over 20 million [not even joking] white slaves from 700ad to 1200ad after a mass 'rape n pillage' capign through southern,western and eastern euroope~ one of the major catalysts for the crusades. SO THERE

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to claim that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous - the actual Arabic words for persecution (idtihad) - and oppression (a variation of "z-l-m") do not appear in the verse. The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly To the Slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Before we started calling Islamic conquest "terrorism" we called it Islamic conquest, and Jihad.

That word has fallen out of style in recent times I've noticed.

If you hate the west leave.


Cucks stand up to defend Jewish extortionists.

>islamic terrorism started 20 years ago
Topkek

Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle).

>There was no Islamic terrorism 20 years ago or so!
[citation needed]

>No Islamic terrorism 20 or so years ago!

t. 20 year old virgin.

Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to Make Mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle. The targets of violence are "those who disbelieve" - further defined in the next verse (13) as "defy and disobey Allah." Nothing is said about self-defense. In fact, the verses in sura 8 were narrated shortly after a battle provoked by Muhammad, who had been trying to attack a lightly-armed caravan to steal goods belonging to other people.

Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Why do people attack Sup Forums for supporting terrorism when Hillary's major involvement with fucking up the Middle East was one of the main things we argued with liberals about?

They wanted the candidate that created the refugees. Not us.

Dey gud bois like the IRA dindu nuffin

BRO you think you can just drop facts like that??

SO RAYCIS

Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

You forgot
>Sack Constantinople at the behest of greedy Venetian Jews, opening the door towards Islamic expansion into Europe

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

Tell that to fucking Spain.

>fascism is for beta males seeking power trips

>islam exists in peaceful traditional nations which are liberal and progressive in social-political identity, with equal rights for women, homosexuals, transgender, and religious minorities

you have to go back muhammad

Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims.

Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has charted them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

...

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).


Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

... so why does the Quran talk about terror? Is the Quran twenty years old?

Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."


Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a True Believer?

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

Try and refute them... I motherfucking double donkey dare you. Np reverseies.

Why not turn to scholars that spend 60years learning and analyzing the Quran? Why not ask them wat these mean instead of taking it at face value? Amazing how you seem to hold more knowledge than scholars that spend their lives understanding the context and situational analysis of these verses.

Don't be ignorant, educate yourself in order to come to an educated unbiased conclusion.

Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. [Note: This parable along with verse 58:22 is a major reason that honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.12).]

Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.

lol @ cherry picking

We had a discussion back on MultiCult subreddit about how white folk always cherry pick from the Quran and never show the same shit from the bible!

Saracen go home

>There was no Islamic Terrorism 20 or so years ago

What is en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Rijeka_bombing

What is en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostar_car_bombing

>I don't know about the hundreds of years Muslims were killing people to instill their religion amongst people

Source?

The first freed black slave was under Mohammad who made him as a person that calls the people to prayer, a high honour and unheard of during that time.

Hey pal you've obviously never heard about all the western involvement over there starting in the late 1800s, or how Muslims tried to culturally invade places before, or the Crusades, or...

Saracen go home!

>You see. When it says "kill them" it actually means something entirely different according to Muslim scholars who clearly hold absolutely no biases. They don't need degrees in history or etymology. They just need to be an honorary "scholar" of islam.

...

The difference is MANY less Christians take the bible word for word than the Quran and Muslims

>Deflecting this hard.

Religion is the problem

>What is Bosnia?

the numbers

In context yes, it does mean something. Every verse in the Quran is linked with context, reading it at face value means nothing.

You're just showing you right ignorance when it comes to the actual understanding of these verses.

Context IS everything you fucking mongoloid

Why cannot we interpret what its literally saying? Why is there some contrived bullshit meaning that has to be made up to make Islam seem peaceful, a contrived image that is just a facade to defend Islams clear and rampant destruction and toxicity. Its clear what Islams tenets are, and some fucking scholar that claims he knows better than me and is able to see some secret meaning behind the obvious words is a ridiculous notion.

>MUH CONTEXT

Yes you see, when it says
"kill all the infidels" it really means "We are peaceful."

But its the same thing so? Islam is just like Christianity. There are a few bad eggs. Same with Judaism in a sense. There's nothing wrong with either or. In fact I would go as far as to say that Christianity has caused more upset than all other religions combined.

>people weren't blowing themselves up with suicide vests on airplanes 1000 years ago so islam has nothing to do with terrorism

Can't argue with that.

>biased sources
For all the wrongs you can accuse the Muslim world of, illiteracy is sadly not one of them. Muslims are almost forbidden from pictorial representative art, so script is the most valued method of knowledge transmission, decoration and artwork, even your poorest muslim hamlet is going to have SOMEONE who reads and writes.

The fact that the language of the Koran itself is regulated to the origional text of the era (vulgar translations are considered inaccurate or impure) serves not only as a method of cultural regulation and unification (you must learn their writing and language to be a proper muslim) but also means that there is not so great degree of linguisitic evolution (particularly in formal writing.)

And no, they were quite proud and bragged quite thoughly about their crushing the 'Kaffir' and the wealth, bloodshed and slaves obtained in this manner.

Also, listening to both sides is helpful. Muslim scholars as a source and as well as your right-wing sources.

I'm sure that's where you got the verses cherry picked from, an anti-Muslim website...

>Cherry picking
Prove it.
>never show the same shit from the Bible
>implying the Bible ever gives a universal command to kill

My dude, you're probably arguing with 50% Western Christians 25% Atheists 25% Heathens.
You can't cherry pick your enemies and then strawmen them.

Seriously dude, Not an argument.

top shitposting lad, would fake believe again

>proofs?
>[proofs]
>lies!
What a retard.

lmao we started "invading" those shit excuses for countries waaay before 20 years ago

>We had a discussion back on MultiCult subreddit

Are you trolling or actually this stupid?
Maybe you're an Islamic """scholar"""

this is the weakest bait Ive ever seen

>What are the Barbary Pirates and Saracens, Alex?

Look to Lebanon, and observe the impact of Islam
on their state.

> Islamic Terrorism 20 or so years ago!
How can anyone seriously believe this? c.f. Islamic invasion of India

>Right-wing sources
>directly quoting the quran

k

Its probably those fucking Russians!!! They hacked the Quran!!!

Easy to cherry pick from the cherry tree that is the Koran.

>Syrians are now shitposting from Ireland
This has gone too far.

damn potato you got rekt

>terrorism started about 20 years ago
Has this retard never opened a history book?

you've obviously never heard of Wahhabism, you fucking nigger.

>Terrorism started about 20 years ago.
Looks like someone failed their history class.

The islamic resurgence goes on for way longer than 20 years.
Examples are the islamic revolution in Iran and teh rise of muslim community services in Egypt, Algeria and so on. And it's still going on in Kasachstan e.g. Only China is really shutting down any islamic resurgence in their norther provinces.

Islam is a cancer that needs to be exterminated. We should make the lives of muslims as bad as possible all over the world.

What if that verse was linked to the context of infidels who try and claim your lands? Or in times of war against your lands? Would context not change the meaning?

Also you emphasizing "MUH" doesn't negate or deprecate wat I'm saying lol

>not posting improved version

I have spoken to an Imam, he said it is divine command to eradicate non-believers, first comes peace then comes war.
What can you say to that?
Can you deny an Imam his authority?
I asked very directly is there an imperative given by Allah and Mohammed to kill non-Muslims.
He
Said
Yes

> In fact I would go as far as to say that Christianity has caused more upset than all other religions combined.

Prove it.

STOP IT! YOUR GIVING THEM IDEAS!

Yes actually, if I heard an imam say that I'd report him to the police as what he is saying is false and harmful to society.

Report him.

Le barbary pirates meme

>Christianity has caused more upset than all other religions combined.
Good, what good is a religion if it can not stir men to thought or action?
Please explain how stimulating human thought is bad?

>MUH "WHAT IF"

keep digging, achmed.

Should have just put Al Rawi in charge of Iraq instead of killing him. Then ISIS wouldn't exist on the scale that it is now.

That's far too much to ask of him, don't be silly now.

sure makes me want to convert to islam

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

Ayy lmao

Faggot, 3 of the 4 original caliphates (one of them being Muhammed's son-in-law) were assassinated. 2 of Muhammed's sons were ambushed and murdered.

Yes, the Western interventions to the Middle East was retarded and created more problems rather than solving any, but Islam is a violent, oppressive religion and you can't fix it because all the words in it are directly from Allah's mouth. So you can't reform shit. It has to die.

Don't believe me ? Check the fucking flag. I live amongst them, and the ones I'm dealing with on a daily basis are the "best" ones.

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

No sources posted! Do you even listen?
The bible has given plenty of commands to kill idiot.
???
I used to be oblivious to the hatred shown towards Islam from mainly Christians until I married my current wife and was introduced to some of her friends from Tajikstan. She's from Belgium but did humanitarian work in Tajikstan as well as in Kabul for awhile and 3 years ago a short while after we married went back and helped to rehouse some of the friends she made over there. We now live in the same neighbourhood as them and although they dress and appear like strict muslims, the one woman of the 6 friends she brought back does not wear any form of strict religious dress. You all cherry pick constantly here. I could use the extreme Christian churches as examples of the other sides.

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates

Again with the "MUH" meme, why can't you just debate?

And the "what if" is questioning you, not questioning the verse. The verse IS linked to that context, not 'if' it was linked. I'm not speaking in hypothetical, I'm speaking fact, facts I understand you do not have, which is why I'm explaining it to you but you seem to not want to accept anything but your own view, I think their is a name for such an action

Iranian hostage crisis?

i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm i.4cdn.org/gif/1482459326437.webm

what a load of crap