8 Thai Soldiers Killed by Suspected Muslim Insurgents

googoomuck SG

The Muslim terrorists did not hide the fact that they are using the religion as a reason to justify their actions.

Their actions are sanctified by influential clerics or imams because they understand the quran very well. They are Arabs or other muslims trained by the Arabs. Among them are lawyers and well educated Muslims. You can't expect people to believe that they have been misled.

You have not been studying in depth the quran and hadiths and other books written by Muslims scholars.

youyayu SG

these are talented people Laughing

tripwire SG

during the qin dynasty of china.... when there is such a suicide attack on the emperor...

the emperor would give the order to massacre every civilian and animals within a 3 mile radius from the incident.

the idea is not to kill the assassins... but to show the assassins and those supporting the assassins... that innocent people (the very people these assassins are supposed to be fighting for) will pay the price for their bravado.

remember 9-11?

in modern times... the method has evolved.... for the bravado of a few followers of islam... USA makes it clear... the consequences by bombing and subsequently occupying iraq and afganistan....

i believe there is little need for me to bring out the number of muslims including innocents who had been made to pay the ultimate price...for the bravado of the few....

and needless to say.... when was the last time the USA homeland was attacked after the 9-11? i believe the message has been well recieved.... by you know who....

many people naively believe the reason is oil... but usa hardly import any oil from the middle east.... most of the oil used in america is either from canada or south america... america has oil too..

surely... the british oil is closer to america then middle east oil....

happieman SG

so if oil is not the reason .... then back to my question ..

why do most of the terrorists are muslim? and not other religions?

faroukalhadad SG

terrorism happens all over the world. sri lanka seperatist, FARC seperatist, palestine seperatist, Columbian rebels fighting for autonomous region, Maoist rebels in nepal, Basque rebel bombing in Spain - all these have performed terrorists acts and were in the headlines last year.

pls prove, by quoting statistics or other tangible evidence, that most terrorists are muslims - as according to you.

happieman SG

googoomuck SG

Self-criticism in Arab media follows school siege

Al-Arabiya GM: Muslims are main perpetrators of terrorism

Quote:

CAIRO, Egypt - Muslims worldwide are the main perpetrators of terrorism, a humiliating and painful truth that must be acknowledged, a prominent Arab writer and television executive wrote Saturday, as Middle East media and officials expressed horror at the bloody rebel siege of a Russian school.

faroukalhadad SG

Originally posted by googoomuck:
Self-criticism in Arab media follows school siege

Al-Arabiya GM: Muslims are main perpetrators of terrorism

Quote:

CAIRO, Egypt - [b]Muslims worldwide are the main perpetrators of terrorism, a humiliating and painful truth that must be acknowledged, a prominent Arab writer and television executive wrote Saturday, as Middle East media and officials expressed horror at the bloody rebel siege of a Russian school.

[/b]

Thank you for your quote but what you have given is just someone's opinion.

Similarly i can paste someone's opinion here to say that Tamil Tigers are the main perpetrators of terrorism last year - but can i prove it?

wat we need is hard statistics.

anyone can have an opinion.

happieman SG

faroukalhadad, you have not reply my previous message ... is also considered as a gd statistics.. will appreciate that

faroukalhadad SG

dear sir,

i find it berating that you have not replied to my request for tangible proof of your statement that "most terrorists are muslims" but yet expect a reply to another additional question on top of that instead.

making statements such as "most terrorists are muslims" are hate-inciting in nature in the context of a multi-religious society like Singapore, and the person making such statements must quantify it with evidence.

happieman SG

pls do not get me wrong, i have many muslim or malay friends.. and i know this is a sensitive issue. i just want to use the forum to clear my doubts. that's all.

me or many of my friends have the impression abt the majority of the terrorists are muslims. the rational why i quoted this statement as to your question above:-

how many maoist rebels in the world (plus length of history) vs. muslim terrorists in the world ? (in term of world regions and lenght of time)

same to columbian rebels vs. muslim terrorists ..

same to basque rebel bombing vs. muslim terrorist attacks ..

just by comparing anyone of the non-muslim terrorists you have mentioned vs. muslim terrorists, you can see my rational ..

i am not biased against anyone, just that this is a very common impression of any non-muslim but not asked or told since it is sensitive.

I am sorry if i sound offensive .. is either i voice out and ask objectively or just feeling the same and hide inside .. which is the same as other fellow non-muslims.

to refer back to your question for the proof of "most terrorists are muslim.."

i do not have solid proof and i just have some info read from the newspaper.

using these comparasion.. what's your opinion and enlightenment ?

Comparing in terms of :
1. different spread of regions in the World
2. historic (or lenght of time)

Compare Maoist Rebel vs. Extremed Muslim Terrorist

Compare Columbian Rebels vs. Extremed Muslim Terrorist

Compare Basque Rebel Bombing vs. Muslim Terrorist attacks ..

Please correct if i am wrong, by comparing them individually, you will see the comparisions are actually unfavourable to the Extremed Muslim Terrorists.

Do you agree with me?

iveco SG

The IRA, ETA and LTTE are local guerrilla movements, unlike the Jihadists. The latter group have stronger networks.

Timmay SG

My post in "Terrorist in S'pore US embassy bomb plot gets life sentence" was not refuted and now, I'm asking Muslims/non-Muslims to refute it.

If I have quoted any verses that are out of context

Please feel free to include the entire passage where its from

We'll see then if I have cowardly quoted the Quran out of context

Well....I gotta agree with Googoomuck that Islam is not a religion of peace

Does the Qur'an really contain dozens of verses commanding violence?

Take the comment in Sura 4:89 about Non-Muslims:

"They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them"

And others

Sura 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"

Sura 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"

Take the comment in Sura 2:216 about fighting

"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." (VERY IMPT)

Sura 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.";

I got many more examples

Maybe its the little itsy bitsy group of Muslims who choose terror

But where they get their motivation for terror?

Where else but the Quran?

The Quran contains dozens of verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers.

Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers, and kill the infidels wherever they may be hiding.

Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

These verses are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not embedded within historical context (as are nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence).

They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Qur'an.

People, remember that even though there are many terror groups that exist with different names

99% have one thing in common

To establish Islamic rule on the face of the earth!

Too bad so sad, really thought we could live together in peace

Timmay SG

Hard statistics?

Okay...

What about reading the newspapers daily?

And REALISE that most terrorist acts are performed by Muslims almost on a daily basis?

So go read the Straits Times( And other news sources)

MohamedF SG

Finally got chance to answer this last post...

4:89 They would love to see you deny the truth even as they have denied it, so that you should be like them. Do not, therefore, take them for your allies until they forsake the domain of evil for the sake of God; and if they revert to [open] enmity, seize them and slay them wherever you may find them. And do not take any of them for your ally or giver of succour

I would like to stress here on the identity of "they". Most people translate "they" as non-muslims so muslims have to kill non-muslims. But the thing is, the "they" here are anti-muslims. People who get out of their way to distory Islam and Muslims. And this verse specifictly say that only fight back if the anti-muslims tries to kill muslims. And kill the "anti-muslims who tries to kill you" where ever you find them. Usually in a war scenerio.

Suran 8:12
Too long to summarise: read this http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/surah8_12.htm

Suran 2:216
All SAF and NS men know, if Singapore kena war, touch wood, all soldiers have to fight, weather they like it or not, or else Singapore dies.

So, even if fighting is a bad thing, still have to fight to protect the ones you love.

This is all that I know of. The rest need to ask some who knows more than me...

happieman SG

So the fight and kill the "anti-muslim" is not justified at times..

For example, in Malaysia the government allows the islamic court to overwrite domestic court when for example a chinese or indian refuse to bury in islamic procedure, and at the end they are forced of doing so despite strong reluctance by their family members. In this case, these "anti-muslim" behaviours got to be killed ?

In another case, when someone commented about the war in Arghanistan and the previous Arghanistan government destroy the Buddha statue, the muslims will stare at commenter fiercely, are these commenters "anti-muslims" ?

there are many real life examples... the phrase "anti-muslim" is not the main reason ...

therefore i disagree with you on saying << To fight and kill the anti-muslim>> so what is the definition of anti-muslim ?

googoomuck SG

For every kafir or infidel killed, the retaliation must be multi-fold in order to balance the global infidel/muslim status quo.

There's no other way.

MohamedF SG

So the fight and kill the "anti-muslim" is not justified at times..

there are many real life examples... the phrase "anti-muslim" is not the main reason ...

therefore i disagree with you on saying << To fight and kill the anti-muslim>> so what is the definition of anti-muslim ?

Like I said earlier, only fight the "anti-muslims" who are attacked the muslims in the first place... And fight with equal retaliation... If they fight with words, fight with words... If they are fighting a war, we have to fight back...

Do you expect me to use a revolver at someone who simply "muslim sucks"? No right...

5:87 O ye who believe! make not unlawful the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you, but commit no excess: for Allah loveth not those given to excess

The right of private defence is lawful to everyone but god forbids killing when you can simple subdue the assailant with non-lethal force

Catknight SG

I once askd a Muslim sheik does he think islam needed reform, he said no..as I’m not a muslim scholar, I did not went on with the conversation but it does not take a scholar why the terror groups most active globally are muslims.

« Previous Page