It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What the Terrorists Want

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I have been saying this for a while now: Terrorism will never go away, and the USA is not the reason for terrorism (we create a good agenda for them though). The terrorists that we all focus on today are Muslim terrorists. (For all you short thinkers, I don’t mean all Muslims, just terrorist Muslims). It seems the VAST majority of terrorism today is perpetrated by the extreme Islamic fundamentalists.

Why will terrorism never go away? Because of what they REALLY want: An Islamic world governed by the “Shari’a”, or Islamic law. Muhammad himself preached this, the prophet himself and the man that wrote THE book. The difference between extremist Muslims and regular Muslims is that extremists take the Qur’an literally and verbatim. They are also willing to act on what Muhammad tells them to do.

Now, there are a billion reasons why somebody may become “extreme”, that’s another topic in itself. The point is these extreme Muslims exist and aren’t terrorists because of the USA, the USA is just something they need to get past to further their agenda: Islamic world domination.

So all of you who sit back and say “they bombed us because we do this, and we do that…” are blind. You have been duped. Its funny, some of the people who actually blow themselves up and some of the lowest people in the terrorists “chains” may actually be driven by some things that happened to them or their families. But the push of the movement has nothing to do with foreign policies. That’s why I laugh when I hear a statement from one of these groups saying that the attacks will stop if we do this or that. The attacks will never stop until we are all dead or Muslims fundamentalists. Period.


Here is a clip of an article by Daniel Pipes on the topic:


“…In nearly all cases, the jihadi terrorists have a patently self-evident ambition: to establish a world dominated by Muslims, Islam, and the Shari’a (Islamic law). Or, again to cite the Daily Telegraph, their “real project is the extension of the Islamic territory across the globe, and the establishment of a worldwide ‘caliphate’ founded on Shari’a law.”

Terrorists openly declare this goal. The Islamists who assassinated Anwar el-Sadat in 1981 decorated their holding cages with banners proclaiming “The caliphate or death.” A biography of Abdullah Azzam, one of the most influential Islamist thinkers of recent times and an influence on Osama bin Laden, declares that his life “revolved around a single goal, namely the establishment of Allah's Rule on earth” and restoring the caliphate.

Bin Laden himself spoke of ensuring that “the pious Caliphate will start from Afghanistan.” His chief deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, also dreamed of re-establishing the caliphate, for then, he wrote, “history would make a new turn, God willing, in the opposite direction against the empire of the United States and the world’s Jewish government.” Another al-Qaeda leader, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, publishes a magazine that declares, “Due to the blessings of jihad, America’s countdown has begun. It will declare defeat soon,” to be followed by the creation of a caliphate…”




Islamic extremist terrorism will never end people, no matter what the USA or any nation changes about its policies. The only things the policies effect are the terrorist’s agendas, not the underlying motives or the extremism.

Because these guys are fundamentalists driven by the Qur’an, they are only governed by THEIR interpretation of it. The extreme Islamic fundamentalists will do anything to further their agenda of world Islamic domination, even killing themselves if necessary.

How do non Muslims stop one of these terrorists? The only way they can: Kill them. Sounds harsh? It is. But no harsher than the tactics they employ to reach their goals. And why is killing them the only way? Because non Muslims are sub human to these terrorists. You represent nothing but the Devil to them; they would never listen to you or negotiate with you. Why would they listen to somebody they want to kill so badly they are willing to kill themselves in the process?

The only way that radical Islamic terrorists will ever be stopped is if Muslims as a whole do something to stomp out the extremism from within. Main stream Islam needs to promote a symbiotic relationship between Islam and other religions of the world. And the only way to do that is to teach their kids the peaceful aspects of their religion and temper the parts that aren’t so peaceful.

As long as some Muslims teach their kids that all non Muslims must die (states so right in the Qur’an) there will be extremists among them willing to kill the infidels (you and me).

And as long as this is the case, all the West can do to stop them is kill them. (for you short thikers, "them" means Muslim terrorists, notall Muslims)



[edit on 26-7-2005 by skippytjc]



OYG

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   
I hope I'm the only idiot to reply to this thread simply because if you count the number of people killed by terrorists in 2004 globally with the people killed by Phillip Morris... well I rest my case...

They both do their jobs well to control the population...



[edit on 26-7-2005 by OYG]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by OYG
I hope I'm the only idiot to reply to this thread simply because if you count the number of people killed by terrorists in 2004 globally with the people killed by Phillip Morris... well I rest my case...

They both do their jobs well to control the population...
[edit on 26-7-2005 by OYG]


Your "case" has nothing to do with the topic of Islamic Terrorists. Its customary on these boards to reply to the TOPIC. So, unless you have comments on the topic of the thread, use your right to not post. Or better yet, choose "ignore"



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Skippytjc,

Well done on your post. You have pointed out a truth
that is little known or understood outside of the
intell community. You are right on the money with your
reference to reestablishing the Islamic Caliphate.
I have kept careful notes on this for the last 3
years and will share some them with you.

What is Al Qaeda up to?

Many people have no idea of what is behind Al Qaeda
and their war on the USA. Most don't even know why
Al Qaeda attacked the world trade center. They somehow
just believe it was an act of hate and let it go at
that. In actual fact though there is an actual strategy
behind the 9-11 attacks. True it has not been given
much coverage in the main media but if you looked closely
you could find references to it in the main media at times.
One of the first times I heard of it on TV was on the
date, 6-28-2004 as I listened to CNN the first mention of
reestablishment of the Islamic Caliphate on the TV news.
Anyone familiar with intel reports from Stratfor had
heard about this as far back for more than a year.
According to those intel reports 9/11 was just part of a
global scheme to reestablish the Islamic Caliphate.
Finally the TV news had brought this story forward.
A certain Michael Ware being interviewed extensively
on CNN told of sitting in meetings of the jihadists in
Iraq hearing them referring to the fight to bring back
this Caliphate. Among things mentioned by them were that
even if the Americans left they would have to follow them
and take the struggle back to them (USA) in order bring
about this global struggle. Michael Ware has been following
this bunch for some time and he said it sounded like he was
back in Afghanistan listening to this dream of the al Qaeda
of the reestablished of the Islamic Caliphate. He said
the jihadists have moved into Iraq and see a struggle to
set up a government true to jihadist principles and
spread their fight.

Now to get back to some of the intel reports that were
present about a year before surfacing on TV news,
the following is a synopsis that I did about
Oct of 2003 many giving reviews from what I read in
Stratfor reports and some other sources. I used this
to send along a report to my veteran group and some
friends.

Synopsis as of Oct 2003:
The events of Sept. 11 were primarily intended to change
the internal dynamics of the Islamic world, but not a single
regime has fallen as of Oct, 2003 as a result of the Sept. 11
attacks. The United States, unable to decline action after direct
attack, took a big risk in response.

The militant Muslims were very successful in destroying
the World Trade Center and shutting down U.S. financial markets,
but al Qaeda failed in its primary goal, that is, a massive
uprising in the Islamic world. Al Qaeda's goal was a radical
change in the Islamic world, reestablishing the Caliphate,
a multinational Islamic empire which during its height,
stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

To achieve this uprising, al Qaeda figured it had to first overthrow
existing regimes in the Islamic world. These regimes were composed
of two types. One, the secular, socialist and military regimes,
modeled by Gamel Abdul Nasser. These were countries like Egypt,
Syria, Iraq and Libya. The other type consisted of formally
Islamic states of the Arabian Peninsula, which Osama bin Laden
referred to as "hypocrites" because their policies undermined the
construction of the Caliphate. Finally, bin Laden had to deal
with the problem of Shiite Iran, which had taken the lead in
revolutionizing Islam but in which the Wahabi and Sunni al Qaeda
had little confidence.

Al Qaeda's objective was to start the process that would replace
these governments with Islamist regimes. In order to do this, al
Qaeda needed to start popular uprisings in some of the countries,
because it reasoned that these governments were puppets of the
Christians, Jews and Hindus. More importantly, al Qaeda had to
show that the US was militarily impotent and an active enemy of
the Islamic world. The attacks purpose was to convince the masses
that the United States could be defeated, and what better way
than an ongoing war with the United States could this be
demonstrated, after all with God's help the Muslims were able
to defeat Russia in Afghanistan, and with God's help the Muslim
world could be inspired to kick the US out of the middle east,
in places like Saudi Arabia (an Al Qaeda hot spot) and bring down
these corrupt governments like in Saudi Arabia..

Al Qaeda had to execute an operation that would accomplish:

1. Show how vulnerable and weak United States is.
2. The action had to be severe enough that the United
States could not avoid a counterattack.
3. The counterattack had to be effectively countered by al Qaeda,
further showing how weak the U.S. is.

The events of Sept. 11 were designed to change the internal dynamics
of the Islamic world. The attacks had to be severe enough that
they could not be minimized or overlooked as insignificant, in
both the Islamic sphere and in the US, as the previous strikes
against US had. Al Qaeda wanted the symbols so obvious that their
significance would be understandable to the simplest Muslim.
The targets would symbolize US business, US military, and
US government. Business - World Trade Center, Military -Pentagon,
and government - US Congress.

As expected, the attacks forced the US to retaliate. If the US
declined the fight it would clearly demonstrate that US was
essentially weak. A counter attack was very difficult because
no optimal military targets were available, and this caused the
US into attacks that were less than optimum.

Afghanistan was the first target, of these. The Al Qaeda
script planned and envisioned the following scenario.
(1) USA would attack Afghanistan in response to 9-11 and
try to weed out Al Qaeda from the country.
(2) Al Qaeda would remain hidden away in remote areas
of Afghanistan and conduct a war of attrition over
many years just as they did with the Russians. This
would demonstrate to the Islamic world that Al Qaeda
was powerful and the word of God, and it would discredit
the US who would be further attacked in whatever Islamic
country they had any presence. The movement would grow
and eventually the Islamic Caliphate would be reborn
under a worldwide true jihadist government.

United States did not follow the script though. For openers
the US chose to use a small special forces group and the
anti Taliban forces of Afghanistan. The US knew from the
Russian experience that occupying and defeating the country
was a losing game. First of all the US did not want to
control Afghanistan as Russia did. Secondly, we were not
prepared to expend the kind of forces that the Russians did
even if we wanted to control the country. So quite logically
the US did not enter the country with any sort of strong
ground force. Instead they concentrated on bringing down
the Taliban government and helping to replace it with a
government that would not give sanctuary to the Al Qaeda
forces there. There was one other factor that promoted the
US decision. That factor was necessity. It was estimated
that it would take at least 6 months to bring in any sizeable
ground force to carry on the war in Afghanistan, and it was
felt that any delay in counter attack would work against the
US both psychologically and tactically.

This plan worked really well. It actually made military
history for what it accomplished. The Special Forces
proved to be worth their weight in gold. They successfully
coordinated with opposition in the country and directed
air support attacks and brought the Afghanistan government
down and defeated the Afghanistan Army, in just a few
weeks. Also they were successful at working with and
helping to set up the new government there which is
very pro-US. To have done this with the handful of men
they had, was beyond anyone's wildest dreams, especially
when you consider how fast they did it. It was simply
amazing what these few men could do with backpacks full
of hundred dollar bills and radios to US air power.

One of the problems though in Afghanistan was that many
of Al Qaeda core escaped. In actual fact they would
probably have escaped even if we sent in a ground army
of 100,000. It was their turf and they knew all the
hiding spots from 10 years of war with the Russians.
So this core was still free to try to implement their
plan of conducting a guerilla war of attrition for
many years against the US. The only thing lacking at
this time, was American troops to attack, so they
pretty much remained hidden. Also they lost their
one and only jihadist government in Afghanistan that
was to be their model to the Islamic world. From
the viewpoint of Al Qaeda, they had missed their
target by a mile. In this mode, Al Qaeda was free
to continue any terror campaigns that they could
mount, but at the same time going after them was
probably a losing game, if the Russian experience
of 10 years meant anything.

So in review Al Qaeda goals were to bring about
a jihadist revolution within Islamic countries.
Their main strategy to do this was to bring
about the unity of the Muslim world to expel
The US. Integral to this was the strategy of
baiting the US into attacking into the Muslim
world. Through this ploy it would be demonstrated
that the US was the enemy and jihadist governments
would be constructed throughout the Islamic
world to replace the puppet and hypocritical governments
present in the Islamic world. Al Qaeda strategy
was to spread jihadist Islamic governments and
the re-establishment of the Caliphate.


What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the
enemy's strategy. --SUN TZU


The US strategy attacked the Al Qaeda goal at its
base. The US took away the only jihadist government
that Al Qaeda had established, the Taliban government
in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda failed in its first goal
when the US did not cooperate by sending thousands of
targets to Afghanistan to be sniped against for 10
years and thereby show the Islamic world that Islam
could defeat the US. To add to the failure of Al
Qaeda on their opening barrage they not only did
not succeed in getting their thousands of targets, but
they lost the only jihadist government which had taken
them 10 to 20 years before to build.

Now tell me, who won round one of the Islamic revolution?
You tell me that and then tell me why you think we attacked
in Iraq. Lets see if it is anywhere near my assessment.
This is becoming fun.

Oh yes, Bush's Problem_And_Dilemma, why has Bush not told the
country and the world what we are up against and why
has he not told them how he was going to counter it? Why
has he not said the US is at war to keep an Islamic
revolution from taking over the middle east that is a threat
to the west? Well, figure it out. Can he come forward and
announce that we are at war with an Islamic revolution?
Doing that might give incentive to millions of Islamic
to volunteer, maybe even if they did not support the
jihadists which the majority of Muslims do not. Also
consider that it is not smart to tell the enemy what
you are going to do. If you announce it ahead of time,
they can more effectively counter it. In short Bush
has to lie about his motives, its just smart warfare.
There is nothing new here. Also Al Qaeda lies about
their motives. They say its to get the US out of Blank.
Fill in the Blank, it can be Afghanistan or Iraq, but
their real motive is the set up of Taliban type governments
throughout the Islamic world and maybe the whole world
after that.

How does the attack of Iraq fit into this fight? There
is real and connected strategy connected here, directly
on the opposition to this new Islamic fascism. See
the post on:

Discussion-America's Response to a Nuke Strike

and look for my posts concerning countering nukes for
that answer. You will also see in those posts why
Bush has not given full explanation to the public
there on the opposition to terrorists with nukes.




[edit on 26-7-2005 by MajorCee]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Frontpage Magazine?







PLEASE!



cjf

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
So all of you who sit back and say “they bombed us because we do this, and we do that…” are blind.
-[snip]-
That’s why I laugh when I hear a statement from one of these groups saying that the attacks will stop if we do this or that. The attacks will never stop until we are all dead or Muslims fundamentalists. Period.


Overall interesting article; however there are other options which involve long-term thought for permanent change. The short-term unfortunately is counter violence.

To your point, the general and specific motives of terrorist acts are fluid, roughly defined and non-static. These actions may stem from individuals, groups, organizations, religions or nations in nature.

But an overall common thread would not be associated to political, religious, personal or national goals etal, because there is no one singular overall goal. Rather a common thread may be found somewhat inside the processes of cultural endemic ideological development which manifests in the need (not want) to act negatively after blame as been assigned in ‘identified’ victimization.

The article touches briefly on the ‘psychology of terrorism’ and after reading many of your threads, perhaps a recent article of the topic of terrorism and psychology may be of some interest as you have touched on many of the points contained in contemporary research in that area.

I found a recent paper authored by Randy Borum, Psy.D. available online which is a short read, but rather full of basic information for a starting point, in pdf format.

(link to paper)


cjf

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 10:41 AM
link   
'

Originally posted by Souljah
Frontpage Magazine?

PLEASE!


Yes and when I log onto ATS I continue to win a ‘years worth of gas $1000 value’ or I am lead to believe I am the 1,000,000th visitor (again) and the site motto is to ‘deny ignorance’

btw, the shirt is funny.
.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Frontpage Magazine?







Again Souljah, your reply contains nothing in regards to the topic. You have yet to create an intelligent reply to but one topic. All you do is question and spread anti USA propaganda.

Maybe someday you will actually reply with an opinion regarding the subject of a thread. Maybe someday....



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   

As long as some Muslims teach their kids that all non Muslims must die (states so right in the Qur’an)

BULL#! THe koran no more insists on the destruction of non-muslims than the bible does of non beleivers, with the decimation of non-jewish tribes, or the revelation fantasy of the destruction of all non-beleivers. The Koran does not demand the death of all non-beleivers. The middle east is one of the last places on earth where there is a large, dominating monotheistic religion and traditional pagan religions, like zoroasterianism and the iraqi luciferians or the babylonian jews or the Unitarians of the Levant or the Copts of egpyt. Get it straight, the Koran inists on an orderly state of affairs within the 'greater islamic kingdom', and this means no civil strife between muslims and pagans and special relations between muslims and christians and jews. The muslims had the most powerful kingdoms throughout the middle east and did not destroy the natives. I'm not going to pretend like some people that islam doesn't have bloody borders, but it most certainly does not require the destruction of all non-muslims. This is the sheerest ignorance!


[edit on 26-7-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Agreed with Nygdan, now its just that Islam is being used by Islamic extremists in a different way, kinda like the KKK using Christianity for their purpose that it is annihilate minorities, but especially blacks. There are many different Muslims with different views. cant compare to the same people. did u guys know that the Confederate flag is being hijacked by the KKK as a symbol to terrorize the blacks? people assume the Confederate flag is meant for oppression, slavery and terrorism on blacks.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Look at this statement:

As long as some some muslims teach that:........

This statement has nothing to do with what is really in the Koran,
but what is taught by some Muslims.

I think it has been pretty well documented about some militant Muslims
hijacking the religion.

[edit on 26-7-2005 by MajorCee]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Maybe someday you will actually reply with an opinion regarding the subject of a thread. Maybe someday....

And How Do I Reply to a post taken from a Site that has a Banner for T-Shirts that says:

"I just Neutered a Cat. Now he is Liberal"?

Serious?



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

As long as some Muslims teach their kids that all non Muslims must die (states so right in the Qur’an)

BULL#! THe koran no more insists on the destruction of non-muslims than the bible does of non beleivers,



Here are three different translations from the Qur'an:

"YUSUFALI: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

PICKTHAL: Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. That (is the ordinance). And if Allah willed He could have punished them (without you) but (thus it is ordained) that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He rendereth not their actions vain.

SHAKIR: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.


Also: My post has nothing to do with any other religion and I couldnt care less about them. This post is about Islamic Extremists using the litteral interpetation of the Qur'an to exterminate all non Muslims. Please make your replies based on that.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by skippytjc
Maybe someday you will actually reply with an opinion regarding the subject of a thread. Maybe someday....

And How Do I Reply to a post taken from a Site that has a Banner for T-Shirts that says:

"I just Neutered a Cat. Now he is Liberal"?

Serious?


And again: No opinion from Souljah on the topic. Like a broken record.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

As long as some Muslims teach their kids that all non Muslims must die (states so right in the Qur’an)

BULL#! THe koran no more insists on the destruction of non-muslims than the bible does of non beleivers, with the decimation of non-jewish tribes, or the revelation fantasy of the destruction of all non-beleivers. The Koran does not demand the death of all non-beleivers. The middle east is one of the last places on earth where there is a large, dominating monotheistic religion and traditional pagan religions, like zoroasterianism and the iraqi luciferians or the babylonian jews or the Unitarians of the Levant or the Copts of egpyt. Get it straight, the Koran inists on an orderly state of affairs within the 'greater islamic kingdom', and this means no civil strife between muslims and pagans and special relations between muslims and christians and jews. The muslims had the most powerful kingdoms throughout the middle east and did not destroy the natives. I'm not going to pretend like some people that islam doesn't have bloody borders, but it most certainly does not require the destruction of all non-muslims. This is the sheerest ignorance!


Sadly you are 100% wrong on both counts. Both the Koran and the Bible do "Demand" the death of non-believers. Read a bit mate...........



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorCee
Skippytjc,

Well done on your post. You have pointed out a truth
that is little known or understood outside of the
intell community. You are right on the money with your
reference to reestablishing the Islamic Caliphate.
I have kept careful notes on this for the last 3
years and will share some them with you.

What is Al Qaeda up to?

Many people have no idea of what is behind Al Qaeda
and their war on the USA. Most don't even know why
Al Qaeda attacked the world trade center.

[edit on 26-7-2005 by MajorCee]



All this intell says nothing about the truth of the matter if al-queda was fabricated by the US as a broad strategy to to defeat their real enemies, which is the case IMHO.

(What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the
enemy's strategy. --SUN TZU)

I wonder how many people of the intel business in the US know what is going on, whats is real and what is illusion.

.


[edit on 26-7-2005 by asala]



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
What the terrorists want is to spark a general war between Islam and the West, in order to unify the Islamic world under one Caliphate, not coincidentally headed by OBL himself. The war with the West is incidental to the real goal: the unification of Islam.

Unfortunately, our own fanatics are determined to do everything they can to help OBL get what he wants.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Maybe they just want food, water, shelter and so on. You know just the basics. My mom and dad taught me to share.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
"YUSUFALI: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens.

This is them talking about fighting a war against non-beleivers who have invaded their lands and who make war with them. Its saying 'if they try to kill and opress you, it is just to defend yourself with force'. Not 'go out and kill all them infidels.






PICKTHAL: Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve

In battle, in a war, not 'start wars with all foreigners and infidels and kill them all.'.


So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates.

A perfectly acceptable way of going about war. Kill the enemy until he surrenders, then, when the heat of the battle is over, do not execute them, but release or at most ransom them. Thats completely different from what you were claiming.




My post has nothing to do with any other religion and I couldnt care less about them. This post is about Islamic Extremists using the litteral interpetation of the Qur'an to exterminate all non Muslims. Please make your replies based on that.

And my replies have been based on that, the Koran does not demand that 'all good muslims kill all the non-beleivers'. It says muslims shouldn't go to war with each other and that when they are at war with non-muslims, that they should fight bravely and fiercely and then take prisoners and treat them humanely. Your post is factually incorrect.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bush43
adly you are 100% wrong on both counts. Both the Koran and the Bible do "Demand" the death of non-believers. Read a bit mate...........

How about you read either book and present the passages that say 'All non-beleivers must be killed, you must wage war against them until you have exterminated them'????



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join