What causes muslims to be violent

[Veritas Aequitas]

This impulsive irrationality and stupidity.

That's exactly your description. Indeed, you are stupid and a lazy parasite who does not even read the sources that you post.

Islamic fundamentalists had killed more than 200 million non-believers and even Muslim since in the name of Allah since Islam emerged.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_violence

The Wikipedia article you referenced does not mention the "200 million" number you quoted. As a matter of fact, that article is quite interesting from a statistical point of view.

I am very well aware of what I wrote.
The Wiki article is meant to be general and represent there are violence within Islam.
I have argued elsewhere why Islam is inherently evil.

Wikipedia:

• Statistical academic studies have found that violent crime is less common among Muslim populations than among non-Muslim populations.[328][329][330][331] The average homicide rate in the Muslim world was 2.4 per 100,000, less than a third of non-Muslim countries which had an average homicide rate of 7.5 per 100,000.[332]

Note the numbers >200 million killed by Muslims in the name of Allah refer to the period since Islam emerged, i.e. from 622 to 2020.
Your current average numbers is off topic.

There are many people killed all over the world for various reasons.
The only religion that condoned killing of non-believers is Islam.

As far as the present is concerned the stats below is frightening.


For the period since 622AD, note this;
Islam Has Massacred Over 669+ Million Non-Muslims Since 622AD. Link

The number above is rough but even if it is reduced by 50% the number is still frightening given that the ideology of Islam is immutable.
Muslims occupied India for around 1000 years and killed around 80 millions in the name of Allah as condoned in the Quran.

Since Islam is the only religion that condoned killing of non-believers as commanded by Allah in the Quran, this is a serious potential for humanity especially when WMDs [nuclear and biological] will be easily accessible and cheap].

Based on the above real evidences and potential,
it is impulsive irrationality and stupidity to prefer Islamic fundamentalists to the proud boys.
Btw, stay on topic and don't deflect nor run when the facts are presented to you.
In addition, don't give me the typical, "what about this or that" excuses.

[gaffo]

The followers of Islam seem to be the most violent among the three Abrahamic religions.

i will take the craziest Islamic fundamentalist over a Proud Boy any day.

why so? i think both are lozer cretins myself.

[gaffo]

The followers of Islam seem to be the most violent among the three Abrahamic religions.

i will take the craziest Islamic fundamentalist over a Proud Boy any day.

you're a *lesbian, yeah?

islamists toss ladies like you offa rooftops, or burn 'em alive in cages

but, that's after the female castration and the honor acid attack

yep, ;-(.

[gaffo]

right wing gangs

People talk a lot about "right wing gangs."

Where are they? I never see any. The major news networks are far left; you would anticipate that they would put up film of every horror show this alleged "right wing" gang commits, just to incense the public. Yet they never do. I never run into them on the street, they have zero presence politically, it seems. No party or platform represents them, it seems...

Where are they? If they're around, let's do something about them. But we can't find them. Biden said something about "Proud Boys." But it seems the PB's are led by a black Cuban immigrant, and include people of all races. So they don't fit.

What we can find is lots of Lefties talking about such "gangs," and tons of Lefties looting, burning, and beating people up...and even the Lefty news shows lots of that. But we can't find these "right wing gangs."

Where are they, B?

the riechwing is out there - we may, probably see them next month after the election - ruing rampant with guns/like the antifa left.

so they are out there, "standing by".

- both sides in my book are lozers and neither love nor support the Rule of Law.

[gaffo]

you're a *lesbian, yeah?

islamists toss ladies like you offa rooftops, or burn 'em alive in cages

but, that's after the female castration and the honor acid attack


*

Islamists and right wing gangs are both wrong because they are both intolerant of people who don't think like them.

seems to me: if joe hates lesbians, but leaves 'em be, he's exercising' toleration

seems to me: if mustafa hates lesbians, and burns 'em up, he's not exercisin' toleration

tolarace is as tolarance does, lets leave "mustafa" out of it, until you can show reichwings are more tolarant than "mustafa".

until them i equate them as the same.

[Belinda]

right wing gangs

People talk a lot about "right wing gangs."

Where are they? I never see any. The major news networks are far left; you would anticipate that they would put up film of every horror show this alleged "right wing" gang commits, just to incense the public. Yet they never do. I never run into them on the street, they have zero presence politically, it seems. No party or platform represents them, it seems...

Where are they? If they're around, let's do something about them. But we can't find them. Biden said something about "Proud Boys." But it seems the PB's are led by a black Cuban immigrant, and include people of all races. So they don't fit.

What we can find is lots of Lefties talking about such "gangs," and tons of Lefties looting, burning, and beating people up...and even the Lefty news shows lots of that. But we can't find these "right wing gangs."

Where are they, B?

Where are the followers of Bolsonaro, Trump, Putin, Lukashenko, Kim Jong-Un, Modi. That is where. Of the lot of them Trump is the most powerful gang leader of the lot.

Gangs are separatists, out for their own members only as long as they support the leader, making divisions between their territories, controlling armed militias against ordinary people.

[Immanuel Can]

Where are they, B?

the riechwing is out there

Yeah? Where?

I can find you hundreds or thousands of rioting Lefties, burning, looting, whining...They're on the telly every night. I can find you any number of media and political organizations that represent their cause, including major political parties. I can point out to you their books and propaganda sources. I can locate their proponents in the university, without even having to get out of my chair. I can show the effects of all their doings, and I can name many of them by name. I can even give you a body count of the people they've killed and injured.

They are not just "out there" in the vague beyond...they're right here, right now, in front of our faces.

Where are the "righties"?

[Immanuel Can]

Trump is the most powerful gang leader of the lot.

Trump's not "right wing." He might be, at most, centre-right, but I think even that's dubious. He's a converted Democrat, actually. And he's just one guy, not some "gang." So that's just a silly thing to suggest. And his current supporters are not in any kind of gang, but seem to be just plain folks from the central US, so far as I can tell, and they protest by voting, not burning cities or beating old people, like the Left does.

No, no...I mean somebody like Antifa, like BLM. Where are these teeming hordes of "righties" who are the terrible threat to us all that the Left keeps rattling on about? I never see any of them, or hear anything from them. Do you? Point them out.

Where do they meet? What is the name of their organization? Where's their manifesto? Which media outlets shill for them? Where are they represented in the public schools or the university campuses? What political party do they run? If I want to stop them, how do I even find them?

I can find the Lefties, and in abundance. Where is this terrifying bunch of right-wing gangs?

[henry quirk]

armed militias against ordinary people.

'murican militia ain't in the streets of major cities destroyin' private & public properties, harassin' drivers in the streets, injurin' and killin' folks...that's Bowels Like Movin' & the fascists who are erroneously self-named Antifa

by the way: by defintion, the whole of the 'murican citizenry is militia

[henry quirk]

Islamists and right wing gangs are both wrong because they are both intolerant of people who don't think like them.

seems to me: if joe hates lesbians, but leaves 'em be, he's exercising' toleration

seems to me: if mustafa hates lesbians, and burns 'em up, he's not exercisin' toleration

tolarace is as tolarance does, lets leave "mustafa" out of it, until you can show reichwings are more tolarant than "mustafa".

until them i equate them as the same.

you can equate as you like, but it's islamists who toss gays offa roofs, not right wingers; it's islamists who burn 'em alive in cages, not right wingers; it's islamists who throw acid in folks' faces, not right wingers; little girls in the clutches of islamists end up havin' their clits sliced off; little girls in right winger homes get to keep theirs

islamists desire an aggressive theocracy; right wingers want to preserve the constitutional republic, emphasis on constitutional


me, I can't see the equivalence

[Immanuel Can]

islamists desire an aggressive theocracy; right wingers want to preserve the constitutional republic, emphasis on constitutional
me, I can't see the equivalence

The "equivalence" is a wanted fiction of the Left.

The Left is terrible at everything positive, everything that comes after the alleged "Revolution." They can't build, they can't protect rights, they can't educate properly or have good art (because they are always ideologically chained to conventional opinions only), they can't sustain an economy, they can't make meaning out of Materialism, they can't protect their own, they can't justify ethics...they can't, in fact, do anything helpful. Their entire vitality is derived from having something more vigorous to oppose, deny, decry, or destroy.

As soon as they don't have any opposition, they start inventing internal "enemies" -- meaning that they turn to destroying their own. That's how it always plays. That's how it has, in fact, played in every single historical case.

The devil eats all his own children.

In contrast, free enterprise, free speech, equal opportunity, personal dignity, personal initiative, personal property, the nuclear family, universal human rights...these are all things about building a society and sustaining an economy. So the "right" isn't as good at complaining, whining, destroying, and denying as the Left is. But they are much better when it comes actually to building something positive.

[Averroes]

I am very well aware of what I wrote.

I don't think you are aware of your level of stupidity and ignorance.

The Wiki article is meant to be general and represent there are violence within Islam.

The interesting fact here is that the Wikipedia article you referenced says that of the three Abrahamic religion, Christianity (followed closely by Judaism) is the most violent and Islam the most peaceful. It is your own sources saying that! The thing is that you are too stupid to understand what you referenced! Even after the explicit quotation I made of your own sources, you still didn't get that! Let me quote your own sources again as you are stupid and a lazy parasite:

• Statistical academic studies have found that violent crime is less common among Muslim populations than among non-Muslim populations.[328][329][330][331] The average homicide rate in the Muslim world was 2.4 per 100,000, less than a third of non-Muslim countries which had an average homicide rate of 7.5 per 100,000.[332] The average homicide rate among the 19 most populous Muslim countries was 2.1 per 100,000, less than a fifth of the average homicide rate among the 19 most populous Christian countries which was 11.0 per 100,000, including 5.6 per 100,000 in the United States.[333] A negative correlation was found between a country's homicide rate and its percentage of Muslims, in contrast to a positive correlation found between a country's homicide rate and its percentage of Christians.[331] According to Professor Steven Fish: "The percentage of the society that is made up of Muslims is an extraordinarily good predictor of a country’s murder rate. More authoritarianism in Muslim countries does not account for the difference. I have found that controlling for political regime in statistical analysis does not change the findings. More Muslims, less homicide."[329][334] Professor Jerome L. Neapolitan compared low crime rates in Islamic countries to low crime in Japan, comparing the role of Islam to that of Japan's Shinto and Buddhist traditions in fostering cultures emphasizing the importance of community and social obligation, contributing to less criminal behaviour than other nations.[330]

I have argued elsewhere why Islam is inherently evil.

Stop fooling yourself, you are too stupid to argue anything.
___________________________________

The only religion that condoned killing of non-believers is Islam.

This is another one of your stupid fantasies.

As a matter of fact, Allah, the Most Generous tells us explicitly in the Holy Quran to be kind and just to the non-Muslims who do not fight us.

• Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.(Holy Quran, interpretation of meaning 60:8)

Moreover, Allah, the All-Wise orders us to invite non-Muslims to Islam in the best of ways and not to force Islam upon anyone who refuses to accept the truth.

• Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.(Holy Quran 16:125)

• There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.(Holy Quran 2:256)

On the other hand, as we saw previously the Wikipedia article that you yourself provided said:

• A statistical textual analysis of the Qur'an and Bible conducted by software engineer Tom Anderson in 2016, using the Odin Text analytics software, found that violence is less frequent in the Qur'an than in the Bible. According to Anderson: "Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament (2.8%) than in the Quran (2.1%), but the Old Testament clearly leads—more than twice that of the Quran—in mentions of destruction and killing (5.3%)."[Wikipedia]

In the light of the sources you dug up for me, let us now investigate some of those biblical verses referred to there in. Remember that you brought these sources to me!

It is reported by an unknown writter in the Bible that biblical Jesus said the following:

• But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'(Luke 19:27)

Also, biblical Jesus is also alleged by the same unknown writter to have said:

• “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.(Luke 14:26)

And there are so many other like in Numbers 31:17-18:

• 17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.(Numbers 31:17-18)

And there are so many others like that.

Here I pause to let the readers know that I do not believe in the description that the corrupted Bible puts forward of the real Prophet Jesus(peace be upon him). While the Bible lies about prophet Jesus(pbuh) and falsely makes him into a hate preacher, the Holy Quran tells the truth about him:

• [Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I remain alive. And [made me] dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me a wretched tyrant. And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive." (Quran 19:30-33)

• That is Jesus, the son of Mary - the word of truth about which they are in dispute. (Quran 19:34)

• It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be," and it is. (Quran 19:35)

• [Jesus said], "And indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path." (Quran 19:36)

________________________________________

For the period since 622AD, note this;
Islam Has Massacred Over 669+ Million Non-Muslims Since 622AD. Link

This is stupidity at its peak. I went through the article in the link. The article provided a hyperlink for its source. When I clicked on it to verify from which source these numbers were coming from, I got the message: "themuslimissue.wordpress.com is no longer available."

However, there is one historian mentioned in the article, namely Firistha, who is alleged to be quoting some numbers. From the Wikipedia entry on him, I found a contemporary historian saying of Firistha the following:

Wikipedia:

• At least one historian, Peter Jackson, explicitly states that Firishta relied upon the works of Barani and Sarhindi, and that his work cannot be relied upon as a first hand account of events, and that at places in the Tarikh he is suspected of having relied upon legends and his own imagination.[Wikipedia]

You are very fortunate to be conversing with me again, because I put in the effort to investigate the veracity of the sources you produce. You then just have to sit back and benefit from my hard work. I was into spoon feeding you before but now I am having to go a step further in that now I chew and you then just have to swallow. But eventually my patience will wear out and you will have to bear alone your stupidity and ignorance.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I am very well aware of what I wrote.

I don't think you are aware of your level of stupidity and ignorance.

It is your stupidity because you provide no justifications.

The Wiki article is meant to be general and represent there are violence within Islam.

The interesting fact here is that the Wikipedia article you referenced says that of the three Abrahamic religion, Christianity (followed closely by Judaism) is the most violent and Islam the most peaceful. It is your own sources saying that! The thing is that you are too stupid to understand what you referenced! Even after the explicit quotation I made of your own sources, you still didn't get that! Let me quote your own sources again as you are stupid and a lazy parasite:

• Statistical academic studies have found that violent crime is less common among Muslim populations than among non-Muslim populations.[328][329][330][331] The average homicide rate in the Muslim world was 2.4 per 100,000, less than a third of non-Muslim countries which had an average homicide rate of 7.5 per 100,000.[332] The average homicide rate among the 19 most populous Muslim countries was 2.1 per 100,000, less than a fifth of the average homicide rate among the 19 most populous Christian countries which was 11.0 per 100,000, including 5.6 per 100,000 in the United States.[333] A negative correlation was found between a country's homicide rate and its percentage of Muslims, in contrast to a positive correlation found between a country's homicide rate and its percentage of Christians.[331] According to Professor Steven Fish: "The percentage of the society that is made up of Muslims is an extraordinarily good predictor of a country’s murder rate. More authoritarianism in Muslim countries does not account for the difference. I have found that controlling for political regime in statistical analysis does not change the findings. More Muslims, less homicide."[329][334] Professor Jerome L. Neapolitan compared low crime rates in Islamic countries to low crime in Japan, comparing the role of Islam to that of Japan's Shinto and Buddhist traditions in fostering cultures emphasizing the importance of community and social obligation, contributing to less criminal behaviour than other nations.[330]

It would be stupid of you [relatively] to try to leverage whatever is written in Wiki as authoritative.

For me, I quote wiki often for general purpose ONLY and I don't take it as highly authoritative.
If anyone disagree then we go into more rigorous arguments and references from more original primary sources and sound arguments and justifications.

I have argued elsewhere why Islam is inherently evil.

Stop fooling yourself, you are too stupid to argue anything.

Again you are the stupid one in making claims without justifications.
___________________________________

The only religion that condoned killing of non-believers is Islam.

This is another one of your stupid fantasies.[/quote]
It is stupid of you to simply jump to conclusion without justifications nor asking for evidences.
If you don't agree then we should go into the details.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Moreover, Allah, the All-Wise orders us to invite non-Muslims to Islam in the best of ways and not to force Islam upon anyone who refuses to accept the truth.

• Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.(Holy Quran 16:125)

• There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.(Holy Quran 2:256)

Btw, as I had stated before, I had spent more than 3 years full time researching the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and 77,430 words or [157935 words] in thorough details to know you are being deceptive with the above verses.

The Quran do have elements of 'good' and almost all of them are only valid for Muslims and where it is related to non-Muslims they are overridden by the default of the inherent evil against them.

The Quran contains more than 3400++ verses with evil laden elements directed at non-Muslims, the non-believers labelled as kafirs and infidels.

The overriding most evil verse against non-Muslim is 5:33 which is after the famous supposedly positive verse in the Quran 5:32, [that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind]
this is one of the most stupid sequence of verses in any holy book.

Note the highly potential evil laden verse of 5:33:

• 5:33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom

The reading of the English translation sound very innocent but when one read it is Arabic [which the serious Muslims do] then one can sense its evilness;

• Quran 5:33
  إِنَّمَا جَزَاءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَسَادًا أَن يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُم
  مِّنْ خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنَ الْأَرْضِ ذَٰلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيم
  Innama jazao allatheena yuhariboona Allaha warasoolahu wayasAAawna fee al-ardi fasadan an yuqattaloo aw yusallaboo aw tuqattaAAa aydeehim waarjuluhum min khilafin aw yunfaw mina al-ardi thalika lahum khizyun fee alddunya walahum fee al-akhirati AAathabun AAatheemun

The critical word here is fasadan [فَسَادًا] which is mildly translated as corruption in the land, but to the serious Muslims reading in Arabic the term fasadan [فَسَادًا] has more wide ranging meaning and have very strong illucutionary force which evoke terrible negative emotions within the believer.
Note my emphasize on this word; https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... ocutionary#

For the Arabic reader the term fasadan [فَسَادًا] general refer to threats against Islam which include disbelief of Islam.

As such to the Muslim reader, what is invoked their mind could be one of this meaning and reactions, i.e.

• 5:33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and are non-believers [ fasadan فَسَادًا] will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom

I understand there are 1.5+ billion of Muslim around the world and the majority will not read 5:33 evilly as above, i.e. fasadan = non-belief in Islam, either they are ignorant, have not read the Quran or not taught by their ulamas.

But, the fact is 20% [justifiable] of humans, thus 300 million Muslims are born with and have natural active evil tendencies.
Thus there will also be 20% of Islamic ulamas who are evil prone and thus will read 5:33 rightly in its most evil meaning and these ulamas will influence the other 300 million evil prone Muslims to kill and commit evil acts upon non-Muslims as justified by Quran 5:33 i.e.
commanded by Allah in the Quran.

The reality of the killing and violence committed by evil prone Muslims as justified by 5:33 and the other 3400 evil laden is so evident with the more than 200 millions killed since 622AD [to be justified with references] and the present state of terrible evils committed by these evil prone Muslims and also the potential threat they will commit in the future in the name of Islam.


What is most dangerous with the inherent evil of Islam is there is no overall authority within the Muslim community to judge any Muslim interpretation of the Quran.
If the evil prone interpret 5:33 RIGHTLY where "fasadan فَسَادًا = non-belief" WHO ARE YOU or anyone to judge they are wrong?
Beside there are many reputable tafsir and authentic hadith that support "fasadan فَسَادًا = non-belief".

I take it that you are one of the moderate Muslims who is ignorant and stupid not to know of the above reality.
Even if you are aware of the above, like I say, WHO ARE YOU or anyone to judge they
are wrong?

Therefore as long as Islam which is based on the Quran's 6236 from Allah and its 5:33 with the other 3400 evil laden verses, there will be evil prone Muslims [20%] to obey the commands of Allah to kill and commit evil upon non-Muslims as justified by 5:33 where they interpret "fasadan فَسَادًا = non-belief".

WHO ARE YOU or anyone* to judge they are wrong, and since no one can judge how the evil prone Muslims can interpret "fasadan فَسَادًا = non-belief" in 5:33 and other evil laden verses, Islam is a threat to humanity as evident from its past, present and will be in the future.

* only Allah can do that on judgment day after the evil acts are already done, but where is Allah?
By then, the human species could have been exterminated based on 5:33 whilst the martyred Muslims reaped their rewards of virgins and drinking wine in the garden of paradise.

Humanity would definitely be better off if all the believers of the ROP convert to Christianity [overridingly pacifist], other pacifist religions or be pacifist non-theistic.
Recommend you do that if you are a moral and responsible citizen of humanity.

[Averroes]

For me, I quote wiki often for general purpose ONLY and I don't take it as highly authoritative.
If anyone disagree then we go into more rigorous arguments and references from more original primary sources and sound arguments and justifications.

"more rigorous arguments"??? But that's impossible for you!  You know why?  Because you are too stupid and a lazy parasite. Tell me truly, you must already at least suspect that you are stupid, don't you? Everyone knows here that you are stupid. This is the one thing that we all agree on.

I have argued elsewhere why Islam is inherently evil.

Stop fooling yourself, you are too stupid to argue anything.

Again you are the stupid one in making claims without justifications.

Why do you need justifications, don't you already know that you are stupid? At least you must suspect that something is wrong with you, don't you? We already all know here of your stupidity. You can open up, it's ok.

It is stupid of you to simply jump to conclusion without justifications nor asking for evidences.
If you don't agree then we should go into the details.

That would be completely useless with you. You already know why. Exactly! You are too stupid to understand the details. And besides, I am done spoon-feeding you, and that too didn't work out anyway as you are too dumb. Now, I am having to chew and then spit it in your mouth for you to just swallow.