Hello to everyone in here, I want to beg everyone who is going to comment on this thread to be matured, and not be sentimental.

I have read on Internet, on news papers and heard on the street that Islam is a violent religion. So I want us to look at this few points.

1, why is Muslem label a violent religion?

2, why is Islam a threat to the western region?

Let talk about this 2 points,

Islam is label a violent region because it's refuse to derail from the original plan of Allah. The western region have tried in so many ways to manipulate Islam, but Islam remains firm and solid. The Arabia country are very conscious of the activities of their females, because we all know what full freedom to a woman can cause? Relate to (Adamu and Hauwa) (Adam and Eve). We all know how death becomes a must abi?

Because Islam refuse to accept sodomi, it's label a violent religion! Because Islam refuse to change from its original self its label a religion of violent! Let stop here for now and talk about the second point.

2, Islam is a very big threat to the western region, because Islam is still its original self, still the same old Quoran and it's Hadits. The western region have introduce sodomi in so many ways, but Islam refuse to accept it, they have tried to stylishly convert every Muslem, no way, now they disguise and cause havoc in the name of Allah, Oh Allah is very merciful. All the havoc in the world can't possibly be coming from Islam, it's the western trick to remain in power.

I implore all Muslem youth to stand their grounds, and disregard any form or critic saying Islam is a violent religion all because we refused to accept sodomi.


Mod front page please.

Frankly, I couldn't make head and tail of the message you were trying to send through the above post.

Blaming the west for terrorism(that is associated with Islam, btw) is kinda over-reaching yourself, don't you think?

FrostyZonn: Frankly, I couldn't make head and tail of the message you were trying to send through the above post.

Blaming the west for terrorism(that is associated with Islam, btw) is kinda over-reaching yourself, don't you think?

He is basically saying that there is a clash between Islamic and Western Civilisations.

The West is more of a terrorist when it sees poor Muslims as expendable in its quest for colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism.

maclatunji:

He is basically saying that there is a clash between Islamic and Western Civilisations.

The West is more of a terrorist when it sees poor Muslims as expendable in its quest for colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism.

I still don't get it, cuz the last time I checked, Neo-colonialism, didn't start with the West or have you forgotten the Ottoman Empire?

Back in the 16 and 17 century, Islam was on a quest to dominate the world and to spread it's influence, and anybody that opposes it was expendable. Or wouldn't that be that be termed as Neo-colonialism as well?

Saying that the West is more of terrorists than Muslims(which is wrong on all fronts because the West doesn't think of Muslims as such, especially France) is irrelevant and an idea that is conceived in ignorance and hatred.

Okay, so the West occupied the middle east for a while, but came because they were invited by circumstances(especially when you are a permanent member of United Nations Security and peace keeping council). The first occupation was to help the Afghanistans defend their country against the Russians(partly, in retaliation for Vietnam debacle, where the Russians supplied arms to the Vietcong), which turned out to be a grievous mistake, cuz the American trained Afghans turned their fury on Americans through terrorism once they had successfully defeated the Russians.

The second occupation was to liberate Kuwait against Iraq. A successful campaign.

The third was to fight against terrorism(again against Iraq) after the 9/11 terrorist attack on WTC at Manhattan district in New York City.

You call it Neo-colonization, I call it liberation.

Many innocent Muslims civilians might have lost their lives in the cross-fire(hence the hatred of the West) but they are nothing but Collateral damage( a significantly part of war]

From a neutral perspective, The West is doing their best to keep the Peace but because of the negative sentiments of the Muslim world against them, it can be misconstrued as imperialism, neo-colonialism and such.

It all boils down to Misinformation(on non-Muslims front), and Misrepresentation(on Muslims front), more or less.

^^^^
You speak of ignorance. Yet you are saying these!!!!!!

BetaThings: ^^^^
You speak of ignorance. Yet you are saying these!!!!!!

Then prove me wrong. I'm not being biased or anything, just exercising my neural point of view.

Thanks so much for the effort, OP. This is nothing new. What we have here are two parties accussing each other of the same thing,the very same thing they are guilty of. While many muslims are free to criticize the westerners of corruption and immoralities. They tend to be unaware of such mischiefs that have been piled up gradually in their societies over time under the guise of Islam.
This is a religious thread and i saw the moderators' warning for the posters, so the less i write, the less my chances of getting my post deleted or my username banned.
It 's just a known fact that people hardly see the errors of their ways, muslims or non muslims.

FrostyZonn:

Then prove me wrong. I'm not being biased or anything, just exercising my neural point of view.

I don't like Ann Coulter but go and read her recxent article on what the Afghans attitude to America is
She will confirm that it was Osama that had issues with the US, not the Afghans

If the West does not give a damn about Islam how come Samuel Huntington wrote about it "The clash of civilizations"
I don't have the time right now but your assumptions are

So the occupation was really about terrorism whne the UN (which was given access to Iraqi's facilities) said there were no WMD
A US citizen said so; to get back at him, his wife Plame working for the CIA was exposed by the Bush Government
Go and watch the film - Fair Game

When you lie to go to war, doctor evidence to go to war and say you are after terrorism and you now (an individual) say it is liberation, it is insensitive and biased

Is Iraq safer now? Who has been liberated? Ask yourself - people must go out daily to seek a living. That is why Nigerians are perishing at sea on the way to Europe. That was why many Nigerians refused to leave Libya during the war

is it easier to earn a living in Iraq now than 10 years ago? Don't work it out in your mind - ask Nigerians who were on ground then

You talk of Muslim sentiments. Do you call this liberation? by people who supposed to be looking for WMD?
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/05/jesus-killed-mohammed/

This is what two of Bush's people said about the war - it for oil. First Palin; 2nd is McCain
I suggest that these two should know more about this issue than the average Nigerian


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVDCXpSD6Fk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMEqQM5zPTg

FrostyZonn: Frankly, I couldn't make head and tail of the message you were trying to send through the above post.

Blaming the west for terrorism(that is associated with Islam, btw) is kinda over-reaching yourself, don't you think?

Do you agree that Mandela was a "terrorist?' Do you believe that Charles de Gaulle was a leader of the french "Resistance" and the guys who resisted the Iraqi occupation were "insurgents?"
Do you agree that the Americans who ambushed the troops of the colonists (Britain) were "terrorists "like the Brits designated them or were they "heroes" like the Americans saw them?
Finally do you know that someone successfully argued that the failure of Israel to reach a meaningful agreement with PLO led to the emergence of the militant Hamas?

BTW can you list the terrorist organisations in the world?
I would also like you to remind us of the first organisation to engage in suicide bombing?
Oh,I remember this, would you call the Budhists who are attacking both Muslims and Christians "peaceful?"