Saluman:

There is no point arguing with me? I put evidence forward to buttress my position and you are taking it personal?

The global peace index is there for all to see. It is one of the best global studies we use today.

The fact remains that these secular countries are far more peaceful than your islamic countries.

Did the "peace" index equate adoption of sharia with being violent?
Isn't that your own (personal) definition? So how does an unproved/untested hypothesis become "evidence"?
Is Japan really a secular state with their PMs often visiting the War Shrine which is supposed to hold the "divine"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasukuni_Shrine
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/18/japanese-mps-war-shrine-china-korea

You would have enhanced your stand by considering alternative hypotheses. You should be wary of simple explanations for social issues. The person who posited Geography as possible explanation for instability around the world provided credible evidence.

Saluman: List of your fails
-You started bring up archaic history of Japans wars to make your failed point. Sorry this is the present. Your Islamic history is full of Jihad, slave trading and conquest.

You are not interested in objective debate.
So Muslims who only slaves acquire during wars (unlike others who use kidnapping, debt etc to turn others into slaves) are now being projected as "slavers"?
When was the last time a muslim country invaded a Christian country? Reverse the question for so-called secular countries
Anyway slave trade is topical

But the WWII to which the Koreans and Chinese are still sensitive is archaic!
Invasions by America as recently as within the last 10 years are part of archaic history!!
Did you witness the Korean war? Can you call archaic? Of course not, because it is still shaping relations today

Japan and Germany are not militarised today because of their history. Objective analysts will agree with this
Did secularism stop Europe from fighting 2 wars (that engulfed the whole world) within 20 years?
Is that not the reason that the EU (rather than secularism) won the nobel prize for peace this year?

Saluman:
-You claim homogeniuty and little religious diversity. Why not take a look at Russia and tell me how peaceful they are despite this two characteristics they possess. Furthermore, there are islamic countries that are mostly Arab and islamic, why arent they peaceful?

Sorry, the fact remains that your islamic countries are not as peaceful as secular ones. Sorry to burst your bubble.

The truth is bitter!

The truth is that you are ignoring the truth
You blamed just one reason (religion) for the peacefulness of some nations. Yet it did not work in Europe. But you are sticking to that reason!
I proposed 3 reasons (Geography, history, diversity) for crises, you attempted to dismiss it by considering only one - cultural homogeneity

Your position is even faulty. Forget Russia's jostling with the US for military supremacy
The internal crisis in Russia derives from diversity.
It is fighting Muslims in Caucasus because they want independence
It invaded Georgia as recently as 2008 on behalf of Russians living in South Ossetia region of Georgia
(Indirectly the Georgian crisis of 2008 derived from diversity)

The Corsicans (Catalonians) are fighting in France(Spain) today because of history and diversity

Let me ask again: if you put all those top 5 "peaceful" countries in the Middle East, will they remain top 5 peaceful countries?
How come 3 of them are Islands and 2 are virtually islands?

I have made my point. Objective people can make up their mind. It is up to you what you choose to believe

@ Vedaxcool and Betathings.


The arguments you people are making are very big strawmen. The fact is simple. On the peace index, your islamic countries are less peaceful than the secular ones.


You guys are claiming that the peace index is biased because it is made by westerners. That is a very desperate attempt to deny reality


a) The peace index is one of the best global measures accepted by the World bank and OECD.
b) The peace index was done by experts with extensive research and analysis.
c) There is muslim professor on the board of research- Mohammed Abu-Nimer
[size=18pt]d) If you dont like studies from western schools, where the hell are your global studies and research from your muslim countries? Where are they? [/size]

BetaThings:

Did the "peace" index equate adoption of sharia with being violent?
Isn't that your own (personal) definition? So how does an unproved/untested hypothesis become "evidence"?

Where did I say that the adoption of sharia equals violence? Why do you love strawmen?

Your islamic countries are less peaceful than the secular ones on the peace index. End of story.

BetaThings:
Is Japan really a secular state with their PMs often visiting the War Shrine which is supposed to hold the "divine"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasukuni_Shrine
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/18/japanese-mps-war-shrine-china-korea

Japan is secular. If you want to base secularism on a war shrine, then feel free to waste your time

BetaThings:
You would have enhanced your stand by considering alternative hypotheses. You should be wary of simple explanations for social issues. The person who posited Geography as possible explanation for instability around the world provided credible evidence.

Enhance what?

The peace index is not a hypothesis. It is a global study. When you have a study showing that islamic countries are more peaceful than secular ones then I will listen to you.


I can not take your hypothesis seriously. Bring hard evidence.

BetaThings:
You are not interested in objective debate.
So Muslims who only slaves acquire during wars (unlike others who use kidnapping, debt etc to turn others into slaves) are now being projected as "slavers"?
When was the last time a muslim country invaded a Christian country? Reverse the question for so-called secular countries
Anyway slave trade is topical

Muslims took slaves by conquering lands that had nothing to do with them also. Read about the Arab African slave trade. Or how do you think islam came to Nigeria? Wasnt it slave trade? Do you think Arabs just came and did Dawah.


Muslims cant invade christians countries because they were defeated long ago. Simple.

Nowadays, many muslim countries are dependent on Western technology. How can you even dare to lift a finger against them?

BetaThings:
But the WWII to which the Koreans and Chinese are still sensitive is archaic!
[b]Invasions by America as recently as within the last 10 years are part of archaic history!!
[/b]Did you witness the Korean war? Can you call archaic? Of course not, because it is still shaping relations today

Did I mention America or does America even rank well on the peace index? Why do you like strawmen?

We are talking of present day peace and you are going into Asian wars and WW2 to say that a country is not currently peaceful. Mtchew

BetaThings:
Japan and Germany are not militarised today because of their history. Objective analysts will agree with this
Did secularism stop Europe from fighting 2 wars (that engulfed the whole world) within 20 years?
Is that not the reason that the EU (rather than secularism) won the nobel prize for peace this year?

When did I say that secularism stops wars?

The point is simple; the secular countries are more peaceful than your islamic ones. Simple.


You can keep denying reality

BetaThings:
The truth is that you are ignoring the truth
You blamed just one reason (religion) for the peacefulness of some nations. Yet it did not work in Europe. But you are sticking to that reason!
I proposed 3 reasons (Geography, history, diversity) for crises, you attempted to dismiss it by considering only one - cultural homogeneity

I never gave any reason for the peace in nations.

I used the peace index to state that secular countries are more peaceful.


Your points do not change the fact that they are more peaceful. Islamic countries have the same factors you have mentioned and so I do not understand what yu are trying to say.

BetaThings:
Your position is even faulty. Forget Russia's jostling with the US for military supremacy
The internal crisis in Russia derives from diversity.
It is fighting Muslims in Caucasus because they want independence
It invaded Georgia as recently as 2008 on behalf of Russians living in South Ossetia region of Georgia
(Indirectly the Georgian crisis of 2008 derived from diversity)

The Corsicans (Catalonians) are fighting in France(Spain) today because of history and diversity

Let me ask again: if you put all those top 5 "peaceful" countries in the Middle East, will they remain top 5 peaceful countries?
How come 3 of them are Islands and 2 are virtually islands?

I have made my point. Objective people can make up their mind. It is up to you what you choose to believe

You have made no points at all.


1) What is a virtual island?

2) The most warmongering and imperialistic nation is an island- The UK. So you point is meaningless]

3) Russia has been in many wars, coups and internal struggle far before Georgia and so you nonsense on homogenuity fails.







Why not address the facts about your islamic countries rather than deflect?











3)

Saluman: @ Vedaxcool and Betathings.


The arguments you people are making are very big strawmen. The fact is simple. On the peace index, your islamic countries are less peaceful than the secular ones.


You guys are claiming that the peace index is biased because it is made by westerners. That is a very desperate attempt to deny reality


a) The peace index is one of the best global measures accepted by the World bank and OECD.
b) The peace index was done by experts with extensive research and analysis.
c) There is muslim professor on the board of research- Mohammed Abu-Nimer
[size=18pt]d) If you dont like studies from western schools, where the hell are your global studies and research from your muslim countries? Where are they? [/size]

BetaThings:
A capitalist will never judge communism as a a viable economic system

It will be hypocritical to sit in judgment on people when you have different social systems, beliefs and needs. Some states in the US have the death penalty on their books. Should a state that does not execute criminals adjudge states that do as violent
So Muslims don't need to become arrogant and start judging based on their own values

Christians often jump at opportunities to rewrite history to favour themselves. The first translation of Quran into English was done by Christians. The first translations of Quran into Nigeria languages were done by Christians. Were these done to enable embrace Islam?

Muslims don't do that. We are not so judgemental and manipulative. Let people apply policies that suit their conditions. It does not make sense for Iceland to be spending so much money on arms. But who would blame military spending of Vietnam, Philippines etc and all the neighbours of China with which China has gone into dispute over the sea near them.

OECD and World banks mean nothing. Where is Washington Consensus on quantitative easing, on liberalisation etc
Having on board, a muslim does not change anything. Turkey is a muslim country but they have restriction on wearing of hijab

BetaThings:



It will be hypocritical to sit in judgment on people when you have different social systems, beliefs and needs. Some states in the US have the death penalty on their books. Should a state that does not execute criminals adjudge states that do as violent
So Muslims don't need to become arrogant and start judging based on their own values

Christians often jump at opportunities to rewrite history to favour themselves. The first translation of Quran into English was done by Christians. The first translations of Quran into Nigeria languages were done by Christians. Were these done to enable embrace Islam?

Muslims don't do that. We are not so judgemental and manipulative. Let people apply policies that suit their conditions. It does not make sense for Iceland to be spending so much money on arms. But who would blame military spending of Vietnam, Philippines etc and all the neighbours of China with which China has gone into dispute over the sea near them.

OECD and World banks mean nothing. Where is Washington Consensus on quantitative easing, on liberalisation etc
Having on board, a muslim does not change anything. Turkey is a muslim country but they have restriction on wearing of hijab

A capitalist would never judge communism as a viable economic system

A muslim would never judge christianity as a viable religious system





Where are your muslim studies since you accept no western studies? Are you not sounding like Boko Haram? "No to western education".


You disagree with research and hardwork done by professors and experts because most of them are from the west. Please give me a better work from your muslim scholars from your muslim countries.

Fact is that a "peace index" report was released
No reason was given for the way countries were placed
Now you, Saluman, hypothesised that secularism can explain the position of countries
In the process, you presented your opinion as a fact.
Your opinion failed to distinguish between correlation (even spurious correlation) and causality
Violence is a social, not a physical science, issue. Hence a simple explanation like yours will not work; normally a multiplicity of factors will be required
Eg poverty can have effect on crime rates. But it cannot fully explain proclivities to crime
Even when you assemble several factors, they will not explain every single case. Explaining about 80% will normally do

Let me mention some points briefly
I never mentioned virtual Islands. I said they are virtually islands. Canada has only one neighbour
Britain is an island that has been very "violent". But history (influenced by geography) explain "Great" Britain's actions
Its problem with IRA (in Northern Ireland) is partly due to religious diversity
Japan's shrine is not an ordinary cementry like the one at Arlington. It is a shrine. Please study Shintoism a little

If you want evidence about influence of geography, read the book I mentioned. It provides compelling evidence
The hypothesis you (Saluman) are pushing (secularism) is not backed by evidence. It is just a weak correlation
Like I have said, if secularism were that important Europe would not have fought WWI and WWII
And WWIII has been averted so far because of EU not because of secularism

I admire your admiration for Turkey, but it is not deep enough
But you ignored 2 points - Turkey is a member of NATO and has always wanted to join EU
So why would it not embrace those "virtues" so much loved by Europe

As regards the quest for peace, I am not interested in factors that play to the taste of foreigners
Respect for fa..ots "rights" is considered a virtue
Do you think any sensible country should accept that devilish
I don't care that my country sits at the bottom of the pile behind everybody, that is something we should not even contemplate

So my questions
When will secularism win Nobel prize for peace?
When will a secular country surrounded by hostile neighbours come tops in that assessment?
Why are secular countries scattered all over the list?
Does that not indicate that other factors are at play?

Now remember a Christian opened this thread. This is of course part of the usual tactic to attack Islam in order to deflect attention from the sordid deeds of Christians. You want me to "face fact" about Islam.
Should we not do the same for Christians in order to strike a balance. Since you are interested in "peace"

Can you tell me any Christian nation, now or in the past, that has implemented the doctrine of turning the other cheek?
Has there even been a Christian nation that did not have an army?
If they have always had armies, what are the purposes they were used for?
Has any Christian nation failed to respond to an attack in compliance with the doctrine of turning the other cheek?
Has Christian nations attacked other nations in the past?
If yes, were those attacks justified by the need to protect themselves?
Or has any Christian nation attacked another nation for economic advantage? Or for political advantage?

^
Nice, couldn't have done better. you always live up to your name betathings, but let me add, that certain secular nations in history had the most violent history e.g the soviet union massacre millions all in a bid to be secular, during the French revolution committed violent atrocities why? All in a bid to be absolutely secular and cleanse the state of religious influence. So we see one thing secularity does not guarantee peace. In fact the M.E is always facing one war or another because it is located in a region that is rich in resources, this simple fact have continued to guarantee interference by world powers etc in ensuing unrestricted access to such resource, so we should forgive our simple minded atheist who blames everything including climate change on religion, in fact he calls UK the most violent country on earth yet it is ranked 29 on the peace index, so we should leave his apparent flip flop with the knowledge that while an atheist blames religion for everything wrong in the world and praise man for everything good religion simply says man has to hold himself to account for his misdeeds and shall one day if not in this world be held responsible for his actions of cruelty.

Thanks
Incidentally, I forgot natural resources. The reason why Congo DR is not likely to have peace. Sadly.
Yet Republic of Congo, since it is not rich in resources, does not get so much attention

Incidentally, we see that some of the reports are sponsored or influenced
See how the IMF auditor says in his report that the IMF was put under pressure to slant a report against China

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/auditor-finds-imf-was-pressured-by-us-to-fault-china/2012/12/19/64979dae-4a11-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html

DELUSION!!!

I think I will highlight the false parts of Betathings comment;

BetaThings: Fact is that a "peace index" report was released
No reason was given for the way countries were placed

Lies. Many factors were considered in the peace index. You are just not willing to admit that your islamic countres are less peaceful

-external and internal wars
-respect for human rights (a consistent failure in islamic countries)
-Political instability
-Number of Jailed persons
etc

BetaThings
Now you, Saluman, hypothesised that secularism can explain the position of countries
In the process, you presented your opinion as a fact.
Your opinion failed to distinguish between correlation (even spurious correlation) and causality
Violence is a social, not a physical science, issue. Hence a simple explanation like yours will not work; normally a multiplicity of factors will be required
Eg poverty can have effect on crime rates. But it cannot fully explain proclivities to crime
Even when you assemble several factors, they will not explain every single case. Explaining about 80% will normally do
[/quote:


No I never said that secularism guarantees peace. That would be easily debunked by China or North Korea.

I mentioned that Secular countries are more peaceful according to the peace index. Simple fact that you want to deny.

The criteria for appointing points for peace on the peace index is very clear;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index#Methodology


So keep arguing with simple evidence.

[quote author=BetaThings
Let me mention some points briefly
I never mentioned virtual Islands. I said they are virtually islands. Canada has only one neighbour
Britain is an island that has been very "violent". But history (influenced by geography) explain "Great" Britain's actions
Its problem with IRA (in Northern Ireland) is partly due to religious diversity
Japan's shrine is not an ordinary cementry like the one at Arlington. It is a shrine. Please study Shintoism a little

How foolish. Shintoism and Buddhism are different religions. Furthermore, unlike you I have Japanese girlfriend who is from a shinto background, so please STFU,muslim!

Now 64% of Japanese do not believe in God and most are not religious. They only identify with their family's religion on census papers. You wouldnt know this if you have never read extensively about religion in Japan or met a Japanese person who explained this to you.


As for Canada, it's neigbour, the USA is violent and the next neighbour, Mexico is even more violent. Get some facts


As for the UK, was it religious diversity that founded its imperialism? Just sharrap! Your island theory fails. The most imperialistic country was an island. Gbam

BetaThings
If you want evidence about influence of geography, read the book I mentioned. It provides compelling evidence
The hypothesis you (Saluman) are pushing (secularism) is not backed by evidence. It is just a weak correlation
Like I have said, if secularism were that important Europe would not have fought WWI and WWII
And WWIII has been averted so far because of EU not because of secularism[/quote:



Nonsense again. I never said that secularism guarantees peace

Secular countries are more peaceful than islamic ones. That is the fact.

[quote author=BetaThings
I admire your admiration for Turkey, but it is not deep enough
But you ignored 2 points - Turkey is a member of NATO and has always wanted to join EU
So why would it not embrace those "virtues" so much loved by Europe

lolz....

BetaThings
As regards the quest for peace, I am not interested in factors that play to the taste of foreigners
Respect for fa..ots "rights" is considered a virtue
Do you think any sensible country should accept that devilish
I don't care that my country sits at the bottom of the pile behind everybody, that is something we should not even contemplate
[/quote:


Does islam teach you to hate? To be a bigot? Why use that word? That discriminatory word against gays?

As for your comment in bold, I wonder why we are talking about gays and why you are satisfied with our country being one of the most underdevloped and least peaceful countries in the world

[quote author=BetaThings
So my questions
When will secularism win Nobel prize for peace?
When will a secular country surrounded by hostile neighbours come tops in that assessment?
Why are secular countries scattered all over the list?
Does that not indicate that other factors are at play?

Japan is next to china if I remember clearly. Your ignorance is quite astounding.

How many muslims compared to atheists win nobel prizes? Why even go there?

BetaThings
Now remember a Christian opened this thread. This is of course part of the usual tactic to attack Islam in order to deflect attention from the sordid deeds of Christians. You want me to "face fact" about Islam.
Should we not do the same for Christians in order to strike a balance. Since you are interested in "peace"
[/quote:


Yawn. I am not a christian

[quote author=BetaThings
Can you tell me any Christian nation, now or in the past, that has implemented the doctrine of turning the other cheek?
Has there even been a Christian nation that did not have an army?
If they have always had armies, what are the purposes they were used for?
Has any Christian nation failed to respond to an attack in compliance with the doctrine of turning the other cheek?
Has Christian nations attacked other nations in the past?
If yes, were those attacks justified by the need to protect themselves?
Or has any Christian nation attacked another nation for economic advantage? Or for political advantage?

I am not a christian

I bet just like "logic"boy professors that wrote the peace index report, these IMF academics put in a lot of work to slant a report against China, lol global politics ever so interesting indeed

BetaThings: Thanks
Incidentally, I forgot natural resources. The reason why Congo DR is not likely to have peace. Sadly.
Yet Republic of Congo, since it is not rich in resources, does not get so much attention

Incidentally, we see that some of the reports are sponsored or influenced
See how the IMF auditor says in his report that the IMF was put under pressure to slant a report against China

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/auditor-finds-imf-was-pressured-by-us-to-fault-china/2012/12/19/64979dae-4a11-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html

BetaThings: Thanks
Incidentally, I forgot natural resources. The reason why Congo DR is not likely to have peace. Sadly.
Yet Republic of Congo, since it is not rich in resources, does not get so much attention
[size=18pt]
Incidentally, we see that some of the reports are sponsored or influenced
See how the IMF auditor says in his report that the IMF was put under pressure to slant a report against China
[/size]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/auditor-finds-imf-was-pressured-by-us-to-fault-china/2012/12/19/64979dae-4a11-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html

See the lies that some people have to tell to keep their delusions of peace alive?


a) The Peace Index is not done by the IMF
b) The peace index is not a report but it is a study based on hard research across many countries.



Furthermore, Your Congo with little natural resources still does rank high in the peace index. Try again

vedaxcool: ^
Nice, couldn't have done better. you always live up to your name betathings, but let me add, that certain secular nations in history had the most violent history e.g the soviet union massacre millions all in a bid to be secular, during the French revolution committed violent atrocities why? All in a bid to be absolutely secular and cleanse the state of religious influence. So we see one thing secularity does not guarantee peace. In fact the M.E is always facing one war or another because it is located in a region that is rich in resources, this simple fact have continued to guarantee interference by world powers etc in ensuing unrestricted access to such resource, so we should forgive our simple minded atheist who blames everything including climate change on religion, in fact he calls UK the most violent country on earth yet it is ranked 29 on the peace index, so we should leave his apparent flip flop with the knowledge that while an atheist blames religion for everything wrong in the world and praise man for everything good religion simply says man has to hold himself to account for his misdeeds and shall one day if not in this world be held responsible for his actions of cruelty.

The bold highlights how silly you are. The peace index is for year 2012 and not 1945 or the 15th century.


As for your strawman argument; when did I claim that secularism guarantees peace? By the way, Stalin was not in this century.

The muslims were presented with the peace index. A rigorous study that shows that secular countries are more peaceful than islamic ones. What did they do about the evidence?

vedaxcool: I bet just like "logic"boy professors that wrote the peace index report, these IMF academics put in a lot of work to slant a report against China, lol global politics ever so interesting indeed

We have been asked to shut up because we are foolish
We should take that advice because as you can see a particular point of view must be pursued at the expense of objectivity

I will advise that u should d ignore further rantings of dis pagan (christian?)Called saluman.Even if he is sponsored to engage in dis fruitless arguement, I believe u guys ve punctured most,if not all of his belated points.
Let it be clear to u-saluman- dat Islam is such a complete, perfect WAY OF LIFE that even the greatest critic, not a warped mind like u acknowledge.
I rest my case.

faluasafe: I will advise that u should d ignore further rantings of dis [b]pagan (christian?)[/b]Called saluman.Even if he is sponsored to engage in dis fruitless arguement, I believe u guys ve punctured most,if not all of his belated points.
Let it be clear to u-saluman- dat Islam is such a complete, perfect WAY OF LIFE that even the greatest critic, not a warped mind like u acknowledge.
I rest my case.

I am not a pagan or christian.


Islam is a complete and perfect way of life but tell any muslim to show you a muslim country with a higher standard of living to a country like Denmark and they start insulting you.

Evidence

www.nairaland.com/attachments/931527_Kaffir_Critic_2_jpg1d1d759dfa61c555ef58043d81f7c014

www.nairaland.com/attachments/931527_Kaffir_Critic_1_jpg079dbcd5db0d6be3ece1bf55ee198476

Saluman:


I am not a pagan or christian.


Islam is a complete and perfect way of life but tell any muslim to show you a muslim country with a higher standard of living to a country like Denmark and they start insulting you.

That is easy now. Saudi Arabia is way above Denmark. Do people in Denmark leave their stalls to offer prayer every day? Does Denmark host about a million people simultaneously every year for any activity?

You have been told that Islamic metrics for these things are different. Yet, you insist on arguing like an obstinate individual. No need to create threads, just live in your bubble.

maclatunji:

That is easy now. Saudi Arabia is way above Denmark. Do people in Denmark leave their stalls to offer prayer every day? Does Denmark host about a million people simultaneously every year for any activity?

You have been told that Islamic metrics for these things are different. Yet, you insist on arguing like an obstinate individual. No need to create threads, just live in your bubble.

Wait!!


What are you talking about? Do you muslims have a different definition of peace? Are war and politcal instability good things?


Sorry, but you are talking bull.

maclatunji:

That is easy now. Saudi Arabia is way above Denmark. Do people in Denmark leave their stalls to offer prayer every day? Does Denmark host about a million people simultaneously every year for any activity?

1) On what basis is Saudi Arabia better than Denmark? Denmark is one of the most peaceful countries in the world and higher ranked than Saudi on the peace index (note that the thread is about peace).

2) For your point about prayers, you are engaging in shirk- idolizing Saudi Arabians that they dont steal based on some dubious claims. I have heard that story and I personally know that it is a lie. Many shopkeepers lock their stores before going for prayers and my friend (a muslim) has been robbed in a downtown market.

There has been an increase in the number of reported cases of pick-pocketing and other forms of theft in Makkah, particularly in the region of the Grand Mosque, and in Madinah. Pilgrims should take additional care with valuables while visiting these two areas and may consider using a money belt or under-garment pouch as a means to carry valuables.

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/hajj/hajj_5584.html


3) As for your point about tourism, Denmark gets about 8.7 million arrivals a year.

maclatunji:
You have been told that Islamic metrics for these things are different. Yet, you insist on arguing like an obstinate individual. No need to create threads, just live in your bubble.

Yeah right. What islamic metrics are there to peace? Mtchew


Keep calling me an obstinate individual after you will ban someone for insults

Saluman:


Wait!!


What are you talking about? Do you muslims have a different definition of peace? Are war and politcal instability good things?


Sorry, but you are talking bull.




1) On what basis is Saudi Arabia better than Denmark? Denmark is one of the most peaceful countries in the world and higher ranked than Saudi on the peace index (note that the thread is about peace).

2) For your point about prayers, you are engaging in shirk- idolizing Saudi Arabians that they dont steal based on some dubious claims. I have heard that story and I personally know that it is a lie. Many shopkeepers lock their stores before going for prayers and my friend (a muslim) has been robbed in a downtown market.


http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/hajj/hajj_5584.html


3) As for your point about tourism, Denmark gets about 8.7 million arrivals a year.










Yeah right. What islamic metrics are there to peace? Mtchew


Keep calling me an obstinate individual after you will ban someone for insults

^Your comprehension is low. Denmark gets 8.7 million visitors in total in a year, divide that by 12. What do you have? Moreover, these people are spread all over Denmark not congregated in a single place and definitely not from all races at the same time.

I never said people don't steal in Saudi Arabia. On that one, you are arguing with yourself.

As it has been proven that crime happens everywhere, it is good to ask you to define peace by yourself.

If millions of people can leave whatever they are doing to perform the same activity 5 times a day in a particular country without anarchy prevailing I wonder what that means if not a highly secure, peaceful and cohesive state.

That you mentioned shirk in the context of my last post simply shows how ignorant you are. Interacting with you is more of a waste of time.

maclatunji:

^Your comprehension is low. Denmark gets 8.7 million visitors in total in a year, divide that by 12. What do you have? Moreover, these people are spread all over Denmark not congregated in a single place and definitely not from all races at the same time.

I never said people don't steal in Saudi Arabia. On that one, you are arguing with yourself.

As it has been proven that crime happens everywhere, it is good to ask you to define peace by yourself.

If millions of people can leave whatever they are doing to perform the same activity 5 times a day in a particular country without anarchy prevailing I wonder what that means if not a highly secure, peaceful and cohesive state.

That you mentioned shirk in the context of my last post simply shows how ignorant you are. Interacting with you is more of a waste of time .

that much is true, a waste of time in every sense of the word!

^ Absolument.

Just see this
http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi-data/

The list of the most peaceful countries:
AMERICA
1. Canada
2. Chile
3. Uruguay

EUROPE
4. Iceland
5. Norway
6. Sweden
7. Finland
8. Spain
9. Portugal
10. Switzerland
11. UK
12. Netherlands
13. Belgium
14. Germany
15. Austria
16. Czech Republic (80% atheist)
17. Slovakia (62.0% of Slovaks identified themselves as Roman Catholics, 5.9% as Protestants, 3.8% as Greek Catholics, 0.9% as Orthodox, 13.4% identified themselves as atheists)
18. Romania ( Christian. 85,9% )
19. Hungary (Christian 80%+ )
20. Poland

AFRIKA
21. Botswana (99% non-islam)
http://www.bedia.co.bw/news/news.php?NewsID=42

ASIA
22. Bhutan (Buddha)
23. Vietnam (82% atheist)
24. Malaysia (60% Islam)
25. Japan ( Non-religious (49%), Buddhism (34%), Shintoism (3%), Christianity (1%) )

AUSTRALIA
26. Australia
27. New Zealand

Yes there is a peaceful islamic country such as malaysia, because it is strongly affected by british.

^^^^
Anybody who believes that Britain is peaceful is trying to twist history
No Indian will believe that anyway
A lot of Nigerians still blame Britain for some of the political problems in Nigeria
If Malaysia is peaceful because of the British, how come countries colonised by Britain in Africa are not on your list
What was the stand of Britain on apartheid and the way it was enforced?

How come I woman is safer on a night bus in Dubai than on an equivalent bus in London

Google the list of the most warlike states and tell us where Britain stand