MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS AND TERRORISTS ARE NOT MUSLIMS

[andromeda876]

I signed this true idea
MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS AND TERRORISTS ARE NOT MUSLIMS.

[hero1111]

Who think muslim people are terrorists i think  this person dont know  anything abouth   Islamism or this persons cant use their brains

[criptix]

^
please spa... post in my yobit thread.
(or use a different translator)

[Spendulus]

FACTS:
All terrorists are of their own branch of religion.
Ones who call themselves Muslim are EXTREMIST MUSLIMS or EXTREMIST

The term EXTREMIST is the only way to describe their religion and they believe themselves to be a member of the Muslim faith. 

So...

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

But that's not what the OP wants us to believe, is it?  He does not want your precise definition.

He simply wants people to believe that terrorists are not muslims....

Well, when you think about it, terrorists cant really be muslims. Islam is not really different from Christianity in a sense, and in both killing the innocent or killing yourself is a major sin.

So the terrorists blowing themselves in suicidal attacks are in fact doubly condemned to Hell is they're Muslims xD

Was Yassir Arafat a Muslim?

Muslim - one who searches for peace (a representation of peace)
Islam - the search for peace
Jihad - a search for justice (technically more of freedome)

All Religioins that believe in God/Allah believe that their life belongs to God, He is the only thing who can give it or take it.

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

Extremism refers to a branch of a religion that is extreme.
The belief that one should force a religion or force death or marriage is, for me, by definition: extremism.

I just asked a simple question.  (bolded)

[yugo23]

FACTS:
All terrorists are of their own branch of religion.
Ones who call themselves Muslim are EXTREMIST MUSLIMS or EXTREMIST

The term EXTREMIST is the only way to describe their religion and they believe themselves to be a member of the Muslim faith. 

So...

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

But that's not what the OP wants us to believe, is it?  He does not want your precise definition.

He simply wants people to believe that terrorists are not muslims....

Well, when you think about it, terrorists cant really be muslims. Islam is not really different from Christianity in a sense, and in both killing the innocent or killing yourself is a major sin.

So the terrorists blowing themselves in suicidal attacks are in fact doubly condemned to Hell is they're Muslims xD

Was Yassir Arafat a Muslim?

I don't. Yeah maybe...

Anyway my answer was here mostly to under light the contradictions of terrorists. It was not a way to defend them.

[Spendulus]

FACTS:
All terrorists are of their own branch of religion.
Ones who call themselves Muslim are EXTREMIST MUSLIMS or EXTREMIST

The term EXTREMIST is the only way to describe their religion and they believe themselves to be a member of the Muslim faith. 

So...

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

But that's not what the OP wants us to believe, is it?  He does not want your precise definition.

He simply wants people to believe that terrorists are not muslims....

Well, when you think about it, terrorists cant really be muslims. Islam is not really different from Christianity in a sense, and in both killing the innocent or killing yourself is a major sin.

So the terrorists blowing themselves in suicidal attacks are in fact doubly condemned to Hell is they're Muslims xD

Was Yassir Arafat a Muslim?

I don't. Yeah maybe...

Anyway my answer was here mostly to under light the contradictions of terrorists. It was not a way to defend them.

I understand, no problem.  But you understand the problem in answering about Arafat.  If you say yes, then all of his terrorists actions were Muslim.  If you say no, then a major Muslim leader and hero is admitted to be Not A Muslim.

And that's the problem in a nutshell.  In logic it's called the "True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

Meanwhile in the real world, Arafat damn sure was a Muslim and was responsible for hundreds of bombings and terrorist actions.

[sartorpc]

the moment they become extremists/terrorist they are not real muslims anymore, they are some extreme-modified violent version of islam.

[craked5]

FACTS:
All terrorists are of their own branch of religion.
Ones who call themselves Muslim are EXTREMIST MUSLIMS or EXTREMIST

The term EXTREMIST is the only way to describe their religion and they believe themselves to be a member of the Muslim faith. 

So...

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

But that's not what the OP wants us to believe, is it?  He does not want your precise definition.

He simply wants people to believe that terrorists are not muslims....

Well, when you think about it, terrorists cant really be muslims. Islam is not really different from Christianity in a sense, and in both killing the innocent or killing yourself is a major sin.

So the terrorists blowing themselves in suicidal attacks are in fact doubly condemned to Hell is they're Muslims xD

Was Yassir Arafat a Muslim?

I don't. Yeah maybe...

Anyway my answer was here mostly to under light the contradictions of terrorists. It was not a way to defend them.

I understand, no problem.  But you understand the problem in answering about Arafat.  If you say yes, then all of his terrorists actions were Muslim.  If you say no, then a major Muslim leader and hero is admitted to be Not A Muslim.

And that's the problem in a nutshell.  In logic it's called the "True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

Meanwhile in the real world, Arafat damn sure was a Muslim and was responsible for hundreds of bombings and terrorist actions.

Difference with the true Scotman logical fallacy is that here there is a sacred text explaining that Arafat was going to go to hell if he was a Muslim. So he maybe believed he was a Muslim but he was probably too dumb to even understand what it meant ^^

[Spendulus]

FACTS:
All terrorists are of their own branch of religion.
Ones who call themselves Muslim are EXTREMIST MUSLIMS or EXTREMIST

The term EXTREMIST is the only way to describe their religion and they believe themselves to be a member of the Muslim faith. 

So...

TERRORISTS ARE NOT (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS AND (NON EXTREMIST) MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS?

But that's not what the OP wants us to believe, is it?  He does not want your precise definition.

He simply wants people to believe that terrorists are not muslims....

Well, when you think about it, terrorists cant really be muslims. Islam is not really different from Christianity in a sense, and in both killing the innocent or killing yourself is a major sin.

So the terrorists blowing themselves in suicidal attacks are in fact doubly condemned to Hell is they're Muslims xD

Was Yassir Arafat a Muslim?

I don't. Yeah maybe...

Anyway my answer was here mostly to under light the contradictions of terrorists. It was not a way to defend them.

I understand, no problem.  But you understand the problem in answering about Arafat.  If you say yes, then all of his terrorists actions were Muslim.  If you say no, then a major Muslim leader and hero is admitted to be Not A Muslim.

And that's the problem in a nutshell.  In logic it's called the "True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

Meanwhile in the real world, Arafat damn sure was a Muslim and was responsible for hundreds of bombings and terrorist actions.

Difference with the true Scotman logical fallacy is that here there is a sacred text explaining that Arafat was going to go to hell if he was a Muslim. So he maybe believed he was a Muslim but he was probably too dumb to even understand what it meant ^^

Lol, that's one decent way to look at it.

But we know that he would have he certainly considered himself Muslim, fighting the valiant cause of Jihad.  As did millions of people.

[craked5]

Lol, that's one decent way to look at it.

But we know that he would have he certainly considered himself Muslim, fighting the valiant cause of Jihad.  As did millions of people.

Yeah for sure.
But it doesn't really matter, I'm still convinced terrorism is a bit a Global plot for industries and banks to control us
(See how here I use really conditional and biased vocabulary, not saying it is, just saying I believe it is ^^)

Terrorism do to little damage, they could do 10000 times more damage if they wanted to.

[Cass LeChat]

Lol, that's one decent way to look at it.

But we know that he would have he certainly considered himself Muslim, fighting the valiant cause of Jihad.  As did millions of people.

Yeah for sure.
But it doesn't really matter, I'm still convinced terrorism is a bit a Global plot for industries and banks to control us
(See how here I use really conditional and biased vocabulary, not saying it is, just saying I believe it is ^^)

Terrorism do to little damage, they could do 10000 times more damage if they wanted to.

People also like to conveniently forget how many terrorists were created by First world intervention and bull, like why does no one ever hold the US responsible for Al-Qaeda?? They created them. Or the Palestinian rebels during the Gaza strip conflicts? 20 years of taking shit from bull Israel. Nevermind that they were the victims of colonization and occupation and were getting killed. People treat people badly without care for the ramifications of their actions and then get confused when people think they suck.

[Spendulus]

Lol, that's one decent way to look at it.

But we know that he would have he certainly considered himself Muslim, fighting the valiant cause of Jihad.  As did millions of people.

Yeah for sure.
But it doesn't really matter, I'm still convinced terrorism is a bit a Global plot for industries and banks to control us
(See how here I use really conditional and biased vocabulary, not saying it is, just saying I believe it is ^^)

Terrorism do to little damage, they could do 10000 times more damage if they wanted to.

Terrorism is by definition, the creation of terror.  This is a different thing than, say, creating mass death or disease or whatever.

I like the conditional and biased approach, no problem with that at all.  As opposed to someone saying "IT IS TRUTH THAT....", lol...

But the problem with the OP, aside from the fact it shouts in all capitals, is that really, using the Arafat example it is this...

MUSLIMS (who I define as muslims meaning they are peaceful not as they define themselves) ARE NOT TERRORISTS (because I have defined msulim so that he is not terrorist)

You get the picture.  It's a total bullshit assertion and the proof of it is also total bullshit.

[Snail2]

This kind of "there were lot worse killers in human history than us" argument looks a bit flawed for me. I don't care who killed who 70, 200, or 2000 years ago. Muslims are a present and future danger, therefore they are something we have to take care of.

You're sick. Muslims are an entire religion who are not any more dangerous than violent Christians. 

Wrong. I'm Hungarian, and we have a couple of hundred years of hands on experience with these "harmless and peaceful" muslims .

BTW you shouldn't let neither your positive or negative preconceptions to blur your sight. I've noticed that you don't like us whites, but why do you think that these brownie muslim fellas had been more compassionate to your kind than we were?

[mainpmf]

This kind of "there were lot worse killers in human history than us" argument looks a bit flawed for me. I don't care who killed who 70, 200, or 2000 years ago. Muslims are a present and future danger, therefore they are something we have to take care of.

You're sick. Muslims are an entire religion who are not any more dangerous than violent Christians. 

Wrong. I'm Hungarian, and we have a couple of hundred years of hands on experience with these "harmless and peaceful" muslims .

BTW you shouldn't let neither your positive or negative preconceptions to blur your sight. I've noticed that you don't like us whites, but why do you think that these brownie muslim fellas had been more compassionate to your kind than we were?

What would be right is to consider Muslims and Christians violence on the long term. Here I'm pretty sure both would be rather similar as Islam is much younger! But currently Islam is killing more.

[mantra]

This kind of "there were lot worse killers in human history than us" argument looks a bit flawed for me. I don't care who killed who 70, 200, or 2000 years ago. Muslims are a present and future danger, therefore they are something we have to take care of.

You're sick. Muslims are an entire religion who are not any more dangerous than violent Christians. 

Wrong. I'm Hungarian, and we have a couple of hundred years of hands on experience with these "harmless and peaceful" muslims .

BTW you shouldn't let neither your positive or negative preconceptions to blur your sight. I've noticed that you don't like us whites, but why do you think that these brownie muslim fellas had been more compassionate to your kind than we were?

What would be right is to consider Muslims and Christians violence on the long term. Here I'm pretty sure both would be rather similar as Islam is much younger! But currently Islam is killing more.

you have to see the movie "my name is khan", my movie I was quite relevant to this topic

[salinizm]

You're so stupid. The fact why we don't call Hitler a Christian terrorist is because he did not killed all the Jews, the Tsigans etc. for his faith, unlike the terrorists.

you are wrong.. hitler killed all the people for the sake of his horrible faith of his unhealty mind..

[Spendulus]

....
What would be right is to consider Muslims and Christians violence on the long term. Here I'm pretty sure both would be rather similar as Islam is much younger! But currently Islam is killing more.

What would be right is to give you a 1950s television to watch and we more modern people will have our computers  and Netflix.  Both are very similar!

[CreativeCarol]

Anyone that doesn't believe the title is just racist so it doesn't matter to feed into the negativity of the world. Just find peace, life, and laughter.

[LyQaN]

Anyone that doesn't believe the title is just racist so it doesn't matter to feed into the negativity of the world. Just find peace, life, and laughter.

Agreed with title.If someone doing wrong or a terrorist then blame him why blaming religion or country.

[mainpmf]

This kind of "there were lot worse killers in human history than us" argument looks a bit flawed for me. I don't care who killed who 70, 200, or 2000 years ago. Muslims are a present and future danger, therefore they are something we have to take care of.

You're sick. Muslims are an entire religion who are not any more dangerous than violent Christians. 

Wrong. I'm Hungarian, and we have a couple of hundred years of hands on experience with these "harmless and peaceful" muslims .

BTW you shouldn't let neither your positive or negative preconceptions to blur your sight. I've noticed that you don't like us whites, but why do you think that these brownie muslim fellas had been more compassionate to your kind than we were?

What would be right is to consider Muslims and Christians violence on the long term. Here I'm pretty sure both would be rather similar as Islam is much younger! But currently Islam is killing more.

you have to see the movie "my name is khan", my movie I was quite relevant to this topic

I saw it and found it beautiful but I don't really see the relevance with the subject