By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Students beat classmate to death screaming Allahu Akbar (New graphic video)

Peh said:
Azuren said:

Wow. Sources? 

Maybe this?

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Was_Muhammad_a_Pedophile%3F

Oh my.

 

(I would like to add that I wasn't being combative in my previous post, but genuinely looking for sources to do my own research.)



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Around the Network
LurkerJ said:

 

nil8r153 said:

You are 100% correct :)

It is an Islamic principle that the burden of proof is upon the claimant. Given my predisposition I would say the claimant is yourself, but regardlesss you still have a right to ask.

If you are after a more scientific approach then I offer you this:

http://www.hizb-australia.org/2016/09/shaykh-taqiuddin-nabhanis-argument-for-god/

If you have heard it spouted endlessly that the Quran is a "miracle" but never understood why, then this should shed light on that:

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/

I am happy to share more if these links create more questions. I leave you with a roughly translated quote from the esteemed scholar, Shaykh Al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy upon him):

The person who is seeking the truth, one evidence will be enough for him. A person who is upon their desires, a thousand evidences will still not be clear for him.

In the first link you provided, someone is trying to prove the existence of God philosophically. I've read better philosophical arguments about the existence of God, but let's say I agree with Taquiddin Nabhani's argument for god, and that he was able to prove God's existence without a doubt with his argument, the question now becomes: how do you reach to the conclusion that the proven God is Allah and not some other god?

Proving the existence of God doesn't validate your religion, a creator may exist, but proving that Allah exists is an entirely different subject. Likewise, disproving Allah's existence is different from disproving the existence of God.

Moving on...

The second link was exhausting to read, and the argument presented there is RIDICULOUS. To say that the Quran is a miracle just because it's linguistically impossible to match, is laughable. I am not an Arab, so I may never appreciate its linguistic beauty, but if I was, I would still scratch my head at the FALSE CLAIMS presented in the Quran.

The Quran's Linguistic beauty doesn't make it a logically sound book. Linguistic beauty doesn't make the Quran's logical fallacies forgivable, and surely, its linguistic beauty alone, can't lift it up to and give it a miraculous status.

Many claims in the Quran can be disproven by using logic. Why the hell would I care if it's written and read beautifully? Allah repeatedly claims that he's "the most merciful and the most just" being ever known to man, If I can prove that claim wrong, why should I care about the "Beauty" of the Quran?


Moving on to disprove Allah's claim of being the "most merciful" and the "most just"

Point Number one: Allah claims that humans are ignorant creatures.

Point Number two: Allah is testing humans in this life because ONLY Adam agreed to get tested

Allah (allegedly) says: "Indeed, we offered the Trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, and they declined to bear it and feared it; but man [undertake to] bear it. Indeed, he was unjust and ignorant." 

After searching for the meaning behind that line, it turns out that, according to the Quran, humans are being tested in this life because we accepted "the Trust", which other creatures, like the sky and the earth, refused to accept, only Humans foolishly accepted it. Allah created us as "unjust and ignorant" beings after all... But here is the issue, I don't remember being asked to accept or refuse, neither do Muslims, apparently only one "ignorant" person was asked, and that person is Adam.

Personally, I'd like to be asked, if the skies and the earth were asked, I'd like to be asked as well, and no, Adam didn't represent all the billions of Humans that came after him when he said yes. 

Worth pointing out that Animals feeding on each other brutally, the same ones we feed on as well, aren't created to be tested, and will not end up in heaven or hell. Let's put a pin on this for later.

I'll move on to establish different points before I finalise my argument.

Point Number three: Allah will punish a subset of Humans with Eternal Hell. Allah (allegedly) says:

“Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him - those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” Baqarah 2/81

“But the ones who deny Our verses and are arrogant toward them - those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” A’raf 7/36

“But [I have for you] only notification from Allah , and His messages." And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger - then indeed, for him is the fire of Hell; they will abide therein forever.” Jinn 72/23

Most Muslims don't understand the gravity of such punishment. Open an empty text document on your PC right now, tap on number "1" once, now click and hold number "0" for an hour. Now, do you see that number in front of you?

Well, that number is still much smaller than eternity. Allah has promised to punish some sinful humans by throwing them in hell for eternity. I can't think of a single sin that warrants such punishment. You can rape men and women for 60 years and I still wouldn't throw you in hell for 100 years, let alone for eternity.

Kill by the millions, torture the weak, steal, and burn animals with fire, and I still wouldn't sentence you in hell for eternity if I was a "just" judge.

A punishment that grand can never be viewed as "just", ESPECIALLY when that kind of punishment is applied to creatures that Allah made "ignorant" by design.

Point number four: Allah is capable of divine interventions

Allah (allegedly) says: "Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the Companions of the Elephant? Did He not make their treacherous plan go astray? And He sent against them Flights of Birds, Striking them with stones of baked clay. Then did He make them like an empty field of stalks and straw, (of which the corn) has been eaten up."

A clear example of divine intervention mentioned in the Quran. The gist of the story: a bunch of bad people went to Makkah to destroy Al-Kaaba, Allah decided that couldn't happen, so he sent a flock of birds throwing burning stones at those bad people until they all died a horrible death. The important point here is that Allah is capable of divine interventions, put another pin on this for later.


Knowing all of the above, I can finalise the big picture I am trying to paint now:

1. According to the Quran, Allah (allegedly) created us as weak and ignorant beings, and he/she is testing us, some of those who fail the test will reside in Hell eternally. At the same time, Allah claims he's the most "just", and no other being being can be "more just" than him/her.

One can simply argue that Eternal Hell is not a suitable punishment for any sin any human can possibly commit. It's not! There is no way you can logically claim that sort of punishment is "just", let alone "the most just".

So Allah's claim about being "the most just" is objectively wrong. Eternal punishment strips him/her from that title. 

2. Allah claims to be the "the most merciful" repeatedly in the Quran, and that there is no other being that can be "more merciful" than him/her.

One can think of many adjustments that Allah can make that will easily make him more merciful than he/she is right now.

Once again, Eternal punishment comes to mind. The grandiosity of this unfit punishment can also strip Allah of the "most merciful" title he/she awarded him/herself with. I can try to understand 100 years of hell, 1000 is acceptable too, and why not 1.000.000 years!

But eternity? Utter madness.

Another example by which Allah can be more merciful is NOT creating animals. Animals are not Humans, they are not tested like us. We, somehow, justify our suffering in this life, and in the afterlife, by saying "we are being tested".

... but how do you explain the suffering of animals? They are not going to hell, they are not going to heaven. So why are they here if not for testing? Just to suffer pain and cruel environmental conditions? How about NOT creating them at all, isn't that more merciful? The earth and the sky aren't tested either, but they don't feel pain or suffering, so their existence isn't cruel compared to the existence of animals.

Another example by which Allah can be more merciful is by making more divine interventions. He/she clearly cares about Al-Kaaba so much, enough to send birds with fire from hell to protect a small building like Al-Kaaba... but what about the people? How many heart wrenching videos coming out of Syria does he/she need? How many more millions of children should die of starving before he/she intervenes? 

Forget all about that, I believe that solely abolishing the Eternal punishment is a clear enough example of how Allah can be more merciful, and it's, once again, enough to strip him off "the most merciful" title he/she describes him/herself with.

Finally, according to all of the above, one can say, without hesitation, that Allah isn't the most merciful and isn't the most just. Therefore, Allah and Quran are wrong, objectively speaking.

Simply providing examples that explain how Allah can be more merciful and more just, is enough to disprove Allah's claims mentioned in the Quran, and there is not any linguistic beauty that can make those logical fallacies go away or make the Quran's literature a "miracle". Not to mention, Allah makes many other ridiculous claims on how he/she is THE PERFECT being.

well.. you are not so perfect if a weak and "ignorant" human like me can think of many ways to improve you, Allah.

Damn, looks like someone just systematically dismantled someone else's beliefs.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

I see some people are making the wrong assumption that Islam in Pakistan, is the same like in Turkey, Indonesia, Kuwait, or Jordan.



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5
Azuren said:

Damn, looks like someone just systematically dismantled someone else's beliefs.

Visit Europe, talk to Muslims, get shocked how mainstream the "death penalty for apostates" is. 

Their hatred for homosexuals is well-established, but there are many other troubling beliefs that should move us to actively shed light on them, so that our people see why we are fighting Islamisation of Europe, and it's not just because we are "racist" or "right wingers" or whatever popular label they are using these days.

Consider that extensive reply my way of trying to correct things. The guy I am debating believes apostates should be killed, and he lives in freaking Australia!

Lucky for us, a new law just passed there to deny citizenship for those who don't adhere to the "Australian Values"

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2017/04/20/turnbull-cracks-down-on-citizenship-rules.html

I hope the law extends to those who have already obtained their citizenship there. Muslims may love their religion so much, but not enough to go back to the shitholes they left behind.

I'd like to see Europe & USA adapting similar and even tougher laws.



LurkerJ said:

 

nil8r153 said:

You are 100% correct :)

It is an Islamic principle that the burden of proof is upon the claimant. Given my predisposition I would say the claimant is yourself, but regardlesss you still have a right to ask.

If you are after a more scientific approach then I offer you this:

http://www.hizb-australia.org/2016/09/shaykh-taqiuddin-nabhanis-argument-for-god/

If you have heard it spouted endlessly that the Quran is a "miracle" but never understood why, then this should shed light on that:

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/

I am happy to share more if these links create more questions. I leave you with a roughly translated quote from the esteemed scholar, Shaykh Al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy upon him):

The person who is seeking the truth, one evidence will be enough for him. A person who is upon their desires, a thousand evidences will still not be clear for him.

...............................................

Knowing all of the above, I can finalise the big picture I am trying to paint now:

1. According to the Quran, Allah (allegedly) created us as weak and ignorant beings, and he/she is testing us, some of those who fail the test will reside in Hell eternally. At the same time, Allah claims he's the most "just", and no other being being can be "more just" than him/her.

2. Allah claims to be the "the most merciful" repeatedly in the Quran, and that there is no other being that can be "more merciful" than him/her.

To give your comment a fair answer would require a bloody book lol but that is more than I have time for, so I will address your final point with a simple point of my own for the sake of brevity, it seems to be the crux of your argument anyway. If you have a burning desire to see any other points addressed from my viewpoint (whatever that's worth, I'm not some authoritative figure or important personality, so don't mean to be arrogant) then let me know which.

So Allah's claim about being "the most just" is objectively wrong. Eternal punishment strips him/her from that title. 

One can think of many adjustments that Allah can make that will easily make him more merciful than he/she is right now.

Something I like to point out when this sort of stuff is brought up is how fickle collective sentiment and morality are. Take homosexuality for exmple, it was widespread in history, became scorned later on, it's ok again now etc. Don't get caught up in the example, my point is that attitudes and opinions change, and these attitudes and opinions are a sorry benchmark to apply to a divine being. It's like a student trying to argue a point with a scholar - the scholar posesses such a broad collection of information that he sees things the student doesn't, and the scholar knows that the student is wrong but even if he tried to explain to the student he would be to dumb to get it anyway.

That being said, your opinion is not objective whatsoever, nor is mine. There are some unavoidable biases at play - mine being the Islamic state of mind, and yours being your ideology. To me, eternal punishment is just, without a doubt. If the Creator, who knows all, knows that an individual will eternally be too arrogant to bow down and worship him, why should said creator not punish the individual eternally? If your response would be something along the lines of higher morality, then my previous paragraph is my answer to that.

My conception of justice is to give a punishment equal to the wrongdoing, and eternal disbelief seems eternally punishable to me (Disclaimer: That is the way I rationalise it but that may not be God's logic, as I am also human afterall, so what weight does my reasoning really hold when we are talking about a divine being.)

Forgive me if my thoughts seem scattered - had a long, tiring day.



Around the Network
Kyuu said:
nil8r153 said:

No, saheeh ahadeeth are not debatable except in the books of modernists and quranists, I hope you don't belong to either camp.

So the numerous ahadeeth that establish the hadd for ridda are ahad? and in your books ahad now means the hadeeth is debatable? What a tremendous error.

"text without historical context is meaningless" ahh ok, there is context, but that is neither here nor there. There is an asl that the circumstances of revelation do not limit the ruling. Modernists attempt to bring up the "historical context" to wash away anything their intellect has trouble accepting, when in reality it does nothing to change the ruling. This is an issue upon which there is ijma', don't twist and turn to try and appease the haters.

Kindly avoid jumping to childish conclusions.

I'm not a Quranist. I'm closer to an apostate. Not your typical emotionally unstable apostate who bashes his former religion because "it's the cool thing to do". I'd rather not associate myself with apostates because I can't help but respect Muhammad and his cousin Ali as inspirational leaders.

I don't care about what your Ijma' says when their methods are logically poor. About 90% of the narrations found in the Hadith collections (Sihah) are singular. Singular narrations (Ahad Hadith), in the language of logic, are essentially a collection of truths, half-truths, rumors, and lies. With all due respect to the simple Muslims who think their ancestor scholars are infallible mini-deities that cannot err or be doubted, any intelligent and impartial person would immediately recognize the unreliability of that as an "undoubtful" source to legislation. It's not Muhammad's fault that the inheritors of his legacy are incompetent. Mainstream Sunni Muslims consider all (emphasis on "ALL") of Muhammad's 120 thousand companions as great and trust-worthy people and as a result, all narrations are reliable by definition regardless of how few people heard them directly from Muhammad, so long as the narration is recognized via a chain of "trust-worthy" narrators.

Al-Bukhari refers to the great number of Singular Narrations as Authentic (Sahih) and the majority of the scholars (Ulama) back in the day agreed to his terms through Consensus (Ijima). Good on them forming a doctrine, and I don't mind you enjoying being an adherent of that doctrine. But it simply does not match my perception and sensibilities and I'm not going to further delve into why it doesn't because this is a complicated subject that I've long since lost interest in discussing. No offense, but you're in no way a representative to your religion, much less a representation of the truth. I couldn't care less about what you hope I belong or don't belong to.

Circumstances and historical context do indeed matter from a pure searcher perspective. This is a very basic and elementary knowledge. My ancestors' interpretations and conclusions via consensus isn't the truth that I'm searching for.

Sorry mate, husn al dhann made me expect the best.  You are right to a degree, I shouldn't have tried to use Islamic usul with someone who doesn't believe as that means very little to you( I didn't "hope" because I thought you would care by the way, I hoped because I believe firmly in Islam and would like all good people to believe also). I get the vibe that you were formally Shi'a based on your anti-Sunni rhetoric, which still manages to shine through despite your disbelief. I'll be honest, I am not able to reply to your mantiq comments nor your claims about the science of hadeeth because you are so brazenly wrong that I feel there would be little benefit. I am happy to connect with you on Facebook if you are open to a long-term discussion, perhaps one of us may convince the other of his position.

"
Circumstances and historical context do indeed matter from a pure searcher perspective" Yes, they matter greatly to me, I can not emphasise how much they mean to me - these are narrations from the beginning of Islam, the ideology I base my whole life on, so I really, truly hold them in high esteem. That doesn't mean that they limit rulings.  If an event occured and Allah revealed a ruling, then similar events will take a similar ruling - it's pretty simple. We can't write off half the ahkaam with the "ahh but look at the context" line, it doesn't even make sense to do so. There are some cases where a ruling was identified as being specific to a case, that is when you can limit it.



Visit Europe, talk to Muslims, get shocked how mainstream the "death penalty for apostates" is. That is heartening to hear :)
Their hatred for homosexuals is well-established, but there are many other troubling beliefs that should move us to actively shed light on them, so that our people see why we are fighting Islamisation of Europe, and it's not just because we are "racist" or "right wingers" or whatever popular label they are using these days. I don't hate homosexuals. My whole family doesn't hate homosexuals. Every friend I have doesn't hate homosexuals. I'm pretty sure any other "troubling beliefs" are just as unfounded as this one.

Consider that extensive reply my way of trying to correct things. The guy I am debating believes apostates should be killed, and he lives in freaking Australia!
Lucky for us, a new law just passed there to deny citizenship for those who don't adhere to the "Australian Values"
Your reply was long-winded, I wouldn't say extensive. I've explained my position on apostasy pretty clearly, and that position will never affect you or anyone you know unless you move to an Islamic state (which doesn't exist at the moment) AND become Muslim AND leave Islam after that. The West talks about freedom of belief or freedom of speech but whenever something makes you uncomfortable you want to do away with it. That is one of the reasons why Western values are such a farce to me.
Why does an Islamic ruling matter to you? It should be a discussion in Pakistan, where the ruling was misapplied on an innocent person and the majority of people are Muslim. In the West it is an ideological discussion that is all about imposing YOUR beliefs on others, with a thin coating of "speaking for justice" for good measure.

I hope the law extends to those who have already obtained their citizenship there. Muslims may love their religion so much, but not enough to go back to the shitholes they left behind.
I'd like to see Europe & USA adapting similar and even tougher laws.
Mate, I hope with all my heart for the exact same thing, I was born here unfortunately, so I'm safe at the moment but a world where all Muslims go back to where they came from and work on reforming their state is my absolute dream <3


Eagle367 said:
spurgeonryan said:
So what I get from this article, is this happened in an Islamic country.
^

If that is truly the case then he ashould have known. Even I know and I am an uncaring American who knows nothing about Asia or the Middle East.


The airplane situation was completely different. Everyone knows don't bad talk that profet guy. I am sure much less know airplane policies and laws.

This was utterly disgusting and the reality is that the poor guy never talked I'll of the Prophet(pbuh). The blasphemy situation in Pakistan is really bad and the mob violence is even worse. The blasphemy law itself is shaky at best. Anyone who has a grudge on someone else can claim that the guut or girl blasphemed, gather a large crowd and do inhumane utterly disgusting stuff like burning bodies and beating dead bodies etc. The problem is very severe especially in Punjab and Sindh. A guy was murdered by his security gaurd for questioning the controversial blasphemy law that's how bad it is and a percentage of population cheered for him. Sadly this is the result of brain washing unlike any other. When the Prophet(pbuh) himself entered victoriously in Makkah there was an almost bloodless victory. The people of Makkah were the worst any blasphemer can get since they used to throw trash, filth and thorns at him, hurl abuses at him and when his uncle died, they devised a plan to murder him. So if the Prophet(pbuh) himself was so tolerant, it makes me really sad to see the people who murder others just for speculation of blasphemy. Sadly the best thing that we can do is wait and hope the brain washed masses learn better. Its not like the entirety of Pakistan is that way. Everyone I know was disgusted at this and I hope the majority were but the truth is that I don't know.

Nice taqiyya there.



Wii U Nintendo Network ID, Borode

XBOX Live ID, Borode

nil8r153 said:

So Allah's claim about being "the most just" is objectively wrong. Eternal punishment strips him/her from that title. 

One can think of many adjustments that Allah can make that will easily make him more merciful than he/she is right now.

That being said, your opinion is not objective whatsoever, nor is mine. There are some unavoidable biases at play - mine being the Islamic state of mind, and yours being your ideology. To me, eternal punishment is just, without a doubt. If the Creator, who knows all, knows that an individual will eternally be too arrogant to bow down and worship him, why should said creator not punish the individual eternally? If your response would be something along the lines of higher morality, then my previous paragraph is my answer to that.

My conception of justice is to give a punishment equal to the wrongdoing, and eternal disbelief seems eternally punishable to me (Disclaimer: That is the way I rationalise it but that may not be God's logic, as I am also human afterall, so what weight does my reasoning really hold when we are talking about a divine being.)

Forgive me if my thoughts seem scattered - had a long, tiring day.

Bolded: 

We only rationalise the irrational, the fact that you had to rationalise eternal punishment can only mean that you don't find it rational yourself. Asking me to admit that the Quran is a miracle thanks to its linguistic beauty and not question its rational fallacies is, once again, ridiculous.

Slanted and underlined:

I was gonna respond to that but upon reading further, I realised its your own rational as you admitted later in your own post. I won't dwell on what's basically pure speculation on your part, and not information provided (allegedly) by Allah.

 

Moving on..

Can't you see the difference between you and me? I evaluate and question what I read before deciding if it's right or wrong. You, on the other hand, got it backward, you basically believe everything mentioned in the Quran is right, and whenever challenged, you will twist, speculate, and come up with implausible scenarios to maintain that belief. Whatever logical fallacy I throw at you next, you will find a way to rationalise it.

The Quran shouldn't contain logical fallacies if Allah wants me to believe in it.

Being a non-believer is not an easy choice, it's much harder than being a Muslim. I'd like to be a believer, what's not to love? Eternal heaven and knowing that whoever I lose in this life, I'll find again in the afterlife. It sounds like a great deal to me, but I am not buying fantasies just to feel better about life.




nil8r153 said:
Visit Europe, talk to Muslims, get shocked how mainstream the "death penalty for apostates" is.

2.That is heartening to hear :)
Their hatred for homosexuals is well-established, but there are many other troubling beliefs that should move us to actively shed light on them, so that our people see why we are fighting Islamisation of Europe, and it's not just because we are "racist" or "right wingers" or whatever popular label they are using these days.

1. I don't hate homosexuals. My whole family doesn't hate homosexuals. Every friend I have doesn't hate homosexuals. I'm pretty sure any other "troubling beliefs" are just as unfounded as this one.

Consider that extensive reply my way of trying to correct things. The guy I am debating believes apostates should be killed, and he lives in freaking Australia!
Lucky for us, a new law just passed there to deny citizenship for those who don't adhere to the "Australian Values"

3. Your reply was long-winded, I wouldn't say extensive. I've explained my position on apostasy pretty clearly, and that position will never affect you or anyone you know unless you move to an Islamic state (which doesn't exist at the moment) AND become Muslim AND leave Islam after that.
4. The West talks about freedom of belief or freedom of speech but whenever something makes you uncomfortable you want to do away with it. That is one of the reasons why Western values are such a farce to me.
5. Why does an Islamic ruling matter to you? It should be a discussion in Pakistan, where the ruling was misapplied on an innocent person and the majority of people are Muslim. In the West it is an ideological discussion that is all about imposing YOUR beliefs on others, with a thin coating of "speaking for justice" for good measure.

I hope the law extends to those who have already obtained their citizenship there. Muslims may love their religion so much, but not enough to go back to the shitholes they left behind.
I'd like to see Europe & USA adapting similar and even tougher laws.

6. Mate, I hope with all my heart for the exact same thing, I was born here unfortunately, so I'm safe at the moment but a world where all Muslims go back to where they came from and work on reforming their state is my absolute dream <3

1. Just like you don't hate the guy in the video, but you still agree that he should've been sentenced to death? Your only objection is the way he was killed isn't the "right way"... So tell me, what's the punishment of homosexual acts in Islam? let us know, and follow it with "I don't hate homosexual :)" please.

As for my unfounded claims about Muslims of Europe not liking homosexuals, read here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

The other belief I find troubling is the punishment of apostates which you are almost too happy with, is that unfounded as well? 


2. Funny how you didn't question my claim when I said: "many Muslims in Europe believe apostates should be punished by death" but you did question me when I said "Muslims of Europe don't like homosexuals"

You only question others when they say things you don't agree with huh?

 

3. Tell that to the Muslims who want Sharia Law in the UK.

 

4. The west foreign policy is based on hypocrisy, especially that of the US and the UK. I am ashamed of our leaders, and our politicians. It seems like yesterday when Trump promised us who will make peace with the Russians and get out of the middle east, but here we are with another set of broken promises. I agree the west uses "justice" as an excuse to wreak havoc on other countries.

 

5. It matters to me because we constantly clash with Muslims in the UK asking for Sharia Law to be imported, and soon, the rest of Europe will face something similar, and like with all religions, it's only a matter of time until someone starting using Islamic rhetoric as a tool to control the Muslims of Europe, that's what all leaders do. 

Moreover, I've researched multiple religions in the past, including Islam, I haven't crossed boundaries throughout the discussion.

 

6. Maybe when the petrodollar system falls apart and wars stop being profitable business, which is unlikely.