1. What religion were the Mongols? Did they ever say they were fighting in the name of the Mongol religion? Hitler was anti-Christian, so were the genocides committed by the Nazis in the name of anti-Christianity? Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that mean the Nazi genocides were committed in the name of vegetarianism?

2. Hitler said his war and genocide was on behalf of the German Volk. Why should I not believe him? Stalin said his massacres were creating the “new Soviet man.” Why should I not believe him? ISIS says they’re acting in the name of Islam. Why should I not believe them?

3. I don’t have to ask my Muslim neighbor what the Quran says, I can read it for myself. Besides which, when President al-Sisi of Egypt goes to Al-Azhar University, the most important and prestigious institution of higher Islamic learning in the world and tells the scholars there that they have to reform Islam and eliminate extremism, Jihadism, and terrorism from Islam, I’ll take his word that those elements are present in Islam.

4. You still haven’t told me how making a prisoner at Abu Ghraib wear women’s underwear on his head, or bark like a dog, or be posed in sexual positions is the same as the rapes, beheadings, and crucifixions carried out by ISIS.

Taqiyya won’t work here. Try the truth.

First, to clear my points with some historical facts.

The humankind history tell us there were many genocides and crimes done to humankind before 1400 ago and after, if you go reading my links without naivety or personal ignorance, you will find that Roman even Babylonian before them, followed by Persian destruction of Babylonian Empire , the atrocities of The Battle of Baghdad in 1258 when Mongol leader Hulagu Khan, a grandson of Genghis Khan. captured, sacked Baghdad, and burned. Many historical accounts detailed the cruelties of the Mongol conquerors, or take recent history Hitler genocides and crimes, S could you consider all of those who done it due to religion attached?

Could we consider Hitler genocides and crimes putting the blame on Christianity faith?
Could we consider Indian genocide putting the blame on Christianity faith?

Could we consider Iraq war and the aftermath of human losses due to direct and indirect causes on GW Bush, putting the blame on Christianity faith?

So my point is 1400 years past, yes there is blood was shattered on the earth, why you thinks today ISIS represent Islam? just because they say so?

You need to do your homework and try to ask any nearby friend, neighbor from Islamic faith, you will find by yourselves the right answer.

Finlay let me guess right, R…S… one of those prison staff or interrogators in Abu Ghraib prison, one off those well trained and masters of humankind atrocities in name of Freedom?

RS, looks you thinking comes not from that part on the top of your body, your thinking comes from your As*.Got it!

Holy Bible Versus Holy Quran ‘Dit Is Normaal’ Experiment Casts Light On Prejudice

One may say from the Christian cosmological or ontological point of view that in one respect in particular the shear existence of the United States is dependent on the whole of creation created by the Christian deity. Which, fine — though we notice any other self-regarding religious believers may say as much about the relation of the whole world to their own plonked down cosmic creator: but for our god, none of these. But then just as much may be predicated by the Christian of the Communist government of China in the same respect as is predicated of the United States, i.e. that its mere existence is owing to the existence of everything created by the Christian god; or may be said of any government whatsoever at any time whatsoever, owing to the dependency of every being to the creation by the god of any and all beings in the whole — even said to the Muslim government with which the United States was engaged in negotiation in the late 18th and early 19th century, although on diplomatic grounds that wouldn’t be mentioned owing to the diplomat’s refusal to give overt and gratuitous insult — our god created you, so your god is either our god or your god is nothing but a phantasm derivatively created by our god.

And what the hell does who discovered America or Indian genocide have to do with what we are talking about?

P.S. Fred, “discover” doesn’t mean “found first.” It means “found first and did something about what he found so that the knowledge was usable.” The laws of gravity always existed; Newton discovered them because he was able to codify, do useful things with, and disseminate what he had found. Maybe a Chinese or Muslim did find America before Columbus — we know the Vikings did. But they packed up and left and never told anybody about what they had found, so it remained for Columbus to discover America.

“A prominent member of Adams’ cabinet, Secretary of War James McHenry, protested the language of article 11 before its ratification. He wrote to Secretary of the Treasury Oliver Wolcott, Jr., September 26, 1800: “The Senate, my good friend, and I said so at the time, ought never to have ratified the treaty alluded to, with the declaration that ‘the government of the United States, is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.’ What else is it founded on? This act always appeared to me like trampling upon the cross. I do not recollect that Barlow was even reprimanded for this outrage upon the government and religion.”

A second treaty, the Treaty of Peace and Amity signed on July 4, 1805, superseded the 1796 treaty. The 1805 treaty did not contain the phrase “not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.“[16][17]”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli#Later_dissent

See UNSCRs 687, 1441, et al from the Gulf War ceasefire that set the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441). The disarmament standard for Saddam’s regime remains the gold standard for disarmament.

Yet the suspect measures in the Iran deal are notable for their contradiction of the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance”. The Iran deal apparently incorporates the changes that Saddam’s advocates had called for the disarmament standard for Iraq so that the UN inspectors would certify Iraq despite Saddam’s regime not actually reforming its behavior.

Hans Blix, unsurprising, endorses the Iran deal because he was opposed to OIF. Yet the finding by Blix’s UNMOVIC team of “about 100 unresolved disarmament issues” in the UNSCR 1441 inspections was the principal casus belli for OIF. Blix’s anti-war solution? Not callng for Iran to disarm to the strict standard that was mandated for Iraq. Instead, Blix supports a looser standard that will make it easier for weapons inspectors to certify Iran – whether or not Iran actually, reliably disarms.

That there is not an “an air tight agreement with Iran on nukes” is a direct consequence of the stigmatization of OIF.

Establishing the prevalent false narrative of OIF set up the political conditions for the same opponents of the US-led Gulf War ceasefire enforcement to assert their preferences and disqualify the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” gold standard.

In order to toughen up on Iran, you first need to re-lay the foundation by setting the record straight on the Iraq intervention.

There’s always the Aztecs, but humans like to pretend things don’t exist because they never lived with them.