Very informative and measured answers. What's up with the dislikes?

@mizuno82

9 жыл бұрын

WoundrousMindTrick You'd think sane Muslims would encourage honest discussions about the differences between their worldview and those of the Jihadists. Until the things Graeme Wood is saying are common knowledge, sane Muslims will suffer from the ignorance.

@mizuno82

9 жыл бұрын

WoundrousMindTrick That's why it's so ridiculous that apologists for Islam - fake Liberals and dishonest hacks like Reza Aslan and Glenn Greenwald - believe they are defending Muslims when they insist no one speak honestly about how it underpins terror organizations' actions. They lend cover to the jihadists with their apologia.

@sjewitt22

6 жыл бұрын

I bet some of the dislikes are fools from the right who hat this as it adds nuisance.

Very informative.

@aehabist

9 жыл бұрын

lol

This was a fantastic interview.

Very instructive interview! Thank you

In this week's episode of _VICE Meets_, journalist Graeme Wood breaks down the Islamic State's religious ideologies and visions for the future.

@engeldeeter

9 жыл бұрын

Before watching this I was going to join The IS because I think women wearing the hijab are sexy and I think hummus is delicious. I was going to continue eating pork chops and drinking liquor privately. I think I'll join Kiwanis or The Elks Club or The Moose Lodge instead. These IS guys seem like total dicks. But seriously, what is the price on Baghdadi's head? Maybe 'caliphs' are bulletproof.:)

good interview, love the facts and questions

To declare yourself Caliph would be like a Neo-Nazi declaring himself Roman Emperor or a Knight of the Round Table... That was actually an incredibly helpful analogy. Great interview!

@sufimuslimlion4114

4 жыл бұрын

Nah it’s an incredibly stupid analogy because the Islamic Caliphate has existed for ALL OF ISLAMIC HISTORY FROM THE DEATH OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him) up until 1924 when the Ottoman Empire was defeated in WW1 and the western word imposed borders they consciously designed to keep the Muslim world divided and many small and weak states which are ruled by predatory and powerless corrupt rulers who have absolutely no legitimacy in the eyes of those they rule and enjoy no significant level of loyalty or allegiance from the Muslims and so yes - the Islamic Caliphate hasn’t been around for 90 years (out of 14231 years) and throughout those 90 years - the issue of the caliphate has been an incredibly significant issue of debate and a cause for motivation among Muslims in almost every region, every school of thought within Mainstream orthodox Sunni Islam. The fact that the entire western world and every significant world power has been united in the cause of keeping the caliphate dead and have had puppet rulers in every Muslim region desperately working to suppress the movement and YET THEY WERE ONLY CAPABLE OF KEELING IT SUPPRESSED FOR 90 YEARS SHOWS HOW RIDICULOUS THAT ANALOGY IS. And the fact that when The Islamic State established the Caliphate again and set historical records for foreign fighters emigrating to their state and fighting on behalf of it shows that the Islamic caliphate is seen by the Muslim world as very much a modern ongoing project and not some delusional symbolic title and even more so that the entire western world and 50+ countries (all of them totally dependent on foreign powers to stay in power) all United suddenly to declare war on and start a military campaign against The Islamic State without ever being attacked by Islamic state - shows how western and world powers and political leaders take the caliphate very much seriously So no the analogy is totally dishonest and idiotic and intellectually bankrupt.

@sufimuslimlion4114

4 жыл бұрын

Nah it’s an incredibly stupid analogy because the Islamic Caliphate has existed for ALL OF ISLAMIC HISTORY FROM THE DEATH OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him) up until 1924 when the Ottoman Empire was defeated in WW1 and the western word imposed borders they consciously designed to keep the Muslim world divided and many small and weak states which are ruled by predatory and powerless corrupt rulers who have absolutely no legitimacy in the eyes of those they rule and enjoy no significant level of loyalty or allegiance from the Muslims and so yes - the Islamic Caliphate hasn’t been around for 90 years (out of 14231 years) and throughout those 90 years - the issue of the caliphate has been an incredibly significant issue of debate and a cause for motivation among Muslims in almost every region, every school of thought within Mainstream orthodox Sunni Islam. The fact that the entire western world and every significant world power has been united in the cause of keeping the caliphate dead and have had puppet rulers in every Muslim region desperately working to suppress the movement and YET THEY WERE ONLY CAPABLE OF KEELING IT SUPPRESSED FOR 90 YEARS SHOWS HOW RIDICULOUS THAT ANALOGY IS. And the fact that when The Islamic State established the Caliphate again and set historical records for foreign fighters emigrating to their state and fighting on behalf of it shows that the Islamic caliphate is seen by the Muslim world as very much a modern ongoing project and not some delusional symbolic title and even more so that the entire western world and 50+ countries (all of them totally dependent on foreign powers to stay in power) all United suddenly to declare war on and start a military campaign against The Islamic State without ever being attacked by Islamic state - shows how western and world powers and political leaders take the caliphate very much seriously So no the analogy is totally dishonest and idiotic and intellectually bankrupt.

@sufimuslimlion4114

4 жыл бұрын

Nah it’s an incredibly stupid analogy because the Islamic Caliphate has existed for ALL OF ISLAMIC HISTORY FROM THE DEATH OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him) up until 1924 when the Ottoman Empire was defeated in WW1 and the western word imposed borders they consciously designed to keep the Muslim world divided and many small and weak states which are ruled by predatory and powerless corrupt rulers who have absolutely no legitimacy in the eyes of those they rule and enjoy no significant level of loyalty or allegiance from the Muslims and so yes - the Islamic Caliphate hasn’t been around for 90 years (out of 14231 years) and throughout those 90 years - the issue of the caliphate has been an incredibly significant issue of debate and a cause for motivation among Muslims in almost every region, every school of thought within Mainstream orthodox Sunni Islam. The fact that the entire western world and every significant world power has been united in the cause of keeping the caliphate dead and have had puppet rulers in every Muslim region desperately working to suppress the movement and YET THEY WERE ONLY CAPABLE OF KEELING IT SUPPRESSED FOR 90 YEARS SHOWS HOW RIDICULOUS THAT ANALOGY IS. And the fact that when The Islamic State established the Caliphate again and set historical records for foreign fighters emigrating to their state and fighting on behalf of it shows that the Islamic caliphate is seen by the Muslim world as very much a modern ongoing project and not some delusional symbolic title and even more so that the entire western world and 50+ countries (all of them totally dependent on foreign powers to stay in power) all United suddenly to declare war on and start a military campaign against The Islamic State without ever being attacked by Islamic state - shows how western and world powers and political leaders take the caliphate very much seriously So no the analogy is totally dishonest and idiotic and intellectually bankrupt.

@ducker2954

3 жыл бұрын

@@sufimuslimlion4114 actually to declare urself a caliph u must have the agreement of all the Muslims and the Muslim states and Muslim leaders. Thats why declaring yourself as a night of the round table is pretty accurate cause it is recognised by almost every muslims. If some Muslim leaders dnt recognize the califate then technically speaking they won't eealy be a caliphate according to the islamic ideology but they will only be a caliphate for the islamic leaders that recognoze the caliphate. So when the ottomans had a caliphate since they conquered most of the muslim world and the muslim leaders exepted them as caliphs thats why they were called caliphs. BUT if there were any muslim leaders or atleast recognized muslim leaders with a following who didn't recognize the caliphate than in accordance with islam they won't really be a caliphate.

@ducker2954

3 жыл бұрын

@@sufimuslimlion4114 and the reason there is no holy roman emperor in the 1900 because the roman empire fell. While the ottoman empire arguably just as strong as the roman empire lasted till the 1900. That is why this analogy is pretty accurate. Friendly debate m8 no hate or hard feelings. I am not religios I am just intrigued by these topics

Wow. This was a fascinating interview.

Nice one vice. Keep up the good work.

I think this guy was like the first western journalist to be honest about IS. Good on him.

@atulsharma1925

4 жыл бұрын

True

excellent interview

Thanks for this I wouldn't get this kind of clarity or grown up approach on the bbc and other sources

The secret agenda of this episode: promote use of the word "punctilious." But in all seriouness, while they use it some 4-5 times I think it's actually the perfect adjective here.

the lvl of apologism for islam is over 9000

@enperson2709

9 жыл бұрын

What do you mean?

@hmm3265

9 жыл бұрын

isak horunge Nothing, he is an idiot. Just trying to be contentious without any real thought.

@RicoSeattle

9 жыл бұрын

I didn't see any apologism here.

@RicoSeattle

9 жыл бұрын

***** We got the reference, but the comment itself doesn't make any sense.

@TheGerogero

9 жыл бұрын

Believe it or not, when you actually have knowledge on an issue your perspective is going to be quite nuanced (or apologetic, as it seems to you).

2076 when I'm 76 its 2012 all over again

3:50 punctilious /pʌŋ(k)ˈtɪlɪəs/ (adjective) showing great attention to detail or correct behaviour. "he was punctilious in providing every amenity for his guests" synonyms: meticulous, conscientious, careful, diligent, attentive, ultra-careful, scrupulous, painstaking, exact, precise, accurate, correct, thorough, studious, rigorous, mathematical, detailed, perfectionist, methodical, particular, religious, strict;

wait a minute, i heard basically the exact same interview with Graeme on NPR months ago...lol get new questions!~:P

In before "illuminate m8" memes.

sykes picot agreement. never mentioned.

Vice News is my favorite news source. Where do you get stuff like this on regular cable or TV?

Ow yea

3:30 so IS is basically evangelical Islam?...

Just realized that the islamic state is like Caesar's Legion from Fallout 3 !

the interviewer looks like a hit man lol

they seem to only say takbir and allah akbar in the media, and they both means allah is great... lol

My brain couldn't keep up with his damn vocabulary. My brain nearly exploded after 10 minutes so I hit stop.

In before the Muslim apologists

@mhuq4854

7 жыл бұрын

Did you even watch the interview?

This bobble head interviewer did much better than previous ones

Good, interesting and CIVIL discussion about the subject of ISIS barbarians. As to how accurate, WHO KNOWS, but still enjoyable.

One of those guys had a fucking sword!! whats that for!? specifically for getting across borders?

Vice as usual, keeping it real. No agendas, no P.C. talk. Just the straight up facts.

Here I thought the world had already ended in 2012...

@ThoughtfulThug

9 жыл бұрын

That was the ancient Mayan prediction. We'll have to wait till 2076...

Interesting interview, if IS do succeed, how would it actually implement a government to oversee the day to day running of it. They seem to be just a band of rebels who fight for their religion without a solid plan as to how to oversee the empire they desire.

@michaelo.1320

9 жыл бұрын

Virgins. Lots of virgins.

@Adriangrosvenor

9 жыл бұрын

***** At this time their has not been a clear leader of IS though, and would any government of the world recognize it and seeing they are fighting those close to them, who will they trade with to provide finance for the economy. I think they would have gained a bit more support if they had not moved the Christians out and imposed a tax on them. Then their is the fact that Islam seems to have so many different sects, and each person vying for their own self gratification rather than uniting for each other. I can't at this time think of a nation under the laws of Islam which have succeeded. The closest their is to mention is Iran, but they have so much conflict within that one wonders if Islam was ever united even when Muhammad was alive. Maybe when they compiled the Quran together and tossed away the pages and things other people said Muhammad thought, they tossed away the aspect of how to unite it.

@Adriangrosvenor

9 жыл бұрын

***** If the Quran is suppose to be the guide of a Muslim, why does he consort hadith? I read how the Quran was compiled after the death of Muhammad, those things which were not corresponding with others were burnt. It is indeed possible that they did not understand those pages and things people said were said by him, and left them out not knowing the effect it would have. Islam is neither united nor will it ever be, their is a vacuum within Islam that provides a step to power for those who are just pretending to be Muslims. Lets not act as if all people who claim something are actually interested in it, many people use things for the advancement of their own personnel gain. And this is demonstrated constantly in Islam. Also your not allowed to kill Christians in Islam, how do you kill the people of the book then consort them? Though IS is a representation of Islam, they will not succeed, they forgot God in the equation of their advancement. God does not sanction murder in the advancement of his cause against those who are seeking to also find him. Also I have not seen any formal declaration of the leader of IS, a leader who hides is not a leader but a coward. IS has no leader at this point which dictates to the world what exactly they are trying to achieve or even attempts to explain the reason for their advancement. When I first heard of ISIS i thought of the Egyptian god, ISIS, and saw it as an evil enterprise set up by wicked men to advance an evil agenda. They then changed their name to IS, but the philosophy of ISIS is still their within this group. So is this indeed an Islamic state or is this a sect of the Egyptian god Isis. Maybe you should research what Isis taught then consider if this is indeed a caliphate.

@Adriangrosvenor

9 жыл бұрын

***** Am not in favor of any Hadith which causes the division among all these sects. Besides if one consort a Hadith one is better off also consulting catholic teachings. Khadijah was the daughter of a Roman Catholic. She was also Catholic, therefore in every Muslim nation you would find a Catholic church next to many mosques, yet the Muslim does not question it or realizes that their is a very close connection between his religion and the catholic. Islam has been so far penetrated they don't even know what they are doing. Place Islam side by side with catholicism and you would see the early influences of the Catholic Church from when they covered their faces and prayed with beads and did many similar things as the Muslim. Catholocism existed before Islam and every dominant teacher of Islam bows down before the pope in submission, neither is their any bite in Islam if it becomes a threat to catholic's, immediately the are punished, but Muslim never target catholic's as instructed by their leaders. But they target Christians. Their is no ISIL, what you have is Isis, this entity will do as it is intended to as the teachings as Isis instructs, this has nothing to do with Islam, I told you study the teachings of Isis, but you are more concerned with the play of words.

@darrenchin_

9 жыл бұрын

***** Adrian Grosvenor wow for a moment there i thought this dialogue was a well-thought and amicable one but someone just had to get agitated as is the laws of the internet i guess. regardless, your arguments are unsound, Mr. Grosvenor. i can't see what you are trying to imply. and i suppose mr abdullah holm has done well not to lose his sh*t over ur incomprehensible points made.

This kind of reminds me of Harry potter 2

faith can be a dangerous thing when combined with profit and influence

Nothing is obscured about their islamic practice. Its pure islam.

OK. But... Can't we all just get along? Ahmmm no, not with ISIS/IS. No we can not. Any other questions?

I wonder where he drew his definitions of Salafism and Wahhabism from. 1. Salafism is reliant on its scholars, however the connection is very much personal between the individual and God - the scholars are those who merely pass on knowledge and make certain concepts more accessible to the laymen. It is however a rejection of blindly following a specific cleric or methodology and a call to following the way of the Prophet in totality. So if a particular school of thought opposes that then it's rejected and the way of the Prophet in all walks of life is something the Salafis aim to adhere to. 2. The Salafi ideology is to understand texts through the lens of the Prophet, his companions, and those from the earlier generations of Islam. This very notion of 'They read and understand the texts themselves without intermediaries' is the actual reason as to why they've deviated and gone to such extremes. There are some ambiguous texts in the Qur'an which without explanations from texts of Hadith could be interpreted to mean anything - and this is largely why they are doing what they're doing now. According to IS the King of KSA is not a Muslim. Why? Because they adopted their own understanding of Quran 5:44 3. 'Wahhabi' is the term given to practicing Salafis by other sects of Islam and no distinction is made between the two and is often used in a derogatory way. Salafis however reject the term 'Wahhabi' because of it's blasphemous misuse of one of Allah's names. Salafi's however follow the works of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab who revived a more puritanical approach to Islam. 4. Saudi Arabia claims to be Salafi. This King and those before him have declared themselves to be Salafi - which is one of IS' gripes. 5. IS claim to follow the path of the Salaf but have deviated from such a path with their vile extremism. This is contrary to Salafi teachings. 6. Salafi scholars in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc actually speak against IS, Nusra, Al Qaeda, etc. The name is irrelevant, their ideology is one. Refer to the works of Salih al Fawzan, Ibn Baz, Al Uthaymeen, Shaykh Raslan and more for the Salafi view on IS (otherwise known as a group called the Khawarij) There needs to be a better understanding of what Salafism is, and the term shouldn't be thrown around so loosely. Those who are actually upon Salafism staunchly oppose IS and everything it stands for. Please refer to Salafi Publications and Wright Street Mosque for a better understanding of the Salafi way of life and it's attitude towards extremism. I would post links but this comment would soon get deleted if I did.

@user-ms8wx9df1q

9 жыл бұрын

im saudi and our governments in west europe got threats from isis.

@Maphisto86

9 жыл бұрын

On #3 - I thought "Wahhabism" is a term adopted from the name of the eighteenth century preacher who founded the revivalist movement that curried favor with the Saudi family; Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab?

@RASPOLOGY

9 жыл бұрын

It is, but no Muslim who follows the same methodology uses the term due to it's blasphemous nature. Secondly 'Wahhabi' is an ascription to the scholar's father - so really it should be called Muhammadi if you want to be correct because his name is ibn (son of) Adbul Wahhaab. But like I said, it's often used in a derogatory way by other sects and by Western media especially - who have created this 'brand' of Islam - and made it into a thing, and not by those who actually follow his teachings and accept his call to a purist approach.

@Maphisto86

9 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the clarifications.

@dolomats

9 жыл бұрын

I Mostly Agree with the definition of RASPOLOGY

The UN have to give aid, sovereignty, security and education to the sunnis in that region who welcome IS because the people are supporting the islamic state because they dont think the west have there interests at heart.

2076? That's way too far into the future. Lame.

@Mropticalgreen

9 жыл бұрын

We survived so many apocalypse days, whats one more

A 25 minute breakdown of just how stupid ISIS is.

Islams Caliphate (Kingdom of God) supports The second coming of Jesus peace be upon him. He the blessed one will Fight all the Nations of disbelief {Polytheism) and behead Democracy's Antichrist. May Allah bless him in his mission.

As a person who loves humanity, I'm not religious and I respect all faiths but now I don't even know who the bad guys are anymore lol. I mean fuck. wtf, Thanks to Reddit I hate all religion now..

@yourmama7721

9 жыл бұрын

That is what r/atheism does to you.

Dark Beer ! Aloha Snackbar !

Who would've thought that the "teachings" of some hippy would cause so much death and destruction...Christianity is crazy! :D Written By: M. Night Shyamalan

" Skip ahead to The End of the World" ... 0_0

Is this guy setting himself as an Analyst ?

This guy looks like brian pickles

I'm going to name my dog Muhammad Ibn Abdullah

Is this Islams mirror to Christainities Protestants, or Calvinists, they also rejected the Priests as intermediaries. My point about Wahhibism is validated, I'l be sharing this. You can bet Saudi intelligence has close links to IS.

@jonathanhanson9977

8 жыл бұрын

That's what I think...it sounds like they are Evangelical Islamists like Christain Evangelicals from the 1500-1600s

@gregnz1

8 жыл бұрын

+Jonathan Hanson Islam is pretty irrelevant to the West, its only able to be what it is because of our wealth and liberties. Islam is a step backwards not forwards for humanity, is this why it feels so threatened? I just see depression and not very happy people.

@rusi6219

Жыл бұрын

Everything he said was completely incorrect so pay no attention to his unsubstantiated theories

Enlightenment and secularism is the only way forward, this medieval mentality can't win. Jihadi's will repress science and progress and the rest of the world will move on and easily crush they're pathetic attempts at repressing the world.

Imagine the westboro baptist church running shit...

@20:52 or, say, for someone to claim to be the vicar of Christ...

that what you call an "expert" see that's your problem . your education system is broken . he was like telling 4 info point 2 of them is wrong one is not accurate.

@Adirondack13

9 жыл бұрын

Our education system is broken? Your english is horrid. He's spot on.

@aehabist

9 жыл бұрын

Adirondack13 yo Adirondack13 english is my 3ed language , i think i am doing fine , if english is your first language i don't think you should ..... you know . i can see he read some books , but from a muslim prospective , he got allot of the basic facts wrong . and hes talking like he "got this shit" . it's just stupid

Mmmmm the toxicity is amazing in a trolls world. now please see the problem for what it is, it's far beyond just a general religious beliefs.

Special operations will deal with this. We need more good Western Muslims to join the military. I feel they can contribute greatly. Really make them think twice before going to sleep. Think twice before going radical psychopath. You think if any of these men would do this if they had jobs or families? Nope.

@AimForMyHead81

9 жыл бұрын

I know a couple of muslims in the military, some of the most patriotic guys you'll meet tbh

@Nero-ho6gt

9 жыл бұрын

Your name is fucking GOLD!

@Peteruspl

9 жыл бұрын

Quite a bit of guys actually do this while having jobs and families. There are highly educated suicide bombers. Not that much of them, but there are.

Good interview. Unbelievable the insane beliefs that people have. We'll, USA , send plenty of them to 'paradise', but in fact, darkness..

WHo is this guy , what authority does he have to speak on this matter ? Where are his credentials, does he have a background in Islamic Studies? I dont think so , i think he has less knowledge of quran and sunnah than me . He just has an agenda and that is to smear orthodox muslims. I am salafi muslim and the mosque I go to always talks against ISIS saying they are the khawarij, in fact the imam always gives quran and hadith to oppose the practise of IS and in fact the salafi scholars say you should not rebel against governments and rulers so this just shows that he does not know what he is talking about

'Flavours of Islam'? Lmao, ridiculous

allah Akbar does not mean "God is great." It means "allah is the greatest." Pagan mohammedians are declaring that their pagan god is greater than the Jewish/Christian, YHWH. The Arabic word for great is kabira. Also, allah is a specific name for a specific god. The word for a general, non specific god in Arabic is alleh. Allah and alleh mean two completely different things.

This guy has no idea what he is talking about. This IS group has absolutely nothing to do with secular law. I'm a student of knowledge in Islam and he said the IS are 'Sufis'. Honestly, Vice your really just going to go with what this guy says? Do your research properly. This IS group are from the sects of 'Al-Khawarij' back in the time of Muhammad (SAW) these people were extremists in Islam. The 'Al-Khawrij' these were people who wanted bloodshed to continue and when they saw peace they broke off and wanted bloodshed to continue. They were people in the time of Muhammad (SAW) who were extremists, Al-Khawarij these are people who broke off and divided into sects and one of their main characteristics was extremism and this existed in the time of Muhammad (SAW). In a hadith narrated in Bukhari, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (RA) says "when Muhammad (SAW) was dividing the booties (loot) of war, there was a man from Bani Tamim (Tribe) his name was Zul-Khawaisara, he came to Muhammad (SAW) with pride and arrogance and was telling Muhammad (SAW) "Be Just". The rudeness of this man, he was ordering Muhammad (SAW) to be Just, Muhammad (SAW) said "woe to you, who could do Justice if I did not, I would be a desperate loser if I did not do Justice". The trials of Al-Khawarij was not something temporary to that era of time, Muhammad (SAW) says "their 'Fitna' (Trials) will continue, whenever one generation of them leaves another generation will come up again until the time of 'Dajjal' (False Messenger)".Muhammad (SAW) is telling us their trials and tribulations will continue and whenever one generation leaves another generation will come up again, what does this mean? Muhammad (SAW) did not say it is a linear continuation, Muhammad (SAW) said "one generation will leave and another generation will come up". Why? They cannot continue because they end up fighting amongst themselves and they destroy themselves, they kill each other or they are killed by outside forces. But then extremism comes up in the minds of different people and a new generation comes out, and then they fight and cause bloodshed until they are eliminated, then they come out in another place. So it is not a linear continuation where one generation is teaching the next, no it is because they cannot agree with each other, they end up killing one another. They have a saying in Yemen "He did not find anyone to disagree with so he disagreed with his own feet". You didn't find anyone in front of you to disagree with so you disagree with yourself. This is the mentality that they have, they have to cause trouble, they have to fight with someone and that is why Muhammad (SAW) said "one generation would be followed by another". A hadith narrated by Ibn Majah (Scholar), Abdullah Ibn Umar (RA) he said "I heard Muhammad (SAW) say whenever one generation of them (Al-Khawarij) comes out it would be amputated and then another generation would come out and it would be amputated". Abdullah Ibn Umar (RA) said "Muhammad (SAW) repeated it more than twenty times and in the end he said until the 'Dajjal' (False Messenger) comes out". So one generation will come out and they will be amputated, either by themselves or by outside forces and another generation would come out and they would be amputated and so on and so forth. Abdullah Ibn Umar (RA) used to consider them the most evil of people, Abdullah Ibn Umar (RA) says "they are the worst of people because they took the verses referring to the non-believers and they applied them on the believers". They accused the Muslims of disbelief, they took the verses of Qur'an which were describing the non-believers and applied it to the believers. They find it very easy accusing people of disbelief, that is also one of their major characteristics, it is very simple for them to accuse someone or a Muslim of disbelief. This is who the Islamic State is, they are just another generation of Extremists and soon they will be exiled.

@corruptionisprevalent9388

9 жыл бұрын

***** Sulafi and Sufi same thing.

@corruptionisprevalent9388

9 жыл бұрын

***** Do you even understand my message or are you here to defend IS?

@RASPOLOGY

9 жыл бұрын

John Cloud Salafi and Sufi are NOT the same thing. Aside from that, everything else you said is on point.

@corruptionisprevalent9388

9 жыл бұрын

RASPOLOGY Okay. My Mistake.

@corruptionisprevalent9388

9 жыл бұрын

***** I made a mistake.

I know of 1 billion people who need to give up Islam or die.

saddly graeme is misinforming the viewers, he lacks understanding of the subject matter his talking to.