Show Mobile Navigation
 
Religion

Top 10 People Who Give Islam a Bad Name

JWall . . . Comments

Islam is the second-largest religion in the world (Christianity is the largest), and one of the fastest growing. While there have been very good Muslims, some have been very bad. This list, in a sense, is a response to the earlier lists of Top 10 People Who Give Christianity a Bad Name and Top 10 People who give Atheism a Bad Name. It is not meant as a commentary on Islam itself – merely ten of its adherents.

10

Hosni Mubarak

Mubarak-Flustered

Muhammad Hosni Mubarak was the President of the Arab Republic of Egypt for 30 years. He held office from 1981, until he was forced to resign by mass protests on February 11, 2011. Mubarak was trained as a pilot, and rose in the ranks of Egypt’s air force during the 1960s and ’70s. President Anwar Sadat named Mubarak to be his vice president in 1975, and in 1978 Mubarak became the vice chairman of the National Democratic Party (NDP), the governing political party in Egypt. When Anwar Sadat was assassinated on October 14, 1981, Mubarak succeeded him to become Chairman of the NDP, as well.

Mubarak quickly became an old-style strongman, with full control of the government. Running uncontested, Mubarak won the Presidency in national referenda in 1987, 1993 and 1999; and, after a change in laws, he won running against a token opponent in 2005. He focused on economic growth and inched toward political reform, but any economic gains in the 1990s were offset by criticisms that Egypt was a near-dictatorship; indeed, Mubarak never lifted the state of emergency imposed after Sadat’s assassination.

In February 2005, Mubarak announced plans for a September 2005 election, that would be Egypt’s first-ever multi-candidate contest for the presidency. On September 7, 2005, he handily won his fifth consecutive term in those elections, but the victory was clouded by low voter turnout, reports of fraud and the imprisonment of Mubarak’s political rival, Ayman Nour. The next years were dominated by two issues: calls for political reform and Mubarak’s love/hate relationship with the United States, a steady provider of military aid.

Mubarak was rebuked for his lack of commitment to democracy by American leaders, including President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, but he remained an important U.S. ally in the region, especially during the U.S. war in Iraq. Egyptians took to the streets in January 2011, to protest his rule; Mubarak at first shuffled his cabinet, then said he would step down in September. He finally was forced to resign on February 11, 2011.

9

King Abdullah

Hosni 89

Crown Prince Abdullah has been the acting leader of Saudi Arabia since his half-brother, King Fahd, suffered a stroke, in 1995. Saudi Arabia is one of the only nations that holds no elections whatsoever. The royal family has promised municipal elections soon, but it has not announced whether women will be allowed to vote. In fact, it is forbidden for unrelated Saudis of the opposite sex to appear in public together, even inside a taxi. Women are not allowed to testify on their own behalf in divorce proceedings. Also, in all court cases, the testimony of a man is equal to that of two women.

According to the U.S. State Department, Saudi Arabia continues to engage in arbitrary arrest and torture. During a human rights conference in 1995, Saudi authorities arrested nonviolent protesters who were calling for freedom of expression. Some were later flogged, the usual punishment for alleged political and religious offenses.

In a very unusual show of power, the religious leaders forbade children from playing with Barbie dolls, which they dubbed “Jewish dolls” that are “symbols of decadence of the perverted West.”


8

Talat Pasha

Mehmed Talat Pasha

Talat Pasha was the key architect of the Armenian genocide, one of the largest genocides in modern history. More than 1 million people were massacred over a span of two years. A member of the Young Turks, Talat rose up and became one of three Pashas who ruled the Ottoman government from 1913, until the end of the disastrous First World War. Many Muslim Turks saw the rise in nationalism of the Christian Armenians as a threat to the existence of the Ottoman state. In previous years, programs had been installed against Armenians where possibly hundreds of thousands died. Thirty thousand died in the Adana massacre of 1909. Once they entered World War One, the Ottoman’s endeavor ended in total failure.

Russian and Armenian forces set up an Armenian mini-state in 1915, and thus Talat Pasha sought to punish them. Security forces rounded up 250 Armenian intellectuals and leaders in Istanbul in 1915, and eventually executed them. After passing a deportation law, Pasha ordered deportations and executions to be carried out against all of the Armenian people. During the deportations conditions were deplorable and men were routinely separated from the rest and executed. Many prisoners were tortured or the victims of gruesome medical experiments, more died of hunger and thirst. In some instances, victims would be crucified in imitation of Jesus, as the perpetrators would say “Now let your Christ come help you!” Others would have red-hot irons and pincers applied to their flesh. Out of a population of 2. 5 million, between 1 and 1.5 million Armenians perished during this period. After the Ottoman collapse, Talat Pasha fled to Berlin and was subsequently murdered there, in 1921. His assassin was an Armenian genocide survivor.

7

Bashar al-Assad

Bashar Al Assad

Under his leadership, Syria underwent a degree of relaxation, with hundreds of political prisoners released and a few tentative steps towards easing media restrictions. But the pace of change has slowed — if not reversed — and President Assad has made it clear that his priority is economic rather than political reform. It has been under fire for its continued presence in Lebanon and for its alleged support for Palestinian militants and insurgents in Iraq.

Tensions escalated after the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, in Beirut. Many critics blamed Syria for his death. The uneasy relationship between the United States and Syria has led many to believe that Syria could be the current US presidential administration’s next target. In the 2011 Middle East unrest, 358,548 protesters were killed.

6

Muammar Qaddafi

Col-Muammar-Gaddafi-5602

A dictator known as much for sponsoring international terrorism as he is for his impeccable fashion sense, Libya’s self-proclaimed “Guide of the Revolution” took power in a September 1969 military coup that deposed King Idriss. One of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi’s first acts as dictator was to rework the calendar and rename all of the months. He also published The Green Book.

President Reagan personally appraised Muammar Qaddafi: “I find he’s not only a barbarian, but he’s flaky. […] I just think that the man is a zealot.” The primary issue was Qaddafi’s longstanding support of international terrorism. He played host to both Abu Nidal and to the infamous assassin Carlos the Jackal. In all likelihood, Qaddafi ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. During the recent Middle East unrest, between 2,500 and 8,000 protesters were killed.

5

Osama Bin Laden

879753-Osama-Bin-Laden

Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. Bin Laden was also indicted over the 1998 embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya. He was wanted by numerous countries for his ties to terrorist activities, and many attempts were made to capture him. On April 29, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama authorized the CIA to conduct a raid, dubbed “Operation Neptune Spear”. In the late evening of May 1, 2011, (EDT), the president announced that bin Laden had been killed in the operation. The entire raid, including intelligence sweeps of the compound, was completed in less than 40 minutes. His body was taken and biometric facial recognition tests were performed. Subsequent genetic testing supported the preliminary identification. On May 6, 2011, al-Qaeda confirmed that bin Laden was dead. They also vowed that they would continue attacking the U.S. and its allies.


4

Saddam Hussein

Saddam Hussein

Saddam, which means “he who confronts,” was born in a village called Al-Auja, outside of Tikrit in northern Iraq. At around the time of his birth, his father disappeared from his life. Some accounts say that his father was killed; other sources say that he abandoned his family. Saddam’s mother soon remarried a man who was illiterate, immoral and brutal. Saddam hated living with his stepfather, and as soon as his uncle Khairullah Tulfah (his mother’s brother) was released from prison, in 1947, Saddam insisted that he go and live with him. Saddam didn’t start primary school until he moved in with his uncle at age 10. At age 18, Saddam graduated from primary school and applied to military school. Joining the military had been Saddam’s dream, and when he wasn’t able to pass the entrance exam, he was devastated. Though Saddam was never in the military, later in his life, he frequently wore military-style outfits.

Saddam moved to Baghdad for high school. He found school boring and enjoyed politics more. Saddam’s uncle, an ardent Arab nationalist, introduced him to the world of politics. Iraq, which had been a British colony from the end of World War I until 1932, was bubbling with internal power struggles. One of the groups vying for power was the Baath Party, and Saddam’s uncle was a member. In 1957, at age 20, Saddam joined the Baath Party. He started out as a low-ranking member of the Party, and was responsible for leading his schoolmates during riots. However, in 1959, he was chosen to be a member of an assassination squad. On October 7, 1959, Saddam and others attempted, but failed, to assassinate the prime minister. Wanted by the Iraqi government, Saddam was forced to flee.

He lived in exile in Syria for three months, and then moved to Egypt, where he lived for three years. In 1963, the Baath Party successfully overthrew the government and took power, which allowed Saddam to return to Iraq from exile. While home, he married his cousin, Sajida Tulfah. However, the Baath Party was overthrown after only nine months in power and Saddam was arrested in 1964, after another coup attempt. He spent 18 months in prison, where he was tortured, before he escaped, in July 1966. During the next two years, Saddam became an important leader within the Baath Party.

In July 1968, when the Baath Party again gained power, Saddam became vice-president. Over the next decade, Saddam grew increasingly powerful. On July 16, 1979, the president of Iraq resigned and Saddam officially took his place. Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq with a brutal hand. He used fear and terror to remain in power. From 1980 to 1988, Saddam led Iraq in a war against Iran, which ended in a stalemate. Also during the 1980s, Saddam used chemical weapons against Kurds within Iraq, including gassing the Kurdish town of Halabja. This action killed 5,000 people, in March 1988. In 1990, Saddam ordered Iraqi troops to invade the country of Kuwait. In response, the United States defended Kuwait in the Persian Gulf War, and on March 19, 2003, the United States attacked Iraq. It was during the fighting that Saddam fled Baghdad. On December 13, 2003, U. S. forces found Saddam Hussein hiding in a hole in al-Dwar, near Tikrit. After a trial, Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death for his crimes, and on December 30, 2006, Saddam Hussein was executed by hanging.

3

Haj Amin al-Husseini

Haj-Amin-Al-Husseini-And-Adolf-Hitler

Mohammad Amin al-Husayni (born 1895 or 1897; died July 4, 1974) was a Palestinian Arab nationalist and Muslim leader in the British Mandate of Palestine. As early as 1920, he was active in opposing the British in order to secure the independence of Palestine as an Arab state, and led violent riots opposing the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. From 1921 to 1948, al-Husayni was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, using the position to continue his promotion of Palestinian nationalism. As a passionate antisemite, al-Husayni encouraged his followers to “kill the Jews wherever you find them”. During World War II, he collaborated with the Nazis and, in 1941, met the Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler in Germany. He asked Hitler to back Arab independence, and requested that Nazi Germany oppose the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish national home as part of the Pan-Arab struggle. According to an American report, al-Husayni energetically recruited Muslims for the Waffen-SS, the Nazi Party’s elite military command. After the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and subsequent Palestinian exodus, his claims to leadership became discredited and he was eventually sidelined by the Palestine Liberation Organization, losing most of his remaining political influence. He died in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1974.


2

Idi Amin

Imgidi Amin4

Idi Amin Dada Oumee (born in 1924, in Uganda) was the military officer and president (1971-79) of Uganda. Amin also took tribalism, a long-standing problem in Uganda, to its extreme by, allegedly, ordering the persecution of Acholi, Lango and other tribes. Reports indicate the torture and murder of 100,000 to 300,000 Ugandans during Amin’s presidency. In 1972, Amin began to expel Asians from Uganda.

He said God had directed him to do this (actually, he had been angered by the refusal of one of the country’s most prominent Asian families, the Madhvanis, to hand over their prettiest daughter as his fifth wife). Over the years, Ugandans would disappear in the thousands, their mutilated bodies washing up on the shores of Lake Victoria. Amin would boast of being a reluctant cannibal— he said human flesh was too salty. He once ordered the decapitation of political prisoners to be broadcast on TV, specifying that the victims “must wear white to make it easy to see the blood.” One of Amin’s guards, Abraham Sule, said “[Amin] put his bayonet in the pot containing human blood and licked the stuff as it ran down the bayonet. Amin told us ‘When you lick the blood of your victim, you will not see nightmares.’ He then did it.”

1

Ruhollah Khomeini

Ruhollah-Khomeini-1

Ayatollah Khomeini was the religious leader of Iran, from 1979 to 1989. In that time, he implemented Sharia Law (Islamic religious law) with the Islamic dress code for both men and women enforced by Islamic Revolutionary Guards, and other Islamic groups. Opposition to the religious rule of the clergy, or Islam in general, was often met with harsh punishments. In a talk at the Fayzieah School in Qom, on August 30, 1979, Khomeini said:

“Those who are trying to bring corruption and destruction to our country in the name of democracy will be oppressed. They are worse than Bani-Ghorizeh Jews, and they must be hanged. We will oppress them by God’s order and God’s call to prayer.”

Following the People’s Mujahedin of Iran operation Forough-e Javidan against the Islamic Republic, Khomeini issued an order to judicial officials to judge every Iranian political prisoner and kill those who would not repent anti-regime activities. Many say that thousands were swiftly put to death inside the prisons. The suppressed memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri reportedly detail the execution of 30,000 political activists. After 11 days in the hospital for an operation to stop internal bleeding, Khomeini died of cancer on Saturday June 4, 1989, at the age of 86.



  • Joanne

    LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!!

    • As soon as i saw the title i thought this would be a list bound to generate conflict

  • Seymour Butts

    I like these kind of list. I list of 10 people who give Islam a good name should be a good read as well.

    Also wanted to say #6 is one ugly dude.

    • Open Your Eyes

      Could you find 10 people who give islam a good name?

      • Canuovea

        Yes.

        • Open Your Eyes

          Name them.

          • Canuovea

            I have in a response to another comment

      • Ade Klipse

        Yes

      • No

      • Ibn Tahir

        Like I’ve always said “The heros of the West are the villains of the East and the villain of the East are the heros of the West”. This particularly implies on Muslims

      • americanideol

        islam is NOT a religion it is term used to kill people and spread like cancer

    • StupidrabbitSuits

      lol :) he looks like Mickey Rourke BAHAHAHAHA!!!

      no?
      ok :(

  • gangsta

    imm first

    • Otter

      Dumbass #2

      • Jim

        Ha ha!

  • Bishop

    i pretty sure bin laden is jewish

    • cow

      here i heard that to

      • dread

        Actually, Bin Laden is dead.

    • Gina

      He was for sure a Muslim. He was an strong anti-semite, so yeah, definitely not Jewish

      • You

        He was a Saudi. Saudis are Semites. How can he be anti-Semitic?

        • circlefan

          please… a little reading before commenting…

          • semite

            no..he is right..saudis are arabs and arabs are semites..

          • Canuovea

            I checked it out and… Yes, if you speak Arabic you are a semite. Kinda. Turns out that according to Wikipedia, Semite “was first used to refer to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages. This family includes the ancient and modern forms of Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge’ez, Hebrew, Maltese, Phoenician, Tigre and Tigrinya among others.”

            And… “the term also came to describe the extended cultures and ethnicities, as well as the history of these varied peoples as associated by close geographic and linguistic distribution.”

            Furthermore “analysis of the DNA of Semitic-speaking peoples suggests that they have some common ancestry. Though no significant common mitochondrial results have been yielded, Y-chromosomal links between Semitic-speaking Near-Eastern peoples like Arabs, Hebrews and Assyrians have proved fruitful”

            Sometimes it is nice to let Wikipedia do the talking.

          • Canuovea

            Okay, the censorship just cracked me up… well, I chuckled.

    • Sardondi

      Simply too stupid to live.

  • The title is quite misleading. How can a follower who is corrupt and just plain evil, give his religion a bad name?? His deeds are not related to his religion. Similarly, following the thought of the writer of the list, does Robert Mugabe, Bush Jr and Nixon give Christianity a bad name?? Even Hitler was a Catholic.

    According to me, some of the people listed are evil and their actions are more of ‘dictator-istic’ than Islamic. for eg., Idi Amin was a murderer, an evil person responsible for innumerable deaths. On the other hand, people like Osama and Ayatollah Khomeini actually use Islam and the name of Prophet Muhammad as a weapon to preach hatred and justify killings. They give Islam a bad name.

    • Nils

      Yeah I agree.

      I would have expected a list of religious leaders advocating violence, of stuff like that. People whose words, actions *and responsibility* (as representatives of the faith) are directly to blame for a negative response from the West.

    • Armin Tamzarian

      That’s what I thought too. Idi Amin is not usually associated with Islam, but more with crazy and dictator. Same goes for Mubarak and Gaddhafi.

    • Armin Tamzarian

      This list isn’t entirely correct. People like Al-Assad and Hussein use methods that we find wrong, but in their situation they are quite right: their countries would fall into sectarian violence if democracy was implemented.

      Also, both of them are secularists. Saddam only went overboard with the religiosity after the Americans betrayed him.

      Al-Assad is a member of a minority religion, the Alawites. He has given the Syrians a great deal of religious freedom, which goes at the cost of political freedom. In Syria, there isn’t a middle way at the moment.

      Same goes for the Lebanese and the Egyptians where Christians and Muslims live in relative peace with each other, thanks to an dictatorial but secular regime.

      • this is the most stupid thing i have ever heard

        our countries will fall into sectarian violence if democracy was implemented???????????

        from where did you get that?

        how about the last 5000 years? were we fighting all this years till Al-Assad and his dogs came and gave us religious freedom?

        our people lived side by side for millennia before these assholes came to regime.

        churches and masjeds are built next to each other everywhere. some of our people still speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. Muslims celebrate Christmas, new year’s eve and eastern with Christians and Christians celebrate Islamic holy days and fast with us Muslims for centuries and you are telling me this is achieved by Al-Assad alone????

        my friend we achieved democracy since islam was introduced to us and that is 1400 years ago and if you read our history you will find many Christian and Jewish minsters and advisors ruling along side with the Muslims.

        so please before you say that we need a dictator to rule us check our history

        • Armin Tamzarian

          You never had democracy. You mean the 5000 years before them, when you were continually ruled by dictators. And do you know what happened when a less powerful dictator came to power? Or when a not-so-secular dictator came to power?

          That’s right, religicide all the way.

          Learn your history boy.

    • Anton

      Yes, I agree too. I would only associate Khomeini, Bin Laden and Abdullah of Saudi Arabia directly with Islam (because they use Islam to justify their actions.)

      Most of the others are just dictators for which it doesn’t really matter what religion they are. (I didn’t even know Idi Amin was a muslim, and wasn’t Saddam’s right hand Tariq Aziz a christian for example?).
      In my opinion, most of them just pretend to be muslim for opportunistic reasons.

    • Le tel

      Those were my exact thoughts when reading the list. 2/3 of the named people I would not have associated with Islam. It’s like I’m Catholic through birth but if i didn’t tell you, you’d never know.

    • MCREN

      ur a smart boy

    • Auburn Tiger

      Wow. Very well said.

    • Totally agree

    • hitler is an antichrist , he is of the devil

      and ones you killed someone not just one over 6 million jewish people

      youre not a christian anymore

      thats the law of GOD

      and bin laden even said that he wants to die because hes ready to meet allah

      same with some of people here, meaning they think thats what islam teaches

      palestine people cheered when the planes hit america .

      when osama died most muslims made osamsa as a hero , how could muslim people consider him a hero who killed thousands of innocent people.

      especially in the philippines where muslims consider him a hero and wants a better burial

      • Woyzeck

        That’s convenient, isn’t it? That you can allow yourself to disown anyone who does anything bad from your religion?

        You should know this already, but let me spell it out for you. The law of GOD is this: if you truly repent and ask God’s forgiveness, then the kingdom of Heaven will be yours. That’s it. To say otherwise is blasphemy.

        Hitler believed himself to be doing God’s work by attempting to exterminate the Jews. He said so himself. Repeatedly. Every SS officer took an oath to God upon their commision. Every soldier in the German army wore the words “Gott Mit Uns” on their belt buckle. You don’t have the right to ignore these facts just because you find them unpalatable. If you think you’re defending your faith by denying history, then chew on this juicy fact: that’s the exact same impulse that leads Neo-Nazis to deny the Holocaust.

      • TheSixthPistol

        Holy Crap. Muslims in the Philippines don’t consider Bin Laden as a hero. Sick bastard. Only the bandits and terrorists who kill their fellow Filipino for profit who hides in the damn jungle consider him a hero. Fuck you and your twisted world view.

    • AndyV

      10 people who gave Christianity a bad name? hmmmm…that has kept me thinking how to adjust all those priests (the representative of the religion) who sodomize young children in the name of the Lord and then destroy their lives…

      We all have got our dirty linen…let’s keep it hidden..shall we?

    • AndyV

      10 people who gave Christianity a bad name…..hmmmmm….that would be a tough one…How do I fit in thousands of priests (the representatives of Christianity and the keeper of the faith) who regularly and repeatedly sodomized young kids and destroyed their lives?

      We all have our dirty linen. Let’s keep it hidden…shall we??

    • jen

      You’re right. But the same is true for the Atheist and Christian lists.

    • Ibrahim

      It’s all a matter of perspective. I do not mean to insult, but many of the people who point the fingers at the leaders are western, and are also uneducated or politicians. But the same goes for the Arab world, here Arabs hate Jews, I myself am a muslim, but because I was educated properly I do not see Judaism as some sort of blight, my only quarrels would be with the Israeli Government who have broken some international laws.

    • faithful

      The Didn’t kill in the name of their religion or torture their own people inflicting rules in the name of religion

  • Otter

    Dumbass #1

  • lebanon

    I believe Osama should be Nr. 1, because he made the people believe that terrorism is linked to Islam, while almost all of the Islam world hates him

    • FanofSina

      Not the entire Islam world hates him !
      Real Followers of Islam were supporting him and mourning when he died !

      • Really? Real followers? Or demented idiots like you who propagate hatred everywhere?

      • HJRO

        the term is extremists not real followers, the extremists you get islam are ones who interpret their religious texts the way they see it just like quite a few christian sects claim extremist views.

        • FanofSina

          You need to go to faithfreedom.org and you will realise what Islam is all about

      • Chinalake

        grow a brain before u post FanoSina

        • But I’ts true, there were many that thought of him as a freedom fighter than a terrorist. Not saying we love Osama, but there are those that did and yes they did mourn

          • Khaled

            Maybe I am one of those who may be considered as Bin Laden supporter, I totally disagree with his behaviors, but I only want a fair view to his points, if you reconsider what he did you will find most of his crimes coming as a reaction more than an action. and also if you compare the effect of his crimes(maybe he killed around 10 thousands throughout his entire life) and compare it with the numbers killed in another terrorist in another war (like Iraqis war) you will find that world contains more evil ppl and more harmful terrorist.

          • Canuovea

            Khaled,

            Yes, Bin Laden was reacting, and there have been worse acts of terror in history than what Bin Laden did, but that does not change the fact that he resorted to violence and chose to kill innocent people to make his point. I do not find the intentional killing of innocents forgivable. Sometimes acceptable, but never forgivable, no matter the reasoning.

            Monstette,

            I agree, there are those who loved Osama, and for good reasons (as they see them, but their reasons hold no sway over me).

            Chinalake,

            That was a pointless and degrading response that will accomplish nothing constructive. It also does not make you look good, it makes you look foolish. Though you are probably not foolish, don’t sell yourself short by acting like that.

            FanofSina,

            No real Scotsman fallacy. Who are you to decide who is a real Muslim or not?

    • As u said, almost all hate him, but some love him too. Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a leader in Kashmir, India held funeral prayers for slain terrorist Osama bin Laden, saying that it was his religious duty to hold prayers for the “martyr”… There are some muslim a.s.s.h.o.l.e.s. who are ready to preach hatred…

      • Husna

        Kabir, search for articles by Ali Sina you will know what FanofSina is talking about

        • I researched and have got an idea about Ali Sina. He is quite right. As i said that some preachers are always preaching hatred and are poisoning the minds of people for their own ulterior goals.

          Ali Sina must be quite courageous to express such views publicly…

  • Kamran

    358,548 protesters killed? Where do you get your numbers from!!?? This list loses all credibility, and so do you as a writer with an outrageous, made up number.

  • FanofSina

    Huh ? These people aren’t giving Islam a bad name ! Islam needs to be studied to know how bad it really is. The author of the list should visit faithfreedom.org urgently

    BTW Saudi Arabia is a land where Islam was born and they practise Sharia Law which means they are using the same law as directed in their “Holy” Koran.

    • What an incredibly naive and stupid comment. Do you even have an idea what you’re talking about? And stop promoting propaganda sites here.

      • FanofSina

        Well am not promoting propaganda sites, I am referring to a website which supports my comment, I suppose you are among those Mullah shouting his lungs out that Islam is a religion of peace !

        • stockyzeus

          islam is a religion of peace. you are a stupid extremist cunt and should stop giving muslims like me a bad name.

          • Swapie

            Actualy, you give yourself a bad name using language like that. Go chew on a Koran and repent!

        • Auburn Tiger

          Not sure if serious. Anyway, I’m going to hope this just some sort of troll we’ll have to endure for today. If not, learn how to think critically. Just because you read something somewhere and someone tells you it’s true doesn’t mean it is. You have to weigh the merits of the evidence for yourself and form an opinion. If you did this and came to the same conclusion, you just might not be cut out for this whole “thinking” thing.

        • Troll. You don’t even have an idea how many muslims there are in this world and how your trash ain’t going to affect any of them in anyway. You can blabber as much as you want- I can see a Zionist influence the moment I read a post.

        • Know the Truth

          More people have been killed in the name of Christianity than in the name of Islam, SO SHUT UP!!!!! I’m not being biased as I’m not even Muslim.

          • Canuovea

            People have been killed in the name of both religions. And your logic does not follow.

    • Brazilian

      Propaganda bitch stop reading made up shit from Israili Media u dumb slut

      • Ni99a

        It aint propaganda if its got facts. faithfreedom.org

        Or wiki this dude: Ali Sina

        • I you are trying to get us on the site to read up or view something that will i some way influence us to change our views on something it is considered Propaganda

          • Jono

            “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. ”
            -Aristotle

          • Canuovea

            Aristotle was smarter than I thought.

            And almost everything is propaganda… in some way and with some definition. Just that propaganda has a negative connotation. I don’t like connotations sometimes.

  • Milan

    you’re very good Listverse, I check everyday for update, except when you write for politics,or like leaders…,I dont even want to read , because we dont know anything for this people, if the medium knows them doesnt mean we know,maybe they love their people, maybe their people love them,just because we know their bad sides from the media doesn’t mean they are evil…well,I will wait for tomorows update :)continue the good work :)

  • kame

    while most of these men had nothing really to do with islam except the fact that they were born muslim. They should be better described as cruel dictators. But as far as osama and khomenie are concerned, i would say that without a doubt what osama did or the is islam he practised was totaly false and unislamic. As for khomenie well you know some people are bad in your book but for others they are the real heroes. What Ayotollah did for his people was what the iranis wanted at that time. And they still consider him a grand hero. And for surely He too would have cared less what the west thinks of him as he knew he was important to people who were important to him.

  • Adam

    Number 1 should be Muhammad Ibn Abdullah.

    • Ni99a

      Win.

      • Not really

        • msmsauban

          Adam you must study history before you post..visit
          http://www.pbuh.us/
          please do get the facts from the true sources..

          GEORGE BERNARD SHAW said about him: “He must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship in the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness”. The Genuine Islam, Singapore, Vol.1, No.8, 1936

          savior of humanity rather than evil person

  • YaAlaaaaaaaa

    The moment i read the list, i decided to stone the guy who has written the list. This list is against Islam. But i have no idea who JWall is. So i have decided to throw stones at Listverse.

    Now there is a big crack on the screen of my laptop. (sad smiley)

    • Stephanie Dixon

      :)

  • Teaparty4ever

    Obama should be #1.

    • Marv in DC

      Aww the Freeloader party came out of the woodwork to comment.

      • SavingPrivateFoz

        Actually, Liberals are the Freeloaders. As the saying goes….Why work when you can just vote democratic?

        • Canuovea

          Strawman fallacy. Attributing false attributes to a person, in this case a large group to support your argument.

          Also, sweeping generalization fallacy. Hopefully it is obvious. I don’t say that all republicans cheat on their wives just because a few prominent ones do. Nor do I believe all republicans live in trailers and shoot at people as they drive by said trailers.

    • Canuovea

      Rarely do I laugh at people instead of trying to have a dialogue… well I try anyway, and… this is really difficult sometimes. This comment is a case in point.

  • bluh

    I miss Geert Wilders.
    He doesn´t do anything else than giving islam a bad name.

  • Pahpshmir

    Pahpshmir:”Give my regards to Mrs Gaddafi. And tell her thanks for the cookies”.

  • Pedro

    Cat Stevens

    • qarstala

      Really? Cat Stevens? He wrote “PEACE TRAIN”. But I think that he called for a fatwa on the author of the “Satanic Verses”. He doesn’t represent Islam, he’s a musician.

      • Woyzeck

        I agree with Pedro. Cat Stevens is awful.

        • msmsauban

          i really like cat stevens

          • Woyzeck

            My condolences.

  • fraterhater

    A dishonerable mention for Abu Bakar Bashir perhaps but I really feel like there should now more than ever be an effort to reduce tension between the worlds people.

    I think it is important to try and understand why there is hatred between some menbers of both islam and the west and try to work on that to improve the situation.

  • Shawn

    I think, the heading is not appropriate. All the above except Osama r leaders of of Muslim countries, who just give their country a bad name. Idi Amin was a convert, so he gives Christians a bad name rather than Muslims or Islam.
    Try looking up for people like Syed Kutb, Abu Bakar, Caliph Usman. The above can be qualified as Evil Muslims

  • MEXICANMAFIOASA

    Worst List EVER

    Racist and JWALL is dumb and dosent relise these people a netually fucked in the head like Hitler some may use there religion in a negitive way to satify there needs…

    • JWall

      Can’t you argue that the Christianity and Atheism list is also racist?

    • Canuovea

      The point of the list seems to be that these people are Muslim and therefore misrepresent Islam to the world. If these are the people who others see when they think of Islam, then yes, they do give Islam a bad name.

      I do not believe that bad name is entirely justified, however, nor do I think most people believe so either.

  • Shawn

    Food for thought:

    Qur’an (5:51) – “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”

    • Honestly, i think you posted that as a way to fuel hate between the religions. The list is about bad people who are Muslim and not what the Qurán says about other religions.

    • Yes Quran says this, also it (and all the Islamic world) accept Jews and christians as followers of God, unlike Jews and Christians.

      Coming to this verse, Quran mentions that if Jews kill their prophet and Christians defy Mohammed, then there is no meaning of befriending with them. But it doesnt say kill or massacre them.

      This list is totally sided and unfortunately leads people to hatred and division. Also using wikipedia or internet based sites as information source is quite ignorant.

    • msmsauban

      check out the following links for some light,(and i am requesting again not to refer racist sites and newspapers for info about islam) Everybody is trash talking about quran ,before you do please read it (not from some anti islamic site) and know the truth….

      read the above verse here
      http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=5
      and detailed explanation here
      http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri

      and another thing Quran is not for fools. it is for those who think and are in the quest of the search of truth

    • Sami

      :) when you put something please continue, this show’s me how you are very ignorance,

      82. Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, “We are Christians”: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.

      83. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: “Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses.

      84. “What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us, seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?”

      just keep reading :).

      sorry again for disturbing

  • kame

    for adam: your just the perfect example why people in both western and islamic world dont bother to know about each other…

    • Adam

      I’m an ex-Muslim who lives in the “Islamic world”.

  • br0ck

    nb 1 mohhamed,nb 2 all islamic people

    • while many might reply to you r comment calling you by many names, i will not, as a Muslim myself, i will just let you swim in your ignorance and pure stupidity

      • 7rau7

        wow… i didn’t know you were a muslim … glad anyhow :-)

    • Canuovea

      Why?

      If you are going to say something that sounds so incredibly stupid, then at least give some kind of reason!

    • msmsauban

      good rely monstette.

      • msmsauban

        good reply

  • kame

    shawn here’s some explanation of that food of thought. The jews and christians CAN BE FRIENDS WITH MUSLIMS. Heck people of book can even marry. The above verse explains that a muslim state shouldnt befriend christians or jews in confidential methods. As a muslim state primarily consists of muslims, so in this light it means to not tell your secrets to the christians and jewish majority states. eg Pakistan should never tell america where the location of their atomic weapons. No hate against you bro but clear up your mind from such things.

  • oouchan

    This list is like the others and just as controversial. They didn’t give their religion or lack thereof a bad name per se but simply by association. This does give one food for thought.

    Interesting list.

  • Saunatroll

    Can only muslims give Islam a bad name?

  • I have to say… this is a poor list.

    For one, it skews far too much to the present time (one would think that in 1,500 years of Islam, you could dig up at least one guy that wasn’t from the 20th or 21st centuries – and yes, I could level the same criticism at the Christianity list).

    Second, it looks like some of the basic facts and data are either skewed or just plain wrong. 358,548 protesters killed? Not even close. The actual number’s closer to 12,000.

    Third – the list seems to be a little leader-heavy. Those leaders, bad as they may have been, had underlings and influences. Surely those who did their bidding or who influenced their conclusions deserve more credit?

  • Ni99a

    Islam itself is a bad thing. I am not trolling.

    faithfreedom.org

    That dude debate with every prominent Islamic scholar and he won. Winning in the sense that, proving Islam is evil and hypocritical.

    • Ignorance itself is a bad thing. I am not trolling.

    • Know the Truth

      The world would be a much better place without racist individuals like you.

      • Ni99a

        ^to those two ignorant idiot above me:

        You guys make judgement before studying the subject or source. I am living in an Islamic country. Being forced to listen to islamic propaganda in my high school, i can say i am pretty much educated about islam.

        So at least visit the site or read up about islamic history before you call someone ignorant.

        Who’s the ignorant now?

        • abcd

          still you

      • blahh

        Actually Islam is a racist Religion, you my friend need to read the below article
        http://agniveer.com/4239/i-am-a-non-arab-muslim/

        • Ni99a

          Win.

          The truth about Islam is in that link above. To people who have read the link dont give excuses like, its the Arabs who give bad name to Islam.

          THOSE RACIST VERSES ARE IN THE QURAN ITSELF DAMN IT!

          WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT?

          Islam is just a case of a very successful cult, like Scientology or People’s Temple where a lot of people were tricked into in 400s to 600s, and turned into a religion.

          • Canuovea

            I read the article and I was not impressed. Logic does not follow.

            It reads back race into history when that concept was not an entirely solid one. This is ahistorical. For example, who are Arabs? Iranians aren’t Arabs, they’re Persians. Yet Iran is its own state run by Muslims…

            It represents an entire group of people through time as having a kind of continuous existence as a person. Such thinking makes dangerous assumptions. Not everyone who converted to Islam did so by force and through captivity. In addition, this method can be used to condemn everyone because everyone has history that involved suppression of, or murder, rape, etc of, another person. How do you think Christianity was spread? Judaism? What about the druids and Celts? What did Joshua do to the Canaanites? By many comparisons, Muhammad comes off looking pretty good.

            Look up the Pact of Umar (or Omar). At the time it gave more rights to non Muslim people in Muslim lands then non Christian people had in Christian lands.

            Most of the criticisms are against an extremist interpretation of the Qu’ran that is used to varying degrees in a few Theocratic states like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Yes, some of these countries are living in the 15th century (well, to varying degrees). But this is regional and cultural more than religious. Why? Because there are other Muslims elsewhere who don’t believe those things. The Caliphate has long been useless.

            Fact is, Islam can be just like Christianity and Judaism… The Bible (And Torah etc) contain some pretty nasty stuff that is absolutely unacceptable to many people in “Western” society, but that gets overlooked as unimportant to the whole message. One can still be a Christian and not believe in stoning rebellious teenagers and Homosexuals. One can still be a Muslim and not believe in Arab “racial superiority” (if that really is an actual interpretation of the Qu’ran). There are both outdated and new interpretations of religious texts the world over. The Qu’ran, like the Bible, has contradictions, is complex, and has many different ways of interpreting it.

            Once again, there are racist verses, or something else terrible like sexist verses or homophobic verses, in almost every religious text. That doesn’t mean those religions have to be sexist, racist, or homophobic.

        • msmsauban

          Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him said in his last sermon in arafa.

          ………..O’ Ye people! Allah says, O’

          people We created you from one male and one female and made you into

          tribes and nations, so as to be known to one another. Verily in the sight

          of Allah, the most honoured amongst you is the one who is most

          God-fearing. There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab and for a

          non-Arab over an Arab, nor for the white over the black nor for the black

          over the white except in God-conciousness………

          for the full sermon go to .
          http://www.alhafeez.org/lastsermon.htm

          • Canuovea

            Well, if that is true, then the whole “Islam is inherently racist” thing gets blown out of the water. Proves that it once again comes down to interpretation. And there are plenty of different types of interpretation.

  • Mrs. Antichrist

    How on earth did Saddam Hussein end up ahead of Osama bin Laden? Saddam was a monster, but bin Laden’s crimes were far, far worse, and his stance on Islam was significantly more extreme.

    There are a number of clerics who would have been far more suited to this list than many of the entries.

    • i guess it’s maybe cause more people were killed during wars(Gulf war/Iran-Iraq war) while he was the leader than the amount of people that died during 9/11. My 2 cents

  • qarstala

    The debate over Islam.
    Ah, such joy!
    Personally as a Muslim born atheist, where I am from we are more excepting of other religions and cultures. I think these leaders actually give their countries a bad name not Islam as a whole. One Muslim doesn’t represent Islam. One Christian doesn’t represent Christianity. These lists are pointless.

    • Canuovea

      One person may not really represent a certain group, but they can be perceived as doing so. That seems to be the point of these lists. To give something a bad name is to damage its reputation. These people do represent Islam in the minds of some people, humans do this quite often, and so they do give Islam a “bad name” regardless of the truth of the matter.

  • djd

    Can we have a list of 10 people who give Islam a good name? Probably not.

    • Woyzeck

      That would be people like Salman Rushdie and the Danish cartoonists, then.

      • Canuovea

        Isn’t Salman Rushdie now no longer Muslim?

        But there are plenty of people who give Islam a good name.

        Take all there scientists, mathematicians, and philosophers for instance. Made the Muslims look smart! (Not that Muslims are stupid!).

        Or whoever came up with the Pact of Omar… which gave rights to Christians and Jews in Muslim lands.

        Modern people? How about “monstette” on the comments here? Her responses seem to have been well thought out and all around reasonable.

        Whoever runs Jordan.

        Those who have spoken out against oppression and terror.

        There are plenty of people.

        • Woyzeck

          Very true. There are a great many Islamic scholars to choose from. My suggestions were of people whose innocuous actions have led Islam to give itself a bad name through its reaction to them; I guess these were missed chances for the Islamic world not to behave like a child.

          • Canuovea

            Oh, yes. The whole Fatwah thing against Mr. Rushdie annoyed me. But not all Muslims think he should be killed. And I read “The Satanic Verses” and loved it. Great story!

            There are also plenty of missed chances for the world at large to not behave like a child. Islam is hardly special in that regard.

          • Ni99a

            Name one.

          • Canuovea

            “Name one?” A good Muslim? Really?

            Okay, despite the fact I’ve already given some options…

            Salahuddin. Here was a man who constantly beat Christian Crusaders to a bloody pulp yet still allowed for Christian pilgrims to visit the Holy Land. He did not launch an invasion of Christian lands and was almost always on the defensive. He behaved courteously and even mercifully to his enemies.

            Again, look up the pact of Umar.

            Here’s something: “On February 5, 1864, Mawlay Muhammad issued a dahir (class. Ar., zahir), or royal decree, declaring his intention to treat his Jews with complete justice as was due any Moroccan subject and to protect them from all oppression. The language of the dahir was in complete accordance with Islamic tradition, albeit in the best sense.” -Norman A. Stillman, “The Jews of Arab Lands”

            What? Islam has varying traditions and reforms and is not some kind of monolithic chunk of humanity that thinks the same way? Who knew?… Oh, right, most people.

          • Woyzeck

            “Name one”? Really? You honestly don’t know of any Islamic scholars? Islam provided us with the brightest scientific and literary minds in the world for hundreds of years, how could you not know this?

          • Canuovea

            Not only that, they kept Greek and Roman knowledge alive and improved on it while the rest of Europe was busy killing each other.

          • Ni99a

            Those scientist are just like Galileo, they are condemned by their community and government for doing their work because what they are doing are not according to the Islamic faith or Quran.

            Then today, when their works are well known for igniting renaissance, the Islamic world try to ‘claim’ them.

            Truth is, it is the ARAB people who made the advances in science.

            ISLAM ONLY NAG NAG NAG ABOUT HOW THIS IS BLASPHEMOUS AND THAT IS INFIDEL.

          • Canuovea

            Not really Ni99a, for most of the time it was the policy of the Islamic government to quite support those scientists and philosophers. In Spain, for example (but it happened elsewhere too), the Islamic government actively employed and encouraged, sometimes financially, JEWISH thinkers, doctors, and philosophers as well as their own. It still wasn’t great to be a Jew under Islam at the time, but it beat being in Christendom.

            Sorry, but while Europe was in the midst of the middle ages and were busy killing each other and getting sick from their drafty castles (if they were lucky), most of the Islamic world was going through an early renaissance of culture. Did it have something to do with the Religion itself of the people? I can’t say for sure, but Islam didn’t stop that cultural and scientific growth (well, at the time… maybe later, I don’t know).

          • Woyzeck

            Absolutely. In comparative terms, I would absolutely prefer we had bypassed religion altogether and gone straight to a secular society. In the absence of this, however, I appreciate the universities, the scholars and the pursuit of knowledge present in the Arab (purely Islamic) world at that time and indeed which exist to this day. To say that they were persecuted for supposed blasphemy is simply factually incorrect. And bear in mind, the greatest days of the Islamic intellectual tradition came during a roughly 700-year period roughly covering the European Dark Ages, the Middle Ages and preceeding the early Modern Age, during which Europe WAS mired in blasphemy trials, witch-hunts and the persecution of scholars. A time when a person could be tortured to death for owning a Bible in their own language (by a man the Catholic church now considers a saint). There is simply no comparison to be made between the two; this is something you would know if you had even the slightest awareness of the subject.

          • msmsauban

            woyzeck what does he know about this subject..?he just knows what he has heard or read from racist sites..anyway good reply woyzeck (and canuovea)

            i wanted to share this small film about this topic,starring ben kingsley
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZDe9DCx7Wk

  • kame

    adam:lol i saw that stunt coming from million mile away but i suppose trolling all day on net and having search engins at your finger tips can easily make anyone a muslim….

  • Doc

    I’d say the only people on this list who “Gave Islam a bad name” were Bin Laden, and Khomeini really. The other were just leaders and dictators who cast a negative light on their own countries. When someone mentions Amin, I think Uganda long before I think Islam, same with Ghadafi, and Mubarek

  • Woyzeck

    Islam gives itself a bad name. Not because of the violence commited by people who think God wants them to kill people, but by nature of the fact that it is a religion and a superstition, and these are not things to be proud of.

    • Geronimo1618

      Respect your views, ‘coz you are an atheist.

    • Canuovea

      In your mind that is enough to give Islam, and most religions, a bad name. Fair enough, but it is not for everyone.

      I do, personally, worry about organized religion sometimes…

    • qarstala

      You keep trashing Islam a religion I grew up with, yet I still like you I have no idea why. If it were some redneck bashing Islam with a comment like “fck dat muhmmad he ain’t a prophet” I’d be pissed off, but when you bash Islam it seems much more intelligent.

      • Canuovea

        Yes, Woyzeck ‘s comments have been fairly well reasoned all around. Also, a lot of his criticisms are valid to some degree. He even defended Islam a couple of times when the attacks on it have been utterly unfactual and unreasonable. I like that kind of approach to things as well.

        I am all for reasonable dialogue, and that he doesn’t devolve into “Muhammmad should be first” is quite reasonable. IF he did have that opinion, he would at least attempt to justify it! I think.

  • Duha alHusseini

    You cant be serious including King Abdallah and Haj Amin AlHusseini in this list!
    King Abdullah is such a moderate Muslim and is fighting to keep a balance in the region!
    Haj Ameen is Also another moderate Muslim who led an entire community in a time of turmoil

    • Woyzeck

      If it’s “moderate” to sanction the oppression of women, the murder of homosexuals, torture and death for such crimes as being raped, then the entire religion is pretty fucked.

      • Canuovea

        It is not easy to be a moderate in such a place. And just because those things happen under his watch doesn’t mean he sanctions it.

        For example, he has pardoned people condemned to be executed by stoning when the situation warranted it… that is far from condoning!

        • Woyzeck

          The situation never warrants stoning. The situation always warrants pardoning. This man is extremely rich and powerful, and he owes his position to a sick, evil, barbaric society. He’s benefitting from torture, oppression and murder. I don’t give a damn if he pardons a few pregnant rape victims every once in a while, he should do the honourable thing and do everything in his power to end the practice of barbarism by his countrymen, or he should give up the throne. It’s as simple as that.

          • Canuovea

            I wasn’t clear. I meant he pardoned people when the situation warranted the pardon. Not when stoning was warranted. I think that stoning may be… necessary for us to accept sometimes. Like the woman who killed her husband so she could run off with another man. In that case some countries would give a death sentence anyway, for the Saudis the method for it is stoning. I don’t like the death sentence, but I do accept that some people do.

            I could also accept crucifixion using similar logic, but I, probably, would never authorize it myself. I could understand other people doing so, however.

            And I am sorry but I disagree. King Abdullah has done what he can in that regard. Just because he is king does not meant that he has absolute power. And if he gives up the throne and someone worse comes in? Think about that. He at least does make an attempt to better things, but we cannot expect him to risk everything for it (people have already tried to assassinate him!).

  • qwert

    osama should be 1st. he made islam and hatred almost synonymous with each other. he was proud of ordering the killing of innocents (9/11) and associated it with islam. a lot of muslims are misled bec. of him and his goals. heck his goals are nonsense and should not be even associated with Islam, Allah or Jihad. even in an interview with his former representative (shown in cnn) it was stated that osama even tolerates a suicide bombing inside a mosque by a muslim. that should be no.1 right there.

  • Mr Regel

    The people who give Islam the worst of its name are those who follow it exactly as it was intended due to the fact that Islam in its original state is in conflict with modern standards.
    Islamic literalism caused chaos to the Middle east and it simply never recovered, even until this day.
    Its always easier for a fundi-extremist muslim to win an argument on who’s following the correct version of Islam (them or moderates) on the grounds that moderates have to constantly twist and reinterpret the Quran, where as the fundi has everything word-for-word, black and white.

    • CowTipper4

      Have you even read the Quran? Or any religious text for that matter? There are so many ambiguities that there is no way any one interpretation is “correct.”

      Also, what do you mean by “Islam in its original state is in conflict with modern standards”? Is that to say that society has come to disregard some of the things that the Quran preaches because they have become outdated? If that’s the case, you can make that claim about every religion. If I’m not mistaken, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all suggest that sex before marriage is forbidden or wrong. But the majority of people today have no qualms with sex before marriage. Homosexuality is another example of something forbidden in religious texts, but it is becoming more widely accepted today. Does that mean that all three major monotheistic religions in their original states are in conflict with modern standards?

      And if that’s the case, then your problems must extend beyond Islam, to God’s word in general, but I digress. Calling extremist Muslims the “right” Muslims is insulting to a majority of the followers of Islam.

      • Canuovea

        Agreed.

        Plus, what is meant by “modern standards” anyway? There are several different types of those.

        Many religions have bits and pieces that don’t feel quite right to a modern audience, not just Islam.

  • Planet Earth

    I like how some people are so passionate about religion and at the same time no nothing about the history of religion .
    Archangel Gabriel is the one who spoke to prophet Muhammad to revealed to the Qur’an . Now that same Angel is talking to Abraham and is mention in the Bible . Now nobody else find it weird that Gabriel is mention in the 3 big religion.

    NOW take a second to think how big the Universe and how many planets are out there . I’m sure someone living 200 trillion light years away has never heard of Jesus or Muhammad or Moses .

    Now i ask you this, what’s the difference between a PROPHET and some one you is PSYCHOFRENIC ?

    • Jack

      You misspelled schizophrenic. Also: http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/schizophrenia
      Schizophrenic is someone who displays the characteristics of someone with schizophrenia.

    • Maggot

      NOW take a second to think how big the Universe and how many planets are out there . I’m sure someone living 200 trillion light years away has never heard of Jesus or Muhammad or Moses.

      If one believes in an omnipresent deity, then it’s not difficult to surmise that it would just send different prophets to different places, as needed. Our earthly perception of distance is irrelevant You see, that’s the beauty of believing in a god. You can just use its alleged omnipotence to fill in any gaps or leaps of logic.

      • Planet Earth

        Maggot . I agree that distance is irrelevant when it comes to god , but i my opinion God is more like infinite energy vs some big white guy.

        To understand how religion manipulate people you must first understand how PROPAGANDA works .Think about all the Bullsh*t war’s that were fought in the name of Religion .

        I wish planet earth was in free contact with a type 2 or type 3 civilizations and we could ask there opinion about god.Human tend to forget that we all live on a ISLAND call Earth .

        • Ben

          Religion isn’t to blame, people are. Many of the wars fought in the name of religion were to pursue other ends, and would have occured with or without religion, under a different banner with which people identify.

          • Woyzeck

            I’ve heard that argument many, many times, yet never seen any evidence to back it up. It is a fact that people kill each other solely on religious grounds, it is a fact that wars have been fought purely for religious reasons and it is a fact that the world would be a better place if religious violence was eliminated.

  • tuco

    i cant believe they’re actually people defending sadaam hussein or islam in general…I guess there’s always going to be a little guy cheering for the other side..It’s like you try to make a point but no one is really listening to you or believing you. Can you make a list of people who give islam a good name? I don’t think you can, because there’s nothing good about it.

    • Know the Truth

      You sir, are an idiot. The “little guy cheering for the other side is also the smarter guy. You can also make a list of people who give Islam a good name. If nobody has ever given Islam a good name, than nobody ever gave Christianity or Judaism a good name. Believe it or not, Muslim law follows the Ten Commandments more closely than the other two religions. You cannot draw pictures of anything divine because it may cause idolatry, whereas there are hundreds of images and sculptures of Jesus that some people (not all) pray to0. I think that Christianity is more idolatrous,

      • Canuovea

        I find it odd that you say Muslim law follows the Ten Commandments more closely then Judaism. After all, the Ten Commandments are directly (sorta) part of Jewish law.

        And calling people idiots never helps a discussion.

  • Geowyn

    Only 10?

  • Mr. Salsa

    Not Mohammed Ahmedinejad?

    • JWall

      I thought of adding him, but I decided to have Khomeini be the Iranian on the list.

      • Canuovea

        Good call!

        • Ata

          it’s Mahmoud ahmadinejad

  • Ferrer

    Anyone knows what happened to the RSS feed? The last item it shows is “Lost and found wallets”. Too bad because I enjoy reading lists on my mobile phone a lot.

  • Scientist

    Christianity is the most historically relevant historical document in the world. Deal with it!

    • Scientist #2

      Except for mormonism. Mormons are stupid!

    • proofread

      Christianity is a document?

    • Ben

      The English language, learn how to manipulate make use of it properly!

  • SnowSoul

    The list would be easier “Top 10 People Who Give Islam a Good Name.” Given the opportunity to vote, the PA voted for Hamas and now the opposition gives is joining Hamas in their hatred of Israel. In Egypt, the terrorist-inspiring Muslim Brootherhood is looking at becoming a large majority there. I don’t think I have to state any of the Islamic republics, which are either highly corrupt or dictators.

    Yes, there are “good” muslims who morph the religion to mean what they want rather than let it change them, as liberal Christians, liberal Jews, and the like. Then there’s a book floating around there that’s done by the grandson of one of Mohammed’s followers that was known as the greatest account of what happened by a civilian and he noted that his followers all went to war after he died to create a succession plan. I’m by no means, “islamophobic” or any of that crap, a previous doctor of mine was muslim and I grew up with friends who were muslim, but honestly, saying people give Islam a bad name is ridiculous.

    • Woyzeck

      I’m no fan of Islam, but almost everything you wrote in that first paragraph was complete bullshit.

      • SnowSoul

        Um, what is exactly? Is Hamas not the majority ruler of the PA government? Did the Muslim Brotherhood not inspire al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations? Are they not the most organized political party in Egypt? Are muslim nations not run by terrorists or corrupt?

        I’d love to know how that’s all wrong.

        • Woyzeck

          Hamas is the majority ruler of the Palestinian government, and they have recently come to terms with Fatah. This does not mean that Fatah has “joined Hamas in their hatred of Israel”, which is a grotesquely distorted and outdated view of the party. Hamas’ stated goals are for a return to a pre-1948 system – in other words, for the entirety of Palestine to return to Palestinian rule and for the state of Israel no longer to exist. This is not borne out of a hatred of Israel – a hatred which undoubtedly exists amongst Palestinians in general, I might add – as is shown by the somewhat unpopular truce offer they made on the condition of a pre-1967 situation coming into existence. Now, I don’t supportthe Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades and I am in favour of Israel’s existence, but I make an effort to educate myself on the subject enough to form and back up my beliefs without resorting to cartoonish tribalism. That is why what you said on that particular subject was bullshit.

          To say that the Muslim Brotherhood “inspired” al-Qaeda betrays a pretty large lack of knowledge about both organisations. If you want to blame anyone for “inspiring” al-Qaeda then your choices are the Soviet Union and the USA; the former for starting the war out of which they were formed and the latter for providing them support, arms and training. The Muslim Brotherhood really had nothing to do with it, though being a very large pan-Islamic movement there are undoubtedly some who are members of both (I can think of one off the top of my head). Again, I have no love for either organisation and I’d like to see al-Qaeda wiped out. Regardless, I make an effort to educate myself on such matters so that I don’t make assertions which don’t stand up to evidence. That is why what you said on that particular subject was bullshit.

          Your last point is most certainly true; I direct you to the caveat “almost”.

          • Canuovea

            I may not agree with everything you say, Woyzeck, but I like how you think! Plus I believe that you are correct here.

  • John Doe

    What a controversial list -_-

  • Rex

    Because you actually can give a religion a bad name! Effing hell, listverse, stop with this shit. Do you have a list titled “X People Who Give Christianity A Bad Name”? What about Judaism? Capitalism? You do have one one Atheists, I believe. Ho hum. I shall not get angry now. I’ll just point out that a more appropriate title would be “10 People Who Did Bad Things And Were Muslims”. But that would be too nuanced and would raise questions about why exactly you are focusing on Islam in your search for “evil” (very awkward word) people.

    • Canuovea

      They do give Islam a bad name though… just because people jump to conclusions.

      • Rex

        Yes, but was this point made? (That is if I understand you correctly. I take it you mean that they are people because of whom many assume that I slam is a bad thing?) Anyway, this list is not okay. At all. Maybe they should do one called “Top Ten African American Rapists” or “Top Ten Predatory Homosexuals”.

        • Woyzeck

          There is a difference though, because people aren’t born Muslims; homosexuality isn’t something you teach and being African-American is not a commitment to a lifestyle. The fact is, several figures on this list act they way they do because of Islam, or use their position of power and influence over other Muslims to do evil things. That is nothing like being a homosexual or an African-American.

          • Canuovea

            Hmm, my point is that there are people who perceive these people as representatives of Islam. They may or may not be justified in believing that (I think not), but that is actually irrelevant to me.

            I would not mind a list of “10 people who give Homosexuality a bad name” because I realize that it is a statement about how some people see these people, not an attempt to reflect reality or Homosexuality.

          • Rex

            /Actually I would mind such a list. I already had a problem with the “evil women” and “evil men” lists that were on here: the human mind has a tendency to desperately try to link and connect things, and to look for cause-and-effect-relations – this is why we have superstitions or the “Just World” fallacy. People who read this lists don’t think “there a some Muslims who do bad things”, they think “These people are bad and they are Muslims, therefore they are bad because they are Muslims, therefore Islam is a horrible religion”. All this is doing is perpetuating already existent and very harmful stereotypes. The same would happen if you made a “worst of” list about any group that is being stereotyped negatively by the readers’ society.
            I know I’m often the first to scream propaganda!, but…

          • Canuovea

            Well, the introduction makes it pretty clear that the list is supposed to reflect the individuals. Then again, I’m sure not everyone reads the introduction.

            And I warn you about rapid generalizations. Not everyone reading this is going to come away thinking that Islam is a horrible religion. In fact, if they say something like that then I believe they held the belief before reading the list.

            The fact of the matter is that a lot of this information on the list is correct… not all of it, and I disagree with placing King Abdullah on it. And, in all honesty, I never was one to compromise truth for political correctness. So long as the list isn’t just “Muslims are evil, Mohammad was no prophet, drop a couple nukes on Mecca” and actually has a point it is making… then I’m all for it. Even if I disagree, sometimes because I disagree actually. Can’t say I speak for everyone though.

          • Rex

            My main issue with this article has nothing to do with political correctness. The point is: don’t categorize people who commit atrocities according to their religion. If you want to write about political regimes in the Middle east or wherever, feel free to do so, but do not link it exclusively to religion. If you want to criticise religion (which is great, I personally believe that all religion is harmful), be consequent and do not single out Islam, because its teachings are in no way more permissive towards violence than others (or at least Christianity, which is to be honest the only one I have studied in-depth).
            On generalizations about people’s view of this list: Writing this in the current political climate surrounding Islam is promoting islamophobia, plain and simple. The majority already believes that Islam is the religion of evil, and this belief is being enforced.

          • Canuovea

            Rex,

            You are talking about political correctness, after a fashion… You are saying that something should not be written because of the political climate. That is censorship through political correctness and I am against that.

            And the point of the list is to address religion… but not attack it. In fact, I see these lists as partially divorcing the people from the religion. That is, if the list is done right. And I believe that this was quite well handled in the introduction. As far as I am concerned, most of this list is true (not all), and I see no problem about the truth. These men can and do give Islam a bad name, a reputation which is not deserved. This list helps show that it is their fault as people, not the religion as a whole.

          • ofcurse some people are born muslims you dumb ass , and by the way people dont get born homosexual , it is an ilness

  • Matt

    Maybe it’s time to add Saif al-Adel, now that he’s the new leader of Al-Qaeda…

  • Canuovea

    Hmm, who was it in Saudi Arabia who kept on pardoning women sentenced to be stoned to death? Could it possibly have been King (then Prince) Abdullah? I think it was actually.

    Problem here is that the list doesn’t mention something bad the man himself did, but rather the problems with the system he lives in. I understood Abdullah to be a fairly strong progressive. If my instincts here are correct then I think he is misplaced on this list. Don’t blame one man for the mess that Saudi Arabia is.

    I am also glad to see that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are NOT at the top of the list.

  • MadMonkey

    Muslims

    /thread

  • OldManJim

    Now I understand that this will be a controversial comment but I feel it has to be said: How can anyone claim Islam is a religion of peace, a few of the people mentioned in this article would be seen to do the correct thing in the eyes of Islam. Even the Qur’an says that “Those who are disbelievers must be sought out and destroyed” Or words to that effect – sorry can’t find the actual quote. Islam, along with Christianity and many other religions, is an evil and monstrous institution, that is all.

    • Lurker

      What a stupid post from you.

      Morons like you should go back and read the context behind the verses in the Quran. Understand that the Quran wasn’t revealed over night, it was revealed over a period of 20 years through revelation to the prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Each revelation has background information and was revealed due to a specific reason. Understand the meaning of the words isn’t enough, you have to understand the context behind those words. For example the quote that you are referring to asks for the killing of disbelievers. Now this was revealed during times of war. During war if you don’t kill your enemy then he will kill you (it’s very simple – self defence). Now do you understand why this verse was revealed. By the way, Muslims were persecuted in Makka by their own relatives who were not Muslims yet. Muslims were only allowed to take up arms when they had their own state in Medina, before then it was forbidden by the Prophet. That is why Muslims living in Non-Muslim countries today are forbidden to fight against that country or even disobey its laws.

      • Woyzeck

        Or in other words, it was wrong to kill until is suited Muhammed to have another “revelation”.

        • msmsauban

          woyzeck i really like your comments.but i dont like the athiestic side of it (no offence)

      • Canuovea

        Interesting explanation. I found it informative. But what the name calling? It really doesn’t help at all.

        • msmsauban

          i wanted to say this on other comment ,that teasing and using foul language is condemned in islam…

          Quran says about cursing that…

          “…..nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames…” 49:11

          The Prophet said:

          “The inmates of Hell are of five types….” And among them he mentioned “…the miser, the liar and those who are in the habit of abusing people and using obscene and foul language.”

          So brother there is no gain using such lang. you will just degrade yourself and Islam …though your comment wass very imformative

          hope i made myself clear

          • Lurker

            OK, I apologise for the use of bad language (although I only called him a moron).

  • Evkero

    You left out the prophet Muhammed. Mass murdering pedophile and preached hate and spawned all these other figures above.

    • Jonnathan

      Dude? Just keep the hate out.

  • Peter Immonen

    You should have just called this “10 worst muslims”

  • Thorlite

    I’ve gotta say I’m a little uncomfortable reading this list, especially after reading the 10 People who give Christianity a bad name. First it’s hardly a comparative list. The people on the Christian list are a very different sort to the ones on the Muslim list. Certainly from a Muslim point of view the list would have contained both jr and sr Bush’s names, Tony blairs, the pope (current), president sarkosy to name 5!
    It was a very blinkered view from a very narrow minded viewpoint.

  • Could have been a little bit better executed, but definitely a good idea as a follow up to the list of people who give Christianity a bad name. Regardless of the entries relation to the title though, it was well-written and informative, so good job.

  • mansooer

    thank you for having khomeini as number 1 but after his death he was replaced by khamenei and does the same stuff as khomeini

  • Gaz

    I love this site – but this is probably one of the worsts lists.. ever?! Some of the facts are shocking.. and why do people still make out Bin Laden as the mastermind for 9/11… Even the FBI mention nothing about 9/11 on THEIR website.
    Furthermore this has nothing to do with Islam… that is like saying that as Bush killed a million plus with his two illegal wars that it was down to his Christian beliefs… of course not Bush just doesn’t like brown people.. especially brown people who are not Christian.

  • Magnumto

    Very interesting list, and well written. Thanks for taking the time to compile it.

  • Armadillotron

    Actually Saddam means Car bumper.. And before you call me crazy, I admire Saddam Hussein. He was a mass-murderer, but there`s other mass-murderers in the world. People say him , Chemical Ali and his relatives used chemical weapons against the Kurds, and crushed an uprising, but other countries have used chemical weapons and crushed uprisings. But we don`t have people moaning about those. there was the farce trial, and when he was basically LYNCHED when he was hung, he showed dignity. He didn`t whine or beg for his life, like Obama, or Dick Cheney would have done.

    • Canuovea

      Sometimes mass murders get something right, but I am hard pressed to find someone who was right about committing mass murder. And just because there are other mass murders doesn’t make one of them less bad.

  • Franky Boyyyy

    No one needs to give Islam a bad rep, anyone who delves a little below the surface will see that Islam turned those people bad and the other way around.

  • anwar

    they do not represent islam in any way

  • Roy

    Anyone who does these type of things is not a muslim. The things they do are not related to Islam no matter what they say. It is completly forbidden in Islam to do those type of things and there are consequences for those who do so.

    • Canuovea

      Not true. They can be and are Muslim. Islam, like other religions, can be interpreted in many different ways… and that is the one they came up with.

      And who are you to decide who is a Muslim or not?

  • Little Billy

    I’ll never understand why people call Bin Laden a “Mastermind”. He flew airplanes into buildings and people all him a “Mastermind”? Fuk that…He was a god damn terrorist.

    • abielectric

      You can be a terrorist and a mastermind. Jeez.

  • Nonya Bidnezz

    Sadly, these are leaders who are Muslim. All well known. If you compiled a list of the top 10 people who give Islam a good name (which I, for one, would like to see), I would bet that they would not be nearly as well known. The VAST MAJORITY of Muslims are upstanding, peace-loving people. However, the leaders, for the most part, are not. It’s time for the silent majority of Muslims to demand that those who distort Islam are not followed, and that good-hearted Muslims become visible and popular.

    • Woyzeck

      Or its time for religions to stop interfering with the affairs of the world and leave us the fuck alone. I know lots of good people who are Muslims; the fact that they are Muslims has no bearing on whether or not they are good people. But when religious beliefs lead to violence, you’d better believe that that’s what people are paying attention to because without those beliefs, the violence would not have been commited.

      • Canuovea

        I disagree. There are plenty of reasons for violence that are not religious. I’m no fan of religion myself, but I don’t think it can be labeled the root of all evil.

        • Woyzeck

          I didn’t say that religion is the only cause of violence, but it is and always has been one of the largest in the world. Society would benefit immensely from people not killing each other over nothing; this is an evil and one which humanity would benefit from seeing the back of. I believe in identifying the things which cause people to kill each other and then eliminating these causes. I see no downside to religion no longer existing, and enormous potential benefit for humanity were this the case.

          • Canuovea

            Okay, I may have put words in your mouth, I was tired.

            Though I am not entirely convinced that religion has been a cause of violence on the scale you suggest. I do believe that it has been an excuse for violence on such a scale, but even without it people would find their reasons.

            I also believe that religion has done good in the world as well. There are plenty of religious charities as well. Though I am not about to say that to be a good person you have to be religious. I’m not religious and I try to be a good person. But it is hard to ignore the influence religion has had on, well, my culture.

          • Woyzeck

            I disagree with two things there: firstly, that religion is merely an excuse for people to fight. That cannot possibly be the case. For example, the suicide bombing community is exclusively religious (quoted from Christopher Hitchens). 9/11 was entirely religious. The Crusades were entirely religious. The foundation of Israel was entirely religious and the rationale used for the persecution of Palestinians is still a religious one. The Troubles in Northern Ireland were borne out of a non-religious struggle, which only turned into the bloody, ongoing conflict it did because of sectarian religious practices. Religion causes normally morally decent people to do and say horrible things.

            The other reason I disagree with this is that it seems to me to be a morally weak position. There are other reasons why people fight, but that doesn’t mean we should just shrug our shoulders and just let people carry on killing each other. I believe in wiping out EVERY reason that people kill each other, and I see no reason why religion should be first seeing as how it is one of the largest causes of conflict in the world and based entirely on nonsense, prejudice and superstition.

            I have no problem with the legacy of religion on our culture. I love churches and (some, not all) religious art. However, I believe that religion’s days of improving our culture have ended. We are left instead with the shrieking and mewling of people who think they are better than everyone else due to their beliefs and should be treated as such. We don’t need this in our society and we shouldn’t have to pander to it. There are religious charities; these are utterly dwarfed by secular charities and have been since the 1930s. The charity aspect of religion is a duty; it does not mean that religious people are more charitable than other people as they are essentially doing it for the promise of reward. Religious charities also include charities to help the religion, which is obviously not beneficial in all cases, and in the kind of institutions which for hundreds of years have been temples to pederasty and the abuse of children. Secular charities are free of such compulsions and conditions.

          • Canuovea

            First off, not all of those are examples of religious motivation for conflict alone.

            Suicide bombing and 9/11 are not necessarily from purely religious motivation. I do not deny that extremist religious rhetoric was used to get people to do those things, but why? What is the reason for it using that rhetoric? I fear it may be rooted deeply in imperialism, both old and new types, and different culture.

            In addition, both of those are examples of asymmetric warfare. They see themselves at war but cannot take on a modern military, what do they do? People do not blow themselves up just for fun, that is desperation. If Christopher Hitchens says these are exclusively religious phenomena then I have to disagree. If I thought that I could save my loved ones by blowing myself up then I would, there is certainly potential for it not to be religiously motivated. But regardless, they perceive a wrong done to them, and it is not simply about religion, is it?

            The foundation of Israel was not entirely about religion, in fact much of it was ethnic. Being Jewish can mean one of two things, or both actually, the person is ethnically Jewish or Religiously Jewish. The Zionist movement had both types in it, and for different reasons. There was, for example, a Socialist Zionist movement (Socialism isn’t exactly a religious thing). And there was a Zionist feminist leader named Puah Rakovsky who did not believe in God from a young age. In addition, many of the Orthodox Jewish community actually were against the founding of the state of Israel because they believed that should only happen when the Messiah came.

            I will not argue about Ireland or the Charities though. And I agree with you that it is not necessary to be religious to be a good person. I don’t think you can’t be a good person if you are religious, but you aren’t saying that at all. I do also believe that religion can make good people do or say bad and stupid things, I have been on the receiving end of that myself.

            However, what can we do? Force people to think we are right? And not only with regards to religion. Violence is caused by differences; cultural and societal as well as religious. Do we say our culture is right and their’s is wrong? Is Cultural imperialism sometimes a good thing? Certainly there are some cases that I think it is, but that doesn’t make it less dangerous. Fact of the matter is that as long as there is some kind of difference in opinion and thought, there is the possibility of violence. We cannot simply eliminate that, and I don’t think we should even if we could.

          • Woyzeck

            “Suicide bombing and 9/11 are not necessarily from purely religious motivation. I do not deny that extremist religious rhetoric was used to get people to do those things, but why? What is the reason for it using that rhetoric? I fear it may be rooted deeply in imperialism, both old and new types, and different culture.”

            Suicide bombing is exclusively religious. It is exclusively jihad, or for the attainment of paradise. It is exclusively to make oneself a martyr. Yes, there are other reasons for it – of which imperialism is the most obvious – but the fact of the matter is that if it weren’t for religion people wouldn’t be blowing themselves up. They would have no reason to do so. Imperialism is another matter, as suicide bombing is the reaction to imperialism – without the key of religion, people couldn’t persuade themselves or anyone else to do so.

            As for 9/11, this had nothing to do with getting people to do things. They believed it themselves. Read Mohammed Atta’s “suicide note” (it wasn’t intended for this purpose, but is widely regarded as such). It is entirely religious and ties in the actions he was about to commit with verses from the Quran (as he interpreted it). Another of the hijackers left behind a note saying that he would soon be with “the women of paradise”. 9/11 would not have happened if these men were not religious. That is a fact.

            “In addition, both of those are examples of asymmetric warfare. They see themselves at war but cannot take on a modern military, what do they do? People do not blow themselves up just for fun, that is desperation.”

            It isn’t desperation in the slightest, and I can show you why. Firstly, there are schools and training camps where children are taught that martyrdom is the ultimate goal of their existence. The people who commit themselves to suicide bombing and to other related actions come from all walks of life – most are young men and women from places like Pakistan and Afghanistan, some travel in from Britain and America to train. Some suicide bombers have lived perfectly comfortable lives in Western democracies. Desperation has nothing to do with it; it is entirely out of anger, religious identification and finally a religious belief in paradise which leads to this. Think of the places in the world in which people are desperate. The Congo, for example, is in the midst of the bloodiest war since the end of the Second World War. It is known as the rape capital of the world. Suicide bombing doesn’t happen there, despite the undoubted desperation of the people.

            “If Christopher Hitchens says these are exclusively religious phenomena then I have to disagree. If I thought that I could save my loved ones by blowing myself up then I would, there is certainly potential for it not to be religiously motivated. But regardless, they perceive a wrong done to them, and it is not simply about religion, is it?”

            There is certainly potential for it to be non-religious, but that isn’t the case at the moment. Suicide bombings are exclusively the domain of the faithful, and I cannot see any situation arising in which secular democracies will be in such a state as for this situation to arise. Again, even if these people do perceive a wrong being done to them, without religion they wouldn’t blow themselves up. To the non-religious, this is completely counter-intuitive. Frequently however, these people don’t perceive wrongs being done to them, they perceive wrongs being done to their fellow religious people or to their faith itself. Without this to drive them, no-one in their right mind would walk into a marketplace and blow themselves up.

            “The foundation of Israel was not entirely about religion, in fact much of it was ethnic. Being Jewish can mean one of two things, or both actually, the person is ethnically Jewish or Religiously Jewish. The Zionist movement had both types in it, and for different reasons. There was, for example, a Socialist Zionist movement (Socialism isn’t exactly a religious thing). And there was a Zionist feminist leader named Puah Rakovsky who did not believe in God from a young age. In addition, many of the Orthodox Jewish community actually were against the founding of the state of Israel because they believed that should only happen when the Messiah came.”

            Israel is secular and much of the reason for its foundation was non-religious, but without the religious aspect it would never have been formed. There would be no reason for it to exist without identification with Judaism or with Jewishness, and with the hatred other religious groups had and have for Jewish people. And the subjugation of the Palestinians is, and always has been, on the grounds that Jewish people are better than them. Zionism is inherently racist and inherently religious. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t secular aspects of it, or products of it, or even causes of it. Regardless, without religion there would be no reason for it to exist.

            “I will not argue about Ireland or the Charities though. And I agree with you that it is not necessary to be religious to be a good person. I don’t think you can’t be a good person if you are religious, but you aren’t saying that at all. I do also believe that religion can make good people do or say bad and stupid things, I have been on the receiving end of that myself.”

            That’s certainly true – many, many religious people are good people.

            “However, what can we do? Force people to think we are right?”

            If by that you mean education and the enforcement of the predicate that people aren’t allowed to kill each other, that religion does not provide an excuse for genocide and that we will not tolerate crimes in the name of any religion, then yes. This doesn’t mean attacking people for being religious, it means ending the practice of giving preferential treatment or deference to superstition.

            “And not only with regards to religion. Violence is caused by differences; cultural and societal as well as religious. Do we say our culture is right and their’s is wrong?”

            If their culture involves killing people then yes, we can say that quite confidently. I am better than suicide bombers. I am better than the people who subjgate Palestine. I am better than Mohammed Atta, Osama Bin Laden and Ayatollah Khomeini. I am their moral superior because I do not advocate killing people simply for my own superstition or prejudice.

            “Is Cultural imperialism sometimes a good thing? Certainly there are some cases that I think it is, but that doesn’t make it less dangerous. Fact of the matter is that as long as there is some kind of difference in opinion and thought, there is the possibility of violence.”

            But not on the same scale as that which comes about when people think they have ‘God on their side’. In a secular democracy, the drive to kill people for political ideas is largely gone. Not so with religious ideas, however, which is why we have religious murders occuring frequently and political murders rarely. Again, I believe in eliminating all the things which cause people to murder each other. The biggest at the moment seems to me to be religion.

          • Canuovea

            Wow. Okay, first I want to thank you for this discussion. Alrighty then. Here we go.

            Suicide bombing: Yes, it is a reaction to Imperialism, past and, arguably, present. I would argue that it is imperialism that makes them desperate enough to engage in this kind of asymmetrical warfare. They see it as an attack on their people, their culture, and their religion. They are willing to fight not just because they get promised heaven, but because they see a need to fight. Kill the reason to fight, and you stop both the suicide bombings and more conventional violence.

            How to do this? That is the difficult question. Can we really just give in to all their demands? No, I don’t think so.

            But anyway, is suicide bombing a religious thing? They knowingly go in there trying to die and do damage to the enemy. There is plenty of similar behaviour in history that was not necessarily religious. It was always about a sacrifice for the Greater Good. Thermopylae for instance. In this case, they seem to see religion, their culture, society, etc, as being part of that Greater Good, but they cannot fight in conventional ways. They see something worth defending, and dying for, but can’t do so normally, and so they are desperate to find a way to. Suicide bombing is one way to hit a perceived target that is difficult to deal with even for a conventional state and military.

            Second, the Quran doesn’t tell people to go blow themselves up. Martyrdom is different from suicide bombing. In that, for them, all suicide bombers are martyrs, but not all martyrs are suicide bombers. Someone can be on a jihad without committing suicide in some way.

            Just because you are training people to be “warriors” who kill themselves to kill enemies doesn’t mean you are not desperate. In fact, it means they are terribly desperate! Suicide bombing has to be seen as a kind of last resort. For example, does Iran have a special suicide bomber military unit? I don’t think so. I know they supply and train terrorists who do use suicide bombers, but they prefer to have a conventional military for themselves.

            And when I said desperation I did not mean desperation necessarily born out of personal circumstances like wealth. I meant desperation in the sense that the see something worth defending, but cannot do so without resorting to desperate measures. Hence desperation.

            What are the things they feel they need to defend? Religion is definitely one of the big ones, as well as one of the big influences, but it is far from the only one. Some of these people see (them, not me) the assualts of imperialism on the nations and cultures and decide that is worth defending. Religion is, it is true, an integral part of both their nations and cultures. But my point is not that suicide bombing is NOT religious, but that it is not exclusively religious. (and I apologize for my double negatives, I find them necessary sometimes).

            I will give one example of how perception can shift this. Remember that movie Inglorious Basterds? I didn’t like it, except for the main antagonist, that actor was brilliant. But my point is that some of the Jews in that movie end up being suicide bombers… and we are supposed to be sympathetic to them! Are they doing it for religious reasons? Not really. Reasons? Nazis are evil, Revenge, keeping your people alive, defending way of life? Eh, yes I know Godwin’s law, but I’m invoking a movie, not the actual Nazis, in order to make a point about perception.

            But you are 100% right in that Religion gives some of the push required. The whole going to heaven thing is pretty convincing for believers. I’m just saying it is not 100% religious.

            Suicide Bombing is Nihilistic, and the suicide bomber is willing to die for a cause. How about Japanese Kamikaze pilots in WW2? Was that for religion? I think it was more for their country, families, and Emperor.

            As far as Israel is concerned… Okay. “There would be no reason for it to exist without identification with Judaism or with Jewishness, and with the hatred other religious groups had and have for Jewish people.” But Jewishness is not necessarily religious, as I have stated, nor is hatred for the Jewish people always based on their religion. For example, there are historical and cultural reasons to want Israel as a homeland. That is where the Jewish people had settled and remained for a long time and where Jewish culture flourished too. They had owned the place in the past and wanted it back. That happens a lot actually, regardless of religion. Again, I am not saying that there is no religious reasons, there are, but it is not exclusively religious.

            Interestingly, there were people who wished to set up a Jewish homeland somewhere in South America… and Stalin had set up a Jewish city of some kind in the East of Russia.

            I will make another point. Religion is one of those things that both unites and divides at the same time. It binds believers closer together in a community of their own, yet it also divides from non-believers. The weaker religion is made the weaker those bonds and divisions become, the stronger (or more extremist) a religion gets the reverse is true. Personally, I have nothing against watered down religion that allows interaction between different groups. However, religion is far from the only thing that has this effect. Nationalism is another one, so is ethnicity. I think that in order to achieve peace we have to break down the strength of these bonds so people interact better. Problem is, that can be dangerous… something else is required to unite everyone. What can that be? Love of freedom? etc? I don’t know.

            “education and the enforcement of the predicate that people aren’t allowed to kill each other, that religion does not provide an excuse for genocide and that we will not tolerate crimes in the name of any religion, then yes. This doesn’t mean attacking people for being religious, it means ending the practice of giving preferential treatment or deference to superstition.” Okay, that is a good approach. To a degree. Still dangerous though, particularly the word “enforcement”. How?

            “If their culture involves killing people then yes, we can say that quite confidently. I am better than suicide bombers. I am better than the people who subjgate Palestine. I am better than Mohammed Atta, Osama Bin Laden and Ayatollah Khomeini. I am their moral superior because I do not advocate killing people simply for my own superstition or prejudice.” -You can say that, they would disagree. The trick is convincing them you are right without using violence yourself.

            “In a secular democracy, the drive to kill people for political ideas is largely gone. Not so with religious ideas, however, which is why we have religious murders occuring frequently and political murders rarely.” -Tell that to the Kennedy’s. If politics becomes polarized enough, whether in a democracy or not, then there will be violence. Perhaps it is easier to polarize religion though.

            “I believe in eliminating all the things which cause people to murder each other. The biggest at the moment seems to me to be religion.”

            And I think this may be where we disagree. I do not see elimination as possible. We need to prevent severe polarization and extremism in any way we can, but not just in religion. Race, Nationalism, Ethnicity, even politics, power and perhaps economics. Any of these things taken to the extreme is dangerous. As for the biggest thing causing murder… greed perhaps? Economics run amok? Religion has competition.

  • Andy

    Am I the only person who thinks bin laden should have been given a trial? After all, Nazis were, the people who commited the Rwandan genocide are, Khmer Rouge members are, Saddam Hussein was, Slobo was, Bosnian Serbs are, YET Bin Laden wasn`t. Personally though, I think they just wanted him dead.

    • Woyzeck

      I think that would have lead to more deaths. If he was in custody then he’d still be a figurehead, but he’d also be something of a living martyr. There would have been enormous demonstrations, possible rescue attempts, and no chance of being rid of him until time took care of that. Then if he had died in custody, no matter the circumstances, things would be much, much worse. Better just to shoot him like a dog and dump him in the sea. After all, the facts aren’t really in dispute and there would have been little information to glean from his testimony.

      • Armadillotron

        I know it sounds crazy, but it`s possible, what if in the future, some divers or explorers are diving, what if they found Bin Laden`s body? Like they did with King Tut? And now that Bin Laden is dead, and especially the way he was took out in a firefight (for years, they said he was dead, now he is they say he`s alive) he`s become some kind of martyr. And Muslims like that kind of thing. “The Warrior`s Death.” And don`t get me wrong I`m glad he`s dead, but the way Americans shouted USA USA USA! I didn`t like it. I just thought, “We got the cowardly maggot.”

        • Woyzeck

          He may be a martyr, but his was hardly a glorious death. He was hiding for nine years, then his enemies caught up with him and wasted him like it was nothing. Personally I wasn’t too bothered by the people chanting “USA! USA!”. I guess I’m in favour of a little revelry in these situations, and it’s good for people. But I can definitely see why others would be put off by it. But let’s face it, this doesn’t really affect our day to day lives; the best thing to do in this situation is to smile for a moment then move on. There’s one less asshole in the world. That’s a win, as far as I’m concerned.

          • Canuovea

            I was glad when Bin Laden was killed, and I felt annoyed at myself for it. Feeling happiness about a person’s death unsettles me. I find myself wondering exactly what kind of person Bin Laden was without the whole terrorism Jihad thing. But I’m still glad he’s dead.

            I too can understand the “USA USA” chanting, if not condone it.

    • Bullamakanka

      No, you’re not the only one. Michael Moore thinks so, too. And Noam Chomsky thinks he’s completely innocent, period. I don’t know if you align yourself with these two numb-nuts, but if you do, well, sorry to say, that makes three.

    • Canuovea

      The best possible outcome would have had him being given a trial. But I would rather have him dead than have one of the SEALs who went in there dead, and so would Obama and whoever else called the shots on that mission. Unless Bin Laden made it perfectly clear he was surrendering I fully agree with him being killed.

  • kame

    islam is perfect in itself and does not need anyone to give it a good name. many words of the Quraan can have hundreds of interptations, that is why it is an evergreen book and is applicable for all the ages… As the westerners usually think religion to be the cause of much suffering thats why they want the least of any religion in their lives, so for them to only take the most irrelevent and anti islamic interptation of quraan to support their theory is just their typical mindset…. Next they would claim to be an muslim born atheist. lol i can claim to be whatever i can on internet.

    • Woyzeck

      Islam isn’t perfect, it’s a medieval superstition forged by an illiterate tribal merchant and his dumbstruck followers.

      • Canuovea

        Heheheheheheh.

        I do believe that is ad hominem.

        • Woyzeck

          It would be if kame was the ‘prophet’ Muhammed.

          • Woyzeck

            Actually, I’ve just reread my comment and noticed that everything I wrote there was true. So no, it isn’t ad hominem in the slightest.

          • Canuovea

            Isn’t ad hominem when you attack a person? Muhammed was a person.

            Even if the statements are true it is still ad hominem. If I say that someone is wrong because they are a wife beater it is ad hominem even if I am right.

            You are suggesting that an illiterate tribal merchant and his dumbstruck followers were incapable of making something (this case a religion or superstition, whichever) perfect in itself. But, just because Muhammad was an illiterate tribal merchant doesn’t make Islam any more or less perfect. I think Islam has plenty of problems, but I don’t believe that one of them is the literacy (or lack thereof) of it’s prophet.

          • Woyzeck

            Ad hominem is when you attack the person making the argument. I wasn’t trying to refute his argument by simply insulting him. The reason I said it wasn’t “ad hominem in the slightest” was because I realised I wasn’t really insulting Muhammed either, just pointing out some facts about him.

            You’re right to say that his illiteracy in itself does not affect how “perfect” the religion is. My original comment wasn’t particularly clear on this I suppose, but I think I was trying to infer that the Quran is an imperfect book (being factually incorrect in notable places, morally dubious in others and cribbed lazily from the Old Testament throughout) and that the foundation Islam was built on was 0ne of an ignorant, stupefied, hysterical peasant society which was easily whipped into hysteria by the rantings of a socially dominant male.

          • Canuovea

            Oh, okay, so long as you weren’t saying that the Quran is an imperfect book or Islam isn’t a perfect religion because of the illiteracy, etc, of the Prophet. Then it would be ad hominem. I think. Because you don’t support those claims. Why would him being illiterate make Islam less perfect? But either way, it wasn’t what you meant anyway.

            You are simply saying Islam isn’t perfect, and I agree. Sorry for dragging this out like that.

  • Erin

    The fact is, every group has good people and bad people; Islam is no different.

    • Canuovea

      Agree.

  • ashleysweet

    islam. the one religion women dont have to worry about appearing on a list like this for. :P

  • Doobie

    Hmmmm…well I would have to say Mohammad started things off by giving Islam a ad name…being a pedophile and all.

    • Canuovea

      And Jesus was a socialist!

      Good thing or bad thing? Who knows?

    • vermilionskin

      Amish girls can get married at the age of 16, would you consider that pedophilia? we have to be careful, in the time Islam started, girls were getting married in a very early age, even in Christian Europe!!!
      All religions have some negative issues, simply because they copied from each other, but regardless, Islam is not the biggest monster in the world.
      Few extreme Muslims decided to do bad, but remember, there are almost 2 Billion Muslims, if Islam was that bad, I tell you at least half of them would have done a lot more evil.

  • Thedukecapone

    Thanks for the nice list. Unfortunately anyone with a foreign arabic name is always going to give Islam a bad name whether they practice it or not.

  • Bullamakanka

    Perhaps the list can be adjusted to include only those that are still living (and continuing to give Islam a bad name, temporarily).

  • Jawa

    Number one should be the media. I just finished a research report on the media’s effect on Islamophobia. There is an enormous correlation between how the media portrays Islam and the Middle East and how it is viewed by the general American population.

    • Canuovea

      Good point about the media.

  • Davo

    fix: get rid of all religion. level the entire middle east.
    done.

  • bigski

    theres a marked difference between this list and the christian bad guys….they were types of priest/preacher …ect. most of the people on this list are head of states…. WTF !

    • Canuovea

      Because now we identify Christianity with Priests and Preachers and currently we identify some of these leaders with Islam. By “we” I mean some people. I cannot speak for everyone…

      • bigski

        i respectfully disagree…what im saying is the list is mislabled. it should be titled heads of islamic states who give islam a bad name !

        • Canuovea

          Well, it could be that. But then Bin Laden would not be on it. I do see your point though, I just disagree.

          I think the name of the list is actually less important than the introduction in explaining the position of the lister. And the fact of the matter is, so long as people identify these heads of state as Muslim, they do give Islam a bad name.

          • bigski

            again bin laden was kind of a head of state…..how can anyone except a head of state (some kind anyway) drop our two towers and hit the pentagon..anyway .

          • bigski

            also just to make a point ,ALL united states presidents were and are christians…
            and i guess you can call some of them evil too but i dont know which…nixon..hahaha.

          • Canuovea

            Bin Laden was not officially a head of state. He was in a position of power, much like the others though. But that is different. Al Queda (sorry about spelling) is more of a Non Governmental Organization… based on an extremist interpretation of religion…

            And Khomeni… he was head of a state, but it is a theocratic one. That is a legitimate representation of Islam at its worst.

            And there are plenty Christian heads of state who have given Christianity a bad name too! US presidents? Maybe…

  • Sean

    also include the name of Mohammad Ali Jinnah…creator of pakistan.

    • Shawn

      How does Jinnah give Islam a bad name???
      :S

      • Sean

        Jinnah created Pakistan in the name Islam and divided the India in 1947.

        • AAA

          how exactly is that bad?

        • frankfidd

          Jinnah created Pakistan for Muslims. How would that give Islam a bad name?

  • AlexanderZhurkov

    wat, why is Qaddafi Sadam Amin or mubarak on here? they are assholes yes, but they aren’t really known for their muslim tendancies

    FUN FACT: All of the above dictators were put into power or supported by the US

    • Canuovea

      Except Khomenei. He got where he was through violent revolution, and the USA sure didn’t like him.

  • Metis

    #1 in my oppinion: Muhammed

    Think about it. If even half of the “officiall” stories of him are true he was, if you think of it objectively, a very bad man. Not only that but he invented islam and made the basic tenets such that it can, is and has been, used to justify horrid crimes against humanity.

    • abcd

      try reading a book about Islam and you’ll see why you’re wrong.

  • Xcal

    All religion just leads to trouble except for buddhism, they cool.

    • Canuovea

      Nah, the Buddhists caused their fair share of trouble too.

      Ask Han Yu (A Tang dynasty official) and the Japanese (There were Buddhist monasteries who fielded armoured warrior monks… had to wipe those out before the Shogunates could really get going). Or the Hindus, Buddhism caused some problems for them.

      Basically no group (or person even) in history is blameless, be it religious, ethnic, or cultural group.

  • Shawn

    To A FEW WHO GOT REPLIED TO MY POST:

    First up, I personally have no problems with the Quran or Muslims. I live in Pakistan, which as all of ur’ll know is a Muslim country.
    The Quran does allow marriage with the people of the Book., but is only to extent of takin them as their wives. A Muslim girl cannot marry a Christian or a Jew.
    Now as for thing that really gives Islam a bad name is the fact that there is no church or synagogue in the KSA n people of other religions r not even allowed to pray in their homes. If anyone doubts that, they can find out for themselves.
    Lastly, im not here to debate or start religious hatred. I just thot that it the para i mentioned goes with the title of this list.
    If any Muslims here think i trying to degrade Islam or trying anything like it, thats not the case

    • Shawn

      sorry for typo

      its – TO THE FEW WHO REPLIED TO MY POST

  • Triptastic

    Islam – what a sad state I’d affairs , cover their heads say the men! Don’t allow them to vote, dont allow them to have a voice, stay hidden, be quiet, be fearful! Boy – it sounds like such an inspiring religion….ohhh please can I join. What a pathetic group of people, really , is this a religion or a prison for women!!!!!!

    • Canuovea

      Many religions have been similar “prisons for women”… but yes, I think that is one of the dangers of Islam. Yet it is cultural too, if not more cultural than religious, and so should we just decide that their culture is inferior?

      Sounds dangerously close to cultural imperialism. Unless you like cultural imperialism… I’m on the fence about it sometimes. Like genital mutilation. I’m more than willing to be culturally imperialistic if it means getting rid of that!

  • Lochi

    laden should be no.1 . he gave islam the worst name!! and @kabir bhai …..for them , in most of the hollywood movie the terrorist is an arab and muslim , for them muslims are always listed as no.1 in every corrupted thing….for them, 50% of the world sees muslims with a different eye. :/

  • Some of these guys say “oh yeah, I’m a Muslim” and then follow self-serving agendas that aren’t even vaguely religious. Others are genuine believers whose interpretation of Islam is misguided. But the end result is that, yep, we’ve got a rogue’s gallery here. They do indeed give Islam a bad name.

    Now I have to go read your Atheist list. That’s my “religion.”

    • Canuovea

      I agree with you here! A “rogue’s gallery” of people who profess to follow Islam. That is what the list is about.

  • truthwillsetyoufree

    These people cant make badder, islam’s already bad name.

  • Dilvish

    Eeeem… how’s Idi Amin Dada a Muslim? AFAIK, he claimed to be a shaman of his tribe’s religion…

  • dilip

    ya … you r correct …

  • David Copperfield

    Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, because he was a completely bloodthirsty and sadistic extremist at the height of Western paranoia over Islam. Not exactly typical, yet unfortunately the era and his actions reflected on all Muslims.

  • Augustus

    Obama?

  • Waterboarder

    I hate Idi Amin. The guy was a mad thug, who said he was “The Conqueror of the British Empire.” In the early 70`s he sent THOUSANDS of Ugandan Asians here, and they have taken over the entire area where I live. Every newsagents where I live, are ran by the children of Ugandan Asians and they go around in hordes. Cheers Idi Amin. NOT.

  • Manny

    I think your numbers are wrong on Syria “358,548 protesters were killed” ummmmmmm I dont think so…where did you get this info from?

  • ribenaberry

    Surely the only way someone can give a religion a bad name is if they do bad things and claim it to be in the name of that religion? That would only leave those recognised as terrorists. Most of the people on this list are people who did bad things and happen to be muslims – not people who did bad things in the name of Islam.

    • Canuovea

      Not necessarily. If people are identified as a member of a group and they behave badly then they can give that group a bad name.

  • Stefan

    How come you have to be so alternative, always, in the 3-1 spots? I mean, c’mon. Undeniably, the man who brought most stink over Islam is Usama bin Laden.

    And Titanic is the best movie evar, and Avatar too. Yeah. Being alternative is out dude!

  • Ben

    Shot to the heart and your too late darlin you give Islam a bad name

    • Woyzeck

      Whoa, we’re halfway there

      Whoa-o five times daily prayers

  • Planet Earth

    I never want to insult people and i don’t want to tell them what to believe . I just people to have access to all the information all the point of views .

    Please google ARC ANGEL GABRIEL and read up on him . I have a few question about angel Gabriel .

    Why does he play a big role in Chirstianity in Judaism and Islam ?
    Why would he play sick mind games with Abraham ?
    Why is he the one to reveal to revealed the Qu ‘ran ?

    IMO religion is used to inform people that Earth can be heaven or it can be hell .

  • Name

    Some of these people (Hussein, for example) didn’t practice Islam. Hard to say how they gave Islam a bad name except they were bad people who others mistakenly thought were practicing the religion dominant in their countries.

    • Dave

      He was asking Allah to save him while he was being hanged.

  • Ryan

    Actually, the thing that really gives Islam a bad name is the western media. I was born in America as a Christian but i’ve gone to Muslim countries (like Pakistan, Egypt, and UAE) and lived amongst Muslims. I’ve learned Islamic values from Muslims living there and those values weren’t extremist nor violent. Islam is portrayed horribly to people living in America, but for anyone who’s actually taken their time to study it, it’s a peaceful religion.

    • Canuovea

      It really is worth agreeing with yet another comment about the media. While there are a broad spectrum of Muslims, extremist to assimilated, the media doesn’t always acknowledge that.

  • Listverse can do better

    Any way you argue it, Mohammed married a child and consummated it while Aisha was still a child. Go ahead, say I’m taking it out of context, take the position to defend child rape.

    • Canuovea

      That is… so… tempting… must resist urge to… aww fine. Challenge accepted. Sorta.

      Had Aisha hit puberty by the time the marriage was consummated (not when the marriage happened)? If so then she was no longer considered a child at the time in that place. Hence it would not be “child rape” at the time, which is the only real way to look at history.

      From a modern viewpoint however… that does come out as bad (as I agree it should). But the fact of the matter is that Muhammad was a man of his cultural context, with or without his revelations.

  • Tommas Gilbert

    THE PEOPLE ON THE LIST ARE ALL GOING TO BURN IN HELL AS THEY ARE NOT JUST LIKE THE MILLION AMERICAN SOLDIERS WHO COMMIT WAR CRIMES WORSE THAN 9/11

  • Micheal Fong

    The WORST People in the world and The RICH JEWS who will raped rabbits for a penny. Second Worst is OBAMA dirty hypocrite pedophile who loves GOAT MILK Bitch ass obama die muther fuker die

    Iam Buddist and I Hate SOME JEWS but my wife is jewish

  • archangel

    While I understand the purpose of this list, the lister would’ve been better off not focusing on sovereigns in my opinion, and more on persons who were devout Muslims who used the religion for their own evil means. For example, Saddam Hussein is not religious at all (and I’m pretty sure he once declared himself atheist, and would only attend religious ceremonies for his image). This is also true for some of the listed.

    • Canuovea

      I’d say it seems that the list is concerned exactly with those type of images.

  • Grimbo

    Go on You Tube and watch Saddam`s Gift to Donald Rumsfeld, and you`ll soon see why Saddam Hussein gave Islam a bad name.. HORRIBLE is an understatement.

  • I hate this kind of list because it makes a misleading assumption that the religion is all overpowering in these people’s decision to be evil which I content are independent. What If I wrote a list “10 evil people who really liked oranges” would that mean that they are evil BECAUSE of the oranges…. not necessarily

  • Ali

    WOW!!! Bin Laden is DEFINITELY the number one! are you crazy or somethin’?!

  • The Front Of The Back

    Lol I am amazed. There is minimal racism in the comments, only about like 10-20 comments are racist.

    • Canuovea

      Yeah, give humanity some credit! And I’m pretty sure some of those comments were made by the same people.

  • wow idi amin is INSANE..

  • hobasan

    king abdullah did good for his people .
    i find him one of the most wise kings at all .
    and he have spend so much money for serving islam and on makka for the muslim people from all around the world .
    and if we will talk about democracy …..i dont believe that democracy does excite anywhere especially in america …..its just a game

  • Zealots of all stripes and types are so astonishingly ignorant of any sort of ethics or morals, it becomes almost impossible to believe in their humaness (I refuse to use the honorific, humanity).

    As we have seen in past Lists, this kind of barbaric zealousness is not the provenance of any one group, but exists in some maniacal

    sub-groups everywhere.

    • Canuovea

      Well, I wouldn’t say zealots are ignorant of any sort of ethics or morals. I’d say that they are too obsessed with their own.

  • DavidB

    I think Muhammad should have been number 1

  • StupidRabbitSuits

    JAFFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    *shrugs*

    he looks arabic, ergo he is islamic. Can’t deny that logic. :)

    plus he has a freaking talking parrot, magic snake stick thingy, and a freaking pointy beard thing and a sweet turban!!!!!!!!!!!!

    He is the ultimate badass!

  • Bren

    People who give Islam a bad name: anyone muslim

  • Nobody can give a bad name to Islam. Islam is a Way of life.

    Man is a social animal. There may be a good and bad person because of their attitude and that is not connected to Islamic principle.

    Please do not try to give misconception about Islam. It is your choice to follow any religion as you wish but avoid to misguide the people.

    I have seen many good articles in Listverse ( https://listverse.com/2009/07/10/top-10-misconcept
    Top 10 Misconceptions About Islam )

    Try to give good articles but not try to wound other`s feelings

    • Canuovea

      Well…

      A bad name contributes to a reputation, a way of life, religion, social group, etc can have a bad reputation.

      I don’t think that a way of life can be actually made bad by a person who adheres to it. There are bad ways of life though, but that is in their actual substance, not their adherents (necessarily).

      I also do not think that this list makes Islam look bad, as it says it is talking about individual people, not the Religion itself. There are lists about Atheism and Christianity too.

  • S.E.A.Mohamed Ali. “nidurali” / 22 May, 2011 at 08:23 pm

    Jazakkallahu Hairan

    JazakAllah Khayr (Arabic: ???? ????? ??????) is an islamic term and Islamic expression of gratitude meaning “May Allâh reward you [in] goodness. …

    The above wishes is for Mr. Ryan (Please see bellow )who has given good comment and true information

    Ryan / 19 May, 2011 at 08:01 pm

    Actually, the thing that really gives Islam a bad name is the western media. I was born in America as a Christian but i’ve gone to Muslim countries (like Pakistan, Egypt, and UAE) and lived amongst Muslims. I’ve learned Islamic values from Muslims living there and those values weren’t extremist nor violent. Islam is portrayed horribly to people living in America, but for anyone who’s actually taken their time to study it, it’s a peaceful religion.

    • Canuovea

      I agree that Media has been portraying Islam negatively.

      But I also think that in Islam, like almost any group, there will be a segment who are violent. But that doesn’t mean the religion is violent.

  • Obama Bin Laden

    Murder. Rape. Thievery. F**K!

  • ILoveIslam

    The person who asked if 10 people could be named that give Islam a good name – you should really learn about Islam through direct sources I.e. Quran and hadith and not from a biased pro-Israel site like listverse. The Prophet Jesus (pbuh), Khadeejah, Aisha, Fatimah, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), any of the rightly guided Khalifah, Malcolm X, Hamza Yusuf, Ingrid Mattison, Suraj Wahaj is a list of more than 10 outstanding Muslims inshaAllah. Let’s stop the ignorance listverse as your pro-Zionist/Jewish agenda is made apparent more and more everyday. No this list does not give Islam a bad name either – inshaAllah the attention given to this beautiful religion will increase its strength and following. And it doesn’t matter what you or anyone thinks about Islam as it is a religion of the heart whose only concern is Allah.

  • jfrater

    I’m drawing Mohammed right now.

  • blue jacket

    Every ass in the air Muzzie is a scum bag.
    Islam is not a religion. It is a socio-political movement aimed at killing us and taking over.

    • Canuovea

      Really? On what authority do you have this?

      Or is it based on the observation of the action of a few individuals who cannot possibly represent all Muslims?

      If we could do that then I could assume that Christianity is a socio-political movement designed to make everyone poor.

      Now I could also make a smart ass comment about “isn’t that the definition of religion in general?” But I wouldn’t mean it. Why? Because when you are talking about any group, you are talking about the individuals of that group as well. Hence the stupidity of sweeping generalizations.

  • FREEMASON

    CHRISTIANS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR:
    Catholic extermination camps
    Surprisingly few know that Nazi extermination camps in World War II were by no means the only ones in Europe at the time. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children! In these camps – the most notorious was Jasenovac, headed by a Franciscan friar – orthodox-Christian Serbians (and a substantial number of Jews) were murdered. Like the Nazis the Catholic Ustasha burned their victims in kilns, alive (the Nazis had victims gassed first). But most of the victims were simply stabbed, slain or shot to death, the number of them being estimated between 300,000 and 600,000, in a rather tiny country. Many of the killers were Franciscan friars. The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi “Sicherheitsdienst der SS”, watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did
    nothing to prevent them. [MV]

    quote: Catholic terror in Vietnam
    In 1954 Vietnamese freedom fighters; the Viet Minh; – had finally defeated the French colonial government in North Vietnam, which by then had been supported by U.S. funds amounting to more than $2 billion. Although the victorious assured religious freedom to all (most non-Buddhist Vietnamese were Catholics), due to huge anticommunist propaganda campaigns many Catholics fled to the South. With the help of Catholic lobbies in Washington and Cardinal Spellman, the Vatican’s spokesman in U.S. politics, who later on would call the U.S. forces in Vietnam “Soldiers of Christ”, a scheme was concocted to prevent democratic elections which could have brought the communist Viet Minh to power in the South as well, and the fanatic Catholic Ngo Dinh Diem was made president of South Vietnam. [MW16ff]
    Diem saw to it that U.S. aid, food, technical and general assistance was given to Catholics alone, Buddhist individuals and villages were ignored or had to pay for the food aids which were given to Catholics for free. The only religious denomination to be supported was Roman Catholicism. The Vietnamese McCarthyism turned even more vicious than its American counterpart. By 1956 Diem promulgated a presidential order which read:

    “Individuals considered dangerous to the national defense and common security may be confined by executive order, to a concentration camp.”

    Supposedly to fight communism, thousands of Buddhist protesters and monks were imprisoned in “detention camps.” Out of protest dozens of Buddhist teachers – male and female – and monks poured gasoline over themselves and burned themselves. (Note that Buddhists burned themselves: in comparison Christians tend to burn others). Meanwhile some of the prison camps, which in the meantime were filled with Protestant and even Catholic protesters as well, had turned into no-nonsense death camps. It is estimated that during this period of terror (1955-1960) at least 24,000 were wounded – ; mostly in street riots ; – 80,000 people were executed, 275,000 had been detained or tortured, and about 500,000 were sent to concentration or detention camps. [MW76-89].
    To support this kind of government in the next decade thousands of American GI’s lost their life.

    quote: Rwanda Massacres
    In 1994 in the small African country of Rwanda in just a few months several hundred thousand civilians were butchered, apparently a conflict of the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups.
    For quite some time I heard only rumors about Catholic clergy actively involved in the 1994 Rwanda massacres. Odd denials of involvement were printed in Catholic church journals, before even anybody had openly accused members of the church.
    Then, 10/10/96, in the newscast of S2 Aktuell, Germany – a station not at all critical to Christianity – the following was stated:

    “Anglican as well as Catholic priests and nuns are suspect of having actively participated in murders. Especially the conduct of a certain Catholic priest has been occupying the public mind in Rwanda’s capital Kigali for months. He was minister of the church of the Holy Family and allegedly murdered Tutsis in the most brutal manner. He is reported to have accompanied marauding Hutu militia with a gun in his cowl. In fact there has been a bloody slaughter of Tutsis seeking shelter in his parish. Even two years after the massacres many Catholics refuse to set foot on the threshold of their church, because to them the participation of a certain part of the clergy in the slaughter is well established. There is almost no church in Rwanda that has not seen refugees – women, children, old – being brutally butchered facing the crucifix.
    According to eyewitnesses clergymen gave away hiding Tutsis and turned them over to the machetes of the Hutu militia.
    In connection with these events again and again two Benedictine nuns are mentioned, both of whom have fled into a Belgian monastery in the meantime to avoid prosecution. According to survivors one of them called the
    Hutu killers and led them to several thousand people who had sought shelter in her monastery. By force the doomed were driven out of the churchyard and were murdered in the presence of the nun right in front of the gate. The other one is also reported to have directly cooperated with the murderers of the Hutu militia. In her case again witnesses report that she watched the slaughtering of people in cold blood and without showing response. She is even accused of having procured some petrol used by the killers to set on
    fire and burn their victims alive…” [S2]

    More recently the BBC aired:

    Priests get death sentence for Rwandan genocide
    BBC NEWS April 19, 1998

    A court in Rwanda has sentenced two Roman Catholic priests to death for their role in the genocide of 1994, in which up to a million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. Pope John Paul said the priests must be made to account for their actions. Different sections of the Rwandan church have been widely accused of playing an active role in the genocide of 1994…

    A Large dated compilation of Christian Crimes since its advent:

    As soon as Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire by imperial edict (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.

    Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.

    Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.

    Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as “temple destroyer.” [DA468]

    Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]

    Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]
    According to Christian chroniclers he “followed meticulously all Christian teachings…”

    In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.

    In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]

    The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
    [DO19-25]

    Emperor Karl (Charlemagne) in 782 had 4500 Saxons, unwilling to convert to Christianity, beheaded. [DO30]

    Peasants of Steding (Germany) unwilling to pay suffocating church taxes: between 5,000 and 11,000 men, women and children slain 5/27/1234 near Altenesch/Germany. [WW223]

    15th century Poland: 1019 churches and 17987 villages plundered by Knights of the Order. Number of victims unknown. [DO30]

    16th and 17th century Ireland. English troops “pacified and civilized” Ireland, where only Gaelic “wild Irish”, “unreasonable beasts lived without any knowledge of God or good manners, in common of their goods, cattle, women, children and every other thing.” One of the more successful soldiers, a certain Humphrey Gilbert, half-brother of Sir Walter Raleigh, ordered that “the heddes of all those (of what sort soever thei were) which were killed in the daie, should be cutte off from their bodies… and should bee laied on the ground by eche side of the waie”, which effort to civilize the Irish indeed caused “greate terrour to the people when thei sawe the heddes of their dedde fathers, brothers, children, kinsfolke, and freinds on the grounde”.
    Tens of thousands of Gaelic Irish fell victim to the carnage. [SH99, 225]

    First Crusade: 1095 on command of pope Urban II. [WW11-41]

    Semlin/Hungary 6/24/96 thousands slain. Wieselburg/Hungary 6/12/96 thousands. [WW23]

    9/9/96-9/26/96 Nikaia, Xerigordon (then Turkish), thousands respectively. [WW25-27]

    Until January 1098 a total of 40 capital cities and 200 castles conquered (number of slain unknown) [WW30]

    After 6/3/98 Antiochia (then Turkish) conquered, between 10,000 and 60,000 slain. 6/28/98 100,000 Turks (incl. women and children) killed.
    [WW32-35]
    Here the Christians “did no other harm to the women found in [the enemy’s] tents – save that they ran their lances through their bellies,” according to Christian chronicler Fulcher of Chartres. [EC60]

    Marra (Maraat an-numan) 12/11/98 thousands killed. Because of the subsequent famine “the already stinking corpses of the enemies were eaten by the Christians” said chronicler Albert Aquensis. [WW36]

    Jerusalem conquered 7/15/1099 more than 60,000 victims (Jewish, Muslim, men, women, children). [WW37-40]
    In the words of one witness: “there [in front of Solomon’s temple] was such a carnage that our people were wading ankle-deep in the blood of our foes”, and after that “happily and crying for joy our people marched to our Saviour’s tomb, to honour it and to pay off our debt of gratitude.”

    The Archbishop of Tyre, eye-witness, wrote: “It was impossible to look upon the vast numbers of the slain without horror; everywhere lay fragments of human bodies, and the very ground was covered with the blood of the slain. It was not alone the spectacle of headless bodies and mutilated limbs strewn in all directions that roused the horror of all who looked upon them. Still more dreadful was it to gaze upon the victors themselves, dripping with blood from head to foot, an ominous sight which brought terror to all who met them. It is reported that within the Temple enclosure alone about ten thousand infidels perished.” [TG79]

    Christian chronicler Eckehard of Aura noted that “even the following summer in all of Palestine the air was polluted by the stench of decomposition”. One million victims of the first crusade alone. [WW41]

    Battle of Askalon, 8/12/1099. 200,000 heathens slaughtered “in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ”. [WW45]

    Fourth crusade: 4/12/1204 Constantinople sacked, number of victims unknown, numerous thousands, many of them Christian. [WW141-148]

    Rest of Crusades in less detail: until the fall of Akkon 1291 probably 20 million victims (in the Holy land and Arab/Turkish areas alone). [WW224]

    Already in 385 C.E. the first Christians, the Spanish Priscillianus and six followers, were beheaded for heresy in Trier/Germany [DO26]

    Manichaean heresy: a crypto-Christian sect decent enough to practice birth control (and thus not as irresponsible as faithful Catholics) was exterminated in huge campaigns all over the Roman empire between 372 C.E. and 444 C.E. Numerous thousands of victims. [NC]

    Albigensians: the first Crusade intended to slay other Christians. [DO29]
    The Albigensians (Cathars) viewed themselves as good Christians, but would not accept Roman Catholic rule, and taxes, and prohibition of birth control. [NC]
    Begin of violence: on command of pope Innocent III (the greatest single mass murderer prior to the Nazi era) in 1209. Beziérs (today France) 7/22/1209 destroyed, all the inhabitants were slaughtered. Number of victims (including Catholics refusing to turn over their heretic
    neighbors and friends) estimated between 20,000-70,000. [WW179-181]
    Carcassonne 8/15/1209, thousands slain. Other cities followed. [WW181]

    Subsequent 20 years of war until nearly all Cathars (probably half the population of the Languedoc, today southern France) were exterminated. [WW183]

    After the war ended (1229) the Inquisition was founded 1232 to search and destroy surviving/hiding heretics. Last Cathars burned at the stake 1324.
    [WW183]

    Estimated one million victims (Cathar heresy alone), [WW183]

    Other heresies: Waldensians, Paulikians, Runcarians, Josephites, and many others. Most of these sects exterminated, (I believe some Waldensians live today, yet they had to endure 600 years of persecution) I estimate at least hundred thousand victims (including the Spanish inquisition but excluding victims in the New World).

    Spanish Inquisitor Torquemada, a former Dominican friar, allegedly was responsible for 10,220 burnings. [DO28]

    John Huss, a critic of papal infallibility and indulgences, was burned at the stake in 1415. [LI475-522]

    Michael Sattler, leader of a baptist community, was burned at the stake in Rottenburg, Germany, May 20, 1527. Several days later his wife and other follwers were also executed. [KM]

    University professor B.Hubmaier burned at the stake 1538 in Vienna. [DO59]

    Giordano Bruno, Dominican monk, after having been incarcerated for seven years, was burned at the stake for heresy on the Campo dei Fiori (Rome) on 2/17/1600.

    Thomas Aikenhead, a twenty-year-old scottish student of Edinburgh University, was hanged for atheism and blasphemy.

    From the beginning of Christianity to 1484 probably more than several thousand.

    In the era of witch hunting (1484-1750) according to modern scholars several hundred thousand (about 80% female) burned at the stake or hanged.
    [WV]

    15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain. [DO30]

    1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action). [DO31]

    1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. [DO31]
    Between 5000 and 6000 Protestants were drowned by Spanish Catholic Troops, “a disaster the burghers of Emden first realized when several thousand broad-brimmed Dutch hats floated by.” [SH216]

    1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee. [DO31]

    17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, “cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals… and then dumped him into the river […but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [… and] dragged what was left … to the gallows of Montfaulcon, ‘to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows’.” [SH191]

    17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. “In a single church fifty women were found beheaded,” reported poet Friedrich Schiller, “and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers.” [SH191]

    17th century 30 years’ war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [DO31-32]

    Already in the 4th and 5th centuries synagogues were burned by Christians.Number of Jews slain unknown.

    In the middle of the fourth century the first synagogue was destroyed on command of bishop Innocentius of Dertona in Northern Italy. The first synagogue known to have been burned down was near the river Euphrat, on command of the bishop of Kallinikon in the year 388. [DA450]

    694 17. Council of Toledo: Jews were enslaved, their property confiscated, and their children forcibly baptized. [DA454]

    1010 The Bishop of Limoges (France) had the cities’ Jews, who would not convert to Christianity, expelled or killed. [DA453]

    1096 First Crusade: Thousands of Jews slaughtered, maybe 12.000 total. Places: Worms 5/18/1096, Mainz 5/27/1096 (1100 persons), Cologne, Neuss, Altenahr, Wevelinghoven, Xanten, Moers, Dortmund, Kerpen, Trier, Metz, Regensburg, Prag and others (All locations Germany except Metz/France, Prag/Czech) [EJ]

    1147 Second Crusade: Several hundred Jews were slain in Ham, Sully, Carentan, and Rameru (all locations in France). [WW57]

    1189/90 Third Crusade: English Jewish communities sacked. [DO40]

    1235, Fulda/Germany: 34 Jewish men and women slain. [DO41]

    1257, 1267: Jewish communities of London, Canterbury, Northampton, Lincoln, Cambridge, and others exterminated. [DO41]

    1290 Bohemia (Poland) allegedly 10,000 Jews killed. [DO41]

    1337 Starting in Deggendorf/Germany a Jew-killing craze reaches 51 towns in Bavaria, Austria, Poland. [DO41]

    1348 All Jews of Basel/Switzerland and Strasbourg/France (two thousand) burned. [DO41]

    1349 In more than 350 towns in Germany all Jews murdered, mostly burned alive (in this one year more Jews were killed than Christians in 200 years of ancient Roman persecution of Christians). [DO42]

    1389 In Prag 3,000 Jews were slaughtered. [DO42]

    1391 Seville’s Jews killed (Archbishop Martinez leading). 4,000 were slain, 25,000 sold as slaves. [DA454] Their identification was made easy by the brightly colored “badges of shame” that all Jews above the age of ten had been forced to wear.

    1492 In the year Columbus set sail to conquer a New World, more than 150,000 Jews were expelled from Spain, many died on their way: 6/30/1492.
    [MM470-476]

    1648 Chmielnitzki massacres: In Poland about 200,000 Jews were slain.
    [DO43]

    Beginning with Columbus (a former slave trader and would-be Holy Crusader) the conquest of the New World began, as usual understood as a means to propagate Christianity.

    Within hours of landfall on the first inhabited island he encountered in the Caribbean, Columbus seized and carried off six native people who, he said, “ought to be good servants … [and] would easily be made Christians, because it seemed to me that they belonged to no religion.” [SH200]
    While Columbus described the Indians as “idolators” and “slaves, as many as [the Crown] shall order,” his pal Michele de Cuneo, Italian nobleman, referred to the natives as “beasts” because “they eat when they are hungry,” and made love “openly whenever they feel like it.” [SH204-205]

    On every island he set foot on, Columbus planted a cross, “making the declarations that are required” – the requerimiento – to claim the ownership for his Catholic patrons in Spain. And “nobody objected.” If the Indians refused or delayed their acceptance (or understanding), the requerimiento continued:

    “I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter in your country and shall make war against you … and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church … and shall do you all mischief that we can, as to vassals who do not obey and refuse to receive their lord and resist and contradict him.” [SH66]

    Likewise in the words of John Winthrop, first governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony: “justifieinge the undertakeres of the intended Plantation in New England … to carry the Gospell into those parts of the world, … and to raise a Bulworke against the kingdome of the Ante-Christ.” [SH235]

    In average two thirds of the native population were killed by colonist-imported smallpox before violence began. This was a great sign of “the marvelous goodness and providence of God” to the Christians of course, e.g. the Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony wrote in 1634, as “for the natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox, so as the Lord hath cleared our title to what we possess.” [SH109,238]

    On Hispaniola alone, on Columbus visits, the native population (Arawak), a rather harmless and happy people living on an island of abundant natural resources, a literal paradise, soon mourned 50,000 dead. [SH204]

    The surviving Indians fell victim to rape, murder, enslavement and Spanish raids.
    As one of the culprits wrote: “So many Indians died that they could not be counted, all through the land the Indians lay dead everywhere. The stench was very great and pestiferous.” [SH69]

    The Indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive. As “they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell.” [SH70]

    What happened to his people was described by an eyewitness:
    “The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties … They built a long gibbet, long enough for the toes to touch the ground to prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles… then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive.” [SH72]
    Or, on another occasion:
    “The Spaniards cut off the arm of one, the leg or hip of another, and from some their heads at one stroke, like butchers cutting up beef and mutton for market. Six hundred, including the cacique, were thus slain like brute beasts…Vasco [de Balboa] ordered forty of them to be torn to pieces by dogs.” [SH83]

    The “island’s population of about eight million people at the time of Columbus’s arrival in 1492 already had declined by a third to a half before the year 1496 was out.” Eventually all the island’s natives were exterminated, so the Spaniards were “forced” to import slaves from other caribbean islands, who soon suffered the same fate. Thus “the Caribbean’s millions of native people [were] thereby effectively liquidated in barely a quarter of a century”. [SH72-73] “In less than the normal lifetime of a single human being, an entire culture of millions of people, thousands of years resident in their homeland, had been exterminated.” [SH75]

    “And then the Spanish turned their attention to the mainland of Mexico and Central America. The slaughter had barely begun. The exquisite city of Tenochtitlán [Mexico city] was next.” [SH75]

    Cortez, Pizarro, De Soto and hundreds of other Spanish conquistadors likewise sacked southern and mesoamerican civilizations in the name of Christ (De Soto also sacked Florida).

    “When the 16th century ended, some 200,000 Spaniards had moved to the Americas. By that time probably more than 60,000,000 natives were dead.”
    [SH95]

    Although none of the settlers would have survived winter without native help, they soon set out to expel and exterminate the Indians. Warfare among (north American) Indians was rather harmless, in comparison to European standards, and was meant to avenge insults rather than conquer land. In the words of some of the pilgrim fathers: “Their Warres are farre less bloudy…”, so that there usually was “no great slawter of nether side”. Indeed, “they might fight seven yeares and not kill seven men.” What is more, the Indians usually spared women and children. [SH111]

    In the spring of 1612 some English colonists found life among the (generally friendly and generous) natives attractive enough to leave Jamestown – “being idell … did runne away unto the Indyans,” – to live among them (that probably solved a sex problem).
    “Governor Thomas Dale had them hunted down and executed: ‘Some he apointed (sic) to be hanged Some burned Some to be broken upon wheles, others to be staked and some shott to deathe’.” [SH105] Of course these elegant measures were restricted for fellow Englishmen: “This was the treatment for those who wished to act like Indians. For those who had no
    choice in the matter, because they were the native people of Virginia” methods were different: “when an Indian was accused by an Englishman of stealing a cup and failing to return it, the English response was to attack the natives in force, burning the entire community” down. [SH105]

    On the territory that is now Massachusetts the founding fathers of the colonies were committing genocide, in what has become known as the “Peqout War.” The killers were New England Puritan Christians, refugees from persecution in their own home country England.

    When however, a dead colonist was found, apparently killed by Narragansett Indians, the Puritan colonists wanted revenge. Despite the Indian chief’s pledge they attacked.
    Somehow they seem to have lost the idea of what they were after, because when they were greeted by Pequot Indians (long-time foes of the Narragansetts) the troops nevertheless made war on the Pequots and burned their villages.
    The puritan commander-in-charge John Mason after one massacre wrote: “And indeed such a dreadful Terror did the Almighty let fall upon their Spirits, that they would fly from us and run into the very Flames, where many of them perished … God was above them, who laughed his Enemies and the Enemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven … Thus did the Lord judge among the Heathen, filling the Place with dead Bodies”: men, women, children. [SH113-114]

    So “the Lord was pleased to smite our Enemies in the hinder Parts, and to give us their land for an inheritance”. [SH111].

    Because of his readers’ assumed knowledge of Deuteronomy, there was no need for Mason to quote the words that immediately follow:
    “Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. But thou shalt utterly destroy them…” (Deut 20)

    Mason’s comrade Underhill recalled how “great and doleful was the bloody sight to the view of the young soldiers” yet reassured his readers that “sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents”. [SH114]

    Other Indians were killed in successful plots of poisoning. The colonists even had dogs especially trained to kill Indians and to devour children from their mothers breasts, in the colonists’ own words: “blood Hounds to draw after them, and Mastives to seaze them.” (This was inspired by Spanish methods of the time)
    In this way they continued until the extermination of the Pequots was near. [SH107-119]

    The surviving handful of Indians “were parceled out to live in servitude. John Endicott and his pastor wrote to the governor asking for ‘a share’ of the captives, specifically ‘a young woman or girle and a boy if you thinke good’.” [SH115]

    Other tribes were to follow the same path.

    Comment the Christian exterminators: “God’s Will, which will at last give us cause to say: How Great is His Goodness! and How Great is his Beauty!”
    “Thus doth the Lord Jesus make them to bow before him, and to lick the Dust!” [TA]

    Like today, lying was morally acceptable to Christians then. “Peace treaties were signed with every intention to violate them: when the Indians ‘grow secure uppon (sic) the treatie’, advised the Council of State in Virginia, ‘we shall have the better Advantage both to surprise them, & cutt downe theire Corne’.” [SH106]

    In 1624 sixty heavily armed Englishmen cut down 800 defenseless Indian men, women and children. [SH107]

    In a single massacre in “King Philip’s War” of 1675 and 1676 some “600 Indians were destroyed. A delighted Cotton Mather, revered pastor of the Second Church in Boston, later referred to the slaughter as a ‘barbeque’.” [SH115]

    To summarize: Before the arrival of the English, the western Abenaki people in New Hampshire and Vermont had numbered 12,000. Less than half a century later about 250 remained alive – a destruction rate of 98%. The Pocumtuck people had numbered more than 18,000, fifty years later they were down to 920 – 95% destroyed. The Quiripi-Unquachog people had numbered about
    30,000, fifty years later they were down to 1500 – 95% destroyed. The Massachusetts people had numbered at least 44,000, fifty years later barely 6000 were alive – 81% destroyed. [SH118] These are only a few examples of the multitude of tribes living before Christian colonists set their foot on the New World. All this was before the smallpox epidemics of 1677 and 1678 had occurred. And the carnage was not over then.

    All the above was only the beginning of the European colonization, it was before the frontier age actually had begun.

    A total of maybe more than 150 million Indians (of both Americas) were destroyed in the period of 1500 to 1900, as an average two thirds by smallpox and other epidemics, that leaves some 50 million killed directly by violence, bad treatment and slavery.

    In many countries, such as Brazil, and Guatemala, this continues even today.

    Reverend Solomon Stoddard, one of New England’s most esteemed religious leaders, in “1703 formally proposed to the Massachusetts Governor that the colonists be given the financial wherewithal to purchase and train large packs of dogs ‘to hunt Indians as they do bears’.” [SH241]

    Massacre of Sand Creek, Colorado 11/29/1864. Colonel John Chivington, a former Methodist minister and still elder in the church (“I long to be wading in gore” had a Cheyenne village of about 600, mostly women and children, gunned down despite the chiefs’ waving with a white flag: 400-500 killed.
    From an eye-witness account: “There were some thirty or forty squaws collected in a hole for protection; they sent out a little girl about six years old with a white flag on a stick; she had not proceeded but a few steps when she was shot and killed. All the squaws in that hole were afterwards killed …” [SH131]

    By the 1860s, “in Hawai’i the Reverend Rufus Anderson surveyed the carnage that by then had reduced those islands’ native population by 90 percent or more, and he declined to see it as tragedy; the expected total die-off of the Hawaiian population was only natural, this missionary said, somewhat equivalent to ‘the amputation of diseased members of the body’.”
    [SH244]

    • Canuovea

      Informative list of atrocities.

      Except you left out that the Pequots were destroyed by both the Puritan settlers and their indigenous allies. In fact, the Narragansett used the Puritans as a tool to settle their own dispute with the Pequots. Not so simple.

      But what was the point of this? Yes, there are lots of bad people who were Christian/Catholic but that doesn’t make Christianity itself bad.

  • ahhhh

    saddam has nothing to do with islam , but good list

  • Andrew

    The Bush administration should be in this list, if not number 1. The majority of negativity towards the religion of Islam is attributable directly to them.

  • ))((

    Why Atketb for the crimes of Bush and Sharon against Muslims and Arabs

  • aynomous

    Talat paasha was a lot worse than Haj Amin al-Husseini.

  • diverse

    no. Terrorists are not muslim. And if any of u ask, who am i to decide who is muslim or not. It’s easy, islam’s law. Islam forbid suicide. Simple.

    I’m muslim, live in country with largest muslim society, and we don’t kill other’s for difference in religion. Ones do bad are not respresent all community, be it muslim, christian, jew or even atheist.

  • Duble D

    This list has ruined listverse for me… I used to believe most things I read and took it as fact, but as I scroll to no.5 “Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks” … this is false, sorry but it is.

  • Dave

    People who give Islam a bad name? I have one. He’s called Muhammad.

    • knight wolf

      I’m very sorry you don’t know any thing about him !!

      Even you don’t know the real meaning about Jesus !!

  • Dave

    It looks like these comments got a bit explosive.

    WHOOPS.

  • bilal bilici

    talat pasha was not a monster but he has no choice.powerful russian forces caused the genocide.russsian army occupied almost half of the turkey and armenians had a key role. it is true a genocide occured but i said ottoman goverment (involving talat pasha too) had no choice to be able to stop the brutal occupattion and of course genocide occured

  • Cathryn Foster

    Damn the saudi king to hell!!! Personally, i’ve known many muslims andi’ve read they’re holy scriptures….THIS @$$%#&e is so not a true muslim…

  • ABDUL

    I DISAGREE I THING GADAFI SHUD BE NUMBA 3 OR BENEATH

  • vermilionskin

    A very good list, but I think Saddam is way better than Osama!! and Muamar’s face need to be sent to the nearest laundry service, needs some pressing lol. Another thing, not all of these men were religious, some of them are Agnostic or even Atheist, Islam is only a mask for some of them. Good List, I’m happy that we got rid of many of them in the Middle East, next step separating religions from politics, I hope.

  • Omar

    Muslim here, HEll Yea !! I AGRREEE .. These people will rot in hell

  • Kindle Fire Review

    Hi there, I discovered your site via Google while searching for a related topic, your web site came up, it looks wonderful. I have bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.

  • Name

    Omar al-Bashir should be the top or very near

  • Nadeem Khan

    pathetic list with poor content and logic !

    You should have let someone write this list who should have at least basic knowledge about principles of Islam.

    There are millions of criminal in US – Does this mean they are maligning Christianity?

    Please grow up there is no connection between the deeds of these corrupt leaders and Islam !

  • knight wolf

    Why king Abdullah is one of them ?

    I’m sorry .. you’ve to think about it again and you also have to explain to me, why did you choose king Abdullah.

  • houssien

    yes

  • iftikhar

    what u know about islam? some of them are bad for islam but some r bad for america that y thy wher killed. about rohulla khumaini he was the hero of islam….

    • MatrixLogan

      ya hez a HERO…………….!!!!!!!!!!!

  • super imperial

    stop it with racism people ive met musliums befor and you know there normal people just like me and you yes they do have so me flwas in there logic and yes there are alot of bad ones but all religons are like this

  • An arabs point of vew

    If you want to call these people terrorists (which some of them realy are) , you should look what made them terrorists For example sadam hussien he wouldn’t of done anything if americans Did thier “war on terrorism” when they actually did thier war on Steeling oils , so The american soldiers are not working to save the world but they are working To steel oils ,so why dont we call them terrorists? , and another example on terrorism look at what isreal did in gaza Killing over 3000 people 50% women and children And alot of inoccent men , and others called terrorist because they are fighting to thier countries freedom…, but never the less , if you wanted to call muslims terrorists you should actually look at what your countries are doing instead of talking about people un knowing what actually made them terrorists . and at the end i say it again alot of the people you mentioned like bin laden,al-assad,husni mubarak ,al gadafi ,idi emin are terrorists , while people like king abdullah should be called a pussy ..

  • An arabs point of vew

    And FYI some of you may not know that ben laden helped america in thier war against the suviet union , and about the 911 if you look carefully at the video you’ll see that the towers got blown from the bottom to up , while the plane hit the towers from up , why wasn’t there any jews in the towers? , so i say that ben laden is a terrorist Against muslims because america used him to make Muslims And arabs Look like terrorists , so if any one that should call ben laden a terrorist it would be arabs and moslims

  • Skye

    you forgot to put in the list their prophet Muhammad.

  • Ed

    You left out the name of Mohammed as the No.1 person who gave Islam a bad name! Read the first ever biography of Mohammed. It was written by a Muslim called Ibn Ishaq. The atrocities committed now pale into insignificance with Mohammed’s documented mass excutions of prisoners of war. Ibn Ishaq also relates a very unpleasant incident where Mohammed ordered the torture of a prisoner by the lighting of a fire on the poor man’s chest.

  • knight wolf

    I’m sorry people, you don’t have any idea to say any word about king Abdullah.

    Saudi Arabia is a great country so America and UK. Every country has its history and economic story. This world isn’t about my or your opinion. Our prophet has sent especially to his people and to all people on earth. It’s not about prophet Mohammed or Jesus peace upon them, it’s for all prophets and messengers whom ever lived on earth. Some of them we don’t know their names even in our holy Qura’n. So we all believe about world’s history. What ever is true, then it’s true and no one can change it ..

    • Arezoo

      king Abdullah isn’t a real muslim…a real muslim never helps ethnics. a real muslim never helps and supports Israel and USA against muslims.
      Is he a real muslim?

      • canuovea

        First off. No true Scotsman fallacy.

        Secondly… Abdullah is a pretty decent fellow who seems to be reform minded and with a good stack of empathy. Unless you are saying that those traits can’t possibly represent a real Muslim…

  • Dave K

    The top ten people who give Islam a GOOD name…..

    1. Kemal Attaturk

    2. Rima Fakih

    3 Shah Massoud

    4. The Shah of Iran

    5 Anwar Sadat

    6 Benazir Bhutto

    7. ……Ah crap, I can only think of 6

    • canuovea

      Disagree about the Shah.

      Attaturk was pretty good. Though a pretty thorough secularist.

      May I suggest the Iranian intellectual Ali Shari’ati? A moderate Islamist who the Shah quite likely had assassinated.

  • Doreen Huner

    A lot of women desire to have larger, tighter and fuller breasts. Still, not every girls are blessed with these busts hence they explore for methods to accomplish their wanted busts. Rather than going through those high priced and unsafe breast enhancement surgical procedures, why not use natural breast enlargement? This calls for ingesting dietary supplements, making use of lotions and creams, or perhaps performing exercises that will help you achieve bigger, tighter and fuller breasts the less dangerous way.

  • it

    Mullah Omar?? The Taliban leader who was responsible for 400,000 deaths????

  • Delcie Mad

    Hi, have you previously thought about to write concerning Nintendo or PS handheld?

  • hatyyyy

    i think some people here are dont know nothing about those they are cursing or prasing.they belive wateva the deceptive media tells them which is very unfotunate and d guy tha write this RUBBISH DOZNT KNOW WHAT HE IS SAYING.u have too many misconceptions.please next time know about the people 1st before writing anything about them.thanks

  • hatyyyy

    dav, ed,skype nd co. please stop embarassing ur selves and d human race.please get a life

  • zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    where’s mirza ghulam ahmed qadiani, who claimed to b a prophet, then messiah

  • Hashim

    the some of the thing above mentioned z wrong one this z listed by any man that who hate muslims

  • HASHIM

    dnt tell anything about the great prophet mohammed he wants to bring peace in the world pls read his history and u may going to know who z he if u read quran i assure tat who read the ll change to muslim…tat z not a book about a god tat z a book a god…

  • Mrmagistar

    so it was only the US that defended kuwait in 1991? what about the saudis who were the first into kuwait city? what about us brits whose special forces gained most of the intelligence behind enemy lines? very american biased articles on here..do some research before posting!

  • l3e

    actually Ruhollah Khomeini was 1 of da gud guys his image is portrayed wrong by da media do sum research it will cum all clear…

  • mike

    i dont agree wth u mate….last people are accurate and they do giv bad name to islam but khamini is not extremist and i think we should follow his footsteps….

  • Reblogged this on Rusty5158.

  • Jade

    crap list, Khomeini isn’t first.

  • muhammad

    Dear Muslim Friends,

    i found the great article islamic website on Friday Prayer , Zam Zam water , etc etc.

    Jazak Allah

  • Christian Schmidt

    #1 Prophet Mohammed

    Several Islamic recordings of this man’s doings and sayings reveal that he was a paedophile war raging tyrant.

    • l3e

      @ Christian Schmidt….lolz man ver do u get ur info from….u crack me up..loz

      • I own l3e

        So exactly how is it incorrect to assume he wasn’t a raging pedo when I can produce a thousand images/stories via www depicting this disgusting practice within the muslim world at present.

        You might want to look into this: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari Aisha

        But why should I debate with an idiot such as yourself? Because you should be put in your place like any other muslim dog that pollutes the streets of any country shouting anything derogatory against the US or its allies.

        And what of the quran burning? You honestly think that just because our present idiot-in-chief apologizes that he actually represents the majority of us…….wrong. It’s only a febble attempt to appease the retards who think they are in control of their own country?

        It boils down to this. Once all the petro reserves in the middle east dry up, they will basically kill each other for basic necessities. The puppet regimes will fall quickly and the area will be what it was……a sandlot.

        • l3e

          @I own l3e…… da sahih which u quoted is discredited by most knowledgeable muslims demselves coz of da idiotic thngs mentioned in it…i dnt blame u 4 da info u gt bt i think u shud read dis b4 u answer further….http://www.shia-nj.org/htm/Aisha%20Age1.1.pdf

  • Mohamed

    I totally disagree …who said Osama bin laden a terrorist? Another terrorist? Who started the first world war ? Muslims ? Who started the second world war ? Muslims ? Who killed about 20 millions of Aborigines in Australia ? Muslims ?? Who sent the nuclear bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Muslims ?? Who killed more than 100 millions of Indians in North America ? Muslims ?? Who killed more than 50 millions of Indians in south America ? Muslims??Who took about 180 millions of African people as slaves and 88% of them died and was thrown in Atlantic ocean ? Muslims ?? No , They weren’t Muslims!!! First of all, You have to define terrorism properly… If a non-Muslim do something bad..it is crime. But if a Muslim commit same..he is terrorist… So first remove this double standard…then come to the point!!! , . . . . .

  • Arezoo

    Hi

    I am a muslim from Iran.I have a very importent comment for you.

    You realy have NO information about Islam.I amphesize” No information”. Because your list is adopted from BBC,CNN,…and so on.

    Open the borders and learn honestly about different people.

    “Ruhollah Khomeini” was our leader that we chose him.This is the real democracy.Is Queen Alyzlbt chose by english people?

    You realy need to wash your eyes.

    • canuovea

      Khomeini was… an interesting fellow. In some ways worse than the Shah, and in some ways better. He certainly had no time for the moderates and reformers that he shared power with at first.

      He deprived the populace under him of many basic freedoms. He instituted morality police and began shoving the state’s nose into where it doesn’t belong. Oh, and suppression of dissent. In this way his regime became eerily similar to the American and Israeli trained SAVAK, the secret police under the Shah, but it was concerned with religious and “morality” matters in addition to political ones.

      Khomeini was also stubborn, but in a “good” way. He simply didn’t give up and demonstrated an iron will. Which was more spine than the Shah showed with his waffling about if he should really fully crack down on the protests against him Khomeini, to his credit, didn’t seem one for half measures.

      I will also give Khomeini credit for getting Iran through a difficult and bloody war and for, Ironically perhaps, fighting against the ultra-conservative Ulema in Iran.

      But he was still a Theocratic dictator who gladly demonstrated some of the worst things a religion can do (from a certain point of view). True, the Iranian people did, in a fashion, choose him. But that doesn’t make him any less a Theocratic dictator.

      PS: Queen Elizabeth the Second has no power. She makes no decisions about state matters and is completely subservient to the British Parliament. Khomeini did have plenty of power.

  • Arezoo

    Osama bin laden and Saddam are terrorists who were trained and supported by USA…At last USA killed them…
    learn this
    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/230497.html

  • Arezoo
  • Arezoo
  • Islamisevil

    You forgot to add the so called prophet Muhammed to the list – He killed way more than any of these people, Infact if you add all the deaths from evil dictators such as hitler stalin and all the people you mentioned here and compare them to how many muhammed killed, You fill find that Muhammed killed far more than all of them.

    • christopher

      as ur name suggests u do have a big beef wid da moslem community mate…bt y so much anger, u do knw dat the Prophet of Islam was a Prophet of God jst like Christ, Abraham and Moses… if u insult a Prophet of God u insult the oders as well thnk abt it mate

      • muslimsarehypocrits

        Im sorry if you take it as anger because I simply state the facts which are totally true, I do see muslim’s as hypocrit’s it has nothing to do with emotion, It has alot to do with rationality.

        Of course you would try to debase what im saying by now focusing the limelight on my personal character rather than on my statement, You wouldn’t want to argue the statement now would you? So why not kill two birds with one stone and simply accuse me of being angry, That way you can make me look ‘angry’ and avoid the argument because you know every ounce of what I said is true.

        Unfortunately you also seem to have alot of paranoia and an extreme delusion thinking that muhammed was a ‘prophet of god’, The day’s of people being stupid are over, The day’s when we combat this stupidity have come, By spreading the truth of the matter, Islam is not peaceful, Islam is not like any other religion, It is as political cult of death where if you dare to leave the religion, They kill you for apostasy, Above all it’s most high ranking official seem’s to be an invisible man in the sky named ‘Allah’, The time will come when every country shall have some kind of constitution seperating state from religion to stop this stupidity that stem’s from the early day’s when man was uneducated on the truth of life that has now been recognised through careful observation, and critical analysis, Alot of hard work under the pressure of religous authorities who would dare to kill anyone that spread information that conflicted with the beliefs of Islam which demand’s that logic and reason are replaced by ‘blind faith’
        Which explains why only 1 percent of the world’s scientific information comes from the Muslim world.

        I guess I just sinned by using the word’s ‘Observation and critical analysis’, Well forgive me for using my intellect and reason that your ‘God’ supposedly endowed me with and not believing that shooting star’s protect people from demons as the ‘Holy Quran’ Teaches, I might add there is no such thing as a shooting star?

        Peace.

        • sebastian

          mate i had the opportunity to study the whole Islamic culture and society also a have a deep insight in the Islamic history, it is a very good religion, I being atheist, born and brought up a Catholic, agree to the things Islam has to teach us. let me make it clear to you by an example, the country you belong to has a society of people that have given the country a bad name though this number maybe small but still foreigners make it a stereotype for that nation like Americans being stupid, which is not true itself but the world focuses on this more than other factors, so in the case of Islam the same thing applies but the only difference is that instead of a small percentage of people being wrong here the maximum number are babbling baboons who dont know their religion very well and are giving a bad name to it, whereas a very small percentage of the muslims are the right one following the actual religion which is very peaceful. So instead of blaming the religion for its people blame the people the majority that has spoiled the name of the religion. hope you read this and think about it before answering and its of no use going political about it, we both know that its will lead us nowhere.

  • Muslimsarehyopcrits

    What does this history have to do with today?

    Why do muslims always have to quote the past to take the limelight off of Islam?

    All as this does is show the world has changed and become a better place – Except for Islam – It’s still the same barbaric cult it has always been, Your prophet killed over 370 million in the rise of Islam. He is far worse than ALL the evil dictators put together.

    • ME

      SHUT UP THE PROPHET KILLED THOSE CUZ THEY WERE BAD PEOPLE

  • sarmad

    i think saddam should be first he did way more bad things than the others, speaking for my self as an iraqi

  • MatrixLogan

    i think da list need some serious shuffling…….or it may give rise 2 religious hatred………………..its a req. to take ” Imam Khomeini ” from the LIST….or legal actions can be taken against the website including the ADMIN.

  • parwez khan

    MUSALMAN = MUKKAMMEL + INSANIYET KE LIYA + IMAN RAKH NAI WALA. KHUDA SABSE BADA HAI., USKEE SABSE AZEEM DAIN INSANIYET HAI ,( USHRUF ULL MUKH LUKHAT =HUMAN IS THE BEST IN UNIVERS, ACCORDING TO QURAAN SHAREEF .

  • eazyfunk

    i was half expecting loads of extreme and polarising responses to this list…. glad to see a rather educated debate here.”

  • Badar

    Muslim’s aren’t on this earth to impress the west, if we were to say top 10 people who give Christianity a bad name, not only would they give Christianity a bad name they would give humanity a bad name. Get off your pedestals it doesn’t make a difference to us how you view Islam, God is our judge not you.

  • faisal

    you must know all of them not muslim just King Abdullah is muslim but the rust is “shieea” its like making other religion like islam you must know the troth of islam before writing or talking about it

  • dwtex
  • V

    The funny thing is, most of these leaders were funded and supported, whether in public or under the covers, by the developed powerful countries such as USA, Russia..etc
    Muslims, at least I myself and the people around me, never considered Osama Bin Laden to be a hero. He used Islam to justify his actions, and from the sequence of the happenings it is obvious that the 9/11 incident is one big conspiracy, along with a lot of the incidents led by the Qaaeda. His existence and missions are all organized just for the sake of giving Islam a bad name. The other country leaders mentioned, their dictatorship and brutality has nothing to do with Islam, for they never justified their actions in the name of God. Haj Amin al-Husseini, he might have gone the wrong way, and aims never justify the method, however; the west would terrorize anyone who works for the sake of the freedom of Palestine. The only man who seriously gives Islam a bad name is King Abdullah, and I myself have so much disrespect and hate towards him, for his oppressive system, disrespect of freedom of choice, and ultimate greediness which prevents him from saving thousands of hungry, ill, homeless people around the world through his billions of dollars.

  • MUSLIM

    hey islam rules SO DON’T YOU EVER SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT US OR ELSE!

  • MUSLIM

    IF U SAY ISLAM IS EVIL THEN YOU ARE EVIL POO HEADS

  • Smarter than Most

    Top 10 people who make jews and Christians look bad…oh wait, they ARE bad. Ahahaha Oh my goodness.

  • American Blood!

    Hey MUSLIMS, listen to this!
    I think my fellow American are soo stupid is because the brains are hangin on a cross…

    WHOOPS! :D

  • marwan

    saddam hussain ? what did he do ?… he fight the guy who gave islam a bad name which is Ruhollah Khomeini !…. and all muslims love him !

    and the americans who said ”he have a nuclear weapons” that never found and never will be -_-

  • raasyid

    Allah is not belong to Saudi because they are missing procedures, they could not reach Allah without believe in jesus christ
    The King Abdul Aziz does not understand about Allah, No body may come to Allah because Allah said that if you want come to me there is only one way , not every one may call Allah to me ,
    Allah said : “even you speak loudly , allahu Akhbar I will not hear you, go away from me ”
    Allah continue said that ” the only way you may come to me that you have to believe what Jesus said, if you did not follow what he said , you are not my people, go to hell”
    Saudi missing procedure come to Allah, it’s mean Allah is not belong to Saudi and their follower, Saudi must change their mind and follow what Jesus said then they may have Allah . so now Saudi don have a Allah even they said they belong to Allah,
    Allah said that : I send Jesus Christ to you if you refuse him, it’s mean that you refuse me, if you do not believe what he said , it’s that mean you do not believe me as your Allah,
    Allah said : if you believe in Jesus Christ I will become your Allah, if you do not believe in Jesus Christ I am not your Allah and do not ever call me Allahhu Akhbar even Lahahillah illallah I would not hear you, go away from me .

    Saudi People do not understand about Allah, they are really leak of religion.

  • Chungo Shite

    Islam is bad for all islam people. Kill an islam and go to heaven. I like that. Tell me what you think. [email protected]

  • wase

    islam and usa
    is antichrist
    usa is in 2050 mostly non white
    thank you lord
    i am german and i life in europe
    thank you lord

  • dsdff

    islam isnt strong

    6 mio jews are stronger than all arabic nation

    six day war

    islam is satan

    • David

      Jews aren’t strong, 3000 Hezbollah fighters fought of Israel in 33 days. Even your government thinks it failed.

  • CanonyTroully

    Name

  • History

    Actually, there was no genocide even planned against Armenians in the late 19th and the 20tg century in the ottoman empire. The armenians were assisting the Russians by causing havoc in their villages, killing their own neighbours so that local authorities would be distracted, thus enabling the Russians to invade north eastern Anatolia easier that they normally could. The ottoman empire wasn’t against Armenians. Armenians were ottoman citizens as well as the Turks the Lazs and the countless other races that lived within the ottoman Borders. A law was passed to move the Armenians from north Anatolia to the south so that they wouldn’t assist the Russians. It is true that some people died while moving but for you that don’t know Anatolia is rocky and the winters can be fatally cold in the east. And the country was at war, some people were affected by the lack of food and water, it wasn’t just the Armenians. Everyone living within the borders of the ottoman empire suffered because western countries were putting their plan to split up the ottoman empire and share its land to action.

  • Amina

    how could u say that prophe muhammad was a bad muslim cuz he wasnt u dont even no a thing about islam so dont think u no anythink about it im a muslim myself :(

  • Duthi Abdi

    First of all, these people are just some of the exceptions. I mean just because these 10 men made Islam look bad, doesn’t mean that Islam is bad! I mean seriously, has anyone even tried to make Christianity’s list of ten bad followers? No. Why? Because the world is filled with racist and ignorant low life losers who have nothing better to do than to hurt other human beings. Making Islam look bad will not help with anything, because after everyday, more and more people join this wonderful and strong religion. Now I’m not saying these men are good people, but it’s not right to blame all of Islam over these losers. Remember, punishing the crowd will not change a thing. So just accept your life the way it is, and mind other people’s business.

  • jgchnghbfg

    I’m sorry but it’s not only those people who have given islam a bad name. It’s the centuries of wars, jihads, killing christians, and people in general which has given islam a bad name. It’s the ideology of the religion itself which is encouraging hatred and killing. In christianism for example, many people have comitted crimes in the name of christ but when you read the ideology it’s totally opposite to what they’ve done. If it were only for 10 people, then islam would be peaceful, while it’s not.

  • MOHAMMAD

    I AGREE THEY ARE MUSLIM BY THE NAME BUT NOT BY HEART . I MEAN THEY ARE NOT MUSLIM

  • icons library
  • it is not forbidden for children to have a barbie doll, i have a friend from saudi arabia cause i used to live there and they are the most generous people! they have barbie dolls and for the women, they are safe this way and they can ask for their rights and work and everything. therefore, it is also one of the richest countries. most of people there have they’re maids drivers and cheifs. and i’ve never seen a country that cares about each other this much. you can’t find any homeless in the streets. and they never ignore people who ask for money. they are a truly great citizens. i just miss the memories of saudi arabia so badly!