Hitler:
Hitler was not an atheist, but a Christian. He never killed a single person in order to spread any Atheism. This is only false Muslim propaganda.
Please see, how Hitler killed millions of Jews, but he didn't kill Christians or Muslims. Why?
If Hitler was really an Atheist, then he would have also killed millions of Christians too.
The DRIVING FORCE behind the killings of Hitler was based upon Nationalism and Racism. It has nothing to do with Atheism.
Actually, Hitler got the full support of the Grand Mufti of Palestine Amin al-Husseini, while he was killing the Jews.
Chinese Leader Mao Zedong
Chinese leader Mao Zedong didn't kill people for the SPREAD of Atheism. No, but the people died in China for the purpose of establishing an economic system, which was based on Socialism. Those wrong policies led to a famine, which ultimately killed many people. The driving force was the Socialist system and not the spread of Atheism.
Communist Stalin:
Similarly, Stalin also didn't kill those millions of people for the spread of Atheism, but in order to establish an economic system, which was based upon Communism. Thus, in this case too, the main DRIVING FORCE was not atheism, but the system of Communism.
People blamed Stalin for killing 20 (or even 40) million people. Nevertheless, the soviet documents showed 1 million people were killed directly, while 6 million died indirectly due to the wrong policies which brought famine and other problems.
Prior to the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the archival revelations, some historians estimated that the numbers killed by Stalin's regime were 20 million or higher (up to 40 million).[5][6][7] . After the Soviet Union dissolved, evidence from the Soviet archives was declassified and researchers were allowed to study it. This contained official records of 799,455 executions (1921–1953),[8] around 1.7 million deaths in the Gulag (the forced labour camps),[9][10] some 390,000[11] deaths during the dekulakization forced resettlement, and up to 400,000 deaths of persons deported during the 1940s,[12] with a total of about 3.3 million officially recorded victims in these categories.[13] According to historian Stephen Wheatcroft, approximately 1 million of these deaths were "purposive" while the rest happened through neglect and irresponsibility.[2] The deaths of at least 5.5 to 6.5 million[14] persons in the Soviet famine of 1932–1933 are sometimes, though not always, included with the victims of the Stalin era.[2][15]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_Stalin
Nevertheless, it is claimed that indeed Stalin supported the spread of Atheism on the State level, and indeed religious Christians were killed by Stalin for this purpose.
During the purges of 1937 and 1938, church documents record that 168,300 Russian Orthodox clergy were arrested. Of these, 106,300 were shot.[78] Many thousands of victims of persecution became recognized in a special canon of saints known as the "new martyrs and confessors of Russia".
A decline in enthusiasm in the campaign occurred in the late 1930s.[79] The tone of the anti-religious campaign changed and became more moderate .[73] It ended at the outbreak of World War II.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union
Answer:
Please remember that:
- The war against the Orthodox Church also had a political angle to it. This war started while the Orthodox Church was allied with Tzars and rebellion against the communist revolution was coming from it.
- And Stalin is not a prophet of atheists. Thus, there was always opposition and criticism present too upon this policy. And this criticism resulted in the form of REFORMS, where this policy was abandoned in the late 1930s.
- But the religion of Islam is rigid. There is no reform possible in it, while it rules came directly from any Allah in the heavens. Thus, Muslims kept on killing people throughout their history of 1400 years, till the Western nations became so powerful that they stopped their aggressive Jihads.
How does a non-religious society work to overcome its negatives?
We believe in a very basic formula, i.e.:
- We, humans, are not perfect. And we are fully prone to making mistakes and taking wrong decisions.
- But we are fully capable of learning from our mistakes and reforming ourselves.
- And we also learn from our failures and experiences.
- Evolution keeps carrying on towards making our society better and better.
But the basic formula for reformation goes only through criticism. Thus, we have learnt to always support freedom of expression and criticism.
We may make a mistake, but we will also reform ourselves.
Therefore, the atheism of Stalin means nothing to us today. We call his crimes to be crimes and oppose him and his policies. Only through this process, we achieved valuable Human Rights in the non-religious Western world.
Why Muslim preachers don't tell the other side of the story, which tells that non-religious Western Europe is able to achieve that PEACE under non-religious freethinking that we had NO wars in the whole of western Europe for the last 70 years? We made our countries so peaceful that millions of Muslims left their Islamic countries (with Sharia Laws) and came to our western European countries. Not a single Islamic era during the last 1400 years ever brought such peace, as has been brought by non-religious freethinking in Western Europe.
Islamic Preachers: The Prophet of Islam killed fewer people than Hitler and Stalin
Islamic Preachers propagate that atheism is a danger to the world, while Stalin and Hitler killed more people than the Prophet of Islam (i.e. Muhammad).
But this comparison of Muhammad and Stalin/Hitler is totally false, while:
- The prophet of Islam is considered 100% Perfect by Muslims and as a person with the highest MORAL values in the universe. Thus, even if he did injustice against a SINGLE person ever, then his whole claim of the prophet and the whole building of Islam is destroyed.
- While we absolutely don't consider Stalin, or any other atheist, to be perfect. Thus, we are free to CRITICIZE any atheist if he commits a crime. And we do condemn Stalin for his killings.
- Nevertheless, this criticism and condemnation of killings by Muhammad/Allah is absolutely absent in the Muslim community. Contrary to it, they praise their killings. Thus, Muslims kept on killing others in the name of Allah/Jihad for the next 1400 years. Their killings, in the name of Jihad, stopped only after the Western countries subdued them by force.
And the second issue is:
- Muhammad's war power was limited and much less as compared to the war power of Stalin and his advanced weapons. But still the ratio of Muhammad's cruelty was 100%.
- Yes, when Muhammad captured any tribe, then he brought 100% DESTRUCTION upon them.
- Muhammad either killed 100% of men or made them slaves.
- And he turned 100% of women into slaves too, and then they were raped by their Muslim Jihadists, and they had to provide sex services to Muslim men for their entire life.
- Muhammad also didn't spare the small girls and boys. He turned 100% of small children into slaves too for the rest of their lives.
- And Islam also looted 100% of their wealth and properties.
Thus, the destruction of tribes at the hands of Muhammad was 100% in all aspects. Please read what Muhammad did to Banu Qurayzah and Banu al-Mustaliq.
Ibn 'Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi' inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote to me that it was (only) necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others (and took them as captives).
And here is how 100% of women were raped in a TEMPORARY sexual relationship, and when the master fulfilled his lust, then he sold her to the 2nd master, who raped her and then sold to the 3rd master ... and this chain of rape of a slave girl continued in Islam.
Abu Sa’id said We went out with the Apostle of Allaah(ﷺ) on the expedition to Banu Al Mustaliq and took some Arab women captive and we desired the women for we were suffering from the absence of our wives and (at the same time) we (also) wanted ransom, so we intended to withdraw the penis (while having intercourse with the slave women, so that they don't get pregnant, so that they get good ransom moeny by selling them in the slave markets). But we asked ourselves “can we draw the penis when the Apostle of Allaah(ﷺ) is among us before asking him about it? So we asked him about it. He said “ (Yes, you can do it, but) it does not matter if you do not do it, for very soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”
Grade: Sahih (Albani)
Please remember, there was absolutely no slave trade possible in India, while Ashoka The Great (a follower of Buddha) closed all the Bazaars of slavery. Similarly, the Bible didn't allow the rape of a captive/slave woman in any temporary sexual relationship, but the Jews/Christians had to marry them, after which they could not be sold any further. (Details are here)
Moreover, not only women, but Jihadists also raped the pre-pubescent small girls too in the same night, when in the day they had killed their fathers and brothers.
Narrated Buraydah:
I hated Ali as I had never hated anyone. ... The Prophet sent to us Ali, and among the female captives was a slave girl who was the finest of the female captives, and he apportioned the Khums (one-fifth of war booty given to the Prophet and his family). Ali divided the shares, and his head was dripping (after taking a ritual bath following sexual intercourse with the slave-girl). We said: "O Abu al-Hasan (i.e. Ali), what is this?!" Ali replied: "Did you not see the slave-girl who was among the female captives? I divided the shares and apportioned Khumus. Then she became part of the Khumus. Then she became part of the household of the Prophet, and then she became part of the house of Ali, and (thus) I had sexual intercourse with her." ...
Grading: Classed Sahih by al-Arna'ut
Istibra is a period of sexual abstinence required till the first period of the captive girl is over. This is to ensure no confusion on paternity. Since Ali raped that captive girl the same night without any Istibra, thus some people criticized this action of Ali.
Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani answered this criticism, and wrote (link):
وقد استشكل وقوع على على الجارية بغير استبراء وكذلك قسمته لنفسه فأما الأول فمحمول على أنها كانت بكرا غير بالغ ورأى أن مثلها لا يستبرأ كما صار إليه غيره من الصحابة
"It was problematic that Ali Had sexual intercourse with the slave-girl without observing Istibra, and also that he apportioned a share for himself.
As for the first issue, it is understood that she was a virgin and not pubescent. He recognized that someone like her need not observe Istibra, and it is in accordance with the practice of other Companions."
Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari 8/67.
Please read more details about the evils of Islamic Slavery here.
And this Prophetic Sunnah (practice) of 100% destruction of non-Muslims continued among the Muslim followers of Muhammad for the next 1400 years. Millions of non-Muslims were killed, and millions of women and small children were made slaves. Millions of women and pre-pubescent girls were raped. And millions were sold in the Bazaars of slavery.
If Atheism is responsible for the cruelties of Stalin, why is then Islam not responsible for the cruelties of ISIS and Taliban and Boko Haram?
Atheism has absolutely no teachings to kill others. What Stalin did, it was his own crime. Nevertheless, Islamic preachers still put the blame of Stalin upon Atheism and upon all atheists.
But unlike Atheism, the teachings of Islam are full of barbaric acts, even against innocent women and children. And when Muslims like ISIS, Taliban, Boko Haram etc. kill people and take women and children as prisoners, according to the Sharia of Islam, then these same Islamic preachers deny putting the blame of their crimes upon Islam. These are nothing else than the Double Standards of Islamic preachers.
Nevertheless, these double standards of Islamic preachers are not going to help them much, while the whole world is gradually coming to know about the real Islamic Sharia, and how it has made it Halal for the Jihadists to enslave and rape innocent women and small girls. ISIS is not alone, but this is the Sharia Ruling, upon which Muslims of the last 1400 years acted unanimously.
Have Muslims ever condemned the massacres & rape & looting in the name of Jihad?
When Stalin and Hitler were murdering people, then they were called terrorists, and they were criticized and condemned.
And this criticism and condemnation is the point, where the REFORMATION starts. In simple words, atheists and non-religious systems are able to reform themselves. That is why even Stalin and Soviet Union also stopped prosecuting religious people in the late 30s.
But where are Muslims who have criticized and condemned Islamic Sharia for killings men and enslaving innocent women and children, and raping them, and looting all their wealth and properties? There is none.
In simple words, no REFORMS are possible in Islam, while there is no room present in it to criticize and condemn the crimes of Islamic Sharia.
Please be aware!!!
Whenever religious Muslims get the power, and they succeed in establishing an Islamic Caliphate, then it will become obligatory for them to wage “Jihad” against all the non-Islamic States.
And as soon as “Jihad” revives, then “Islamic Slavery” will also revive automatically along with it (as the captive women and children of the non-Muslims will be made slaves after the war)
You will find this same ruling, in the fatwa of Saudi Grand Mufti Sheikh Saleh al-Fawzan, who is openly declaring that institutions of Jihad and Slavery will revive automatically with the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saleh_Al-Fawzan
In the tape he was quoted as saying, “Slavery is a part of Islam ... Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” As for the modernist interpretation that Islam totally abolished slavery, he dismissed its exponents saying, “They are ignorant, not scholars. ... Whoever says such things is an infidel.”
