• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Muslims

Only according to Ibn Ishaq who was deemed a liar. There is an interesting website of Jewish converts to Islam that claims that this is a myth from the Jewish traditions and that the alleged number of those killed has been recycled several times in the various versions of the myth, and shouldn't be taken seriously. Since they are devout people and should know their scriptures the best, who am I to question their learned opinion?

Jews for Allah - Muhammad and Judaism

In any case, the OT has much more severe instructions on how to treat nonbelievers.

I am not a Christian, nor am I Jew. Thus your argument about the Old Testmant has no relevance to me.
 
How about the bombing of Dresden and other German cities in WW2 as criminal acts that brought about burnt ruins? Or Coventry, for that matter, despite having cracked the Enigma code?

The ultimate chutzpah in this regard must be with regards to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of course, for no really good reasons, as the Japanese were placated at that point...

Muslims did not do that.

One case doesn't cancel out the other you know. And anyway, the bombing of Dresden occurred during a war which paid back the perpetrator nation more than in kind for the bombing of Coventry. And other cities too of course.

Muslims didn't do it, but then nor did I.

This is a straw man argument I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:
One case doesn't cancel out the other you know. And anyway, the bombing of Dresden occurred during a war which paid back the perpetrator nation more than in kind for the bombing of Coventry. And other cities too of course.

Muslims didn't do it, but then nor did I.

This is a straw man argument I'm afraid.
Why? Aren't these much more serious crimes than you could attribute to Muslims?
'
 
Very disappointing that some human beings would go that low.

Assuming, of course, that those who go that low are human beings to begin with.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Saladin. The Protocols of Zion are recognized in all legitimate circles as lies and anti-semetic propaganda. Presenting them as valid in ANY way would be considered hate speech and will net you a considerable infraction. Do not do this again.
 
You have yet to clarify which Muslim nation is closest to your Muslim Brotherhood ideal of what constitutes an ideal Muslim nation.
Listen. History is on a cusp where the Muslims are controlled by the oppressive dictator-puppets of the West. There is nothing to choose that's particularly Islamic amongst them...they're all in the thrall of their puppet-meisters, and regularly abuse their citizens at the behest of the West, carrying out torture, murder, and other forms of totally unacceptable oppression including waterboarding and such...this is where those flights go for rendering the victims of US without the administration having to account for them to Congress and such...which is why so much money goes missing and accounted for from various US budgets.

BUT good news it at hand. According to the Prophetic Hadith, the last stage of Muslim history, in the future, is a Caliphate that is so similar to the first, that it is like a shower of rain, in that you cannot tell what has the greater blessing, the first of it or the last of it. Remember the First Caliphate was at the time, for example, when Caliph AbuBakr severely reprimanded a judge in a civil case for referring to him as the Commander of the Faithful, whereas he was appearing in his private capacity as one of the parties subject to judgement, and when Caliph Umar would wander around incognito, fearful as to what injustices were done by his administration in his name for which he would be accountable for, on the day of Judgement. This was the time where candidates who WISHED for the post were automatically barred from it, the Caliph being appointed by grabbing hold of the most suitable person, who wished not to be elected because he knew how weighty the responsibility was, and was dragged, kicking and biting as it were, and forcibly inducted to the post! A far cry from today's mess. And indeed it is how, according to Hadiths, the Mahdi, a future leader prophesied to be contemporaneous with Jesus on his return, will indeed be elected not too long in the future according to some reports!
 
Last edited:
Why? Aren't these much more serious crimes than you could attribute to Muslims?
'

It's a straw man because you're trying to divert the debate away from what I asked you to prove onto something totally irrelevant.

That you can even dare link Allied bombing campaigns of World War 2 with Islamic terrorist outrages just scrapes the barrel.

I asked you to prove that Muslim terrorists weren't responsible for the attacks on Bali, London, etc, after all. That's what you seem to be suggesting.
 
It's a straw man because you're trying to divert the debate away from what I asked you to prove onto something totally irrelevant.

That you can even dare link Allied bombing campaigns of World War 2 with Islamic terrorist outrages just scrapes the barrel.

I asked you to prove that Muslim terrorists weren't responsible for the attacks on Bali, London, etc, after all. That's what you seem to be suggesting.
Dare? Churchill was gung-ho to gas the Kurds of Iraq, remember? Something the west lynched Saddam for...:shock:
 
It's a straw man because you're trying to divert the debate away from what I asked you to prove onto something totally irrelevant.

That you can even dare link Allied bombing campaigns of World War 2 with Islamic terrorist outrages just scrapes the barrel.

I asked you to prove that Muslim terrorists weren't responsible for the attacks on Bali, London, etc, after all. That's what you seem to be suggesting.
Believe me, I would, but for these Swords of Damocles hanging over me...but in the new religion there are some so holy that their names may not be mentioned. "Go figure" as they say around here.
 
Last edited:
Believe me, I would, but for these Swords of Damocles hanging over me...but in the new religion there are some so holy that their names may not be mentioned.

Are the ZOG agents I sent to your house there yet?
 
Dare? Churchill was gung-ho to gas the Kurds of Iraq, remember? Something the west lynched Saddam for...:shock:

Another cheap shot! Rumours abounded but nothing was confirmed: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_British_use_of_gas_in_Mesopotamia_in_1920]Alleged British use of gas in Mesopotamia in 1920 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


Another straw man. Incapable of admitting any atrocity perpetuated by fellow Mohammadeans, you have to accuse others of descending to their shabby level.
 
Last edited:
Are the ZOG agents I sent to your house there yet?
Ye are behind times, lad. All telephones these days are accessible to be tapped without even needing any extra circuitry ... even the White House. Clinton paid dearly, and indeed in the Lewinsky scandal testimony he claimed that a foreign power was tapping the phones. Do you think these Congress critters would all vote in a certain way unless their activities with underage pages and aides and such could be presented back to them with dire threats of exposure?
 
Last edited:
Another cheap shot! Rumours abounded but nothing was confirmed: Alleged British use of gas in Mesopotamia in 1920 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another straw man. Incapable of admitting any atrocity perpetuated by fellow Mohammadeans, you have to accuse others of descending to their shabby level.
FYI Saddam was not acting the way he did because he was a Muslim, but because he was an Alawiyite, similar to the Syrian case. He was encouraged by the US Ambassador to invade Kuwait, which used to be a province of Iraq until it was cut off by the Brits, and who were tapping into Iraqi oil by side drilling. He was plied with WMDs and other methods of coercion, not by any Muslim state - said WMDs are strictly verboten in Islam - but by our Dumbsfeld & Co to fight Iran on our behalf...why do you think a lot of the pages of Saddam's sources which he handed to the UN were redacted and other pages with lots of black ink masking out the details? Besides, it is our US govmint that helped Saddam set up shop in the first place.
 
Last edited:
According to various Google returns, phone tap candidates included trhe Isrealis, Chinese and the FBI.

I suppose if they all wanted to listen in, the resultant show would have been just as entertaining as your rambles on here.

That's why I think it's wrong to give you all these moderator warnings - they should just let you get on with it and allow me to be thoroughly entertained as I consume my beer and crisps.
 
According to various Google returns, phone tap candidates included trhe Isrealis, Chinese and the FBI.

I suppose if they all wanted to listen in, the resultant show would have been just as entertaining as your rambles on here.

That's why I think it's wrong to give you all these moderator warnings - they should just let you get on with it and allow me to be thoroughly entertained as I consume my beer and crisps.
Each of the alleged tappers on your list would have their own reasons, of course.
 
Ya see what I mean? :(:shock:

No, what I see is you attempting to foist a long ago debunked manuscript of lies and hate as some kind of legitimate tool with which to hammer the Jews with. Your methodology is without a doubt suspect, your motives quite clear.

Not to mention you're ****ing with a 6A by insinuating that CC's warning is motivated by some Zionist bias.
 
FYI Saddam was not acting the way he did because he was a Muslim.

I never said that his being a Muslim was his primary motivation. Just that you used Churchill's alleged behaviour against the Kurds to deflect from the actions of the Muslim terrorists you have never condemned.

And whatever the rights and wrongs of the Iraq war, the full and unexpergated account we may never know, this is still a diversion from what you say you are not allowed to prove.
 
Right, I'll get the crisps...

Let's have the 'lowdown'....
I guess you guys overfished all the cod, then.:(

Listen. You wanna be entertained, become a member of RCGroups.com and search for all the posts by me, iwannarc, all the way back to 2001. ;)''

Yup, they've banned me for the last time, for similar alleged infractions...
 
Well, goodbye and 'stay loose'.

I think you're round the bend of course, but I must admit that I've quite enjoyed the thrust and parry in a few places.

I'm sure there are still plenty of Islamic boards out there which won't kick you off.
 
Well, goodbye and 'stay loose'.

I think you're round the bend of course, but I must admit that I've quite enjoyed the thrust and parry in a few places.
Some RCGroups person compared my survival there to watching Brer Rabbit ! I certainly enjoyed it, as English is pretty much my first language, and I could defend myself quite comfortably, Thank God.
I'm sure there are still plenty of Islamic boards out there which won't kick you off.
no no - it was RCGroups who banned me for the last time...hopefully I have more lives here than the proverbial cat, but we'll see...
 
Last edited:
..Or maybe Mecca.

While I'm off to bed, here's an intriguing little video. It's about the hard crust of Islamist supremacists being allowed to stake their cultural claims in Britain, regardless of the wishes of ordinary people and other Muslims:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_zZGS1ZQuw&feature=related"]YouTube - Labour Appeasing Islam: WAKE UP UK. political correctness multiculturalism[/ame]

Thanks Labour. In not wanting to 'offend' virtually any Muslim at all, the pendulum of extremity is allowed to swing too far one way. And then it'll be due to swing back....
 
Back
Top Bottom