Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I also like to watch them deny trying to defending terrorists.I love reading desperate attempts to defend murdering fanatics.
No one in this thread is trying to defend murderous fanatics.
Let me know when you're capable of something more than hurling personal attacks.
It's always the same shit with you isn't it? You always dive in when anything negative is said about Muslim behavior or Islam in general.
But wait, you're just an "objective" unbiased person here, right? Riiiiiiiight. Ha ha ha.
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
It's always the same shit with you isn't it? You always dive in when anything negative is said about Muslim behavior or Islam in general.
But wait, you're just an "objective" unbiased person here, right? Riiiiiiiight. Ha ha ha.
In post # 18, he espoused the supremacist Islamist point of view. By trying to foster the notion that when his people dominate, subjugate and deny equal rights to the oppressed people under their thumb that this is really "coexistence", he indulges in a rhetorical sleight of hand by trying to create the impression that the complete subjugation of the victims of his supremacist ideology is actually some sort of good thing. Coexistence= living as a beaten down, second class citizen living under the yoke of their Islamist masters.
Taking note of who actually thanked him for expressing the Islamist supremacist point of view will also help identify some of the other Islamists here.
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
You can claim anything you want, but the truth of any poster's statements in this regard is revealed much more clearly by their pattern of rhetoric.
If you were an actual atheist, you certainly would not be offended at the mention that Mohammad had sex with children or murdered people as these are well-established facts, nor would you be on record as supporting Islamic supremacy as you are in this thread.
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
when do you start that "sourcing" You citation of CORDOBA as a bastion of 'loving living side by side'---
is actually lifted directly from the islamo Nazi propaganda
song-book-------Is there some reason that you did not mention the murderous pogroms there?-------You don't
source-----you make baseless assertions
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
when do you start that "sourcing" You citation of CORDOBA as a bastion of 'loving living side by side'---
is actually lifted directly from the islamo Nazi propaganda
song-book-------Is there some reason that you did not mention the murderous pogroms there?-------You don't
source-----you make baseless assertions
I'd be perfectly willing do debate you within a structured format / formal setting as well. You have a tendency to make sweeping generalized statements and then become super sensitive when someone points at that your statements are a little unfair given how general they are; you then proceed to rant and rave about your experience and use it as a appeal to authority without ever supporting your generalizations with actual examples, data sets, or other forms of robust evidence.
Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
when do you start that "sourcing" You citation of CORDOBA as a bastion of 'loving living side by side'---
is actually lifted directly from the islamo Nazi propaganda
song-book-------Is there some reason that you did not mention the murderous pogroms there?-------You don't
source-----you make baseless assertions
I'd be perfectly willing do debate you within a structured format / formal setting as well. You have a tendency to make sweeping generalized statements and then become super sensitive when someone points at that your statements are a little unfair given how general they are; you then proceed to rant and rave about your experience and use it as a appeal to authority without ever supporting your generalizations with actual examples, data sets, or other forms of robust evidence.
Oso you have AGAIN posted a "nothing" post----a kind of silly and baseless assertion. I have no intention of leaving my home today and visting a "formal debating setting"----This is a message board. Your assertion
that I make "sweeping generalized statements" is completely unsubstantiated yet you CLAIM that you
substantiate EVERYHING.----so far you have never done
so. With your silly FART----"you rant and rave"----you demonstrate your desperation.
try again-----in places----in which there are MUSLIMS and/or HINDUS
and/or CHRISTIANS, and/or JEWS------each of those groups GROUP
UP--------and are very much like ETHNICITIES do you live under a rock
or are you under 20 years old? I will provide an example for you-----lets take
MUMBAI (the erstwhile Bombay) Do you actually imagine that historically each of the groups------muslims, hindus, Zoroastrians, jews-------did not GROUP UP---with their separate customs and even their separate cuisines? etc etc?
I will answer that-------they did------in some cases they barely mingled AT ALL----
they didn't just hang out toasting marshmellows together on warm summer evenings. Ask me a question of the relationships between jews and muslims
in Yemen------my expert is right here sipping his coffee
Through conflict studies I know this to not be very true. Take Sri Lanka for example. The Tamil Tigers had no problem expelling Muslim Tamils right along with the others, nor did the Sinhalese Buddhist nationalists hesitate to slaughter Sinhalese socialists and persecute those Sinhalese who converted to Islam. Religion can often follow ethnic lines and divides, but it doesn't have to.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
when do you start that "sourcing" You citation of CORDOBA as a bastion of 'loving living side by side'---
is actually lifted directly from the islamo Nazi propaganda
song-book-------Is there some reason that you did not mention the murderous pogroms there?-------You don't
source-----you make baseless assertions
I'd be perfectly willing do debate you within a structured format / formal setting as well. You have a tendency to make sweeping generalized statements and then become super sensitive when someone points at that your statements are a little unfair given how general they are; you then proceed to rant and rave about your experience and use it as a appeal to authority without ever supporting your generalizations with actual examples, data sets, or other forms of robust evidence.
Oso you have AGAIN posted a "nothing" post----a kind of silly and baseless assertion. I have no intention of leaving my home today and visting a "formal debating setting"----This is a message board. Your assertion
that I make "sweeping generalized statements" is completely unsubstantiated yet you CLAIM that you
substantiate EVERYHING.----so far you have never done
so. With your silly FART----"you rant and rave"----you demonstrate your desperation.
You don't have to leave your home to have a formal debate. There are two specific places on this board for them. I'm not sure what you were picturing but I was suggesting a discussion where you will have to rely on more than a vague appeal to authority, and generalizations to support your point. I'll understand if you don't feel up for it.
try again-----in places----in which there are MUSLIMS and/or HINDUS
and/or CHRISTIANS, and/or JEWS------each of those groups GROUP
UP--------and are very much like ETHNICITIES do you live under a rock
or are you under 20 years old? I will provide an example for you-----lets take
MUMBAI (the erstwhile Bombay) Do you actually imagine that historically each of the groups------muslims, hindus, Zoroastrians, jews-------did not GROUP UP---with their separate customs and even their separate cuisines? etc etc?
I will answer that-------they did------in some cases they barely mingled AT ALL----
they didn't just hang out toasting marshmellows together on warm summer evenings. Ask me a question of the relationships between jews and muslims
in Yemen------my expert is right here sipping his coffee
Through conflict studies I know this to not be very true. Take Sri Lanka for example. The Tamil Tigers had no problem expelling Muslim Tamils right along with the others, nor did the Sinhalese Buddhist nationalists hesitate to slaughter Sinhalese socialists and persecute those Sinhalese who converted to Islam. Religion can often follow ethnic lines and divides, but it doesn't have to.
the tamil tigers are HINDUS-------they barely LOOK at a muslim or a Buddhist----
Tamils are not all Hindus. You see you made a claim that Hindus were an ethnic group: that suggests that either all people of a single ethnicity are Hindus and/or that all Hindus belong to one ethnic groups and identity with each other as such. The simple fact that not all members of the Tamil ethnic group identify with the same religion proves you wrong.
the correct point I made was that in lands with muslim majorities like in the Levant-------the different religious groups function like different ethnic groups-----
And even more correct way of saying it is that ethnic groups acted like ethnic groups. The various Indian peoples were fighting amongst themselves (Hindus against Hindus) even when the Muslims were around. You are attempting to lump distinct peoples like the Oriya, the Sindhi, the Tamils and the Marathi all together because most of them practice Hinduism, and it really doesn't work that way.
DID YOUR FATHER EVER VISIT A MUSLIM IN THE HOME OF THE MUSLIM
******NEVER!!!!*****
1.) You literally know nothing about my father.
2.) I have visited Muslims in the home of Muslims, and I work with Islamic populations all of the time. On top of it, I have actually received some formal training in the area of Sunni Islamic fiqh. Your attempt to brush aside what I am saying and my own experience and rely on some sense of natural superiority despite an inability to argue specifics isn't very impressive.
Your comments make no sense. At no time did I suggest that there are NOT various groups of hindus---some hostile to each other. MOST tamils are hindus As to YOUR activities as a foreign guest in a muslim country ----it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the experience of groups oppressed under the filth of dhimmia in shariah shit holes-------YOU get treated as a GUEST.----they get treated as something entirely inferior by LAW ------YOU ACTUALLY KNOW NOTHING ------btw----I have been a guest many times of muslims-----even got invited to a mosque. I am an American I am not a jew living under the filth of dhimmia in a classical shariah shit hole and neither are you. For an understanding of that condition-----the persons with whom to talk are those who have experienced the stink. The last place to learn about the muslim way of life is -----in the parlor sipping tea. -----YOU TEACH??? sheeesh---you
are clueless
It's always the same shit with you isn't it? You always dive in when anything negative is said about Muslim behavior or Islam in general.
But wait, you're just an "objective" unbiased person here, right? Riiiiiiiight. Ha ha ha.
In post # 18, he espoused the supremacist Islamist point of view. By trying to foster the notion that when his people dominate, subjugate and deny equal rights to the oppressed people under their thumb that this is really "coexistence", he indulges in a rhetorical sleight of hand by trying to create the impression that the complete subjugation of the victims of his supremacist ideology is actually some sort of good thing. Coexistence= living as a beaten down, second class citizen living under the yoke of their Islamist masters.
Taking note of who actually thanked him for expressing the Islamist supremacist point of view will also help identify some of the other Islamists here.
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
"I'll debate you in a special format...blah blah blah...too scared to debate here...need to make something up to escape from this thread...."Let me know when you are comfortable enough with the subject material to have an actual discussion about it.
Let me know when you are willing to make even so much as one honest statement.
I'd be perfectly willing to debate you on any of these topics in a structured discussion format. I'm perfectly comfortable with my ability to source my arguments.
when do you start that "sourcing" You citation of CORDOBA as a bastion of 'loving living side by side'---
is actually lifted directly from the islamo Nazi propaganda
song-book-------Is there some reason that you did not mention the murderous pogroms there?-------You don't
source-----you make baseless assertions
I'd be perfectly willing do debate you within a structured format / formal setting as well. You have a tendency to make sweeping generalized statements and then become super sensitive when someone points at that your statements are a little unfair given how general they are; you then proceed to rant and rave about your experience and use it as a appeal to authority without ever supporting your generalizations with actual examples, data sets, or other forms of robust evidence.
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
You can claim anything you want, but the truth of any poster's statements in this regard is revealed much more clearly by their pattern of rhetoric.
If you were an actual atheist, you certainly would not be offended at the mention that Mohammad had sex with children or murdered people as these are well-established facts, nor would you be on record as supporting Islamic supremacy as you are in this thread.
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
You can claim anything you want, but the truth of any poster's statements in this regard is revealed much more clearly by their pattern of rhetoric.
If you were an actual atheist, you certainly would not be offended at the mention that Mohammad had sex with children or murdered people as these are well-established facts, nor would you be on record as supporting Islamic supremacy as you are in this thread.
Don't you get it?!
He went to college and decided to study Issssssslam, yet he's an "atheist"!
I'm an atheist there sport, as already stated in the thread. But if you need me to be some sort of secret Islamist in order to justify the fact that you can't keep up in the conversation then I understand.
You can claim anything you want, but the truth of any poster's statements in this regard is revealed much more clearly by their pattern of rhetoric.
If you were an actual atheist, you certainly would not be offended at the mention that Mohammad had sex with children or murdered people as these are well-established facts, nor would you be on record as supporting Islamic supremacy as you are in this thread.
Don't you get it?!
He went to college and decided to study Issssssslam, yet he's an "atheist"!
yes-----I-encountered lots of this kind of stuff for decades.
Apologists for islam paint themselves with a fresh. albeit
thin veneer-----every Tuesday and Thursday. This one
is something like from a bible belt protestant
background that magically went to CATHOLIC SCHOOL--
so he "knows" both and uses a star of David as his
symbol and is so UNIVERSAL in his approach that he
adheres to no religion at all ----A MAN FOR ALL
SEASONS------the UNIVERSAL MAN ----kinda like MUHUMMAD
and "the religion for all mankind" -----achmadinejad UN speech.
Today reports out of ADEN are horrific------the religion for
"all mankind" is murdering in THE GARDEN OF EDEN.
