freediver wrote on Jan 30^th, 2019 at 7:45pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 9:43am: Frank wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:21am: Auggie wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:12am: Any religion or idea is capable of reform. Change will only come. Unfortunately such change usually does not come about by peaceful means. The Koran is the masterpiece of guidance and knowledge bestowed upon humanity by the Almighty. It cannot be modified in any way whatsoever. It is the final book. The commandments of the Almighty are entrenched in the Koran which provides for a complete way of life. Asia Bibi, for example, was acquitted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan NOT because they threw out the sharia rules on blasphemy as outdated or irrelevant in a modern society but simply because the prosecution did not prove that the blasphemy occurred. In other words, there is not one iota of moving away from sharia law and its demands in relation to punishing blasphemy by death. Sharia rules are completely unchanged in 11400 years because the Koran's guidance is unmodifiable. For Muslims, its forever Groundhog Day of 8 June 632 AD. The Bible sanctifies the butchering of women and children as noble acts of faith. Oh yes it does. For centuries such butchering was sanctioned by the church as noble acts of faith. And yet, you would be the first to argue that Christianity has got over that and 'reformed'. There is nothing in Islamic doctrine that should act as an impenetrable 'never ever' road block to muslims behaving both civily and keeping in faith with their religion. Even if you insist there are specific doctrinal passages that make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith (ridiculous, but I'll humour you), there's no reason why it can't be bypassed, ignored or rationalised into something more compatible with civil society. The truth is most muslims do it anyway, and on the other side of the coin, the jihadis bypass ignore or rationalise specific commands to not be intolerant butchering thugs. If Christians can get past specific doctrinal commands to punish and/or revile homosexuals and look upon women as subservient, inferior beings who must not be heard in public - into a religion that officially embraces gay rights and women's equality - then I don't think its a stretch for muslims to get over some pretty vague and ambiguous doctrinal references that allegedly condone slaughtering innocents on the basis of personal beliefs as an act of faith. For one thing, they can instead emphasise the decidedly *NON* vague and *NON ambiguous commands to accept and embrace freedom of thought in 2:256 and 18:29. What's to stop Muslims paying attention to it again? Would it be fair to describe you as a hypocrite for suggesting Muslims ignore those parts of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with? Or are you only suggesting that non-Muslims ignore them?

Gandalf can you explain your logic here? Is there really no reason why parts of the Quran can't simply be ignored, bypassed, rationalised etc?

FD, you posted that. Can you explain your logic there, please?

Is there any reason why parts of the Quran can't be - etc, etc, etc, Mindless Collective, traitorous Jews, so unfair, etc, etc?

Cheers.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 30^th, 2019 at 9:43am:

There is nothing in Islamic doctrine that should act as an impenetrable 'never ever' road block to muslims behaving both civily and keeping in faith with their religion. Even if you insist there are specific doctrinal passages that make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith (ridiculous, but I'll humour you), there's no reason why it can't be bypassed, ignored or rationalised into something more compatible with civil society.

QUESTION;
What happens to       the authority       of ISLAMIC LAW,
if verses of the inerrant and immutable Koran were to be ignored - BY MOSLEMS, BY FOLLOWERS OF ISLAM, AND ISLAMIC LAW ?

Q.
Would any gathering of ISLAMIC scholars alive today, come to an agreement which would allow, some moslems, to    lawfully   ignore ISLAMIC LAW ?



What has that got to do, with what is within the Koran ?

ARGUMENT;
There is no ISLAMIC source which has more authority or influence upon ISLAMIC law, than the Holy Koran.

The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:06am:

The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran

How about Jewish law and the Torah, Bias?

Them too, or when we're done with the Muselman and his apologists?

Karnal wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 9:11am:

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:06am: The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran How about Jewish law and the Torah, Bias?

Never even thought about it Karnal, have Jews killed anyone on the street lately? Islam seems to be the main problem except for the crazy politicians who let muzzos in, we'll be paying the price for that indiscretion for a long long time

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 9:47am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 9:11am: Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:06am: The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran How about Jewish law and the Torah, Bias? Never even though about it Karnal, have Jews killed anyone on the street lately?

No, Issue, individual Jews have. Abe Saffron used to tie them to an old washing machine and use them to feed the fish.?

I'm not sure what a subject like family and contract law has to do with killing people on the streets though.

You?

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2019 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:45pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 9:43am: Frank wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:21am: Auggie wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:12am: Any religion or idea is capable of reform. Change will only come. Unfortunately such change usually does not come about by peaceful means. The Koran is the masterpiece of guidance and knowledge bestowed upon humanity by the Almighty. It cannot be modified in any way whatsoever. It is the final book. The commandments of the Almighty are entrenched in the Koran which provides for a complete way of life. Asia Bibi, for example, was acquitted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan NOT because they threw out the sharia rules on blasphemy as outdated or irrelevant in a modern society but simply because the prosecution did not prove that the blasphemy occurred. In other words, there is not one iota of moving away from sharia law and its demands in relation to punishing blasphemy by death. Sharia rules are completely unchanged in 11400 years because the Koran's guidance is unmodifiable. For Muslims, its forever Groundhog Day of 8 June 632 AD. The Bible sanctifies the butchering of women and children as noble acts of faith. Oh yes it does. For centuries such butchering was sanctioned by the church as noble acts of faith. And yet, you would be the first to argue that Christianity has got over that and 'reformed'. There is nothing in Islamic doctrine that should act as an impenetrable 'never ever' road block to muslims behaving both civily and keeping in faith with their religion. Even if you insist there are specific doctrinal passages that make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith (ridiculous, but I'll humour you), there's no reason why it can't be bypassed, ignored or rationalised into something more compatible with civil society. The truth is most muslims do it anyway, and on the other side of the coin, the jihadis bypass ignore or rationalise specific commands to not be intolerant butchering thugs. If Christians can get past specific doctrinal commands to punish and/or revile homosexuals and look upon women as subservient, inferior beings who must not be heard in public - into a religion that officially embraces gay rights and women's equality - then I don't think its a stretch for muslims to get over some pretty vague and ambiguous doctrinal references that allegedly condone slaughtering innocents on the basis of personal beliefs as an act of faith. For one thing, they can instead emphasise the decidedly *NON* vague and *NON ambiguous commands to accept and embrace freedom of thought in 2:256 and 18:29. What's to stop Muslims paying attention to it again? Would it be fair to describe you as a hypocrite for suggesting Muslims ignore those parts of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with? Or are you only suggesting that non-Muslims ignore them? Gandalf can you explain your logic here? Is there really no reason why parts of the Quran can't simply be ignored, bypassed, rationalised etc?

This is the problem with highlighting and focusing only on half a sentence.

Quranic verses that jihadis and Islamophobes alike bypass, ignor or rationalise into something more compatible with their narrow views:

"no compulsion in religion" (2:256)

"The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve." (18:29)

"Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out from darknesses into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path." (5:16)

"Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors." (2:193)

The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf.

Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

Karnal wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 10:54am:

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 9:47am: Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 9:11am: Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:06am: The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran How about Jewish law and the Torah, Bias? Never even thought about it Karnal, have Jews killed anyone on the street lately? No, Issue, individual Jews have. Abe Saffron used to tie them to an old washing machine and use them to feed the fish.? You?

Who's bible is that in Karnal? - and who are you talking to, me or Issuevoter?

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:25pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 10:54am: Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 9:47am: Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 9:11am: Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:06am: The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran How about Jewish law and the Torah, Bias? Never even thought about it Karnal, have Jews killed anyone on the street lately? No, Issue, individual Jews have. Abe Saffron used to tie them to an old washing machine and use them to feed the fish.? You? Who's bible is that in Karnal? - and who are you talking to, me or Issuevoter?

Sorry, Bias, you. The Torah is the Old Testament.

freediver wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:13pm:

The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam.

Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like.

You?

Don't answer that.

Karnal wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:32pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that.

That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam.

And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-)

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:45pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that. That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam. And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-)

So, Christians who ignore the "love thy neighbour" bit and the bit about "not throwing the first stone," in the Bible really are Christians afterall, Secret?   Moses contends otherwise.  What do you think?  Is Christian Terrorism anything to do with Christianity or is it counter to Christianity?  Mmmmm?    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:01pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:45pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that. That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam. And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-) So, Christians who ignore the "love thy neighbour" bit and the bit about "not throwing the first stone," in the Bible really are Christians afterall, Secret?   Moses contends otherwise.  What do you think?  Is Christian Terrorism anything to do with Christianity or is it counter to Christianity?  Mmmmm?    ::)

Moses is a religious numpty, he is as idiotic as anyone else who needs a sky daddy to feel complete or for comfort and guidance.

I can totally accept Christian motivations for such things as bombing abortion clinics.

Where I disagree with you is relativism and relevance. Crusades, your go to apologism, ain't relevent, and Islamic inspired v Christian inspired violence ain't relative.

You defend the excess of Islam, in fact you have declared loudly and proudly that you will not criticise it.

You have dealt yourself out of any debate as biased, as well as being ridiculous in your mental contortions,  I have followed your contortions of logic impeccably.  Contrary to Islam, therefore not Islamic therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.

You defend Islam the same way that Moses defends Christianity. 

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:14pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 1:01pm: Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:45pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that. That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam. And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-) So, Christians who ignore the "love thy neighbour" bit and the bit about "not throwing the first stone," in the Bible really are Christians afterall, Secret?   Moses contends otherwise.  What do you think?  Is Christian Terrorism anything to do with Christianity or is it counter to Christianity?  Mmmmm?    ::) Moses is a religious numpty, he is as idiotic as anyone else who needs a sky daddy to feel complete or for comfort and guidance. I can totally accept Christian motivations for such things as bombing abortion clinics. Where I disagree with you is relativism and relevance. Crusades, your go to apologism, ain't relevent, and Islamic inspired v Christian inspired violence ain't relative. You defend the excess of Islam, in fact you have declared loudly and proudly that you will not criticise it. You have dealt yourself out of any debate as biased, as well as being ridiculous in your mental contortions,  I have followed your contortions of logic impeccably.  Contrary to Islam, therefore not Islamic therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam. You defend Islam the same way that Moses defends Christianity.

Why would Moses defend a religion that did not exist when he was supposedly alive?  Moses was a Jew, not a Christian and Christianity hadn't even been heard of then.   ::)

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Another Islamophobe who is so narrow-minded he reads what he believes I type, rather than what I type.  I have never defended Islam at all.  I have defended ordinary, everyday, peaceful, law-abiding Muslims from the hatred and bigotry we see all too often displayed on here from Islamophobes.   I refuse to criticise Islam because I admit that I am ignorant about it's subtle nuances and idioms - as the overwhelming majority of non-Muslims and many Muslims are.   The difference is, I am willing to admit my ignorance, whereas Islamophobes claim they know all about it without question.  Muslims have the same rights in our society as any other citizen - a right to worship their religion, to raise their kids, to be Muslims - all within the existing legal framework of our society. 

I am unsure why Islamophobes hate Muslims so much.  It must be based upon what they believe their religion teaches as against what it actually consists of.   Ignorance is the only acceptable excuse and they refuse to admit that so it must just be sheer plain ol' bigotry and hatred, mustn't it?  They hate people who are different to them and what they believe is the "norm" for Australians and Australia.   Australian Muslims are mainly peaceful, mainly law-abiding (as are most non-Muslims) and well assimilated into our society which is Multicultural and Multireligious in nature.    ::)

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:45pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that. That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam. And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-)

Strange. That's exactly what Moses, Yadda and the old boy say about Christians who disobey the Bible.

Mind you, they all have clauses. Moses brings up Jesus being tempted by the devil in the desert to encourage Christians to hate, ban and kill the Muselman, which is haram in Christianity. Y says he's not perfect and he'll face his Maker on Judgement Day. The old boy just pretends he's not a Christian.

Mind you, none of them are very fond of Christians who practice Christianity. They call them apologists.

You?

Karnal wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:29pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:45pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? Muslim drug dealers ignore bits of the Quran too, FD, but that doesn't stop decent white people everywhere from blaming Islam. Muslim drunks, Muslim mortgage brokers, Muslim insurance agents, Muslim suicide bombers, all ignore the bits of the Quran they don't like. You? Don't answer that. That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam. And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   8-) Strange. That's exactly what Moses, Yadda and the old boy say about Christians who disobey the Bible. Mind you, they all have clauses. Moses brings up Jesus being tempted by the devil in the desert to encourage Christians to hate, ban and kill the Muselman, which is haram in Christianity. Y says he's not perfect and he'll face his Maker on Judgement Day. The old boy just pretends he's not a Christian. Mind you, none of them are very fond of Christians who practice Christianity. They call them apologists. You?

It's not  strange at all. Different sides to a single coin. Brian yourself etc are apologists for Islam, Moses and Yadda apologist for Christians. 

You even use the same arguments, Moses conjures up the not really Christian, Brian not really Muslim.  Brian goes a step further and has loudly and proudly stated his allegiance. 

 

Quote:

I refuse to criticise Islam because I admit that I am ignorant about it's subtle nuances and idioms - as the overwhelming majority of non-Muslims and many Muslims are.

I am not a doctor of divinity, I am happy to accept at face value a Muslim holding a dripping head declaring that he has gone choppy choppy and done it for Jihad and Allan. Especially because that person usually has an internally coherent justification in the scriptures they believe.

I might have missed a few subtle nuances and idioms I admit but then I am looking not for excuses why the head hacking jihadist is not weeeely a Muslim, therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.  And no need for me to do so, you have more than covered the apologism and justifications.

freediver wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:13pm:

The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

You've lost me FD. Jihadis kill people by ignoring or rationalising the verses I just mentioned. What exactly is it about that point that you take issue with?

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 11:46am:

Quranic verses that jihadis and Islamophobes alike bypass, ignor or rationalise into something more compatible with their narrow views: "no compulsion in religion" (2:256) "The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve." (18:29) "Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out from darknesses into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path." (5:16) "Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors." (2:193)

What about these verses?


Quote:

Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction https://quran.com/4/82

This one sounds like convert or die, does this contradict your peaceful verses?


Quote:

And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. https://quran.com/9/5

Does Allah say you cannot pick and choose which verses you believe in, is it a package deal if you want all those houris and an everlasting erection to service them?



Quote:

So do you believe in part of the Scripture and disbelieve in part? Then what is the recompense for those who do that among you except disgrace in worldly life; and on the Day of Resurrection they will be sent back to the severest of punishment. And Allah is not unaware of what you do. https://quran.com/2/85

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:46pm:

Quote: I refuse to criticise Islam because I admit that I am ignorant about it's subtle nuances and idioms - as the overwhelming majority of non-Muslims and many Muslims are.  I am not a doctor of divinity, I am happy to accept at face value a Muslim holding a dripping head declaring that he has gone choppy choppy and done it for Jihad and Allan. Especially because that person usually has an internally coherent justification in the scriptures they believe. I might have missed a few subtle nuances and idioms I admit but then I am looking not for excuses why the head hacking jihadist is not weeeely a Muslim, therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.  And no need for me to do so, you have more than covered the apologism and justifications.

Yet you appear to refuse to accept that a Christian who murders someone and proclaims they have done so for Christ, isn't a Christian?   Funny how yours and Moses and Yadda's mind works.   It seems one rule for Muslims but another, different rule for Christians.  Muslims who commit atrocities, even if they are against the teachings of Islam, is automatically a devout Muslim but a Christian who commits atrocities which are against Christianities' most sacred tenants, oh, no, they can't be Christians, now can they?   Extremists, of all religions are well, extreme in their views and their actions, justifying their crimes through their religion.  That doesn't make their religion or their co-religionists guilty of their crimes.   What it means is that better instruction is required, better understanding of what the religion believes and teaches.   The overwhelming majority of Christians or Muslims or Hindus or Buddhists don't support the killing of innocent people in the main.   To suggest otherwise shows the depth of your bigotry and in this case, Islamophobia.    ::) ::)

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:46pm:

Quote: I refuse to criticise Islam because I admit that I am ignorant about it's subtle nuances and idioms - as the overwhelming majority of non-Muslims and many Muslims are.  I am not a doctor of divinity, I am happy to accept at face value a Muslim holding a dripping head declaring that he has gone choppy choppy and done it for Jihad and Allan. Especially because that person usually has an internally coherent justification in the scriptures they believe. I might have missed a few subtle nuances and idioms I admit but then I am looking not for excuses why the head hacking jihadist is not weeeely a Muslim, therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.  And no need for me to do so, you have more than covered the apologism and justifications.

Not at all, Secret. Killing innocent people and holding up their heads on Facebook is the height of bad manners in Islam. It's more haram than eating pork.

Raping? Haram. Kidnapping? Haram. Torturing? You know.

This is in the Quran verses G has quoted. G has even quoted the not-all-who-go-in-my-name passage, the same thing Jesus said.

Muslims who ban, hate and kill are disagreeing the words of their Cunning Prophet. Christians who ban, hate and kill are disagreeing with their Holy Saviour. Not all who go in their names shall enter the Kingdom.

Personally, I believe them both. Rather than ban, hate and kill, welcome, love and bring life to others. That's the message of both. That's why I'm an apologist, you see.

I am a Moslem and a Christian. I spit, make the sign of the cross and squat down to pee and play with my dick afterwards.

You?

Quote:

Yet you appear to refuse to accept that a Christian who murders someone and proclaims they have done so for Christ, isn't a Christian?

If you disobey the teachings of Christ, by making up your own rules and regulations, Christ has rejected you Matthew 7:21-23.

muslims who rape torture and kill non-believers and apostate corrupt muslims, are obeying the teachings of muhammad.

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 3:30pm:

his one sounds like convert or die, does this contradict your peaceful verses? Quote: And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. https://quran.com/9/5

In isolation, of course it does. Until you realise the context. Which polytheists is it referring to?...


Quote:

[This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.

and...


Quote:

Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you

'Kill the polytheists wherever you find them' - provided they are a) those with whom you made a treaty with and b) have been unfaithful to (violated) the treaty they made with you


Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 3:30pm:

Does Allah say you cannot pick and choose which verses you believe in, is it a package deal if you want all those houris and an everlasting erection to service them?

Good point Baron. Perhaps in light of this you should be asking yourself why you (and most others here) believe that the jihadis and the terrorists are the most faithful to Islamic doctrine - despite their *BLATANT* disobeying of verses like 2:256 and 18:29.

At least I actually try to tackle head on the alleged "kill the infidel" verses and mount a case for why I don't think it is incompatible with my version of Islam.

Whereas the jihadis and FD and moses alike just pretend that 2:256 and 18:29 etc don't exist, and run away from them whenever they are raised.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 2:39pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? You've lost me FD. Jihadis kill people by ignoring or rationalising the verses I just mentioned. What exactly is it about that point that you take issue with?

They kill them by chopping their heads off Gandalf.

Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

moses wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 6:14pm:

Quote: Yet you appear to refuse to accept that a Christian who murders someone and proclaims they have done so for Christ, isn't a Christian? If you disobey the teachings of Christ, by making up your own rules and regulations, Christ has rejected you Matthew 7:21-23. muslims who rape torture and kill non-believers and apostate corrupt muslims, are obeying the teachings of muhammad.

So are you saying if you disobey the words of Christ and shriek ban them kill them cesterete them, Christ has rejected you?

That's a bit harsh, Moses. After all, if thou knocketh, the door will be answered unto Ye.

Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly in.

Matthew 15:9   Mark 7:7  Matthew 7:21 - 23

Quote:

Yet you appear to refuse to accept that a Christian who murders someone and proclaims they have done so for Christ, isn't a Christian?

If you disobey the teachings of Christ, by making up your own rules and regulations, Christianty will not rejected you.  Churches will accept you, even make you into a saint, Moses.

Christians who rape torture and kill non-believers and apostate corrupt Christians are obeying the teachings of Christianity.   ::)

Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly throughout Christianity's troubled history, Moses.  Amazing your disregard what Christians have done for ~2019+ years.   ::)

Aw gee tell us again how Christian teachings that women must not teach in a Church, should be modest, that husbands and wives must love each other, are just as evil as the teachings in islam which condone rape, bashing women and detaining them in a house until they die.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 4:48pm:

Yet you appear to refuse to accept that a Christian who murders someone and proclaims they have done so for Christ, isn't a Christian?

Gissa for example, Bwian.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 3:41pm:

Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly throughout Christianity's troubled history, Moses.  Amazing your disregard what Christians have done for ~2019+ years.   ::)

Christianity didn't start ~ 2019+ years ago, Doktor Thickness.

Is there nothing in this world that you are not hideously wrong and stupid about?  Nothing?


Nothing.   :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

moses wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 3:54pm:

Aw gee tell us again how Christian teachings that women must not teach in a Church, should be modest, that husbands and wives must love each other, are just as evil as the teachings in islam which condone rape, bashing women and detaining them in a house until they die.

Do you deny that Christianity has been instrumental in it's suppression of women in western society, Moses?  really?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tripped up by reality, yet again...   ::)

Frank wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 4:22pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 3:41pm: Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly throughout Christianity's troubled history, Moses.  Amazing your disregard what Christians have done for ~2019+ years.   ::) Christianity didn't start ~ 2019+ years ago, Doktor Thickness. Is there nothing in this world that you are not hideously wrong and stupid about?  Nothing? Nothing.   :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

Thank you for confirming how long Christianity has been suppressing women, Soren.  You do understand what the "tilde" means in mathematics, don't you?  It means "approximately".  Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 4:32pm:

Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::)

It's your alter-egos, Turd the Obnoxious and Auggie the Simple Muslim.

Frank wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 6:00pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:32pm: Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::) It's your alter-egos, Turd the Obnoxious and Auggie the Simple Muslim.

So, why are they calling you, Soren?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 6:45pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 6:00pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:32pm: Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::) It's your alter-egos, Turd the Obnoxious and Auggie the Simple Muslim. So, why are they calling you, Soren?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Gawd, you are a stunted 6 year old, aren't you, Bwian.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 4:32pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:22pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 3:41pm: Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly throughout Christianity's troubled history, Moses.  Amazing your disregard what Christians have done for ~2019+ years.   ::) Christianity didn't start ~ 2019+ years ago, Doktor Thickness. Is there nothing in this world that you are not hideously wrong and stupid about?  Nothing? Nothing.   :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( Thank you for confirming how long Christianity has been suppressing women, Soren.  You do understand what the "tilde" means in mathematics, don't you?  It means "approximately".  Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::)

Alt jungend, alt jungend! Vo bist du, alt jungend?

Frank wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 8:18pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 6:45pm: Frank wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 6:00pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:32pm: Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::) It's your alter-egos, Turd the Obnoxious and Auggie the Simple Muslim. So, why are they calling you, Soren?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) Gawd, you are a stunted 6 year old, aren't you, Bwian.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  There I was think we were starting to make some progress in treating your Islamophobia, Soren and you've just had a massive relapse, with complications from Tourette's Syndrome as well.   Tsk, tsk.    ::) ::)

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 8:52pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:32pm: Frank wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 4:22pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3rd, 2019 at 3:41pm: Well the answer you're looking for is marked out fairly clearly throughout Christianity's troubled history, Moses.  Amazing your disregard what Christians have done for ~2019+ years.   ::) Christianity didn't start ~ 2019+ years ago, Doktor Thickness. Is there nothing in this world that you are not hideously wrong and stupid about?  Nothing? Nothing.   :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( Thank you for confirming how long Christianity has been suppressing women, Soren.  You do understand what the "tilde" means in mathematics, don't you?  It means "approximately".  Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK?  ::) Alt jungend, alt jungend! Vo bist du, alt jungend?

Her! her, doktor. Jeg har roen klar! I denne sprøjte!   :)

Quote:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 2:39pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? You've lost me FD. Jihadis kill people by ignoring or rationalising the verses I just mentioned. What exactly is it about that point that you take issue with? They kill them by chopping their heads off Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

I don't ignore them FD, thats my point. I've been vigorously not ignoring them, and dealing with them head on for years. Its just that you incorrectly interpret "not agreeing with my interpretation" as "ignoring".

Whats your excuse for the jihadis and how they get to chop non-believers heads off - in spite of the crystal clear commands of 2:256 and 18:29 and others? Are you still mounting a heroic case for how they are not ignoring key parts of the Quran?

It comes down to this: If parts of the Koran can be ignored, then it is not the word of God . . . or unidentified scoundrels inserted sections of their own into the word of God. The same might be said of the Bible.

Pretty dull stuff, but what might be interesting is how anyone would convince themselves that any of it is the word of God.

I can see how some people might consider elements of doctrine desirable, but the adamant belief in the supernatural is the domain of religious fanatics, and while they may not be dangerous today, their psychology is unpredictable.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2019 at 1:32pm:

Quote: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 2:39pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? You've lost me FD. Jihadis kill people by ignoring or rationalising the verses I just mentioned. What exactly is it about that point that you take issue with? They kill them by chopping their heads off Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? I don't ignore them FD, thats my point. I've been vigorously not ignoring them, and dealing with them head on for years.

:D ;D :D ;D


Kvetching here to/about FD is not 'dealing with them head on', is it?  Having a circle wank with Karnal year in year out is not exactly dealing with jihadists head on, is it - unless you mean 'head on' in Karnal's slobering sense of 'head' on.
Maybe we need to call an imam on that one. A scholar who speaks classical Arabic?

The bible is the words of men driven by the spirit of their inner self.

Exactly the same as the qur'an.

The  O.T is the product of 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses. The N.T. is the product of a varied group of men and women also.

The qur'an is the product of one single man who was a thief, liar, paedophile, rapist, torturer and mass  murderer. The qur'an reflects the inner self of this sick, depraved pervert, it's as simple as that.

The board liar wrote: Reply 34

Quote:

Do you deny that Christianity has been instrumental in it's suppression of women in western society, Moses?  really?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tripped up by reality, yet again...

I have consistently said the verses that women should be silent in church, that men and women should love each other unconditionally, that women should be modest in dress are in the N.T.. I have consistently said that Christianity has relegated many of these teachings to the scrap heap today 2019.

You have consistently told us these Christian teachings are no worse that the islamic teachings of: men may rape women, men may bash women, men may detain a woman in a house until she dies.

You're one sick puppy forked tongue.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2019 at 1:32pm:

Quote: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 2:39pm: freediver wrote on Feb 1st, 2019 at 12:13pm: The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? You've lost me FD. Jihadis kill people by ignoring or rationalising the verses I just mentioned. What exactly is it about that point that you take issue with? They kill them by chopping their heads off Gandalf. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it? I don't ignore them FD, thats my point. I've been vigorously not ignoring them, and dealing with them head on for years. Its just that you incorrectly interpret "not agreeing with my interpretation" as "ignoring". Whats your excuse for the jihadis and how they get to chop non-believers heads off - in spite of the crystal clear commands of 2:256 and 18:29 and others? Are you still mounting a heroic case for how they are not ignoring key parts of the Quran?

And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work?

If a Jihadi suggested to you that you should ignore 2:256, would you describe him as a hypocrite?

freediver wrote on Feb 4^th, 2019 at 9:13pm:

And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work?

I pointed out to you that you took half a sentence and completely distorted my meaning. Now in classic FD style, rather than go back to the original statement and understand what I actually said, we once again go through this "me no speaka da English - and thats the slippery muslim's fault" routine.

My statement (in its entirety) was a response to the hand-over-your-ears "never ever" screaming crowd who absolutely refuse to even contemplate any muslim arguments that the Quran isn't actually the uncompromising, hateful call to wholesale slaughter of anyone who even resembles a non-believer they portray it as. There's no point in banging my head against a wall to try to convince them otherwise, so I may as well play them at their own game - and point out their double standards with regards to Christians and jews. Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith (interestingly, something the Quran never touches). Christians and jews clearly ignore, bypass or rationalise these inconvenient passages into something thats more compatible with modern society - yet neither Judaism or Christianity is condemned as 'unreformable' nearly as much as Islam. Hence I made the simple point - if you believe jews and christians can be cherry pickers, why not muslims?

Gandalf wrote:

Quote:

Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith

Are these in the Old Testament and specifically refer to one certain group of people e.g.:

(Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18).   The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.  The book of Joshua tells the story of slaughtering all the Canaanite clans throughout Canaan.

It is a time, geography and people specific, past tense story. (about 3,400 years old)

It does not tell the Hebrews to kill every single non Hebrew in the world for ever and a day in the future .

Now get to the qur'an it is written in the present and future tense, the satanic commands of depravity in the qur'an are meant for the then and now, the present and the future.

-----aaannnnnd  you really don't know why the muzzies are still doing all the raping torturing and killing?


Late addendum

A few samples (there are zillions more) from the qur'an which are written in the present and future tense.

qur'an 2.216: Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

*Is* prescribed for you it doesn't say *was* prescribed, it's present and future tense.

qur'an 3.151: We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners, for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong-doers.

*Shall* cast terror, it doesn't say *did*, it's present and future tense.

qur'an 61.4: Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.

allah loves those who *Fight* it doesn't say who *fought*, once again present and future tense.


qur'an 5.33: Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet *be cut off* from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

*Be killed* it doesn't say were *killed*, once again present and future tense

qur'an 4.74: Let those that fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the cause of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.

*Fight and sell your life*, present and future tense commands to the suicide terrorists, it didn't say *fought and sold* their lives.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 3:10pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 4th, 2019 at 9:13pm: And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work? I pointed out to you that you took half a sentence and completely distorted my meaning. Now in classic FD style, rather than go back to the original statement and understand what I actually said, we once again go through this "me no speaka da English - and thats the slippery muslim's fault" routine. My statement (in its entirety) was a response to the hand-over-your-ears "never ever" screaming crowd who absolutely refuse to even contemplate any muslim arguments that the Quran isn't actually the uncompromising, hateful call to wholesale slaughter of anyone who even resembles a non-believer they portray it as. There's no point in banging my head against a wall to try to convince them otherwise, so I may as well play them at their own game - and point out their double standards with regards to Christians and jews. Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith (interestingly, something the Quran never touches). Christians and jews clearly ignore, bypass or rationalise these inconvenient passages into something thats more compatible with modern society - yet neither Judaism or Christianity is condemned as 'unreformable' nearly as much as Islam. Hence I made the simple point - if you believe jews and christians can be cherry pickers, why not muslims?

So you were never claiming that you yourself believe Muslims should be cherry pickers, you were only suggesting that non-Muslims should believe this about them?

freediver wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 7:19pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 5th, 2019 at 3:10pm: freediver wrote on Feb 4th, 2019 at 9:13pm: And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work? I pointed out to you that you took half a sentence and completely distorted my meaning. Now in classic FD style, rather than go back to the original statement and understand what I actually said, we once again go through this "me no speaka da English - and thats the slippery muslim's fault" routine. My statement (in its entirety) was a response to the hand-over-your-ears "never ever" screaming crowd who absolutely refuse to even contemplate any muslim arguments that the Quran isn't actually the uncompromising, hateful call to wholesale slaughter of anyone who even resembles a non-believer they portray it as. There's no point in banging my head against a wall to try to convince them otherwise, so I may as well play them at their own game - and point out their double standards with regards to Christians and jews. Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith (interestingly, something the Quran never touches). Christians and jews clearly ignore, bypass or rationalise these inconvenient passages into something thats more compatible with modern society - yet neither Judaism or Christianity is condemned as 'unreformable' nearly as much as Islam. Hence I made the simple point - if you believe jews and christians can be cherry pickers, why not muslims? So you were never claiming that you yourself believe Muslims should be cherry pickers, you were only suggesting that non-Muslims should believe this about them?

If they refuse to consider arguments in favour of a non-slaughtering Islamic doctrine - yes.

moses wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 3:28pm:

Gandalf wrote: Quote: Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith Are these in the Old Testament and specifically refer to one certain group of people e.g.: (Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18).   The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.  The book of Joshua tells the story of slaughtering all the Canaanite clans throughout Canaan. It is a time, geography and people specific, past tense story. (about 3,400 years old) It does not tell the Hebrews to kill every single non Hebrew in the world for ever and a day in the future .

Firstly, I think its still pertinent to point out the texts of a religion that purports to be about love and peace- sanctifying the butchering of women and babies - at genocidal levels - even when it is dealing with a specific time and place in the past. There's this thing called universal values. I don't know about you Moses, but I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable worshiping a deity who once upon a time said to a group of people "killing women and babies is totally awesome - and you must do it to prove your faith" - especially when you hold that same deity to be the very embodiment of peace and love.

There is a second and separate point you raise about present and future tense - and therefore relevance. The big trump card used by Bible apologists when comparing the Quran, has always been this question of present and future tense - that contrary to the Bible, chapter 9 and others in the Quran allegedly give carte blanche to slaughtering infidels in both the present and future - with no expiry date.

Such apologists of course ignore clear verses in the Bible commanding the very same:

exhibit A - kill the disbelievers amongst you:

Quote:

Deuteronomy 13: 6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

exhibit B - go forth and slaughter infidels and raze their towns:


Quote:

12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.

Note there is no past tense here, its actually future tense. Nor is there any specifying that this is strictly only for one particular group in a particular time and place. And it certainly doesn't say anywhere that this rule only applies for a limited time. Undoubtedly you will claim that it is implied, but fact remains it is not specified. And no, the "nah just kidding" new covenant verse you always allude to is not sufficient. At the very best the NT is highly open to interpretation on this matter.

gandi quoted The book of Deuteronomy as his proof that ancient texts are applicable today, well here we go again just for you gandi.

first off what is Deuteronomy?

Deuteronomy Summary

Moses wrote this book

The genre of the book of Deuteronomy is not much different from that of Exodus. It is Narrative History and Law

The very first verse in Deuteronomy is, 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.

Narrative History and Law gandi.

History is about the past.

3500 years ago these laws preached by Moses would have not raised an eyebrow, civilization was barbaric to say the least back then.

Now this law was officially made defunct 2019 years ago by Christ: once again for the umpteenth time,

Luke 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth into it.

The law had a distinct time frame on it.

2019 years ago man was justified by faith not the law:

Once again for the zillionth time

Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Romans 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Galatians  2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 3:11  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

The law you refer to had a clear-cut time frame, was made inoperative 2019 years ago, it is no longer applicable.

That's the reason you don't have Christians running around killing people willy-nilly today 2019, like the muzzies do.

The qur'an is in the present / future tense, so we have muslims committing the most heinous of crimes against their fellow man right now. because the qur'an tells them to do it.

moses wrote on Feb 4^th, 2019 at 8:17pm:

The board liar wrote: Reply 34 Quote: Do you deny that Christianity has been instrumental in it's suppression of women in western society, Moses?  really?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk, tripped up by reality, yet again... I have consistently said the verses that women should be silent in church, that men and women should love each other unconditionally, that women should be modest in dress are in the N.T.. I have consistently said that Christianity has relegated many of these teachings to the scrap heap today 2019.

They are, though, in the New Testament, now aren't they, Moses?  You know, the bit you have told us which is instrumental in instruction Christians what Christianity is all about.   Paul's testimony is an integral part of Christianity's core teaching.   Funny that, hey?  Misogyny is a core part of Christianity, now isn't it?   ::)


Quote:

You have consistently told us these Christian teachings are no worse that the islamic teachings of: men may rape women, men may bash women, men may detain a woman in a house until she dies. You're one sick puppy forked tongue.

I have told you no such thing, Moses.  You have construed that from my placing them before you and the other members here.   You have decided that anything I say about Christianity is false, it is all "lies".  In reality, you're the one who is lying, you're denying your own religion's core tenants, now aren't you, Moses?  Tsk, tsk, don't you worry, I'm sure you won't be ejected from your church of one, singular, yourself and no other person, right?   Afterall, all other believers believe things you refute continually, now, don't they?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   ::)

moses wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 2:58pm:

gandi quoted The book of Deuteronomy as his proof that ancient texts are applicable today, well here we go again just for you gandi. first off what is Deuteronomy? Deuteronomy Summary Moses wrote this book The genre of the book of Deuteronomy is not much different from that of Exodus. It is Narrative History and Law The very first verse in Deuteronomy is, 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab. Narrative History and Law gandi. History is about the past. 3500 years ago these laws preached by Moses would have not raised an eyebrow, civilization was barbaric to say the least back then. Now this law was officially made defunct 2019 years ago by Christ: once again for the umpteenth time, Luke 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth into it. The law had a distinct time frame on it. 2019 years ago man was justified by faith not the law: Once again for the zillionth time Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Romans 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Galatians  2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Galatians 3:11  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. The law you refer to had a clear-cut time frame, was made inoperative 2019 years ago, it is no longer applicable. That's the reason you don't have Christians running around killing people willy-nilly today 2019, like the muzzies do. The qur'an is in the present / future tense, so we have muslims committing the most heinous of crimes against their fellow man right now. because the qur'an tells them to do it.

History is about the past, yes, Moses but "law" is about the present and the future, now isn't it?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me, tripped up by language, yet again, hey?   ::) ::)

Holy Quran has covered all of your life aspects. You can find anything here related to your life.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 9:25am:

freediver wrote on Feb 5th, 2019 at 7:19pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 5th, 2019 at 3:10pm: freediver wrote on Feb 4th, 2019 at 9:13pm: And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work? I pointed out to you that you took half a sentence and completely distorted my meaning. Now in classic FD style, rather than go back to the original statement and understand what I actually said, we once again go through this "me no speaka da English - and thats the slippery muslim's fault" routine. My statement (in its entirety) was a response to the hand-over-your-ears "never ever" screaming crowd who absolutely refuse to even contemplate any muslim arguments that the Quran isn't actually the uncompromising, hateful call to wholesale slaughter of anyone who even resembles a non-believer they portray it as. There's no point in banging my head against a wall to try to convince them otherwise, so I may as well play them at their own game - and point out their double standards with regards to Christians and jews. Both these groups have a holy book that upholds the hacking of women and babies to death with swords by the 10s of thousands - as glorious acts of faith (interestingly, something the Quran never touches). Christians and jews clearly ignore, bypass or rationalise these inconvenient passages into something thats more compatible with modern society - yet neither Judaism or Christianity is condemned as 'unreformable' nearly as much as Islam. Hence I made the simple point - if you believe jews and christians can be cherry pickers, why not muslims? So you were never claiming that you yourself believe Muslims should be cherry pickers, you were only suggesting that non-Muslims should believe this about them? If they refuse to consider arguments in favour of a non-slaughtering Islamic doctrine - yes.

So you were making an argument that you personally believe to be crap, but that you thought the infidel might be convinced by, because the infidel would not accept something else you said?

Do you do this often?

hairstyles wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 5:37pm:

Holy Quran has covered all of your life aspects. You can find anything here related to your life.

Thanks, Hair. Is there anything in the Holy Quran about squatting down to pee and playing with your dick afterwards? I've asked a couple of Muselman about that. They claimed they'd never heard about this.

You?

Karnal wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 9:23pm:

hairstyles wrote on Feb 6th, 2019 at 5:37pm: Quran has covered all of your life aspects.Holy You can find anything here related to your life. Thanks, Hair. Is there anything in the Holy Quran about squatting down to pee and playing with your dick afterwards? I've asked a couple of Muselman about that. They claimed they'd never heard about this. You?

Let the boy dig, Paki.  The Holy Koran has answers. let the boy speak.

Always challenging, always knowing better - very Paki of you but let thee boy speak, for a change. He's not gandalf that you always have to jump in and speak for him because you know better - you may be gandalf's wife but you aren't this boy's.

Frank wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 10:06pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 6th, 2019 at 9:23pm: hairstyles wrote on Feb 6th, 2019 at 5:37pm: Quran has covered all of your life aspects.Holy You can find anything here related to your life. Thanks, Hair. Is there anything in the Holy Quran about squatting down to pee and playing with your dick afterwards? I've asked a couple of Muselman about that. They claimed they'd never heard about this. You? Let the boy dig, Paki.  The Holy Koran has answers. let the boy speak. Always challenging, always knowing better - very Paki of you but let thee boy speak, for a change. He's not gandalf that you always have to jump in and speak for him because you know better - you may be gandalf's wife but you aren't this boy's.

Well, I'm curious, I can't help that, old boy. I'm sure Hair will come back with an answer.

Unless he's changed back into Xeej, it's hard to say.

moses wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 2:58pm:

gandi quoted The book of Deuteronomy as his proof that ancient texts are applicable today, well here we go again just for you gandi. first off what is Deuteronomy? Deuteronomy Summary Moses wrote this book The genre of the book of Deuteronomy is not much different from that of Exodus. It is Narrative History and Law The very first verse in Deuteronomy is, 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab. Narrative History and Law gandi. History is about the past. 3500 years ago these laws preached by Moses would have not raised an eyebrow, civilization was barbaric to say the least back then. Now this law was officially made defunct 2019 years ago by Christ: once again for the umpteenth time, Luke 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth into it. The law had a distinct time frame on it. 2019 years ago man was justified by faith not the law: Once again for the zillionth time Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Romans 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Galatians  2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Galatians 3:11  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. The law you refer to had a clear-cut time frame, was made inoperative 2019 years ago, it is no longer applicable. That's the reason you don't have Christians running around killing people willy-nilly today 2019, like the muzzies do. The qur'an is in the present / future tense, so we have muslims committing the most heinous of crimes against their fellow man right now. because the qur'an tells them to do it.

So moses, by your logic the 10 commandants are irrelevant and not applicable today right?

Or is there a formula that enables us to pick and choose what laws of the OT we can keep and which ones we must abandon?

That said I do support and commend Christians for attempting to cherry pick out the trully awful bits of the OT (and even the NT - vis your thoughts about St Paul's misogyny). But the double standards on display between how the bible is treated compared to how the quran is treated - is trully breathtaking.

Gandalf, principles like forgiveness and turning the other cheek inevitably force Christians to reject a lot of OT principles.

The same is not true of Islam, as the Quran was written entirely by Muhammad, and it is misleading of you to draw some kind of parallel. The closest thing would be Christians rejecting what Jesus said.

Gandi wrote:


Quote:

So moses, by your logic the 10 commandants are irrelevant and not applicable today right? Or is there a formula that enables us to pick and choose what laws of the OT we can keep and which ones we must abandon? That said I do support and commend Christians for attempting to cherry pick out the trully awful bits of the OT (and even the NT - vis your thoughts about St Paul's misogyny). But the double standards on display between how the bible is treated compared to how the quran is treated - is trully breathtaking.

You genuinely don't know the difference between commandments and laws?

1/. One is called the Commandments of God === the other the law of Moses.

2/. Mosaic law is written on a book === the Commandments written on stone.

3/. Commandments are placed inside the ark of the covenant === the law outside the ark of the covenant.

4. Mosaic law ended on the cross with the death of Christ === the Commandments will last forever.

You get the drift gandi?

Two separate entities.

One of them the law of Moses is long gone dead in the water.

The other the commandments are eternal.

moses wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:14pm:

Gandi wrote: Quote: So moses, by your logic the 10 commandants are irrelevant and not applicable today right? Or is there a formula that enables us to pick and choose what laws of the OT we can keep and which ones we must abandon? That said I do support and commend Christians for attempting to cherry pick out the trully awful bits of the OT (and even the NT - vis your thoughts about St Paul's misogyny). But the double standards on display between how the bible is treated compared to how the quran is treated - is trully breathtaking. You genuinely don't know the difference between commandments and laws? 1/. One is called the Commandments of God === the other the law of Moses. 2/. Mosaic law is written on a book === the Commandments written on stone. 3/. Commandments are placed inside the ark of the covenant === the law outside the ark of the covenant. 4. Mosaic law ended on the cross with the death of Christ === the Commandments will last forever. You get the drift gandi? Two separate entities. One of them the law of Moses is long gone dead in the water. The other the commandments are eternal.

Did God Himself make any such distinction? Its a genuine question, I don't know.

So did God say to Moses one day "put these *commandments* separate to all those other *laws* so you'll remember which ones to keep for all times, and which ones to stop following after a while?

freediver wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:41pm:

Gandalf, principles like forgiveness and turning the other cheek inevitably force Christians to reject a lot of OT principles. The same is not true of Islam, as the Quran was written entirely by Muhammad, and it is misleading of you to draw some kind of parallel. The closest thing would be Christians rejecting what Jesus said.

FD, you may not have noticed, but the principle of abrogation in the Quran is one of the key weapons used by Islam critics. Chapter 9 'abrogates' all the peace and tolerance verses - remember? Of course there is a parallel.

As for 'turn the other cheek' - I present to you 41:34

And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

Moses brought the tablets of stone down from Mt. Sinai after God inscribed his 10 commandments on them, they are considered divine commandments.

Moses wrote the law, it is called Mosaic Law.

Commandments are attributed directly to God.

Mosaic law ascribed directly to Moses.

They are entirely two different entities gandi.   

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:32pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 7th, 2019 at 12:41pm: Gandalf, principles like forgiveness and turning the other cheek inevitably force Christians to reject a lot of OT principles. The same is not true of Islam, as the Quran was written entirely by Muhammad, and it is misleading of you to draw some kind of parallel. The closest thing would be Christians rejecting what Jesus said. FD, you may not have noticed, but the principle of abrogation in the Quran is one of the key weapons used by Islam critics. Chapter 9 'abrogates' all the peace and tolerance verses - remember? Of course there is a parallel. As for 'turn the other cheek' - I present to you 41:34 And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

Muhammad contradicting himself and becoming more violent as he gained power is not the same thing as Jesus preaching new concepts, that were presented as new concepts, which force the rejection of some of the OT concepts.

Are you going to explain your logic for advocating ignoring bits of the Quran, or just try to change the subject? Would you accuse a Muslim of being a hypocrite if he did what you suggest non-Muslims do?

Am I correct that you openly promoted an argument to a non-Muslim that you personally believe to be crap?

freediver wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 7:30pm:

Muhammad contradicting himself and becoming more violent as he gained power is not the same thing as Jesus preaching new concepts, that were presented as new concepts, which force the rejection of some of the OT concepts.

Or to put it another way, Muhammad contradicting himself is totally different to the second half of the bible contradicting the first half - right?

Would you at least like to have a go at explaining why Muhammad "contradicting himself" as you put it, would not force muslims to reject some of the Quranic concepts in the same way as some OT concepts are rejected by christians?


freediver wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 7:30pm:

Are you going to explain your logic for advocating ignoring bits of the Quran,

No because I don't advocate it. Seems you have great difficulty understanding this simple point.

What I do advocate is for Islam critics who do insist that the Quran is inherently contradictory, to apply some consistency in relation to the way they downplay, rationalise and outright apologise for the glorification of slaughtering innocents in the Christian holy book.


freediver wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 7:30pm:

Am I correct that you openly promoted an argument to a non-Muslim that you personally believe to be crap?

No I did not promote it. I called on non-muslims to apply some consistency to the arguments they already make. If its acceptable in their view to apply the "yeah nah just kidding" principle to the Bible, why not the Quran?

moses wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:51pm:

Moses brought the tablets of stone down from Mt. Sinai after God inscribed his 10 commandments on them, they are considered divine commandments. Moses wrote the law, it is called Mosaic Law. Commandments are attributed directly to God. Mosaic law ascribed directly to Moses. They are entirely two different entities gandi.

Actually Moses, it turns out that its all Mosaic Law. Thus it comes down to which parts of Mosaic Law Christians think should still apply, and which don't:


Quote:

Most Christians believe that only parts dealing with the moral law (as opposed to ceremonial law) are still applicable, others believe that none apply, dual-covenant theologians believe that the Old Covenant remains valid only for Jews, and a minority have the view that all parts still apply to believers in Jesus and in the New Covenant.

Thus we get whats known as supersessionism, that the new covenant of the NT replaces the covenant of Mosaic Law - which is the mainstream view of Christians today. I believe its this concept that gives rise to the myth about abrogation in the Quran, where like the misunderstanding about the role of Muhammad in Islam led to the concept of 'Muhammadism' - western critics are once again projecting an erroneous "biblical" interpretation of Islam.

The point is, we get this idea that the 'kill the infidel' and other awful parts of the OT can conveniently be ignored as superseded by nicer parts of the bible. And thats quite acceptable apparently, despite it being based on, at best, ambiguous evidence. But the point remains, that the vast majority of Christians don't believe that their faith commands them to kill non-believers and march into infidel towns and raise them. This is true despite me pointing to Deuteronomy and the very clear commands to do just that. Similarly, the vast majority of muslims don't accept that their faith commands them to slaughter all non-muslims, and this remains true regardless of how many times you point to chapter 9 etc and insist that its true.

Quote:

Or to put it another way, Muhammad contradicting himself is totally different to the second half of the bible contradicting the first half - right?

Here's a revelation for you Gandalf: Christianity and Judaism are different religions. I don't see two different versions of Islam, one that follows Muhammad before he was so corrupted by power, and one for after. As much as you try to invent a different version of Islam for the eyes of the infidel.

freediver wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 12:53pm:

Here's a revelation for you Gandalf: Christianity and Judaism are different religions.

Heres a revelation for you FD, the old testament is still part of the Christian Bible.

freediver wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 12:53pm:

Here's a revelation for you Gandalf: Christianity and Judaism are different religions.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 2:52pm:

Heres a revelation for you FD,        the old testament is still part of the Christian Bible.

gandalf,

This is what the Old Testament part of the Christian Bible teaches.


Exodus 12:49
One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.


Exodus 22:21
Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him...


Exodus 23:9
Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger...


Leviticus 19:33
And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.
34  But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself...


Deuteronomy 1:16
And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.


Deuteronomy 10:17-19
For the LORD your God... loveth the stranger, ...Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.


Jeremiah 22:3
Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.



.



And gandalf, this is what the Koran teaches, again, and again, and again.....


"Fighting [against disbelievers] is prescribed for you, and [if] ye dislike it.....Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
Koran 2.216


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29


"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4





p.s.

The punishments described in the Old Testament laws, were to be applied    not    to 'disbelievers',
but to,
1/ covenant breakers,
and,
2/ to common criminals.


There is no sanction from the God of Israel [in O.T. laws], to harm any 'disbeliever'.



Deuteronomy 10:17-19
For the LORD your God... loveth the stranger, ...Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

gandalf  wrote:Reply #69 - Today at 10:05am


Quote:

Actually Moses, it turns out that its all Mosaic Law. Thus it comes down to which parts of Mosaic Law Christians think should still apply, and which don't:

Are you making your own rules now gandi?

The  Hebrews apparently thought different to you gandi

1/. One is called the Commandments of God=== the other the law of Moses.

2/. Mosaic law is written on a book === the Commandments written on stone.

3/. Commandments are placed inside the ark of the covenant === the law outside the ark of the covenant.

4. Mosaic law ended on the cross with the death of Christ === the Commandments will last forever.


Quote:

Thus we get whats known as supersessionism, that the new covenant of the NT replaces the covenant of Mosaic Law - which is the mainstream view of Christians today. I believe its this concept that gives rise to the myth about abrogation in the Quran, where like the misunderstanding about the role of Muhammad in Islam led to the concept of 'Muhammadism' - western critics are once again projecting an erroneous "biblical" interpretation of Islam. The point is, we get this idea that the 'kill the infidel' and other awful parts of the OT can conveniently be ignored as superseded by nicer parts of the bible. And thats quite acceptable apparently, despite it being based on, at best, ambiguous evidence. But the point remains, that the vast majority of Christians don't believe that their faith commands them to kill non-believers and march into infidel towns and raise them. This is true despite me pointing to Deuteronomy and the very clear commands to do just that[. Similarly, the vast majority of muslims don't accept that their faith commands them to slaughter all non-muslims, and this remains true regardless of how many times you point to chapter 9 etc and insist that its true.

 

The Messiah of the N.T. was foretold in the O.T., He distinctly said that the law was until the time of John it was obsolete.

You say ambiguous evidence, well the N.T is the only evidence we have and it absolutely stated that the law was finished and man was saved by faith in Christ. (there is no other authority on this earth which supersedes the teachings of the N.T. for Christians)

Gandi you're looking for any excuse no matter how false to hide from the fact that muslims kill people today 2019 because the qur'an tells them to do so.

The writings of the qur'an have no time frame on them, it's the perfect word of allah for you, it was written by people who had no idea how the world was going to pan out, they couldn't see beyond the 7th century and the total domination of muslims / islam over all other people.

The end result is that muslims are brainwashed from birth with this muslim supremacist crap written in the present tense, the highest grade ones, fully believe their destiny is to rape torture and murder their way across the land, in the pursuit of establishing islam as the only religion allowed.

Then we have others like you, who can see that this is  not acceptable in the 21dst century so there is conflict between the number one muslims (the rapists torturers and killers), and the *moderates*  who know that the commands to slaughter etc. are not acceptable today.

So what do you the *moderates* do?

Well you kill allahs' loved ones, they retaliate and kill you.

You are a weak dishonest person, who denys that the verses of evil in the qur'an mean what they say, you keep making excuses gandi.

To question and expose all the evil in the qur'an will destroy islam, so you instead prefer the survival of islam and the never ending bloodshed.

That's it in a nutshell gandi, it's got sweet fanny adams to do with Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, paganism you name it.

The problem is totally a muslim one and the unequivocal present tense evil in the qur'an gandi.

Yadda wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

p.s. The punishments described in the Old Testament laws, were to be applied    not    to 'disbelievers', but to, 1/ covenant breakers, and, 2/ to common criminals.

And, every follower of ISLAM, is, a common criminal, and is a covenant breaker.


How so ?

Because, he is a follower of ISLAM, and......

1/ Because the laws of ISLAM sanctifies [and makes 'lawful'] a moslem lying to those who are not moslems [breaking a covenant of peace with a 'disbeliever'].

2/ And the laws of ISLAM sanctifies [and makes 'lawful'] a moslem murdering non-moslems who reject ISLAM.



.




A UK moslem community leader, speaking in the wake of the London 7/7 bombing.


Quote:

Inside the sect that loves terror August 07, 2005 ......In public interviews         Bakri condemned the killing of all innocent civilians. Later when he addressed his own followers he explained that he had in fact been referring only to Muslims as only they were innocent: “Yes I condemn killing any innocent people, but not any kuffar.”

these are old links, but the article is kosher.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1724541,00.html
another source, "Undercover in the academy of hatred"...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1458729/posts




.




Spokesmen for ISLAM will tell anyone who will listen;

THAT IT IS WRONG, AND THAT IT IS TOTALLY AGAINST ISLAMIC LAW,      TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE.



Here is a moslem in the UK explaining, who the innocent people are.

---------- >



Please watch this YT...
A UK moslem community leader, speaking in the wake of the London 7/7 bombing;


Quote:

YT KILLING OF NON-MUSLIMS IS LEGITIMATE "...when we say innocent people, we mean moslems." "....[not accepting ISLAM] is a crime against God." "...If you are a non-moslem, then you are guilty of not believing in God." "...as a moslem....i must have hatred towards everything which is non-ISLAM." "...[moslems] allegiance is always with the moslems, so i will never condemn a moslem for what he does." "...Britain has always been Dar al Harb [the Land of War]" "...no, i could never condemn a moslem brother, i would never condemn a moslem brother. I will always stand with my moslem brother....whether he is an oppresser or the oppressed."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4

Hi Yadda,
your posts are still too long to read.

Please make them short and punchy.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 3:47pm:

Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy.

Moslem == a follower of Islam.

Karnal wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 7:11pm:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 3:47pm: Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy. Moslem == a follower of Islam.

Please make them short and punchy


Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat.

Geddit?

You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 2:52pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 12:53pm: Here's a revelation for you Gandalf: Christianity and Judaism are different religions. Heres a revelation for you FD, the old testament is still part of the Christian Bible.

People only seem to have trouble getting their head around it if they want to. You are equating the difference between Christianity and Judaism with the difference between Muhammad and Muhammad, before and after he got into a position to start head hacking.

You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 2:52pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 12:53pm: Here's a revelation for you Gandalf: Christianity and Judaism are different religions. Heres a revelation for you FD, the old testament is still part of the Christian Bible.

Explain the place of the OT is Christianity, Italian muslima. You were a christian well before you were a Musulman, so you shoul d know the weight and significance  of the OT in in Christianity.


Speak, Mohammedan convert.

Frank wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 3:47pm: Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy. Moslem == a follower of Islam. Please make them short and punchy Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat. Geddit? You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke.

He's got you there, G. Moslem == inferior twat.

Superior analysis, innit.

Karnal wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 8:46pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:23pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 3:47pm: Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy. Moslem == a follower of Islam. Please make them short and punchy Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat. Geddit? You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke. He's got you there, G. Moslem == inferior twat. Superior analysis, innit.

Thanks.

Exactly. believe in Islam= twats on stilts. You must be mad to buy into such idiocy.   But they do. Twats.

What's your explanation for grown ups signing up to such twattery?


A puzzle for the ages.   Must be all that hair, I am guessing.

Frank wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 8:50pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 8:46pm: Frank wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:23pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 3:47pm: Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy. Moslem == a follower of Islam. Please make them short and punchy Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat. Geddit? You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke. He's got you there, G. Moslem == inferior twat. Superior analysis, innit. Thanks. Exactly. believe in Islam= twats on stilts. You must m]be mad to buy into such idiocy.   But they do. Twats. What's your explanation for grown ups signing up to such twattery? A puzzle for the ages.

Not at all, dear boy. Grown-ups get all hysterical about such twattery because they're lonely.

You?

Karnal wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 9:28pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 8:50pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 8:46pm: Frank wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:23pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 3:47pm: Hi Yadda, your posts are still too long to read. Please make them short and punchy. Moslem == a follower of Islam. Please make them short and punchy Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat. Geddit? You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke. He's got you there, G. Moslem == inferior twat. Superior analysis, innit. Thanks. Exactly. believe in Islam= twats on stilts. You must m]be mad to buy into such idiocy.   But they do. Twats. What's your explanation for grown ups signing up to such twattery? A puzzle for the ages.  Not at all, dear boy. Grown-ups get all hysterical about such twattery because they're lonely. You?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/6962058-3x2-940x627.jpg

Here's a question for all of you:

If Islam was perfected at Muhammad's death as Surah 5 claims, then doesn't that mean that the territorial extent of the Islamic state at the time of Muhammad's death should be stuck in all time? E.g. further expansion of Islamic borders beyond the extent that Muhammad established during his lifetime is actually unislamic?

So, technically global jihad is actually inconsistent with Islamic principles.

Auggie wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 6:41pm:

Here's a question for all of you: So, technically global jihad is actually inconsistent with Islamic principles.

Global Jihad is consistent with Islamic ideology

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 7:07pm:

Auggie wrote on Feb 12th, 2019 at 6:41pm: Here's a question for all of you: So, technically global jihad is actually inconsistent with Islamic principles. Global Jihad is consistent with Islamic ideology

How so?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313

Does that answer your question, Auggie?

Auggie wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 7:26pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12th, 2019 at 7:07pm: Auggie wrote on Feb 12th, 2019 at 6:41pm: Here's a question for all of you: So, technically global jihad is actually inconsistent with Islamic principles. Global Jihad is consistent with Islamic ideology How so?

You could try reading the Quran, FD has provided a link for chapter 9.

Many other verses as well.


Quote:

Indeed, those who have believed and those who have emigrated and fought in the cause of Allah - those expect the mercy of Allah . And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. https://quran.com/2/218

Quote:

the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa`id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah! https://sunnah.com/muslim/33/175

I know you're thick but try to comprehend what these verses say

freediver wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 7:34pm:

You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with.

Good point FD. I mean I've only pointed out about 5 times in the clearest possible language that I never said that - that I only referred to non-muslims who insist on abrogation and such.

#muslimsShouldNotIgnoreAnyBitsOfTheQuran

Don't reject it just ignore it?

Australia: Muslims say call to disavow violent Qur’an verses is “inappropriate,” will “never, ever, ever” do it
Feb 2, 2019 10:51 am

Australian Muslim leaders have rejected comments from a NSW Supreme Court justice, who said Muslim leaders should publicly denounce “belligerent” verses of the Koran, as “inappropriate”.

Grand Mufti of Australia Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohamed said religious leaders would “never, ever, ever” disavow verses of the holy text while president of the Australian Muslim Women’s Association Silma Ihram said that it was not appropriate for a judge to delve into religious scripture interpretations.

“All Muslim associations that are registered and well-known in Australia have condemned acts of violence and have condemned the use of terrorism,” she said.

“So to hold us to account for the misinterpretation and misuse of our holy book is inappropriate.”

Dr Rateb Jneid, Australian Federation of Islamic Councils president, said a judge shouldn’t be drawing conclusions on a holy text.

Justice Fagan pointed to sermons on the pair’s phones quoting Koran verses which “unmistakably instruct the believers to undertake jihad in pursuit of universal Islamic dominance” as an example of verses that should be denounced.

“As seen in this and numerous other prosecutions, the hostile verses [in the Koran] are inspiring serious crimes,” he said.

It’s not the first time that Muslim community leaders have been called on to do more to stop radicalism in their communities.

Well well well, the worm is turning.

As usual the muzzies all turn a blind eye and lie, saying there is nothing to disavow.

Proof that muslims prefer the violence bloodshed and death spawned by the *holy* text of the qur'an.

How long will we have to endure the putridity of islamic holy jihad against the nonbelievers?

Are muslims really so stupid that they can't see that islam is nothing more than the urgings of muhammad as he sought to instill islam across the land.

The majority of the qur'an deals with hating and oppressing the kufirs.

The highest grade of muslims are the killers, muslims can take sex slaves, muslim paradise is a brothel filled with hour'is with big tits and little boys.

Why are muslims the top listed terrorist organizations in the world?

Why are we even having this argument, if [whine voice]it's got *nuffin to do wiv islam* cos it's been misinterpreted.?[/whine voice]

It will happen as sure as the sun will come up in the east, it's just a matter of time.

The perverse thing is that muzzies and apologists choose islam does not have to answer for its' evil, over stopping the degeneracy caused by islamic texts from the qur'an.

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313

Surah 9 clearly refers to those with whom you have a treaty.

I thought Gandalf had been through this with you ad nauseum??

Auggie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:15pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 12th, 2019 at 8:12pm: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313 Surah 9 clearly refers to those with whom you have a treaty. I thought Gandalf had been through this with you ad nauseum??

LOL!

Good luck with that one Auggie  ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 12:26pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:34pm: You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with. Good point FD. I mean I've only pointed out about 5 times in the clearest possible language that I never said that - that I only referred to non-muslims who insist on abrogation and such. #muslimsShouldNotIgnoreAnyBitsOfTheQuran

He's being evasive again, FD. Better ask him once more.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 12:26pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:34pm: You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with. Good point FD. I mean I've only pointed out about 5 times in the clearest possible language that I never said that - that I only referred to non-muslims who insist on abrogation and such. #muslimsShouldNotIgnoreAnyBitsOfTheQuran

Any muslim who says alcohol is haram insists on Abrogation.


Why do muslims say alcohol is haram when the Quran allows it?


Quote:

And from the fruits of the palm trees and grapevines you take intoxicant and good provision. Indeed in that is a sign for a people who reason. https://quran.com/16/67

Quote:

And of the fruits of date-palms and vines comes forth a fruit from which you draw an intoxicant a wine that intoxicates — it the wine is referred to by the verbal noun sakaran ‘intoxicant’ and this verse came before it was prohibited — and goodly provision such as dates raisins vinegar and molasses. Surely in that which is mentioned there is a sign indicating His power exalted be He for a people who understand a people who reflect. https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=16&tAyahNo=67&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

As we see with alcohol earlier verses are abrogated by later verses. For some reason muslims are deceptive in denying abrogation exists with Quran verses.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 12:26pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:34pm: You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with. Good point FD. I mean I've only pointed out about 5 times in the clearest possible language that I never said that - that I only referred to non-muslims who insist on abrogation and such. #muslimsShouldNotIgnoreAnyBitsOfTheQuran

So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence?


freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2019 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:45pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 9:43am: Frank wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:21am: Auggie wrote on Jan 26th, 2019 at 11:12am: Any religion or idea is capable of reform. Change will only come. Unfortunately such change usually does not come about by peaceful means. The Koran is the masterpiece of guidance and knowledge bestowed upon humanity by the Almighty. It cannot be modified in any way whatsoever. It is the final book. The commandments of the Almighty are entrenched in the Koran which provides for a complete way of life. Asia Bibi, for example, was acquitted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan NOT because they threw out the sharia rules on blasphemy as outdated or irrelevant in a modern society but simply because the prosecution did not prove that the blasphemy occurred. In other words, there is not one iota of moving away from sharia law and its demands in relation to punishing blasphemy by death. Sharia rules are completely unchanged in 11400 years because the Koran's guidance is unmodifiable. For Muslims, its forever Groundhog Day of 8 June 632 AD. The Bible sanctifies the butchering of women and children as noble acts of faith. Oh yes it does. For centuries such butchering was sanctioned by the church as noble acts of faith. And yet, you would be the first to argue that Christianity has got over that and 'reformed'. There is nothing in Islamic doctrine that should act as an impenetrable 'never ever' road block to muslims behaving both civily and keeping in faith with their religion. Even if you insist there are specific doctrinal passages that make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith (ridiculous, but I'll humour you), there's no reason why it can't be bypassed, ignored or rationalised into something more compatible with civil society. The truth is most muslims do it anyway, and on the other side of the coin, the jihadis bypass ignore or rationalise specific commands to not be intolerant butchering thugs. If Christians can get past specific doctrinal commands to punish and/or revile homosexuals and look upon women as subservient, inferior beings who must not be heard in public - into a religion that officially embraces gay rights and women's equality - then I don't think its a stretch for muslims to get over some pretty vague and ambiguous doctrinal references that allegedly condone slaughtering innocents on the basis of personal beliefs as an act of faith. For one thing, they can instead emphasise the decidedly *NON* vague and *NON ambiguous commands to accept and embrace freedom of thought in 2:256 and 18:29. What's to stop Muslims paying attention to it again? Would it be fair to describe you as a hypocrite for suggesting Muslims ignore those parts of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with? Or are you only suggesting that non-Muslims ignore them? Gandalf can you explain your logic here? Is there really no reason why parts of the Quran can't simply be ignored, bypassed, rationalised etc?

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2019 at 12:28pm:

So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence?

I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game.

I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start.

---------aaaaannnnddd so it goes on, muzzies and apologists all slithering around, saying they prefer the death cult, muslim supremacist ideology not be questioned, over putting a stop to the global violence and death caused by said islamic doctrine.

- aaaaannnnddd so it goes on, Christians and apologists all slithering around, saying they prefer the death cult, Christian supremacist ideology not be questioned, over putting a stop to the global violence and death caused by said Christian doctrine.  Tsk, tsk, such lies they tell, hey?   ::)

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 10:14pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 12:26pm: freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2019 at 7:34pm: You are also being shifty and evasive about your argument that Muslims should be able to just ignore the bits of the Quran they feel uncomfortable with. Good point FD. I mean I've only pointed out about 5 times in the clearest possible language that I never said that - that I only referred to non-muslims who insist on abrogation and such. #muslimsShouldNotIgnoreAnyBitsOfTheQuran Any muslim who says alcohol is haram insists on Abrogation. Why do muslims say alcohol is haram when the Quran allows it? Quote: And from the fruits of the palm trees and grapevines you take intoxicant and good provision. Indeed in that is a sign for a people who reason. https://quran.com/16/67 [quote]And of the fruits of date-palms and vines comes forth a fruit from which you draw an intoxicant a wine that intoxicates — it the wine is referred to by the verbal noun sakaran ‘intoxicant’ and this verse came before it was prohibited — and goodly provision such as dates raisins vinegar and molasses. Surely in that which is mentioned there is a sign indicating His power exalted be He for a people who understand a people who reflect. https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=16&tAyahNo=67&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

As we see with alcohol earlier verses are abrogated by later verses. For some reason muslims are deceptive in denying abrogation exists with Quran verses.
[/quote]

Hey, Baron, excellent point. Your Muselman can partake in the grape, eh?

In vito veritas. Those who get pissed have reason. How about those who get stoned?

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2019 at 4:38pm:

- aaaaannnnddd so it goes on, Christians and apologists all slithering around, saying they prefer the death cult, Christian supremacist ideology not be questioned, over putting a stop to the global violence and death caused by said Christian doctrine.  Tsk, tsk, such lies they tell, hey?   ::)

Faaark you are stupid, Bwian. Really. Mindless, witless, shallow.

You can't think so you just repeat and alter. Makes no sense? No matter, you will utter it.  You remind me of the Turdy McTurdface - he is just like you, stupid beyond words.

Know him?  You must. There can't be two people so identically idiotic in a small town in WA.

Frank wrote on Feb 14^th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 4:38pm: - aaaaannnnddd so it goes on, Christians and apologists all slithering around, saying they prefer the death cult, Christian supremacist ideology not be questioned, over putting a stop to the global violence and death caused by said Christian doctrine.  Tsk, tsk, such lies they tell, hey?   ::) Faaark you are stupid, Bwian. Really. Mindless, witless, shallow. You can't think so you just repeat and alter. Makes no sense? No matter, you will utter it.  You remind me of the Turdy McTurdface - he is just like you, stupid beyond words. Know him?  You must. There can't be two people so identically idiotic in a small town in WA.

Speaking of intoxicants...

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14^th, 2019 at 2:07pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 12:28pm: So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence? I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game. I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start.

Can you think of any reason why Muslims couldn't simply ignore parts of the Quran?

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2019 at 1:03pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 2:07pm: freediver wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 12:28pm: So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence? I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game. I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start. Can you think of any reason why Muslims couldn't simply ignore parts of the Quran?

Of course they can if they want FD. They can do whatever they like. I wouldn't advise it though, and I certainly didn't say they should.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 15^th, 2019 at 4:32pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 1:03pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 2:07pm: freediver wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 12:28pm: So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence? I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game. I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start. Can you think of any reason why Muslims couldn't simply ignore parts of the Quran? Of course they can if they want FD. They can do whatever they like. I wouldn't advise it though, and I certainly didn't say they should.

Are there any doctrinal reasons why they can't?

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2019 at 6:35pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 4:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 1:03pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 2:07pm: freediver wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 12:28pm: So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence? I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game. I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start. Can you think of any reason why Muslims couldn't simply ignore parts of the Quran? Of course they can if they want FD. They can do whatever they like. I wouldn't advise it though, and I certainly didn't say they should. Are there any doctrinal reasons why they can't?

Of course there are doctrinal reasons they can't - the whole 'Quran is the word of God' thing - obviously.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 15^th, 2019 at 6:45pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 6:35pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 4:32pm: freediver wrote on Feb 15th, 2019 at 1:03pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 2:07pm: freediver wrote on Feb 14th, 2019 at 12:28pm: So here you are only arguing that non-Muslims should ignore the bits of the Quran that promote violence? I didn't even say that FD. Permitting self defense could pass as "promoting violence" I suppose. Its almost as if you are deliberately looking to subtly and strategically change my words in order to create a gotcha moment. And we are also once again back to the part where you ignore half a sentence to completely misrepresent what I actually wrote. See this is the problem with paraphrasing beyond all meaning. I chose my words very carefully. And I'm not partaking in your little "lets get gandalf to explain my wording of what he says - not his" game. I assure you what I wrote really does make sense. Good news for you though - that unlike your latest jellyfish act in refusing to acknowledge what I actually wrote vis the mindless collective, you are actually presenting my full quote. Thats a good start. Can you think of any reason why Muslims couldn't simply ignore parts of the Quran? Of course they can if they want FD. They can do whatever they like. I wouldn't advise it though, and I certainly didn't say they should. Are there any doctrinal reasons why they can't? Of course there are doctrinal reasons they can't - the whole 'Quran is the word of God' thing - obviously.

And this is entirely consistent with your other claim:


Quote:

Even if you insist there are specific doctrinal passages that make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith (ridiculous, but I'll humour you), there's no reason why it can't be bypassed, ignored or rationalised into something more compatible with civil society.

?

absolutely.

Who were you arguing should be able to ignore, bypass or rationalise the Quran into something compatible with civilised society?

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 14^th, 2019 at 4:38pm:

- aaaaannnnddd so it goes on, Christians and apologists all slithering around, saying they prefer the death cult, Christian supremacist ideology not be questioned, over putting a stop to the global violence and death caused by said Christian doctrine.  Tsk, tsk, such lies they tell, hey?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 10:12pm:

When have I ever engaged in posting "mindless shite"?

Quote:

the whole 'Quran is the word of God' thing

Reality is:

The whole qur'an is the words of muhammad touted as being the words of a reinvented pagan moon god allah.

allah just happened to be  revamped as the god of muslim supremacy, who hates all non believers and urges muslims to oppress, rape, torture and kill them, if they don't take up islam.

moses wrote on Feb 16^th, 2019 at 1:44pm:

[quote]the whole 'Quran is the word of God' thing

Reality is:

The whole Bible is the words of Church leaders touted as being the words of a reinvented Jewish moon god called "Yahweh".

"Yahweh" just happened to be  revamped as the god of Christian supremacy, who hates all non believers and urges Christians to oppress, rape, torture and kill them, if they don't take up Christianity.    ::)

Reality is:

All books are the words of men.

Men who are driven by their inner spirit.

The words they connote reflect the spirit of the times they live in and their own inner beliefs.

The O.T. is a book which was authored by some 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses.

The Old Testament / Old Covenant corresponds with the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh, for religious purposes it consists of  four categories: Instructions, Prophets, History and Wisdom.

It is an account of God's dealings with the Hebrews as his chosen people. It recounts how the Israelites became a people and settled in the Promised Land, It describes the development of Israel's monarchy and the messages of the prophets, it contains Judaic Law, the Ten Commandments and the Psalms.

The designations "Old" and "New" Testaments are to distinguish between the books of the Mosaic covenant (Old Testament) and those of the "new" covenant in Christ or the New Testament.

The N.T. is a book authored by several men and women from a variety of lifestyles and occupations, it also contains the Words of Christ as the main theme.

It is a book which proclaims a new covenant with the spirit of righteousness, the new covenant states that mosaic law (old covenant) was fulfilled and finalized by the death of Christ on the cross.

2019 years ago all men are now justified by faith in Christ as their redeemer, no man can be saved by the deeds of the law.

It is a book reflecting the times in which it was authored, with a theme of grace and love for all mankind, a book which had no difficulties in keeping up with the progress of man.



Conversely:


The qur'an is a book authored by a thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer (muhammad).

It reflects the inner self of this said pedophile psychopath and his hatred of all people who were not muslims.

It is a book which this sociopath touted as being the final perfect words of his reinvented pagan moon god allah.

The majority (64%) of the qur'an is dedicated to the hatred of non muslims.

The theme of muslim oppression of non believers, muslims supremacists who have the right to rape torture and kill their fellow man, is the direct cause of the worlds troubles right now 2019.

This book has a basis of, the highest grade of believers are actually those who kill and are killed in the spread of islam, the book has a paradise which is a brothel staffed with female aliens with big tits and little boys scattered like pearls around said brothel.

Because of this book muslims right now are the worlds top 26 listed terrorist organizations.

muslims are the worlds refugee problem with millions of them fleeing other muslims all the while demanding that the hated kufir feed and shelter them.

muslims are slaughtering their own children in the hundreds of thousands with starvation, death by refugee flight, all because of the filth in the qur'an, a book which is the words of a 7th century blood crazed psychopath (muhammad).

The qur'an is long overdue for a thorough reviewing of the many and varied verses which are nothing but pure evil.

The qur'an quiet simply is not a fit book for todays' modern civilizations.

Reality is:

All books are the words of men.

Men who are driven by their inner spirit.

The words they connote reflect the spirit of the times they live in and their own inner beliefs.

The O.T. is a book which was authored by some 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses.

The Old Testament / Old Covenant corresponds with the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh, for religious purposes it consists of  four categories: Instructions, Prophets, History and Wisdom.

It is an account of God's dealings with the Hebrews as his chosen people. It recounts how the Israelites became a people and settled in the Promised Land, It describes the development of Israel's monarchy and the messages of the prophets, it contains Judaic Law, the Ten Commandments and the Psalms.

The designations "Old" and "New" Testaments are to distinguish between the books of the Mosaic covenant (Old Testament) and those of the "new" covenant in Christ or the New Testament.

The N.T. is a book authored by several men and women from a variety of lifestyles and occupations, it also contains the Words of Christ as the main theme.

It is a book which proclaims a new covenant with the spirit of righteousness, the new covenant states that mosaic law (old covenant) was fulfilled and finalized by the death of Christ on the cross.

2019 years ago all men are now justified by faith in Christ as their redeemer, no man can be saved by the deeds of the law but yet, still they proclaim happily the most horrendious crimes against other people who don't believe their faith.  They export their faith on the end of a sword/bayonet/bomb.

It is a book reflecting the times in which it was authored, with a theme of hatred for all non-believers, a book which has had greate difficulties in keeping up with the progress of man.

Conversely:

The Qur'an is a book authored by Prophet Muhammad.

It reflects the inner self of this Prophet said and his love of all peoples, particularly the Muslims.

It is a book which this Prophet touted as being the final perfect words of his god Allah.

The majority of the Qur'an is dedicated to the love of all Muslims.

The theme of Muslims being oppressed by non believers, who have the right to rape torture and kill their fellow man, is the direct cause of the worlds troubles right now 2019.

This book has a basis of, the highest grade of believers are actually those who live peacefully and  spread Islam, the book has a paradise which is a beauty staffed with women with big tits and little boys scattered like pearls around said paradise.

Because of this book Muslims right now are the worlds top 26 listed peaceful organizations.

Muslims are the worlds refugee problem with millions of them fleeing other muslims all the while demanding that the kufir feed and shelter them.

Islamists are slaughtering children in the hundreds of thousands with starvation, death by refugee flight, all because of their hatred of true Muslims.   Islamophobes mistake Islamists for true Muslims all the time 'cause they fear Islam.

The Qur'an is long overdue for people to understand and accept it's revelation.

The Qur'an quite simply is a fit book for todays' modern civilizations.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 17^th, 2019 at 5:00pm:

Reality is: All books are the words of men. Men who are driven by their inner spirit. The words they connote reflect the spirit of the times they live in and their own inner beliefs. The O.T. is a book which was authored by some 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses. The Old Testament / Old Covenant corresponds with the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh, for religious purposes it consists of  four categories: Instructions, Prophets, History and Wisdom. It is an account of God's dealings with the Hebrews as his chosen people. It recounts how the Israelites became a people and settled in the Promised Land, It describes the development of Israel's monarchy and the messages of the prophets, it contains Judaic Law, the Ten Commandments and the Psalms. The designations "Old" and "New" Testaments are to distinguish between the books of the Mosaic covenant (Old Testament) and those of the "new" covenant in Christ or the New Testament. The N.T. is a book authored by several men and women from a variety of lifestyles and occupations, it also contains the Words of Christ as the main theme. It is a book which proclaims a new covenant with the spirit of righteousness, the new covenant states that mosaic law (old covenant) was fulfilled and finalized by the death of Christ on the cross. 2019 years ago all men are now justified by faith in Christ as their redeemer, no man can be saved by the deeds of the law but yet, still they proclaim happily the most horrendious crimes against other people who don't believe their faith.  They export their faith on the end of a sword/bayonet/bomb. It is a book reflecting the times in which it was authored, with a theme of hatred for all non-believers, a book which has had greate difficulties in keeping up with the progress of man. Conversely: The Qur'an is a book authored by Prophet Muhammad. It reflects the inner self of this Prophet said and his love of all peoples, particularly the Muslims. It is a book which this Prophet touted as being the final perfect words of his god Allah. The majority of the Qur'an is dedicated to the love of all Muslims. The theme of Muslims being oppressed by non believers, who have the right to rape torture and kill their fellow man, is the direct cause of the worlds troubles right now 2019. This book has a basis of, the highest grade of believers are actually those who live peacefully and  spread Islam, the book has a paradise which is a beauty staffed with women with big tits and little boys scattered like pearls around said paradise. Because of this book Muslims right now are the worlds top 26 listed peaceful organizations. Muslims are the worlds refugee problem with millions of them fleeing other muslims all the while demanding that the kufir feed and shelter them. Islamists are slaughtering children in the hundreds of thousands with starvation, death by refugee flight, all because of their hatred of true Muslims.   Islamophobes mistake Islamists for true Muslims all the time 'cause they fear Islam. The Qur'an is long overdue for people to understand and accept it's revelation. The Qur'an quite simply is a fit book for todays' modern civilizations.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


Brian Ross wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 10:12pm:

When have I ever engaged in posting "mindless shite"?

[/quote]

Lets give it to Brian, at least he can come up with thoughtful arguments (even if I dont always agree) to push his point rather than some of the drivel pushed by others who shall not be named.

barryfromthebush wrote on Feb 17^th, 2019 at 8:03pm:

Lets give it to Brian, at least he can come up with thoughtful arguments (even if I dont always agree) to push his point rather than some of the drivel pushed by others who shall not be named.

Don't worry, Soren will grow tired of his antics and wander off back to the little kiddies' playground where he likes to play his games with his little mates.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 17^th, 2019 at 5:00pm:

Reality is:

The reality is that you have been out of your intellectual depth for most of your life, Bwian, but your vanity demands that you be a shining intellectual. So you bought a mail order doctorate to salve your sense of utter failure.

You are too stupid and too vain to face it.  Stupid and vain. Bwian's reality.

Frank wrote on Feb 17^th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 17th, 2019 at 5:00pm: Reality is: The reality is that you have been out of your intellectual depth for most of your life, Bwian, but your vanity demands that you be a shining intellectual. So you bought a mail order doctorate to salve your sense of utter failure. You are too stupid and too vain to face it.  Stupid and vain. Bwian's reality.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Poor, poor, Soren.  Still unable to debate the points that have been raised and instead, as per usual, resorting to ad hominem argument?   Tsk, tsk,  you are being called back to the little kiddies' playground by your nursemaid, Soren.  Off you trot, it's beddy-bye time for little lads like you.   ::)

barryfromthebush wrote on Feb 17^th, 2019 at 8:03pm:

Lets give it to Brian, at least he can come up with thoughtful arguments (even if I dont always agree) to push his point rather than some of the drivel pushed by others who shall not be named.

So you are a Sock

Reality is:

People who commit deeds of iniquity are disobeying the teachings of Christ.

Conversely:

muslims who are committing unspeakable acts of depravity against their fellow man are obeying the teachings of muhammad.

These islamic purveyors of evil are most certainly not ignoring the 64% of the qur'an which advises depraved behaviour against the kufir

Reality is:

People who commit deeds of iniquity are not disobeying the teachings of Christianity.

They are obeying the teachings contained in their holy book The Bible.

Conversely:

Muslims who are committing unspeakable acts of depravity against their fellow man are not obeying the teachings of Muhammad.

These Islamic purveyors of divinity are most certainly not ignoring the the qur'an which advises correct behaviour against the kufir.

[tr][/tr]
freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2019 at 10:09pm:

Who were you arguing should be able to ignore, bypass or rationalise the Quran into something compatible with civilised society?

Thank you for providing the full quote. As you can see in that (entire) sentence, I prefaced my statement with a hypothetical that I clearly reject - ie the idea that there are Quranic passages that "make slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith".

Who were you arguing should be able to ignore, bypass or rationalise the Quran into something compatible with civilised society?

anyone who insists the quran makes slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith - a notion that I find absurd and reject.

Reality is:

Australian National Security


The current National Terrorism Threat Level is PROBABLE and the public should continue to exercise caution.

Listed terrorist organisations

Currently, 26 organisations are listed as terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code. They are:

•Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)

•Al-Murabitun

•Al-Qa'ida (AQ)

•Al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)

•Al-Qa’ida in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS)

•Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)

•Al-Shabaab

•Boko Haram

•Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades

•Hizballah's External Security Organisation (ESO)

•Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan

•Islamic State

•Islamic State East Asia

•Islamic State in Libya (IS-Libya)

•Islamic State Khorasan Province

•Islamic State Sinai Province (IS-Sinai)

•Jabhat al-Nusra

•Jaish-e-Mohammad

•Jama’at Mujahideen Bangladesh

•Jamiat ul-Ansar (JuA)

•Jemaah Anshorut DaulahListed 9 June 2018

•Jemaah Islamiyah (JI)

•Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)

•Lashkar-e Jhangvi

•Lashkar-e-Tayyiba

•Palestinian Islamic Jihad


NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400

Just thought I'd include the hotline number in case any leftard apologists for islamic terror have some info about all them dastardly terrorists that aren't muslims.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 19^th, 2019 at 12:56pm:

anyone who insists the quran makes slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith - a notion that I find absurd and reject.

So people you disagree with, Muslim or non-Muslim, should have no reason why they cannot simply ignore parts of the Quran?

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 19th, 2019 at 12:56pm: anyone who insists the quran makes slaughtering innocents a compulsory act of faith - a notion that I find absurd and reject. So people you disagree with, Muslim or non-Muslim, should have no reason why they cannot simply ignore parts of the Quran?

Yes FD, people who hold a position that I find absurd and reject - are by definition people I disagree with  :)

Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with?

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with?

Because I don't know how else they could rationalise and agree with something I find so absurd and rejectionable. Whereas people I agree with on matters of Islamic faith already adopt the same approach to the Quran as I do (ie don't ignore bits) - otherwise I wouldn't agree with them.

Poor, poor, Moses.  You know why he relies on the Australia list of proscribed organisations, rather than the world-wide list?  Because the Australian Government doesn't like to list European/Central-Southern American and Asian Terrorist organisations, unless they are Muslim based.

According to Wikipedia, there are 204 Terrorist organisations presently active and proscribed by one government or another 'round the world.  Of those 204, 57 are European/Central-Southern American or Asian based Terrorist organisations, which Moses of cause never mentions, funny that, hey?

All Tripura Tiger Force
Balochistan Liberation Army
Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist)
Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist–Leninist
Conspiracy of Fire Nuclei
Continuity Irish Republican Army
Cumann na mBan
Donetsk People's Republic
Fianna Éireann
Flag of Koma Civakên Kurdistanê.svg
Grey Wolves
International Sikh Youth Federation
Irish National Liberation Army
Irish People's Liberation Organisation
Irish Republican Army
Kach and Kahane Chai
Kangleipak Communist Party
Komala
Korean People's Army
Kurdistan Communities Union
Kurdistan Democratic Party/North
Kurdistan Freedom Hawks
Kurdistan Workers' Party
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
Lugansk People's Republic
Manipur People’s Liberation Front
Maoist Communist Centre of India
Marxist–Leninist Communist Party
National Action
National Democratic Front of Bodoland
National Liberation Army
National Liberation Front of Tripura
Orange Volunteers
Party of Free Life of Kurdistan
PDK Bakur.png
People's Liberation Army of Manipur
People's Mujahedin of Iran
People's Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak
Provisional Irish Republican Army
Real Irish Republican Army
Red Hand Commando
Red Hand Defenders
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
Revolutionary Organization 17 November
Revolutionary Party of Kurdistan
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party–Front
Revolutionary Struggle
Saor Éire
Shining Path[127]
Ulster Defence Association
Ulster Volunteer Force
United Liberation Front of Assam
United National Liberation Front
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia
Workers' Party of Korea
World Tamil Movement

Wikipedia goes on and lists another 20 Terrorist organisations that have either faded away or transformed themselves into political parties and/or governments.

African National Congress
Aum Shinrikyo
Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council
Japanese Red Army
Kach and Kahane Chai
Khmer Rouge
Ku Klux Klan
Manuel Rodríguez Patriotic Front
Red Brigades
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
Revolutionary Nuclei
Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement
Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia

Again, groups that Moses doesn't mention.  Again, an amazing coincidence.  Funny that, hey?

However, rather typical of the forum's arch-Islamophobe.    ::) ::)

Are you saying that our NATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATION has got it all wrong regarding who constitutes the actual threat to Australias' security?

Please phone NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400 and inform them of their mistake.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 7:00am:

freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2019 at 9:24pm: Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with? Because I don't know how else they could rationalise and agree with something I find so absurd and rejectionable. Whereas people I agree with on matters of Islamic faith already adopt the same approach to the Quran as I do (ie don't ignore bits) - otherwise I wouldn't agree with them.

So yours is the only possible conclusion someone could reach if they actually read the Quran?

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 3:11pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 7:00am: freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2019 at 9:24pm: Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with? Because I don't know how else they could rationalise and agree with something I find so absurd and rejectionable. Whereas people I agree with on matters of Islamic faith already adopt the same approach to the Quran as I do (ie don't ignore bits) - otherwise I wouldn't agree with them. So yours is the only possible conclusion someone could reach if they actually read the Quran?

Of course not FD, thats not what I said.

Clearly you came to the conclusion that slaughtering infidels is an essential act of Islamic faith. I can't exactly say you didn't come to that conclusion now can I?

moses wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 2:56pm:

Are you saying that our NATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATION has got it all wrong regarding who constitutes the actual threat to Australias' security? Please phone NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400 and inform them of their mistake.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

You know how to stuff ASIO?  Steal their bike.   ::)

ASIO does a necessary job.  Unfortunately they attract people like you, Moses who have a bee in their bonnet.   ASIO unnecessarily targeted the Left during the Cold War.  ASIO missed out on the dangers of the Right at the same time 'cause they were, "our sort of chaps."    Today, ASIO follows Muslims often unnecessarily.  Why?  'cause their thinking is like yours - narrow minded and one tracked, Moses.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 6:51pm:

moses wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 2:56pm: Are you saying that our NATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATION has got it all wrong regarding who constitutes the actual threat to Australias' security? Please phone NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400 and inform them of their mistake. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg You know how to stuff ASIO?  Steal their bike.   ::) ASIO does a necessary job.  Unfortunately they attract people like you, Moses who have a bee in their bonnet.   ASIO unnecessarily targeted the Left during the Cold War.  ASIO missed out on the dangers of the Right at the same time 'cause they were, "our sort of chaps."    Today, ASIO follows Muslims often unnecessarily.  Why?  'cause their thinking is like yours - narrow minded and one tracked, Moses.    ::)

Not because of terrorism?


polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 3:46pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 3:11pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 7:00am: freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2019 at 9:24pm: Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with? Because I don't know how else they could rationalise and agree with something I find so absurd and rejectionable. Whereas people I agree with on matters of Islamic faith already adopt the same approach to the Quran as I do (ie don't ignore bits) - otherwise I wouldn't agree with them. So yours is the only possible conclusion someone could reach if they actually read the Quran? Of course not FD, thats not what I said. Clearly you came to the conclusion that slaughtering infidels is an essential act of Islamic faith. I can't exactly say you didn't come to that conclusion now can I?

So it basically boils down to your ignorance - because you do not know, people you disagree with can ignore bits of the Quran, even if they are Muslims, because there is no other possible explanation for them disagreeing with you, but Muslims who agree with you cannot, because that would go against a fundamental tenet of Islam?

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 8:38pm:

Muslims who agree with you cannot, because that would go against a fundamental tenet of Islam?

Muslims who agree with me, by definition - don't hold a position that I reject. Thats why they agree with me. It really isn't any more nuanced than that FD.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 3:46pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 3:11pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 7:00am: freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2019 at 9:24pm: Why would you expect Muslims you disagree with to be able to ignore bits of the Quran so easily, but not Muslims you agree with? Because I don't know how else they could rationalise and agree with something I find so absurd and rejectionable. Whereas people I agree with on matters of Islamic faith already adopt the same approach to the Quran as I do (ie don't ignore bits) - otherwise I wouldn't agree with them. So yours is the only possible conclusion someone could reach if they actually read the Quran? Of course not FD, thats not what I said. Clearly you came to the conclusion that slaughtering infidels is an essential act of Islamic faith. I can't exactly say you didn't come to that conclusion now can I?

So it basically boils down to your ignorance - because you do not know, people you disagree with can ignore bits of the Quran, even if they are Muslims, because there is no other possible explanation for them disagreeing with you, but Muslims who agree with you cannot ignore bits of the Quran, because that would go against a fundamental tenet of Islam?

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 8:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 6:51pm: moses wrote on Feb 21st, 2019 at 2:56pm: Are you saying that our NATIONAL SECURITY ORGANIZATION has got it all wrong regarding who constitutes the actual threat to Australias' security? Please phone NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400 and inform them of their mistake. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg You know how to stuff ASIO?  Steal their bike.   ::) ASIO does a necessary job.  Unfortunately they attract people like you, Moses who have a bee in their bonnet.   ASIO unnecessarily targeted the Left during the Cold War.  ASIO missed out on the dangers of the Right at the same time 'cause they were, "our sort of chaps."    Today, ASIO follows Muslims often unnecessarily.  Why?  'cause their thinking is like yours - narrow minded and one tracked, Moses.    ::) Not because of terrorism?

You answer my questions, I might answer yours, Freediver.    ::) ::)

Quote:

You know how to stuff ASIO?  Steal their bike.  ASIO does a necessary job.  Unfortunately they attract people like you, Moses who have a bee in their bonnet.   ASIO unnecessarily targeted the Left during the Cold War.  ASIO missed out on the dangers of the Right at the same time 'cause they were, "our sort of chaps."    Today, ASIO follows Muslims often unnecessarily.  Why?  'cause their thinking is like yours - narrow minded and one tracked, Moses.

Oh well that explains it all then, ASIO has got it wrong, they targeted our enemies.

I mean gee how terribly terribly silly of them.

Or, then again, ASIO is actually doing the right thing by our citizens.

In other words forked tongue, you're the bad guy in this scenario, you and your muslim terrorist masters are the ones we have to be careful of and watch.

The danger of the 21st century in this case forked tongue is, the muslim terrorist / leftard apologist duo.

You have shown your true colours once again, with your posts which are trying to create a smokescreen around the reality of global islamic terror in the 21st century.

moses wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2019 at 3:46pm:

Quote: You know how to stuff ASIO?  Steal their bike.  ASIO does a necessary job.  Unfortunately they attract people like you, Moses who have a bee in their bonnet.   ASIO unnecessarily targeted the Left during the Cold War.  ASIO missed out on the dangers of the Right at the same time 'cause they were, "our sort of chaps."    Today, ASIO follows Muslims often unnecessarily.  Why?  'cause their thinking is like yours - narrow minded and one tracked, Moses. Oh well that explains it all then, ASIO has got it wrong, they targeted our enemies. I mean gee how terribly terribly silly of them. Or, then again, ASIO is actually doing the right thing by our citizens. In other words forked tongue, you're the bad guy in this scenario, you and your muslim terrorist masters are the ones we have to be careful of and watch. The danger of the 21st century in this case forked tongue is, the muslim terrorist / leftard apologist duo. You have shown your true colours once again, with your posts which are trying to create a smokescreen around the reality of global islamic terror in the 21st century.

Their main problem is identifying our friends from our enemies, Moses.  Always has been, always will be.  I know of one Left group during the 1970s which broke up because all the remaining members of the committee ended up confessing to one another that they were either ASIO, Special Branch or Military Intelligence.    Funny that, keeping a hard Left organisation going 'cause it was easier that way to identify who was a member of the hard Left, right?

As for Muslims, their ability to differentiate between the Islamists and the ordinary, everyday, peaceful Muslims is rather limited so they rely on information received from the ordinary, everyday, peaceful Muslims.  You know, the folks that you have branded as being all Terrorists or Terrorist sympathisers?  The folks that you wish to condemn for the crimes of a tiny minority of their number.    Now, where would ASIO be without those folks to help them?  Stuffed of course and it is something ASIO recognises.   Something you refuse to recognise in your wide condemnation of all matters of Islam and all Muslims.

Moses, you're an Islamophobic, Christian bigot.   ::)

In a nutshell:

Islamic terrorism is todays global problem that's reality.

Every single muslim terrorist can justify his /her deeds by citing the qur'an.

You try and produce smokescreens to hide global islamic terrorism every day of your life forked tongue.

In a nutshell:

Religious terrorism is todays one of many global problem that's reality.

Every single religous terrorist can justify his /her deeds by citing their holy book.

You try and produce smokescreens to hide global Christian terrorism every day of your life, Moses.  Tsk, tsk, such bigotry, such hatred for anybody who isn't a Christian, hey?    ::)

Canada: Arabic newspaper praises jihad massacre at synagogue as a “qualitative attack'”
Feb 22, 2019 1:00 pm By Christine Douglass-Williams

The Canadian Arabic newspaper, Al Forqan, based in Windsor, Ontario and “distributed in Canada and the United States described a terrorist attack against a synagogue in Jerusalem as a ‘qualitative attack’ carried out by ‘two heroes.'”

Six people were murdered in the jihad attack; the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) claimed responsibility.

Not long before Christmas, Al Forqan also published “hadith, accounts of sayings attributed directly to Muhammad, that speaks about Muslims killing Jews as part of the final Islamic fight to establish Sharia law and justice in the entire world.”

Well it looks like they did not ignore the bad bits of islam, in fact they are the champions of islam, just doing the good works of allah and muhammad.

Oh well one day the world will wake up and turn on them.

It's sad that they could be stopped by simply renouncing the evil in the qur'an.

But our *moderates* and leftard apologists prefer this never ending bloodshed over being honest about the evil in the qur'an.

Quote:

Why Mark Anthony Conditt – a white Christian – isn't called a terrorist Daniel José Camacho If a Muslim man planted bombs in predominately white neighborhoods before blowing himself up, you could bet that the White House and various media outlets would label him a terrorist and draw some connection between his religion and his violent acts. But the case of the Austin bomber reveals an enduring double standard: white Christian terrorists continue to get a free pass. According to a Buzzfeed report, 23-year-old Mark Anthony Conditt – the one responsible for the recent bombings in Austin – was part of conservative survivalist circles. An acquaintance of Conditt confirmed he was involved in a group called Righteous Invasion of Truth, “a Bible study and outdoors group for homeschooled kids, created and named by the kids and their families that included monthly activities such as archery, gun skills and water balloon fights.” Thus far, the White House press secretary has denied any link between the Austin bombings and terrorism. Never mind that Austin was terrorized in a three-week long serial bombing campaign. The Austin police chief claims Conditt should primarily be seen as a “very challenged young man” because he did not mention terrorism or hate in the video he left behind before carrying out the bombings. I guess we should let all bombers self-identify now? Racial and religious privilege intersect in how Conditt is being perceived. Because he is white, his acts are reduced to a personal problem even though white American men have consistently posed a bigger domestic terrorist threat than Muslim foreigners who get treated as systemic threat. Since Conditt is a Christian, his faith is considered coincidental in spite of the fact that conservative survivalist circles explicitly pursue a racialized, apocalyptic social project. Many refuse to label Conditt a terrorist over technicalities involving whether his acts were clearly “politically motivated.” But that’s the luxury of being white. To be white is to be considered culturally and politically neutral even when you’re part of a long legacy of white extremists. Granted, violence is complicated and its motivations cannot be reduced to one factor. Nevertheless, even if Conditt was not primarily motivated by his faith, we are still right to question whether such a segregated and militant religious ideology can feed ignorance, hate and violent acts. We may never find a video or journal in which Conditt claims that his religious faith was the prime motivator for his terrorizing acts. But even if we did, the double standard would probably still endure. According to a PRRI survey: “White evangelical Protestants are the most likely (87%) to disown Christian terrorists who claim to be acting in Christianity’s name. However, they are among the least likely (44%) to say the same about terrorists who say they’re Muslim.” In other words, white evangelicals find it hard to believe that white Christian terrorists can truly exist. Yet this flies against everything that has happened in the history of the US. At one point, almost half of the Christians in this country went to war over the power to own black slaves. When that failed, they reverted to organized terrorism. As Christian writer Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove powerfully recounts in his book Reconstructing the Gospel: Finding Freedom from Slaveholder Religion, the era of reconstruction following the civil war was interrupted by Christian terrorist attacks, such as the Colfax massacre that took place on Easter Sunday in 1873. The history of Christian-identifying terrorist groups such as the Klu Klux Klan shows how the violence of Christian terrorists continually flies below this nation’s radar. Thinking about Stephon Clark getting shot 20 times while unarmed in his backyard and about the reluctance of many to name Mark Anthony Conditt a white terrorist makes me wonder: it’s almost as if this nation was founded on the sacredness and holiness of white violence. This is a violence set apart.

[url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/mark-anthony-conditt-terrorism-christianity]Source[/url]

Well it looks like they did not ignore the bad bits of the Bible, in fact they are the champions of Christianity, just doing the good works of Christianity and Christ.

Oh well one day the world will wake up and turn on them.

It's sad that they could be stopped by simply renouncing the evil in the Bible.

But our *moderates* and Rightard apologists prefer this never ending bloodshed over being honest about the evil in the Bible.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2019 at 4:37pm:

In a nutshell: Religious terrorism is todays one of many global problem that's reality. Every single religous terrorist can justify his /her deeds by citing their holy book. You try and produce smokescreens to hide global Christian terrorism every day of your life, Moses.  Tsk, tsk, such bigotry, such hatred for anybody who isn't a Christian, hey?    ::)

Twonk.

Frank wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2019 at 7:36pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 23rd, 2019 at 4:37pm: In a nutshell: Religious terrorism is todays one of many global problem that's reality. Every single religous terrorist can justify his /her deeds by citing their holy book. You try and produce smokescreens to hide global Christian terrorism every day of your life, Moses.  Tsk, tsk, such bigotry, such hatred for anybody who isn't a Christian, hey?    ::) Twonk.

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Poor, poor, Soren, nothing of value to contribute so instead you resort immediately to ad hominem insults.   Such a strange reaction.  You been seeking help for your paranoia yet?   ::)

The board liar wrote:Reply #145 - Yesterday at 5:11pm

Quote:

Well it looks like they did not ignore the bad bits of the Bible, in fact they are the champions of Christianity, just doing the good works of Christianity and Christ.

Well well old forked tongue is so jealous of this site run by freediver that he sneaks around being a lying troll.

He can never show that Christ taught people should be terrorists, yet he has no objections to deliberately lying on this site.

Once a liar always a liar.

It is an undisputed fact that brian ross is a cowardly jealous liar troll on this board.

Well well old forked tongue is so jealous of this site run by Freediver that he sneaks around being a lying troll.

He can never show that Mohammed taught people should be terrorists, yet he has no objections to deliberately lying on this site.

Once a liar always a liar.

It is an undisputed fact that Moses is a cowardly jealous liar troll on this board.   ::) ::)

Germany: Muslim migrant strikes 12-year-old girl on her buttocks, says “I am entitled to do this”
Feb 23, 2019 4:00

Where could this man have gotten such an idea? Could it be from the Qur’an? The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.

A case of harassment or injury to the detriment of a girl took place on Friday afternoon on a bus of line 7644.

girl of about 12 to 13 years of age got on the bus around 4:20PM at the Ledergraben stop in Reutlingen, going in the direction of St. Johann-Würtingen. At the Südbahnhof stop, she went to the front doors of the bus to get off. As she walked past, a 37-year-old Syrian sitting in front of her in the bus hit her buttocks with his hand. Crying, the girl then turned to the 37-year-old and asked him the reason for his actions; he dismissed her with the words “I am entitled to do this.”

In the further course of events, the accused then uttered vulgar abuse and threats against other passengers who had observed the events and expressed their incomprehension. As a result, the bus driver informed the police, who met the accused on the spot and, after completing the police action, placed him in a hospital because of his psychological condition….

I mean gee he was only following the qur'an which say it best for females to cover up and not cause people to annoy you.(he did not ignore the bad bits it seems)

You know the Germans are beginning to reap the fruits of their labour, the chooks are coming home to roost.

Oh well one day the whole world will finally be honest about the evil in the qur'an.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 24^th, 2019 at 2:27pm:

Well well old forked tongue is so jealous of this site run by Freediver that he sneaks around being a lying troll. He can never show that Mohammed taught people should be terrorists, yet he has no objections to deliberately lying on this site. Once a liar always a liar. It is an undisputed fact that Moses is a cowardly jealous liar troll on this board.   ::) ::)

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Poor, poor, Fvckwit Bwian, nothing of value to contribute so instead you resort immediately to ad hominem insults.   Such a strange reaction.  You been seeking help for your paranoia yet?    ::)

Alt jungend, alt jungend! Wo bist du, alt jungend?

Karnal wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 2:24am:

Alt jungend, alt jungend! Wo bist du, alt jungend?

Sørens synspunkt er absolut kunstig. Det har ingen betydning for virkeligheden overhovedet. Han bor i en fantasiverden, hvor han mener, at han kan hader og udtrykker det hader uden at der er nogen konsekvenser. Læge Jeg tror, vi bør straks henvende Søren til behandling! Han har brug for hjælp til at genoprette forbindelse til virkeligheden, hurtigt! 

[-] اثنين من الحركات اليسارية السخيفة التي تتذلل أمام قوة الله. سيقول أي كذب يمكنهم من حماية الإرهاب الإسلامي. /athnyn min alharakat alyasariat alsakhifat alty tatadhalal 'amam quat allh. sayaqul 'ay kadhab yumkinuhum min himayat al'iirhab al'iislami./

فقير ، فقير ، موسى ، شخص طفولي أحمق. تسك ، تسك ، التعصب المسيحي الخاص بك يعمل بشكل واضح من خلال جميع مشاركاتك. اذهب ، عد إلى ملعب الأطفال الصغير حيث تنتمي ، حيث يتم التسامح مع أعمالك الغريبة.   ::) ::)

سوف يكافئك الله مع الساعة مع كبير الثدي والصبية الصغار ، والاستمرار في الكذب يا الحذاء اللعق المدافع عن الإرهاب الإسلامي

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 4:33pm:

فقير ، فقير ، موسى ، شخص طفولي أحمق. تسك ، تسك ، التعصب المسيحي الخاص بك يعمل بشكل واضح من خلال جميع مشاركاتك. اذهب ، عد إلى ملعب الأطفال الصغير حيث تنتمي ، حيث يتم التسامح مع أعمالك الغريبة.   ::) ::)

Twonk. Bleedin' twonk.

How do you say 'bleedin' twonk' in Arabic, loon?

moses wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 5:32pm:

وف يكافئك الله مع الساعة مع كبير الثدي والصبية الصغار ، والاستمرار في الكذب يا الحذاء اللعق المدافع عن الإرهاب الإسلامي

أتحداك يا أيها موسى العظيم أن أظهر أين دافعت عن الإرهاب أو الإسلام أو غيره. الفشل من جانبك في تقديم الأدلة يشير ببساطة إلى من هو النقيض الحقيقي من الأكاذيب والتعبيرية.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 8:33pm:

moses wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 5:32pm: وف يكافئك الله مع الساعة مع كبير الثدي والصبية الصغار ، والاستمرار في الكذب يا الحذاء اللعق المدافع عن الإرهاب الإسلامي أتحداك يا أيها موسى العظيم أن أظهر أين دافعت عن الإرهاب أو الإسلام أو غيره. الفشل من جانبك في تقديم الأدلة يشير ببساطة إلى من هو النقيض الحقيقي من الأكاذيب والتعبيرية.   ::)

Twonk.
Twit, twat, plonker.

Frank wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 8:14pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 4:33pm: فقير ، فقير ، موسى ، شخص طفولي أحمق. تسك ، تسك ، التعصب المسيحي الخاص بك يعمل بشكل واضح من خلال جميع مشاركاتك. اذهب ، عد إلى ملعب الأطفال الصغير حيث تنتمي ، حيث يتم التسامح مع أعمالك الغريبة.   ::) ::) Twonk. Bleedin' twonk. How do you say 'bleedin' twonk' in Arabic, loon?

سورين  ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 8:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 4:33pm: فقير ، فقير ، موسى ، شخص طفولي أحمق. تسك ، تسك ، التعصب المسيحي الخاص بك يعمل بشكل واضح من خلال جميع مشاركاتك. اذهب ، عد إلى ملعب الأطفال الصغير حيث تنتمي ، حيث يتم التسامح مع أعمالك الغريبة.   ::) ::) Twonk. Bleedin' twonk. How do you say 'bleedin' twonk' in Arabic, loon? سورين  ::) ::)

Surin??


You stupid googling twonk, you.

What a wanker. Worse than karnal and he is a champion self-abuser. But you beat even him, Bwian. You stand alone in the mindless wanky twonk league.
You are THE wanky twonk aunty, Bwian. No contest.

Best to speak in Kraut, Brian. The old boy isn't too fond of the Semitic languages, of which t'wonq is one.

Can you get his nanny to call him again?

It might help, dear.

Jihad Report February 16, 2019 - February 22, 2019

Attacks 39  Killed 255  Injured 129  Suicide Blasts 4  Countries 16

I mean if only they had ignored the bad bits like the *moderates* are saying.

What the *moderate* refuses to acknowledge and keeps lying about is the fact that these killers are the no.1 true blue muslim according to the qur'an.

The refuse to be honest and accept that muhammad/allah created two different classes of muslims.

The killers rapists torturers all know from their *book* that what they are doing in the name of allah is absolutely gaining them entry into paradise, which has been touted as a heavenly brothel filled with aliens with big tits and little boys scattered like pearls.

It's a simple as that, the *book* is nothing more that a call to arms for muslims, who are to rape torture and pillage their way across the land in the spread of islam.

Why would these low intelligence cretins want to ignore the bad bits?

Frank wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 8:36pm: Frank wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 8:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Feb 25th, 2019 at 4:33pm: فقير ، فقير ، موسى ، شخص طفولي أحمق. تسك ، تسك ، التعصب المسيحي الخاص بك يعمل بشكل واضح من خلال جميع مشاركاتك. اذهب ، عد إلى ملعب الأطفال الصغير حيث تنتمي ، حيث يتم التسامح مع أعمالك الغريبة.   ::) ::) Twonk. Bleedin' twonk. How do you say 'bleedin' twonk' in Arabic, loon? سورين  ::) ::) Surin??

سورين, Soren, in Arabic.


Quote:

You stupid googling twonk, you. What a wanker. Worse than karnal and he is a champion self-abuser. But you beat even him, Bwian. You stand alone in the mindless wanky twonk league. You are THE wanky twonk aunty, Bwian. No contest.

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Poor, poor, Soren.  Lost the debate, yet again, hey?  You resort to ad hominem insults everytime you lose.    ::)

Karnal wrote on Feb 25^th, 2019 at 11:06pm:

Best to speak in Kraut, Brian. The old boy isn't too fond of the Semitic languages, of which t'wonq is one. Can you get his nanny to call him again? It might help, dear.

I think she has given up on him.  Shame really, there he was, making progress.  Obviously the change in drug regime helped but he's stopped taking them for some strange reason.   

So you’re scared of Islam? By that logic, you should be scared of Christianity as well   :o

Meanwhile the truth is:


Australian National Security

The current National Terrorism Threat Level is PROBABLE and the public should continue to exercise caution.

Crowded places such as stadiums, shopping centres, pedestrian malls and major events will continue to be attractive targets for terrorists. Australia is not immune. The objective of Australia’s Strategy for Protecting Crowded Places from Terrorism is to protect the lives of people working in, using, and visiting crowded places by making these places more resilient to terrorism.

Currently, 26 organisations are listed as terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code. They are:

•Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)

•Al-Murabitun

•Al-Qa'ida (AQ)

•Al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)

•Al-Qa’ida in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS)

•Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)

•Al-Shabaab

•Boko Haram

•Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades

•Hizballah's External Security Organisation (ESO)

•Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan

•Islamic State

•Islamic State East Asia

•Islamic State in Libya (IS-Libya)

•Islamic State Khorasan Province

•Islamic State Sinai Province (IS-Sinai)

•Jabhat al-Nusra

•Jaish-e-Mohammad

•Jama’at Mujahideen Bangladesh

•Jamiat ul-Ansar (JuA)

•Jemaah Anshorut Daulah

•Jemaah Islamiyah (JI)

•Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)

•Lashkar-e Jhangvi

•Lashkar-e-Tayyiba

•Palestinian Islamic Jihad

No jolly Christians in sight ,only good old muzzies who definitely will not ignore the bad bits of the *infallible book*.

Meanwhile the truth is:

Islam plays a relatively minor note in the Terrorism that the Western World experiences.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 27^th, 2019 at 5:17pm:

Meanwhile the truth is: Islam plays a relatively minor note in the Terrorism that the Western World experiences.   ::)

Luiz Romero
Luiz Romero is a reporter for Quartz based in São Paulo.


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/914917711892959232/p-wVszYY_400x400.jpg




;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

One frikken clueless nobsocket getting guidance for his life from another no-idea twonk.  Or vice versa.



Bwian is gettin' a Bwazilian....