Quote:


I am disputing the deliberately misleading spin you are putting on them. Muhammed opened up a second front because he was afraid of a second front? That's almost as daft as your earlier claim that it didn't make strategic sense to slaughter these Jews because it would discourage others from surrendering without a fight.

It was cold blooded collective punishment. Your feeble excuses are no different to Nazis trying to justify the holocaust because of crimes committed by Jews, except that you expect people to respect this absurdity because you really truly believe it.

Quote:


Since when do Muslims hold the sealed nectar as a reliable source? The historical evidence indicates that some of these people actually helped the Muslims, and there were no actual hostilities against them.

If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective, does that mean you will accept it when people insist that Muslims are like the borg and they can all be punished for the actions of a few? Or would common sense suddenly kick in if the tables were turned?

Quote:


They were ungrateful Jews after all. They should have leapt to Muhammed's support after he waltzed in, took over, and expelled two other Jewish tribes from their own homes and started preaching anti-Jewish propaganda in the main street.

Quote:


And 800 of your relatives. And we'll rape all your women. Just so you know we mean it.

Quote:


Yes please. I have often wondered what definition of treason includes all 800 people that Muhammed executed, and all the women that were taken as sex slaves.

While you are at it, can you provide a definition of front that includes failed negotiations and no actual hostilities?

Quote:


Would that be one of those imaginary fronts that lacks an actual front? How is it that when Muslims go round expelling and slaughtering  entire tribes they still manage to claim victimhood status? Muslims only need to imagine a war, and it justifies every evil act they can think of.

Quote:


I understand what you are saying. I just cannot fathom how you take yourself seriously. How do you manage to ignore the term collective punishment whenever I use it? Do you not understand the term? There is no way all 800 people were guilty of a crime, and Muhammed made no effort at giving them a trial.

Quote:


Collective punishment. Do you understand the term?

Quote:


It still does not mean that all 800 people committed a crime. Muslims act like the borg today, but can you imagine their whining if we executed 800 relatives because one of them talked to Alquaida?

Even in identical modern situations like the military it is still not right to collectively punish. People are judged for their own actions, not the actions of others.

You have been arguing that they were 'deserting' to Muhammed in droves. Are you now saying that they were absolutely loyal whenever you are making up excuses for mass slaughter, while at the same time acting as individuals when choosing to swap sides?

If their tribal loyalty was absolute and they acted as one, how is it that some of them helped Muhammed while others were negotiating with the enemy?

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:


The sealed nectar says there were actual attacks on the muslim garrison by the Quraysa. Either way, there is no dispute that they were negotiating with the enemy about supporting the Quraysh siege, and commencing hostilities with the muslims. Try as you may, you are not going to explain that away as not breaking the treaty and an act of treason.

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:


Evidence?

Thats not my understanding at all. "Helping" Muhammad was merely a ploy, as a way of hedging their bets, and to go about their treachery with the least amount of suspicion.

This "all for one and one for all" tribal culture can be a little hard to get your head around, and it certainly doesn't help making comparisons with the contemporary world, since it was nothing like the world we know today. As I said, there was no real concept of individuality - your personality was literally defined by which tribe you belonged to. And the decisions that govern the tribe are very much decisions that are represented by all the individuals who make up the tribe. Thus there really is no question of collective guilt - no matter how abhorrent we find the term today.

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:


The pagans were deserting in droves, not the jews. The agrarian jewish tribes were far more close-knit communities than the mercantile pagans. Still, some members of the Qurayza walked away from their tribe - thereby disassociating themselves from the treasonous decisions made by the tribe - and their lives were spared.

I already quoted it for you Baron:

Quote:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1374022294/116#116

Its from the pdf you linked before. Look it up yourself if you don't believe me.

Quote:


HB, it is an Islamic principle that unless something is expressly forbidden, then it is permitted. Furthermore, if he was running the country at a time when it was happening and he did nothing to stop it, then he condoned it.

Quote:


The negotiations had failed. The enemy had gone home. 'They' were not negotiating. A small number of them were - the ones who were actually guilty of treason. The rest were prisoners of war by every reasonable standard.

Most wars involve the breaking for some kind of agreement, particularly civil wars. By your reasoning this makes every POW captured in such a war guilty of treason. Basically, Islam allows the execution of POWs whenever they can cobble together some kind of excuse like a broken treaty.

Furthermore, it was Muhammed himself who broke the treaty. The tribes of Medina did not agree to having Muhammed expel them one by one on the weakest of pretexts. They did not sign up to having Muhammed preach anti-Jewish propaganda in their own market places. They did not sign up to be utterly subservient to Muhammed.

It merely demonstrates that Islam requires it's followers to completely discard objectivity. It requires them to claim victimhood on behalf of a 7th century Hitler who went round raping, pillaging and slaughtering.

Quote:




It is only a ploy if you need a bullshit excuse for Muhammed executing 800 people, many of whom were actually on his side and helped him. On the other hand if you want to suck up the facts and be objective about it, they assisted the Muslims. There was no effort at justice. It was a barefaced act of aggression and fearmongering - unless you do exactly what I tell you to and meekly put up with all the poo I heap on you, I will kill you, 800 of your male relatives, and take all the women as sex slaves.

Quote:


I can see exactly what it is, and Muhammed was the worst example of that culture. He took tribal brutality and turned it into a nation building machine. He extinguished the tribalism, not the brutality.

Actually 20 times that is exaggerated.

Real number of muslims killed by jews since 1948 number in the millions.

Approximately 1.5 million Palestinian civilians have died since 1948,including the victims of the ethnic cleansing campaigns in the west in 1948-50 and in the east since 1967. Civilian deaths have escalated dramatically in recent years since the zionists developed their obsession with the Palestinian birth-rate,and children are often the target. There is only a small fine for killing a Palestinian in cold blood. It's based on a weapons charge,not murder. To understand the genocidal character of this vile regime,one need only glance at the responses from zionists; at least half advocate or at least imply approval of the killing of non-jews. Adocating genocide is by the way a reportable offence on Y/A. Aproximately 2000 civilian Palestinians are killed each year. If you are jewish and you shoot an 8-year-old Palestinian girl in cold blood,you will have your weapons license revoked for three months and pay a fine equivalent to 50-100 dollars U.S. It's considered by the "government'"to be more or less the same thing as shooting squirrals within city limits with a .22. would be in America. Zionists love to murder Palestinian children and they do it all the time. The military handles the mass-murders. We are not talking about suicide bombers or militants; those figures fall into another category. I am referring to wanton killing of civilians.