Australian Politics Forum - spineless apologetics

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2010 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:50pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:48pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

The American government is now a religious institution?

To the evangelicals and the religious white supremacist nutjobs - absolutely it is. And they absolutely see 'righteous' wars like toppling Saddam and financially and militarily aiding Israel's occupation of Palestine as carrying out God's divine plan. Its no coincidence that George W proudly declared that God told him to invade Iraq. American (read: white christian) hegemony over evil heathens in the ME, and the necessary terrorising of those populations that comes with that is central to these extremist's ideology - and from where they're sitting, their government is doing a bang up job on that front.

Fairly sure he was talking to the Palestinians when he said that, not the evangelicals. But hey, nothing new to see you take something out of context. The reality is, the American government is not driven by religion when it comes to whatever military operation it undertakes. On the other hand, the fact Shiites and Sunnis can't live together, the fact you have states stoning people in the name of Islam, the act you have jihadists, all has very much to do with their religion.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:56pm by sir prince duke alevine »

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2011 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 11:17am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 12:25am:

Actually extremist catholics, protestants and jews are different to extremist muslims because extremist catholics, protestants and jews don't go around blowing up people

Thats right alevine - they don't need to, as the moderate ones do it for them. How many people do you think are blown up every day by the moderate "non-extremist" American government? Do you reckon the number of innocents killed by extremist muslims pales in comparison to the number of innocents killed by "non-extremist" catholics, protestants and jews?

The American government is now a religious institution? I'm just gonna pretend this a comment from you after your first beer, Gandalf. Honestly.

How many killings occurred in the world last year in the names of the catholic, Protestant, Jewish religions?

And how many in the name of Islam?

And how many extremist Jews and Christians cheered on George W Bush's alleged "crusade" against the "Axis of Evil?"

Honestly?

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 41110
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2012 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92745
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2013 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:02pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 11:17am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 12:25am:

Actually extremist catholics, protestants and jews are different to extremist muslims because extremist catholics, protestants and jews don't go around blowing up people

Thats right alevine - they don't need to, as the moderate ones do it for them. How many people do you think are blown up every day by the moderate "non-extremist" American government? Do you reckon the number of innocents killed by extremist muslims pales in comparison to the number of innocents killed by "non-extremist" catholics, protestants and jews?

The American government is now a religious institution? I'm just gonna pretend this a comment from you after your first beer, Gandalf. Honestly.

How many killings occurred in the world last year in the names of the catholic, Protestant, Jewish religions?

And how many in the name of Islam?

And how many extremist Jews and Christians cheered on George W Bush's alleged "crusade" against the "Axis of Evil?"

Honestly?

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word.

Which word did he mean to use, Alevine?

I'm curious.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92745
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2014 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2015 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:18pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 11:17am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 12:25am:

Actually extremist catholics, protestants and jews are different to extremist muslims because extremist catholics, protestants and jews don't go around blowing up people

Thats right alevine - they don't need to, as the moderate ones do it for them. How many people do you think are blown up every day by the moderate "non-extremist" American government? Do you reckon the number of innocents killed by extremist muslims pales in comparison to the number of innocents killed by "non-extremist" catholics, protestants and jews?

The American government is now a religious institution? I'm just gonna pretend this a comment from you after your first beer, Gandalf. Honestly.

How many killings occurred in the world last year in the names of the catholic, Protestant, Jewish religions?

And how many in the name of Islam?

And how many extremist Jews and Christians cheered on George W Bush's alleged "crusade" against the "Axis of Evil?"

Honestly?

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word.

Which word did he mean to use, Alevine?

I'm curious.

It#s a simple google Karnal. Youtube video. 'Bush talks about god and war'

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2016 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:20pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

How about you actually stick to what we're discussing, Karnal? How many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

How many muslim leaders, who advocate for sharia law and you know...stoning someone for being raped, tell us afterwards that's not what they meant?

The point is, you can misstate a position (heck you do it all the time and so do I). You can misuse a word. You can overstate something in the heat of a moment. But, the reality is NONE of the people who have been telling us they do what they do because of Islam have backtracked and decided to tell us otherwise.

But keep getting your undies in a twist over Bush using the word crusade, which he then admitted was not what he meant. Not to mention that the decisions of a liberal secular society are not based on religion.

And you never answeered Karnal - how many Jews and Catholics celebrated Bush's use of the word crusade? A number, or a percentage, would do.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:29pm by sir prince duke alevine »

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

Brian Ross Gold Member Offline Representative of me Posts: 39709	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2017 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 7:15pm moses wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 2:16pm: Quote: Moses, do you think the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was part of a divine plan ordained by G-d Himself? ??? Err no. So, tell us, what you do you think of the Christians who disagree with you?
Back to top	Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 39709

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2018 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 7:18pm

Justsayno wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 3:36pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 12:09pm:

Justsayno wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 11:11am:

How does it feel to be found out Brian you charlatan?

Oh, dearie, dearie, me. Run along little man.

More ad hominem from a person that has been proven to be a fraud and a charlatan.

Oh, dearie, dearie, me. Tsk, tsk. Move along folks move along, nothing of interest here, just more of JSN's ad hominem arguments. Roll Eyes

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:28pm by Brian Ross »

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 41110
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2019 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 8:23pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

Still a good point.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92745
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2020 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:09pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:18pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 11:17am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 12:25am:

Actually extremist catholics, protestants and jews are different to extremist muslims because extremist catholics, protestants and jews don't go around blowing up people

Thats right alevine - they don't need to, as the moderate ones do it for them. How many people do you think are blown up every day by the moderate "non-extremist" American government? Do you reckon the number of innocents killed by extremist muslims pales in comparison to the number of innocents killed by "non-extremist" catholics, protestants and jews?

The American government is now a religious institution? I'm just gonna pretend this a comment from you after your first beer, Gandalf. Honestly.

How many killings occurred in the world last year in the names of the catholic, Protestant, Jewish religions?

And how many in the name of Islam?

And how many extremist Jews and Christians cheered on George W Bush's alleged "crusade" against the "Axis of Evil?"

Honestly?

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word.

Which word did he mean to use, Alevine?

I'm curious.

It#s a simple google Karnal. Youtube video. 'Bush talks about god and war'

Slipped your mind, has it?

Perhaps he meant to say Kool Aid. I'm sure the teleprompter was going too fast to keep up.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92745
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2021 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:15pm

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 8:23pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

Still a good point.

True. The focus groups, speech writers and White House history buffs stumbled upon the wrong choice of word. An easy mishtake to make.

You'd never see the tinted races do that, eh?

Apart from that spineless Sheik Hilaly and his cat-meat nonsense. Typical.

"Regressives".

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92745
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2022 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:20pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:20pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

How about you actually stick to what we're discussing, Karnal? How many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

How many muslim leaders, who advocate for sharia law and you know...stoning someone for being raped, tell us afterwards that's not what they meant?

Good point, Alevine. Like Tony Blair, you mean?

Oh, I know.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2023 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:22pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:09pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:18pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 1:25pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 25^th, 2017 at 9:40pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 11:17am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2017 at 12:25am:

Actually extremist catholics, protestants and jews are different to extremist muslims because extremist catholics, protestants and jews don't go around blowing up people

Thats right alevine - they don't need to, as the moderate ones do it for them. How many people do you think are blown up every day by the moderate "non-extremist" American government? Do you reckon the number of innocents killed by extremist muslims pales in comparison to the number of innocents killed by "non-extremist" catholics, protestants and jews?

The American government is now a religious institution? I'm just gonna pretend this a comment from you after your first beer, Gandalf. Honestly.

How many killings occurred in the world last year in the names of the catholic, Protestant, Jewish religions?

And how many in the name of Islam?

And how many extremist Jews and Christians cheered on George W Bush's alleged "crusade" against the "Axis of Evil?"

Honestly?

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word.

Which word did he mean to use, Alevine?

I'm curious.

It#s a simple google Karnal. Youtube video. 'Bush talks about god and war'

Slipped your mind, has it?

Perhaps he meant to say Kool Aid. I'm sure the teleprompter was going too fast to keep up.

Isn't it hilarious how the regressive mind works? A person says they misspoke, and you say "bullcrap." A person never says they misspoke, always give you the same response, and you still say "bullcrap". your irrationality is profound.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2024 - Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:24pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 9:20pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:20pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 6:06pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 26^th, 2017 at 5:52pm:

How many?

And the use of crusade was admitted by bush to be the wrong choice of word. Now, how many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

Keep trying to link where links don't exist. It only goes to show how much of a spineless, dishonest apologetic you are.

Good point.

Oh, I know. Alevine's taken to your style, dear boy. The only thing he's left out is the tinted Paki Bastard compliment.

How about you actually stick to what we're discussing, Karnal? How many jihadists afterwards tell us they were wrong to say they committed an act in the name of their religion?

How many muslim leaders, who advocate for sharia law and you know...stoning someone for being raped, tell us afterwards that's not what they meant?

Good point, Alevine. Like Tony Blair, you mean?

Oh, I know.

Now tony Blair also partook in the war because He felt obliged by his religion?

Why do you ignore my question, karnal? You said it, back it up!

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged