Australian Politics Forum - spineless apologetics

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2505 - Sep 17^th, 2019 at 11:57am

freediver wrote on Sep 11^th, 2019 at 6:37pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 10^th, 2019 at 9:27am:

freediver wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 6:42pm:

Are you suggesting it is not good enough Gandalf?

Are we actually playing this game where we pretend thats not a mother of 7 being executed for murdering her husband as the source says - and instead pretend its a little girl being executed as Frank lied?

Once you finally get your head around the fact that Frank told a porky here, let me know if you think its acceptable way of debating, or whether you think your response (to apologise for the porky and somehow make it into an attack on me) was appropriate.

You appear to be agreeing with me at the same time as accusing me of attacking you. Is that why you aren't giving a straight answer?

I'm agreeing with you that a clearly labelled picture of a grown woman being executed for murdering her husband is "good enough" evidence that school girls were executed for going to school - am I FD?

Did you think that one through?

Or are is some bizarre way of deflecting from you falling head over heels for the most blatant of porkies - and accepting without question that the picture was what Frank claimed it to be?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40675
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2506 - Sep 17^th, 2019 at 8:49pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 7:21pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 7:01pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 3:32pm:

FD's response when Frank posted a picture of a woman being executed for murdering her husband - and passing it off as the taliban killing school girls for going to school - along with the question "What was the fate of the Talib who shot this particular school girl?"...

freediver wrote on Sep 6^th, 2019 at 10:04pm:

Gandalf will say that is not good enough Frank. With the letterbox outfit on you cannot tell whether the Taliban are shooting that girl in the face or the back of the head. Or her age. Abracadaver, the Taliban are really no worse than the Saudis.

FD can you possibly think of a more snivelling spineless apology for the most blatant porky than this?

The taliban are deadly violent beacuse they are fundamentalist

ISLAMi

sts.

Islam.

So a picture of the Taliban killing a grown woman somehow invalidates, to what you call your mind, the idea that the Taliban systematically violently prevents girls' education. And so latch onto the Talibs' brutality against women generally to argue that they are - mysteriously, but somehow not really - violently against girls' education??

Yes, Gandalf, it's

ALL

about Islamic doctrine and enforcement.

Show us what they taught you in the madrassa to wriggle off those particular pins, son of Mo.

Interesting question, dear boy. Can you explain how the execution of a woman for murder fits into the Taliban policy on girls' education?

I'd ask FD, but he's too busy pretending there's an 8 year old in that letterbox outfit.

They ARE killing women, men, children. For barbaric reasons.

Which of those killings do you, Gandalf and rest of you bastards approve of?

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92409
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2507 - Sep 21^st, 2019 at 1:19am

Frank wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 8:49pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 7:21pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 7:01pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 3:32pm:

FD's response when Frank posted a picture of a woman being executed for murdering her husband - and passing it off as the taliban killing school girls for going to school - along with the question "What was the fate of the Talib who shot this particular school girl?"...

freediver wrote on Sep 6^th, 2019 at 10:04pm:

Gandalf will say that is not good enough Frank. With the letterbox outfit on you cannot tell whether the Taliban are shooting that girl in the face or the back of the head. Or her age. Abracadaver, the Taliban are really no worse than the Saudis.

FD can you possibly think of a more snivelling spineless apology for the most blatant porky than this?

The taliban are deadly violent beacuse they are fundamentalist

ISLAMi

sts.

Islam.

So a picture of the Taliban killing a grown woman somehow invalidates, to what you call your mind, the idea that the Taliban systematically violently prevents girls' education. And so latch onto the Talibs' brutality against women generally to argue that they are - mysteriously, but somehow not really - violently against girls' education??

Yes, Gandalf, it's

ALL

about Islamic doctrine and enforcement.

Show us what they taught you in the madrassa to wriggle off those particular pins, son of Mo.

Interesting question, dear boy. Can you explain how the execution of a woman for murder fits into the Taliban policy on girls' education?

I'd ask FD, but he's too busy pretending there's an 8 year old in that letterbox outfit.

They ARE killing women, men, children. For barbaric reasons.

Which of those killings do you, Gandalf and rest of you bastards approve of?

Have another photo, do you? Do share, dear boy.

Perhaps you can rustle up a few of those bearded numpties and dress them up as schoolgirls.

Give FD a wink about white man's burden.

Tell him it's the Pirates of Penzance, he won't know the difference.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47481
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2508 - Sep 21^st, 2019 at 7:48am

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 11:57am:

freediver wrote on Sep 11^th, 2019 at 6:37pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 10^th, 2019 at 9:27am:

freediver wrote on Sep 9^th, 2019 at 6:42pm:

Are you suggesting it is not good enough Gandalf?

Are we actually playing this game where we pretend thats not a mother of 7 being executed for murdering her husband as the source says - and instead pretend its a little girl being executed as Frank lied?

Once you finally get your head around the fact that Frank told a porky here, let me know if you think its acceptable way of debating, or whether you think your response (to apologise for the porky and somehow make it into an attack on me) was appropriate.

You appear to be agreeing with me at the same time as accusing me of attacking you. Is that why you aren't giving a straight answer?

I'm agreeing with you that a clearly labelled picture of a grown woman being executed for murdering her husband is "good enough" evidence that school girls were executed for going to school - am I FD?

Did you think that one through?

Or are is some bizarre way of deflecting from you falling head over heels for the most blatant of porkies - and accepting without question that the picture was what Frank claimed it to be?

Are you having another opposite day Gandalf?

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20023 Canberra Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2509 - Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 10:27am Best not to over think these things FD. Are you still saying that Frank's picture was a good example of a school girl getting shot for not going to school - despite the contradictory description from its source? Hopefully you won't need another 4 days to mull this over.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92409
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2510 - Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 12:34pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 10:27am:

Best not to over think these things FD.

Are you still saying that Frank's picture was a good example of a school girl getting shot for not going to school - despite the contradictory description from its source?

Hopefully you won't need another 4 days to mull this over.

FD's already said that, G. He didn't have much time to elaborate because he wanted to say how much of a Taliban apologist you are.

FD's trying to excuse the Saudis, you see. They're on our side. They're hardly even Muslims.

If the Saudis get up to no good, they're just being a bit cheeky. Nothing to do with Islam.

FD doesn't have the time to prove it, just believe him.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 12:41pm by Mattyfisk »

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2511 - Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 1:59pm

Imagine if FD decided to switch sides and get to work on this mother-of-all 'yeah but no yeah' squirming and deflection - instead of apologising for it:

Frank wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 6:33pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 12:01pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 11^th, 2019 at 6:04pm:

I was not lying and claimed what you are now trying to twist, knowingly.

You are taking the piss right?

Referring to a clearly labelled picture of a woman being executed for murdering her husband you asked in clear black and white:

"What was the fate of the Talib who shot this particular school girl?"

Would you like to retract the claim that you were not lying Frank?

Honestly, you were far more likable when you just proudly owned your fibs, rather than attempting FD-like contortions to try and hide your lies.

Enough lying, son of Mohammed.

I said a few pages ago:

I was not lying and claimed what you are now trying to twist, knowingly. My post had pictures from the Wikipedia article on women's treatment by the Taliban in Afghanistan. I also posted an article from Time.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1567134066/246#246

Malala Yousufzai WAS shot in the head by the Taliban FOR going to school. We have pictures only of the result, not the act. But I did ask, re 'you idiotic ddissembling about policy, whether the shooter was ever repri,anded by the Taliban by going rougue, as you idiotically try to insinuate. The answer is no. he was carrying out Talioban policy. See also https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/world/asia/taliban-girls-schools.html

The Taliban DO mistreat women, they DO attack schools, the DO kill schoolgirls. And not only in Afghanistan but in Paki's homeland (Peshawar massacre) as well. And the Talibs are not alone. Chechen jihadis have proven themselves to be as bloodthirsty and evil in Veslan and elsewhere.

And you have the hide and the cheek (hide 'n cheek Shocked) to act miffed, as if the gruesome jihadis have been miswepwesented and their good name besmirched.i

I reckon he could go a good 6 months on this - across about 15 separate threads, each at least 20 pages long.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47481
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2512 - Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 9:08pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 10:27am:

Best not to over think these things FD.

Are you still saying that Frank's picture was a good example of a school girl getting shot for not going to school - despite the contradictory description from its source?

Hopefully you won't need another 4 days to mull this over.

I said that you would say it was not good enough. Then you came along and said it was not good enough, thus proving me wrong, somehow.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40675
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2513 - Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 9:39pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 1:59pm:

Imagine if FD decided to switch sides and get to work on this mother-of-all 'yeah but no yeah' squirming and deflection - instead of apologising for it:

Frank wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 6:33pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 17^th, 2019 at 12:01pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 11^th, 2019 at 6:04pm:

I was not lying and claimed what you are now trying to twist, knowingly.

You are taking the piss right?

Referring to a clearly labelled picture of a woman being executed for murdering her husband you asked in clear black and white:

"What was the fate of the Talib who shot this particular school girl?"

Would you like to retract the claim that you were not lying Frank?

Honestly, you were far more likable when you just proudly owned your fibs, rather than attempting FD-like contortions to try and hide your lies.

Enough lying, son of Mohammed.

I said a few pages ago:

I was not lying and claimed what you are now trying to twist, knowingly. My post had pictures from the Wikipedia article on women's treatment by the Taliban in Afghanistan. I also posted an article from Time.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1567134066/246#246

Malala Yousufzai WAS shot in the head by the Taliban FOR going to school. We have pictures only of the result, not the act. But I did ask, re 'you idiotic ddissembling about policy, whether the shooter was ever repri,anded by the Taliban by going rougue, as you idiotically try to insinuate. The answer is no. he was carrying out Talioban policy. See also https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/world/asia/taliban-girls-schools.html

The Taliban DO mistreat women, they DO attack schools, the DO kill schoolgirls. And not only in Afghanistan but in Paki's homeland (Peshawar massacre) as well. And the Talibs are not alone. Chechen jihadis have proven themselves to be as bloodthirsty and evil in Veslan and elsewhere.

And you have the hide and the cheek (hide 'n cheek Shocked) to act miffed, as if the gruesome jihadis have been miswepwesented and their good name besmirched.i

I reckon he could go a good 6 months on this - across about 15 separate threads, each at least 20 pages long.

That picture of the Taliban executing a woman was never presented as a picture of the Taliban shooting a schoolgirl. It was always an example of the general barbarity of Islam towards women - linked to the wikipedia of its source.

You demanding an apology for Islamic barbarity that you deliberately misrepresent for spineless lying purposes is telling and is example number 1001 + n of the utter, unprincipled eastern dishonesty of Mohammed and all his sons like you. With mindsets like yours, I can see how muslims execute victims of rape. Honesty takes a distant backseat to defending Islamic, mohammedan ukase, no matter how barbaric and outrageous. You will always sacrifice honesty to Mohamed.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 24^th, 2019 at 6:46pm by Frank »

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

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2514 - Sep 24^th, 2019 at 10:26am

freediver wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 9:08pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2019 at 10:27am:

Best not to over think these things FD.

Are you still saying that Frank's picture was a good example of a school girl getting shot for not going to school - despite the contradictory description from its source?

Hopefully you won't need another 4 days to mull this over.

I said that you would say it was not good enough. Then you came along and said it was not good enough, thus proving me wrong, somehow.

And why did you say I would say it was not good enough FD - other than to suggest yourself that it is indeed good enough? Is that what you were suggesting FD? Do you think it is "good enough" evidence now - in light of what you now know about the context of the picture?

Why on earth would you continue to quiz me on the suitability of a piece of evidence I have already labelled - clearly and repeatedly - as a big fat lie? You seem to be going to enormous lengths to deflect from the fact that you apologised for a big fat porky.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47481 At my desk.	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2515 - Sep 24^th, 2019 at 6:33pm Quote: And why did you say I would say it was not good enough FD That's what my crystal ball said would happen. What it did not foresee was you spending many pages attempting to disagree with something you actually agree with. Perhaps I need to get it re-tuned.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20023 Canberra Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2516 - Sep 25^th, 2019 at 9:15am At the risk of giving you license for further idiotic ducking and weaving, I'll skip over your confusion about what I did and didn't disagree with and try for a straight answer again: Do you think its 'good enough' FD? Or do you acknowledge that Frank was telling a big fat porky? You didn't say.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47481 At my desk.	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2517 - Sep 25^th, 2019 at 6:18pm It's not good enough for you, obviously. I see no porky from Frank however. I just see you lying about what Frank actually said.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

moses Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6353	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #2518 - Sep 25^th, 2019 at 10:09pm It's O.K. to lie, cos allah knows what's in your heart.
Back to top	IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40675
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #2519 - Sep 25^th, 2019 at 10:35pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 25^th, 2019 at 9:15am:

Or do you acknowledge that Frank was telling a big fat porky?

You are lying, Mohammedan. On purpose.

You are cementing the Mohammedan reputation for slimy dishonesty with every repeated dishonesty - and you hardly do anything else! You do not mean to but with each of these posts you reinforce the dissonance of being a Muslim and being in the West. Being a Mohammedan you cannot follow Reason - being in the West, you cannot be entirely, openly a son of the unquestioning East - so you speak AS IF there was any honesty, logic and reason in Mohammedanism.
In the face of the practical reality of Taliban - students of Islam - violence against women generally and against girls' education in particular, you are left with nothing but lying about the attributes of a picture showing the Taliban executing a woman and insisting that this picture is no proof of the Taliban being against girls' education - which nobody ever said it was. Yet you, a Mohammedan devoid of any reasonableness and tasked with the upholding of a wholly unreasonable and barbaric set of doctrines, find yourself arguing the toss about the age of an executed woman. Islam and Mohammed have made you stupid, distasteful, dishonest, inhumane. And you will praise them for it.

Back to top

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

IP Logged