Australian Politics Forum - Muhammad as the anti-christ

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40506
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #120 - Mar 6^th, 2018 at 6:20pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 11:08am:

Frank wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 7:20pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:44pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:49pm:

Well, Mohammed was a pretty evil man by any account. He would be locked up or executed now if he did now what he did then.

Jesus would get the Nobel Peace Prize. That's the difference - a war criminal and a peace maker.

Ah yes - like Kissenger, no?

Kill them.

you stupid arse-sucking pervert.

Nobody gets killed for not accepting Kissinger as the final prophet,

you contemptible lowlife. Go and suck arse, you Paki idiot.

I'd say there's a Nobel Peace Prize for you, dear boy.

You?

You are an idiot. You delete the pertinent point and then you do the perverted lowlife act.

Mohammed WAS pretty evil by any measure. The anti Christ in the literal sense - and otherwise. His whole point WAS to be anti Christ. And he was. His followers are.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 6^th, 2018 at 8:59pm by Frank »

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

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 39529

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #121 - Mar 6^th, 2018 at 9:17pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 2:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 2:16pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 1:43pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 1:41pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:12am:

Quote:

If you choose to rely on faith, rather than reason, why are we discussing this at all, Augie? You don't need affirmation from me, afterall you have faith, now don't you? Tsk, tsk.

Brian is it possible to conduct a reasoned analysis of the very real, earthly consequences of people's faith-based beliefs? Or is that only possible if you have the right and ability to criticise other religions?

You have thus failed to show you have an understanding of Islam, Freediver, therefore I do not think you have the right or the ability to criticise it. When you realise just how ignorant you are, we might be able to have a discussion. Until then, all you're doing is showing your Islamophobia. Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

So neither you nor I have the right or ability to criticise Islam?

Have you ever met anyone who does?

Yes.

Were they real, or a figment of your imagination, like those Christian terrorists who 'often' cite the book of Luke to justify terrorism?

More questions with question, hey? Tsk tsk, FD. Oh, dearie, dearie, me. Roll Eyes

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... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92264
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #122 - Mar 7^th, 2018 at 10:24am

Frank wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 6:20pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 11:08am:

Frank wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 7:20pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:44pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:49pm:

Well, Mohammed was a pretty evil man by any account. He would be locked up or executed now if he did now what he did then.

Jesus would get the Nobel Peace Prize. That's the difference - a war criminal and a peace maker.

Ah yes - like Kissenger, no?

Kill them.

you stupid arse-sucking pervert.

Nobody gets killed for not accepting Kissinger as the final prophet,

you contemptible lowlife. Go and suck arse, you Paki idiot.

I'd say there's a Nobel Peace Prize for you, dear boy.

You?

idiot... perverted lowlife act.

As you can see, the old boy is compelled to obey the orders of his prophet.

Submission, innit.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #123 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 11:20am

freediver wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2018 at 12:45pm:

Quote:

As I have said repeatedly, Jesus was not leading any state, and had no responsibility for the running of an actual society.

Neither was Muhammad, until he decided to use rape and pillage to build a state from scratch - a state that institutionalised rape and pillage for the benefit of the state. In order to build this state to impose his religion on people, Muhammad chose to sacrifice everything that was good about his religion and turn it into a tool of evil for the benefit of his state.

Quote:

When you understand this point, you might understand the fact that Muhammad's actions were done with the welfare of his people in mind.

We do not fail to understand it. We criticse it as morally vacuous and self serving.

Quote:

The fact is, when his people were evicted from their homes - from a city and society which was really the only place that resembled a commercial centre in the entire peninsula - a state of war had been established.

Only if you have been indoctrinated by Islam into a culture of hysterical over-reaction and victimhood mongering. This is why that state of war has existed for 1400 years - because Islam teaches Muslims to seek excuse for war where any humane ideology would teach the pursuit of peace.

Quote:

The muslim community in Medina was not only not safe from the power of Mecca, the non-agrarian community had no means of livelihood in the entirely agrarian city of Medina.

Absolute BS. Muhammad got away with murdering Meccan traders and robbing their caravans, unchallenged for a long time (except for the traders themselves trying to avoid being murdered). Muhamamd's own fetish for murder is what created the danger, and lo and behold, his fetish for even more murder was the solution.

Quote:

Caravan raids were not merely a legitimate prosecution of an existing war that was not started by the muslims - it was actually a means of survival for a group that had almost no possessions, and had no experience or skills carving a life on a farm.

There was no war. There was no state to fight that war. None of this existed until Muhammad turned his religion to hsyterical over-reaction, victimhood mongering, violence and warfare. No wonder modern Muslims follow his lead and never let go of any percieved wrong, turning it instead into a convenient excuse to murder people who they see as being linked in even the most tenuous way. No wonder Muslim countries are such basket cases of never ending violence.

Muhammad went far beyond survival. He went from nothing to ruling everything in a short time. But thanks for thinking of yet another excuse.

Looks like my prediction is coming true. Let's list Gandalf's excuses so far:

Muhammad was only acting in self defence: lie

Muhammad only murdered people to stay alive: lie

Muhammad's 'people' only murdered Meccan traders because they were unfairly evicted: another lie, most only joined up after the rape and pillage started to gain the spoils of war

Jesus didn't really mean what he preached about forgiveness and turning the other cheek, rather it was a cunning plan to get his (apparently unknown) real message out: Muslims projecting the self indulgent cynicism of Islam onto other ideologies

Jesus only did what he did to stay alive: does not even make sense, given that he died

There you go, according to FD, arguing that war is declared when you are forcibly evicted from your homes and your property is seized and an attempt is made on the life of your leader - is "a culture of hysterical over-reaction and victimhood mongering"

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

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #124 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:04pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 11:20am: