polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 9
th, 2018 at 10:00am:
freediver wrote on Mar 8
th, 2018 at 7:22pm:
Quote:Good question FD. I believe I asked you that exact same question when you made your BS claim about Islam recruitment only starting when potential followers saw the attraction of slaughtering innocent and defenceless caravaners.
No Gandalf. I asked you the question. I have asked it every time you use this excuse, to highlight the absurdity of your excuses. How does Muhammad's mistreatment by some people in Meccca justify an entirely different group of Muslims using it as an excuse to murder and steal from an entirely different group of Meccans? This is the evil of Islam.
No really FD, I asked you. 7 days ago, to be exact - here it is again:
polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 2
nd, 2018 at 11:15am:
freediver wrote on Mar 1
st, 2018 at 7:56pm:
Muhammad had bugger all followers until he started robbing Meccan trade caravans and murdering innocent traders from his base in Medina.
Quote:For most of the Muslims, it was the first attack. They only became followers of Muhammad to join in the looting.
Good point FD. Now
if you wouldn't mind just furnishing me with some figures (with evidence preferably) for the pre and post first caravan raid muslim population. Just a ballpark figure will do.thanks.
Oh surprise surprise, you ducked and weaved from it.
Why is this important? Because your BS claim that the caravan raids were carried out (at least in part) by a population that were not involved in the hijra - is completely baseless. But once again, as you always do, you state it as unquestioned fact.
As it happens, we know you are wrong. The caravan raids were carried out entirely by the emigrants (muhajirun) - which a simple search on wikipedia would have told you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MuhajirunAnd while we're on the subject of BS claims, lets also dispense with your claim that it was "years" between the hijra and the first raids. The hijra happened in sometime between June and September 622, and the first raid happened between January and March the following year - well under one year later.
Gandalf, I asked you many times for the numbers prior to that.
Also, that wikipedia article says the opposite of what you claim it says. Did you read it?
Quote:do you think its important bringing actual facts to the table when debating actual history?
Yes Gandalf, that's why I have asked you so many times for the numbers of followers.
Quote:When you have been proven wrong so many times on specific points of historical fact, do you think it delegitimises your argument? Even just a little bit?
Just as an example, is the wikipedia article you posted a link to an example of you proving me wrong on a specific point of historical fact?