I was hoping you wouldn't drag this quote out FD, as it makes no freaking sense at all. Or at least, I was hoping that if you did drag it out, you would at least make it more comprehensible. Alas it was a forlorn hope

Lets at least try and break it down then....
freediver wrote on Jun 29
th, 2019 at 8:11am:
Even if they revised the numbers down to zero, they would still have to contend with the fact that the vast majority of Muslims claim Muhammad did something evil
Why is this a contention? Personally I have no problem with disagreeing with other muslims on any number of theological points (and this is not even theological, but historical).
freediver wrote on Jun 29
th, 2019 at 8:11am:
and they don't want to put themselves in the position where a disagreement over historical fact, in which they are in the minority, is all it takes to paint Muhammad as evil.
This is where the logical fallacy kicks in. Plus it makes no sense. I don't even know where to begin, as it is literally incomprehensible. So I guess this is what I meant by "pretend I'm stupid - dumb it down even more please".
freediver wrote on Jun 29
th, 2019 at 8:11am:
Quote:
Most muslims FD? Thats funny, I'd say most muslims accept the numbers quoted by Islamic sources at face value. Where on earth did you get this idea?
And yet they still deny it is genocide.
No FD, these are not the genocide deniers.
Genocide deniers obviously don't accept any figure that purports to be the slaughter of the entire male population.
freediver wrote on Jun 29
th, 2019 at 8:11am:
Or some other bald-faced lie such as it was an act of war, they were an army, or only the warriors were killed - all lies you have tried to tell us.
Or try even "only the ringleaders/those directly involved in treating with the enemy" - all other males, including warriors, were spared.