Australian Politics Forum - Islam is the cause of the conflict

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Islam › Islam is the cause of the conflict

(Moderator: polite_gandalf)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 9

Islam is the cause of the conflict (Read 6068 times)

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Islam is the cause of the conflict
Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:29pm

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:09pm:

freediver wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 11:49am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 11:11am:

freediver wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 11:02am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 10:51am:

freediver wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 10:29am:

Palestine did not exist as a country until Israel did. It is 100% about religion. The middle east was carved up however western countries wanted it. Most of the countries are very recent inventions. The locals got over it and moved on, until the Jews stepped out of line.

Religion is the marker by which most on each side identify themselves, not the reason for war.

I'd bet there are Palestinian Christians who stand with their Palestinian compatriots against Israel, as there may be Arab-Israelis who stand with Israel.

Had another Semitic people or other foreign entity claimed Palestine as Jews did, the local Palestinians would have risen up against them also.

This is about cultural identity and nationhood, not religious affiliation.

You are projecting. In this case, it is entirely about religion. The Palestinians would not have risen up against other Muslims. Israel is the only middle eastern country whose existence the Muslims generally object to, because of the Jews rising above their natural place.

You mean like Iran and Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Saudi Arabia, Kurds against Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey?

Yes. We have Australian Muslims on this website preaching that Islam will inevitably reconquer Israel. They actually say the same thing about Spain. They consider the land to be owned by the religion. Not by a country or an ethnicity or some other ideology. By religion.

We have? Where, whom? Evidence please, Freediver? Or you are talking bullshit again? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

falah wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 2:42pm:

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

It cannot cope with trying to make peace with the victors.

You mean surrender. Muslims don't surrender. Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act? Why don't you go and live in France you surrender-monkey?

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

It cannot cope with a Jewish homeland in land 'owned' by Islam.

Jews lived in Muslim land with peace and security for centuries while they were persecuted by the Catholic church.

Do Muslims accept that jews steal land and dispossess Muslim? Of course not. Who would accept that?

falah wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:32pm:

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Quote:

Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act?

It is better than refusing to acknowledge you lost a war.

If you don't surrender, you haven't lost.

falah wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:32pm:

Quote:

Falah, what is the difference between refusing to surrender when you have lost so miserably, and not wanting the bloodshed to continue? Do you actually think the Palestinians are on the verge of some kind of victory?

It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain.

Take the Aboriginal example in Australia. The Aborigines who surrenderd to the British Christians were virtually wiped out and dispossessed. Those who put up the fiercest resistance, like the Yolngu Arnhem Landers, today remain on their land.

History shows us that many wars have looked lost before they swung the other way. The USSR looked lost in 1941 when the Nazis were on the outskirts of Moscow. Just over three years later Soviet troops had captured Berlin.

It looked like the merciless Crusaders were firmly entrenched in the Palestine when Saladin became leader of Egypt in 1167. 20 years later Saladin had managed to unify the muslims in the region and expel the Christian invaders from Jerusalem. The Crusader occuaption of jerusalem last for 99 years. The Balfour Zionist occupation of Jerusalem has lasted 94 years.

In recent years Muslim have freed Sinai, Gaza and southern Lebanon from the Zionist occupation.

Since 2000 muslims have managed to force Israel to withdraw from Gaza and southern Lebanon. Full victory is just around the corner by the Grace of God Almighty.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:01pm:

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 9:16am:

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 8:19am:

Quote:

But too I believe Palestinians can exist as neighbours to us.

I wonder if Abu and Falah could reciprocate this gesture without qualifying it as temporary or some other silly attempt at deception.

I believe Israelis can live as good neighbours as soon as they get off stolen Palestinian land.

And go where?

Wherever they came from.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:51pm:

The Israelis can end the violence now by giving the Palestinians their land back. It is simple.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #1 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:29pm

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:51pm:

Put simply, the Israeli Jews will never make peace because, as their rejection of every peace demonstrates, their greed is overwhelming.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

Despite their many crimes, Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance to stay if they converted to Islam. Some of the Jews dedcided to take up the offer and converted o Islam, others left.

This was all done on a case by case basis. Over the years, all the Jewish tribes in Madina proved themselves to be treacherous and broke their treaties with the Muslims.

falah wrote on Jun 5^th, 2012 at 12:35am:

freediver wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 12:27pm:

falah wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 10:07am:

freediver wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 8:13am:

...It even has calls for more violence between settlers and aborigines...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1338172056

More lies Freeliar. You really can't help yourself can you?

It is good for people to see that the Islam-haters are liars.

Your stupidity harms your own cause.

Quotes from Falah:

Quote:

The thesis in its entirety demonstrates how interaction with Muslims saved the Arnhem Land Aboriginies from being genocided by European Christians like what happedned everywhere else in Australia.

Quote:

The Yolngu had seen white Dutch in their travels to Indonesia. They had been told to be wary of the whites, and knew they needed to resist them, and they knew how to deal with them.

Quote:

Indigenous people in northern coastal areas visited by Macassans were prepared to fight invaders from the earliest instances, unlike their Southern counterparts whose timidity often allowed European settlers to gain a strong foothold that made resistance more difficult.

How should we interpret this Falah? Would the southern aborigines have been better off if they knew about and used more violent strategies?

If the Southern Aborigines had managed to defend themselves better, they might still own the land.

Can you prove your lie that my thesis calls for more violence?

falah wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 8:26pm:

Freeliar it is Israel which is attacking Muslims, and the whole world except you and the rest of the Jews knows this.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 5^th, 2008 at 7:36pm:

Against my better judgement I'm resuming posting in this thread...

Quote:

Didn't either you or Malik say that they elected rulers in the Caliphate and that there were provisions for this in the Koran?

Note that I said forbidden from partaking in democratic elections. As I mentioned earlier, democracy doesn't mean electing your leader, democracy means human beings legislating right and wrong from their own minds. As far as I'm aware the word "republic" describes the system by which the leader is popularly elected to represent the people. Islam has no problem with a republican model of electing a leader, but when it comes to human beings legislating, the Qur'an and hadith are quite clear.

"And whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed, such are disbelievers" (5:44)

Also from the hadith we have the story of Adi Bin Hatim (May God be pleased with him) who came upon a gathering around the Messenger of God (Pbuh) and heard him saying the Jews and Christians had stooped into polytheism. He interjected and noted that even though the Christians had done this, the Jews had not. So Muhammad (Pbuh) said that their Priests and Rabbis make right and wrong for them from their own minds, and the people follow it, and that is worship of them, instead of God.

Basically what it comes down is that one of God's 99 attributes/names according to Islam is Al-Haakim (The Legislator). And he is the sole being worthy of legislating, so anyone who competes with him in this matter is considered to be a false god, and anyone who subscribes to that legislation is a worshipper of a false god, ie. a polytheist.

That is why a Muslim is not permitted to partake in Democratic elections, whether in Australia or Makkah or in Timbuktu for that matter. Whether the party is the ALP or it is a so called "Islamic party". Democratic elections are a competition not simply for who will be ruler, but who will be legislator, Muslims are forbidden to elect a legislator, we may only elect a representative (Caliph) who will implement the legislation of the only true Legislator, God.

Malik Shakur wrote on Jul 5^th, 2008 at 9:57pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5^th, 2008 at 4:24pm:

Some scholars say it's prohibited to vote in elections because your voting in a non muslim government

Is that the extent of it? There is nothing against democracy in the Koran, just against voting for someone who isn't a muslim?

It depends on how you define democracy FD, the word means the rule by the people. If you mean that the people make the legislation according to their own lusts and wants etc then that wont work in an Islamic State because the law is primarily decided by the Qur'an and Sunnah. Christians are bound by Christian law and Jews are bound by Jewish law.

« Last Edit: Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:47pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #2 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:51pm

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 12^th, 2012 at 10:19pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2012 at 5:57pm:

Is it obligatory?

For women also?

I'm not aware of any obligatory state military service according to Islam.

However if a Muslim land is occupied or attacked, then it's obligatory upon all Muslims to protect it, as a group responsibility.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 14^th, 2012 at 7:34pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Aug 14^th, 2012 at 8:16am:

You will understand that I am still in the Israeli army so I cannot comment on any story like this.

Of course you don't wanna comment about being a member of a despicable inhuman terrorist organisation like that, which goes around butchering women and children.

You're a maggot.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 12:31am:

Big Dave wrote on Aug 15^th, 2012 at 8:20am:

Never mind all of the people killed by terrorists bombings inside Isreal hey. Oh, and we'll skip the rockets fired at Isreal . And we'll even skip the fact that a whole bunch of neighbouring arab muslim countries tried to invade them and had their butts kicked. I just don't understand how a person with half a neuron could overlook such facts.

ٍOk, so you think the Muslims mishandled the mass illegal immigration of Jews into their land and their taking over it and turning it into a Jewish-state...

So tell us what you would do if Muslims did the same to Australia? I'm honestly interested in what you think the correct way to handle such a massive swamping and saturation of your population by a foreign people seeking to overrun your land and make it exclusively theirs.

Not one of you tossers on here has ever honestly answered this scenario, and I doubt you specifically have the grey matter to be the first, but please at least attempt it, be my guest.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 31^st, 2012 at 11:24pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Aug 31^st, 2012 at 11:35am:

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 30^th, 2012 at 10:02pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 30^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

There will be a bloodbath before Europe falls.
There always is.

You mean more of the kind of stuff your mate Breivik did?

As you and I both know, Europe is intellectually declining, ideologically they have nothing, their way of life is a failure, and so it will be swept away by an ideology that deserves to be implemented.

And all their offspring (ie. former European colonies like us) will eventually follow suit. The future is for Islam, you know it, and you will eventually submit to it!!!

Grin

Well, you are right that it is in intellectual decline, but that is only because it has grown weak and allowed the neo-Marxist and anarchist types to dominate the intellectual discourse. (Actually, it has grown weak because of the neo-Marxists and anarchists).
This will continue for some time, as their egalitarian slogans have the good conscience on its side, but wait for another large economic downturn and the course of the West will change, again. Unfortunately for you, it won't be Islam. Islam offers nothing practical; it's purely sloganeering injected with mysticism.
The Anglo-Saxon geist in particular works on a more empirical level; therefore your mystical preaching won't gain much traction.

No, it has grown weak because it has abandoned all moral anchorage and debased itself to a state of wayward hedonism, which does nothing but misguide.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 31^st, 2012 at 11:28pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 30^th, 2012 at 10:39pm:

Europe has beaten back Muslim invasions before, at least twice. It will not fold quietly this time either, certainly not to primitivism (ie Islam).

That was pure luck. Muslims just weren't focusing as much as they should've been. Internal struggles within the Umayyad and later Ottoman societies diverted their attention from Europe. They took large swathes of it though, and will do so again, insha'allah.

Time for Neo-Andalusianism Wink

Soren wrote on Aug 30^th, 2012 at 10:39pm:

Europe is indeed ripe for a renewal but Islam is not it. Islam is for primitive people, it is for the taming the desert pagans and Aboriginese and Indonesians and Malays and other backward races. It will not be taken up by any sophisticated civilisation, no matter how enervated. They might as well go back to their own primitive, pagan roots, which they have always been nostalgic about. They don't need some stupid Arab joke of a superstition. They have their own paganism.

Hate to break it to ya sunshine, but never heard of the Albanians or Bosnians? And of course the Andalusians for several centuries?

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 12:24am:

Quote:

Do you understand that such behaviour could be construed as a declaration of war?

I don't know where you've been, but the Zionists declared war on the entire Muslim world back in the 1920's when they began their little project to swipe a Muslim country, and make it their own. Bit late to realise a state of war exists isn't it?

« Last Edit: Oct 8^th, 2023 at 12:59pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #3 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:00pm

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 10^th, 2011 at 7:51pm:

Quote:

However the violation of diplomatic status is a common occurrence in middle eastern 'nations', indicating a lack of the maturity and intelligence required to be taken seriously on the world stage.

It is? Can you name a few examples for me?

The Israeli embassy should not be there in the first place, as the Egyptian, and all other people in the region, do not accept or recognise the imposition on the land of Palestine that is the Zionist descration. For decades American-imposed dictators have forced the people to accept these embassies and these relations with this illegitimate entity, not any more.

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 4:49am:

Yadda,

No treaty ever existed between the Muslims and the Zionist entity. That's the point here. The treaty existed between the Western installed puppets and the Western installed Zionist entity... ie. the treaty was between the West and herself. Just like the wars were largely between the West and herself. The Zionist trained and installed army against the British led "Arab" legions... A farce designed to fool the gullible, (obviously reaching its intended target in you).

Sappho, not just the Arab world, the entire Muslim world, yes. Again, where have you been?

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 1:31pm:

If you're a fascist I guess that's what you'd be wanting to do.

Keep in mind here, it is the West that has made this declaration against the Muslim world, not the other way 'round.

So not only are they the victims of these aggressions, you're now suggesting that they should be further vilified and oppressed.

Quite a nasty piece of work aren't you?

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 9:24pm:

I don't recall saying Arab nations... this is your invention.

The West declared war on the Muslim world, on the civilians, on the people, on their resources, on their culture, on their society, on their sanctity, on their security, on their peace. The "nations", or the puppet rulers the West put into place, are certainly not at war with the West, they are sustained by the West. Hence the misunderstanding about the Israeli embassy in Cairo. The puppet government there respects the embassy, and defends it with their lives, and the Israelis acknowledge that. The people on the other hand are a different kettle of fish.

Calanen wrote on Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:13pm:

Quote:

hahhaha, wadda hide the treacherous hamas have.

Yes there is never any permanent truce with infidels. Only a hudna, during which time you consolidate your forces to attack them again.

Even if there is a treaty with the infidels, you are free to break it. Hamas has also said a few times that a truce could last 10 years, but not more than 10 years. Why 10 years? Because that is what Islam permits, a hudna of up to 10 years with infidels.

As with the Treaty of Al-Hudaybiyyah - which is often cited as code by Muslims to say, 'Don't worry, this agreement is only temporary.' This happened with Yassir Arafat for him to reassure his party members about the Oslo Accords.

Have a read of Majid Khadduri's War and Peace and the Law of Islam. I might do a little blogging section on it, soon.

« Last Edit: Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:08pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #4 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:10pm

Calanen wrote on Jan 28^th, 2009 at 1:50pm:

Ah yes, Brigadier-General Khadduri's War and Peace and the Law of Islam. Published in 1955 for the benefit of the Pakistani Army, long before the Religion of Peace, Dhimmitude in the Western Press and Political Correctness.

*EVERY* British soldier, US soldier and Australian soldier should have a copy of this book and read it. And every politician in those countries. That way they might in fact have a clue instead of reciting the same bulls** Al Taqiyya about the Religion of Peace.

Quote:

'It follows that in Muslim legal theory, defeat is an anomaly which could be tolerated only under force majeur; thus the imam is advised either to abstain from going to war if his forces are insufficient to attain victory, or, if he should suffer defeat, to withdraw and save the lives of surviving believers. Defeated muslims always maintained taht their battle with the enemy would be resumed, however long they had to wait for the second round.

at [136]

Quote:

"By their very nature treaties must be of a temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory the normal relations between Muslim and non-Mulslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike. Since in theory the jihad could not possibly be suspended more than ten years, treaties must necessarily be terminated by the end of that period, even though the duration is not specified in its terms.

at 220

Quote:

"Thus the dar al harb (House of War where we live),in contrast to the dar al Islam, may be regarded as a territory outside the pale of Muslim law; it lacks the legal competence to enter into relations with dar al-Islam on the basis of equality. It follows that any arrangements made between the two dars is, by necessity, of short duration, since it carries with it no implied recognition or change in the war status.'

at [170]

So, you IDIOTS, start learning that your treaties and agreements with Muslims are a temporary respite for when war returns and are meaningless.

On nuclear non-proliferation treaties with Muslim nations:

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 18^th, 2012 at 2:01pm:

When the treaty is aimed at solidifying the military/technological hegemony of a few select countries, why not?

Any such treaty isn't worth the paper it's written on, and I suspect the powers behind it well know it. Doesn't stop them attempting to bully smaller nations into line though, if they're gullible enough to accept it.

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 6^th, 2011 at 6:41am:

Quote:

with a strategy to undermine it

Quote:

Christians and indeed secularists and Atheists are going to develop strategies too and their resistance is going to be greater having held those lands for many years. Islam would not peacefully become the minority in Mecca without bloodshed would it?

Well its certainly become a minority in al-Quds (ie. Jerusalem), a land which we've lived in for close to 2 thousand years, ie. about 10 times longer than Christians have lived in Australia.

So if Christians can take our land and turn it into a majority of another religion, then I'm sure we can reciprocate.

Quote:

For example it was be hard to find a Christian in an Islamic country who thought they were being treated fairly and impartially. The general consensus of opinion seems to be their very lives are under siege.

Firstly there is no Islamic country. All of the nations in the Muslim world are colonialist concoctions, not Islamic countries. Secondly, EVERYONE is treated badly in them, hence the reason Muslims and Christians and others have all been rising up together to overthrow the Western imposed dictators who've been oppressing EVERYONE every since the West installed them.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13^th, 2013 at 9:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 13^th, 2013 at 9:34pm:

Does every single one of these historical accounts blame the Jews?

Yeah, pretty much.

Try, if you can, to view this outside the prevailing "can't ever say anything negative about the jews" prism that we live in today. I know it can be hard, since it is so culturally entrenched. But it shouldn't make us intellectually dishonest about historical facts. If you have any valid evidence that these jewish tribes were victims of an anti-semitic agenda, by all means present it. I haven't seen any yet. All I see is political conflict between competing rival powers, which eventually came to a head. In the absense of evidence to the contrary, Muhammad should get the benefit of the doubt that he was sincere about his commitment to coexist peacefully with his non-muslim neighbours - until he was forced to change because of strategic-defensive concerns.

« Last Edit: Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:20pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

MeisterEckhart Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 11319 Gender:	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #5 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:20pm Who are these loonies?
Back to top	IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18169
Gender: male

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #6 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:28pm

MeisterEckhart wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:20pm:

Who are these loonies?

Abu Rashid was the moderator of the Islam sub forum before gandalf.

Falah was just your average Salafi muslim. There was a couple of good posts when He told Annie Anthrax (another muslim) that it's OK to marry a 8 year old girl because Muhammad married a 8 yo. Annir had a 8 yo daughter she called him a sick freak and no longer claims to be a muslim.

Back to Israel there are reports Hamas are capturing women nothing new here that is how Muhammad gained a few wives. Muhammad hated jews he didn't mind sticking his dick into jewish women.

Quote:

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith.

https://sunnah.com/muslim:1730a

Juwairiya became one of Muhammads wives take note of the captured part. There would have been a few Allahu Akbars that day.

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #7 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:56pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:28pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 1:20pm:

Who are these loonies?

https://sunnah.com/muslim:1730a

Juwairiya became one of Muhammads wives take note of the captured part. There would have been a few Allahu Akbars that day.

Muslims try to paint it as an Islamic love story.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 101623 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #8 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:59pm Islam is the cause of the conflict - I agree ban Islam.
Back to top	IP Logged

Brian Ross Gold Member Offline Representative of me Posts: 40572	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #9 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 3:09pm So, no one in the last decade, Freediver? Gee, how far back do you have to troll to find evidence, hey? Tsk, tsk, tsk...
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

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 43983 Gender:	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #10 - Oct 8^th, 2023 at 8:10pm Brian Ross wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 3:09pm: So, no one in the last decade, Freediver? Gee, how far back do you have to troll to find evidence, hey? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Bbwian is the big guy on the right.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

AusGeoff Gold Member Offline Sage of Gippsland Posts: 5999 Victoria Gender:	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #11 - Oct 9^th, 2023 at 1:45am Bobby. wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:59pm: Islam is the cause of the conflict - I agree ban Islam. If I were "King" of the world, I'd ban *all* religions. Religions—all of them—have caused more deaths than WWI and WWII combined.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48816 At my desk.	Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict Reply #12 - Oct 9^th, 2023 at 9:41am Brian Ross wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 3:09pm: So, no one in the last decade, Freediver? Gee, how far back do you have to troll to find evidence, hey? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Are you saying Islam has changed in the last decade, or is this just more spineless apologetics?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48816
At my desk.

Re: Islam is the cause of the conflict
Reply #13 - Oct 9^th, 2023 at 9:43am

AusGeoff wrote on Oct 9^th, 2023 at 1:45am:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 8^th, 2023 at 2:59pm:

Islam is the cause of the conflict -

I agree ban Islam.

If I were "King" of the world, I'd ban all religions.

Religions—all of them—have caused more deaths
than WWI and WWII combined.

Actually, the one ideology that has killed more people than any is atheist. There is nothing more dangerous than someone who wants to control what you think, and who sincerely believes they are doing it for your own good.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.