F20M TH3 R1V3R T0 TH3 S3A

Author: 3RU7AL
Ethics
intp
Anarchy
GNOSTIC
informationwar

Posts

Total: 65
Topic's author
#61
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@MarkWebberFan2
They are humans, albeit with intent to kill every israeli kafir harbi. Perhaps they have a feverish belief to prove to everyone that their prophet was a perfect manifestation of mercy, even if they had a good record of gunning down random israeli citizens. The intent to reduce civilian casualties should not downplay the clear, obvious threat that islam poses to the west. For example, all of Hamas battalions are revered as heroes in the muslim world, even if the battalion consists of only rapists and pedophiles (though, only if they prey on kafir harbi children; they'd still get punished and disowned if they start molesting muslim kids though).

i'm pretty sure we already covered "HAMAS = TEH EVILZZ"


i'm also pretty sure if we find someone guilty of mass murder for any one of the hundreds of school shootings

we should slaughter their entire family

certainly their mother should be killed first

then their father of course

then any brothers and sisters they might have


and of course we should also slaughter their neighbors

because they "should have known better" than to live next to an evil person
#62
MarkWebberFan2
MarkWebberFan2's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 100
1
2
4
MarkWebberFan2's avatar
MarkWebberFan2
1
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
The repeat is intentional. Islam repeats, even in hiding. The Prophet Muhammad didn't style himself as just a warlord and commanded the stoning of adulterers and polytheists. He took his time, because according to him, Allah commanded him to. When Polytheists reigned in Mecca, all Muhammad could do was wait, because he had no political or military power to confront them. Search a treatise written by Ibn Taymiyyah and you'll see complex justification for why every muslim should wage 'military' jihad, both in moments of weakness and strength. In moments of powerless and oppression, Muslims are obligated to secretly gather some form of "warchest" even if the governing party is outwardly anti-islam. Unless non-muslims subject themselves to the rulings of Allah, and pay the Jizya, the muslims ARE OBLIGATED TO WAGE WAR. 

Your words are EXACTLY the same words preached by muslim clerics. When rebellious free-hair iranians are tortured and jailed, the words uttered by the committee were often in some variation of  "you should've known better than to disobey Allah". But, I guess for the purpose of this discussion, I could see why you'd think it's repetitive. I do have the fortunate experience of feeling what it's like to be on the receiving side of someone complaining things are getting repetitive. Not to me though, especially on islam. I'm forced to live in a fundamentalist environment; I'll press boundaries to my heart's content. No one in the west seems to understand what Exmuslims have been repeating, and the west would rather advise the israelis to adopt disingenous slogans like "Let's confront Radical Islamism" as opposed to actually addressing the root cause of it: Islam.
Topic's author
#63
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@MarkWebberFan2
Your words are EXACTLY the same words preached by muslim clerics.

i don't know if you've happened to pick up a bible lately


but "the children of YHWH" do quite a bit of slaughtering women and children by divine command

10 days later

#64
MarkWebberFan2
MarkWebberFan2's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 100
1
2
4
MarkWebberFan2's avatar
MarkWebberFan2
1
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Well, if you check the Christian Debates in Renaissance France, the free press had had to fight against the incredibly well-funded christian church. And, the debates were basically modern amusement parks since no serious theological critique was publicly debated. But, they had conceptions that differed greatly from the bible. I'm confident that's different from Islam, whose serious scholars have trumped almost every modern, reformist thought. Sure, you can group Abu Mansor against Ibn Taymiyyah, but that's like arguing the difference between a spiral and a conventional staircase.
Topic's author
#65
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@MarkWebberFan2
Well, if you check the Christian Debates in Renaissance France, the free press had had to fight against the incredibly well-funded christian church. And, the debates were basically modern amusement parks since no serious theological critique was publicly debated. But, they had conceptions that differed greatly from the bible. I'm confident that's different from Islam, whose serious scholars have trumped almost every modern, reformist thought. Sure, you can group Abu Mansor against Ibn Taymiyyah, but that's like arguing the difference between a spiral and a conventional staircase.

please correct me if i am mistaken here

but it sounds like

you're suggesting it's ok to kill muslims because they believe things you disagree with