Anti-immigration gunman linked to extremist Christian group, police say

Houston: Gunman Larry McQuilliams, who fired more than 100 gunshots at government offices last week, was a "homegrown American extremist" connected to an extremist Christian group, police in Austin said on Monday.

"He had hate in his heart," Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo said.

Police said McQuilliams, 49, belonged to the Phineas Priesthood, a white supremacist group based in the Pacific Northwest that is responsible for armed robberies, abortion-clinic bombings and planned attacks on FBI buildings.
Lone mission: Larry McQuilliams was a member of a Christian supremacist group.

Lone mission: Larry McQuilliams was a member of a Christian supremacist group. Photo: Facebook

He had served time for a 1992 armed robbery, but acted alone in last week's carefully planned attack, Mr Acevedo said.

Days before, McQuilliams rented a white van and packed it with supplies, including several guns; ammunition; a gas mask; homemade explosives; a list of 34 targets (among them two churches); and the book Vigilantes of Christendom, in which he left a note describing himself as a priest  opposed to "anti-God people", Mr Acevedo said.

The first shots were reported at 2.18am on Friday,  when the gunman targeted police headquarters, a federal courthouse and the Mexican consulate.

Austin Police Sergeant Adam Johnson was nearby with a mounted patrol. As McQuilliams fired what sounded like an automatic rifle, Sergeant Johnson gripped the reins of two horses with one hand and with the other took aim in the dark, Mr Acevedo said. Johnson fired a single shot that struck and killed McQuilliams. No one else was injured in the attack.

At the medical examiner's office, officials discovered McQuilliams had scrawled  the message "let me die" on his chest, beneath a tactical vest stuffed with ammunition.

He did not leave a note explaining his motives. Neighbours at his South Austin apartment complex described him as an impoverished, gentle loner who rode his bicycle to work at a nearby car wash. He was also a Renaissance Faire enthusiast. Investigators said he appeared "upset by the fact that he could not find employment".

"In his eyes, many immigrants had more services afforded to them than he had himself," said Christopher Combes, FBI special agent in charge of the San Antonio division office.

The Austin police chief said investigators were still trying to determine whether McQuilliams was mentally ill and how, as a convicted felon, he managed to obtain several guns.

"We have a country where it's way too easy for people to use straw purchasers to get these guns in their hands," Mr Acevedo said, noting that he and other police chiefs have called for legislation that would restrict such purchases of guns, "to ensure we protect the Second Amendment by keeping them in the hands of law-abiding Americans of sound mind".

Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine. 

8-)

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-)

Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion.

Looks like DL has jumped the gun.  I'm away for a few minutes and missed it.

Of course, we could say he's a lone-wolf gunman, who is mentally deranged and his beliefs have nothing do "wiv"* mainstream Christianity.  However, we are reliably informed, time after time by many here that this viewpoint is wrong, that religious inspiration is what motivates such people all the time, that mental illness has nothing "to do wiv nothin'"*, so therefore we must claim that his views are in fact illustrative of what the majority of Christians believe in their hearts.   Now DL we wouldn't want to be inconsistent, now would we?   I fully expect to see Yadda, Sprint, Soren, Freediver, Baron, etc., all leaping to the same conclusion and accepting that this man was divinely inspired by his Christian beliefs about the superiority of white people over all them coloured folks!   I also expect, when they fail to make that leap, to see you criticising them for failing to do so!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:17pm:

Looks like DL has jumped the gun.  I'm away for a few minutes and missed it. Of course, we could say he's a lone-wolf gunman, who is mentally deranged and his beliefs have nothing do "wiv"* mainstream Christianity.  However, we are reliably informed, time after time by many here that this viewpoint is wrong, that religious inspiration is what motivates such people all the time, that mental illness has nothing "to do wiv nothin'"*, so therefore we must claim that his views are in fact illustrative of what the majority of Christians believe in their hearts.   Now DL we wouldn't want to be inconsistent, now would we?   I fully expect to see Yadda, Sprint, Soren, Freediver, Baron, etc., all leaping to the same conclusion and accepting that this man was divinely inspired by his Christian beliefs about the superiority of white people over all them coloured folks!   I also expect, when they fail to make that leap, to see you criticising them for failing to do so!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Well it is that inconsistency which was the point of my post and which you are amply displaying as I knew you would. You are an apologist and a dissembler for excesses and atrocities inspired by one religion but not for equivalent actions done by another.

If this had been posted but it referring to an islamic gunman, yourself, Brain and Gandy would have been all over it. 

Still no "hey look over there" posts from you referencing an islamic atrocity.  Your Google suddenly broken?  You don't normally need to be prompted, you and Brain both.  Not so impartial as you pretend obviously. 

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:15pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion.

I don't know what the purpose of the thread is, I was talking about the inconsistent response.  Am I allowed to do that?

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:28pm:

If this had been posted but it referring to an islamic gunman, yourself, Brain and Gandy would have been all over it.

If HB had garnished this story with irrelevant bible quotes and/or references to some unrelated incitement by some extreme christian "leaders" - or even some inane comment at the end of the story like "christianity always begets violence" - as the discussions on muslim crimes always are - then you might have a point. And yes, in such a situation I would be pouncing on it to say no, this has nothing to do with christian doctrine.

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:31pm:

don't know what the purpose of the thread is

I'm explaining it to you - and showing you why this produces "inconsistent" responses. Am I allowed to do that?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:37pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:28pm: If this had been posted but it referring to an islamic gunman, yourself, Brain and Gandy would have been all over it.  If HB had garnished this story with irrelevant bible quotes and/or references to some unrelated incitement by some extreme christian "leaders" - or even some inane comment at the end of the story like "christianity always begets violence" - as the discussions on muslim crimes always are - then you might have a point. And yes, in such a situation I would be pouncing on it to say no, this has nothing to do with christian doctrine.

Hot Socks is Wally? I guess that explains why he made a thread about a Christian extremist. 

But I don't believe you, if this had been posted exactly as it is, but in reference to an Islamicgunman, yourself and the usual "hey look over there" first responders would be making excuses and posting links to christian inspired excesses. 

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:40pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:31pm: don't know what the purpose of the thread is I'm explaining it to you - and showing you why this produces "inconsistent" responses. Am I allowed to do that?

I expected nothing less, this thread is going exactly as it always would.   8-)

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:44pm:

But I don't believe you, if this had been posted exactly as it is, but in reference to an Islamicgunman, yourself and the usual "hey look over there" first responders would be making excuses and posting links to christian inspired excesses.

I myself start threads about such 'Islamicgunmen" all the time.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:40pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:31pm: don't know what the purpose of the thread is I'm explaining it to you - and showing you why this produces "inconsistent" responses. Am I allowed to do that?

Didn't you know?  Only DL is allowed to make posts about the inconsistencies that he believes he's detected!  He doesn't like it when other people point out his inconsistencies in detecting inconsistencies!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:28pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:17pm: Looks like DL has jumped the gun.  I'm away for a few minutes and missed it. Of course, we could say he's a lone-wolf gunman, who is mentally deranged and his beliefs have nothing do "wiv"* mainstream Christianity.  However, we are reliably informed, time after time by many here that this viewpoint is wrong, that religious inspiration is what motivates such people all the time, that mental illness has nothing "to do wiv nothin'"*, so therefore we must claim that his views are in fact illustrative of what the majority of Christians believe in their hearts.   Now DL we wouldn't want to be inconsistent, now would we?   I fully expect to see Yadda, Sprint, Soren, Freediver, Baron, etc., all leaping to the same conclusion and accepting that this man was divinely inspired by his Christian beliefs about the superiority of white people over all them coloured folks!   I also expect, when they fail to make that leap, to see you criticising them for failing to do so!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D Well it is that inconsistency which was the point of my post and which you are amply displaying as I knew you would.

I didn't want to disappoint you DL.  I know you like me to be consistent in my inconsistencies.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D


Quote:

You are an apologist and a dissembler for excesses and atrocities inspired by one religion but not for equivalent actions done by another.

Really?  Perhaps I actually don't give a stuff about any religion but am quite willing to protect innocent believers from persecution by ignorant feckwits who can't tell their arses from their elbows 'cause of their prejudices?   :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D


Quote:

If this had been posted but it referring to an islamic gunman, yourself, Brain and Gandy would have been all over it.  Still no "hey look over there" posts from you referencing an islamic atrocity.  Your Google suddenly broken?  You don't normally need to be prompted, you and Brain both.  Not so impartial as you pretend obviously.

As usual, you miss the point of what I say DL.  If I am "all over" such stories it is to point out that all other Muslims are not any more responsible for what other Muslims do than Christians are for what other Christians do.   I do not accept guilt by association, which you seem to be defending by your comments.  Do you believe in guilt by association?  That membership of a group makes all members responsible for what one member may have done?  I felt I had to explain that 'cause I wonder sometimes about whether you really understand some of the terms we use in these discussions 'cause your responses seem to be rather biased.  So, do you believe in guilt by association?  Are all Muslims responsible when a single Muslim on the other side of the world decides to chop the head off some poor bvgger who's his victim?   :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

To think of the atrocious acts of terror; September 11, the Barcelona train attack, the London subway attacks, the Dutch embassy fires, Bali, all of the beheadings and - let's not forget - that crazy Christian guy that got shot by the mountie!
;D ;D ;D

Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert. 

I wonder why the first responders are behaving so differently, hmmmmm let me think.  LOL. 

Keep at it clowns.  8-) ample demonstration of your bias. 

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:01pm:

Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert.  I wonder why the first responders are behaving so differently, hmmmmm let me think.  LOL.  Keep at it clowns.  8-) ample demonstration of your bias.

And yours.  I see no attack by you on the Christian apologists.  I wonder why?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:06pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:01pm: Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert.  I wonder why the first responders are behaving so differently, hmmmmm let me think.  LOL.  Keep at it clowns.  8-) ample demonstration of your bias.  And yours.  I see no attack by you on the Christian apologists.  I wonder why?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Keep at it clown, you will be surfacing in China soon.   ;D

DL you're obviously a Christian apologist.  Such inconsistencies cannot be explained in any other way!  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:34pm:

DL you're obviously a Christian apologist.  Such inconsistencies cannot be explained in any other way!  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Nope, happy to condemn christian excesses, not deflect and distract.  I have done it many times. 

I leave the excuses and apologies and not feeling the ability to critisise or condemn to the first responders like you and Brain.  At least Gandy has the excuse he has a faith he wants to protect. 

You however profess intentions of defending against the many being blamed for the excesses and atrocities committed by the few, but yours and Brains consistent behaviour is that only Islam is defended and you will swarm any thread where the excesses of Islam are described.

This thread is a great and glaring example of your bias.

Keep at it clown.  8-) 

Im surprised FD hasnt come on board and asked me why i posted the OP.

I guess matthew 7:21 is right when it mentions " Not everyone who says to me "lord,lord" shall enter the kingdon of heaven.

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:31pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:15pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion. I don't know what the purpose of the thread is, I was talking about the inconsistent response.  Am I allowed to do that?

That's strange. When you posted this, there was no response at all.

Shurely shome mishtake, eh?

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:46pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:34pm: DL you're obviously a Christian apologist.  Such inconsistencies cannot be explained in any other way!  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D Nope, happy to condemn christian excesses, not deflect and distract.  I have done it many times.

You should be able to point us to some examples then DL, right?   ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D


Quote:

I leave the excuses and apologies and not feeling the ability to critisise or condemn to the first responders like you and Brain.

Brian doesn't seem to have responded at all...   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D


Quote:

At least Gandy has the excuse he has a faith he wants to protect.  You however profess intentions of defending against the many being blamed for the excesses and atrocities committed by the few, but yours and Brains consistent behaviour is that only Islam is defended and you will swarm any thread where the excesses of Islam are described.

No, for myself, I attempt to correct the misconception commonly held by many here hold, as you seem to, that all Muslims are personally responsible for what every other Muslim does.  Such a stupid idea, collective guilt.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D


Quote:

This thread is a great and glaring example of your bias.

Perhaps you need to stop looking in the mirror?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D


Quote:

Keep at it clown.  8-)

To be sure, to be sure, I'll be doing that.  Anything to make your life hard, pointing out the inconsistencies!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

He does not seem to be getting a lot of sympathy from christians here.
I can't see the basis for his actions in christianity.

Anyway, this is way cool ..........".............Austin Police Sergeant Adam Johnson was nearby with a mounted patrol. As McQuilliams fired what sounded like an automatic rifle, Sergeant Johnson gripped the reins of two horses with one hand and with the other took aim in the dark, Mr Acevedo said. Johnson fired a single shot that struck and killed McQuilliams. No one else was injured in the attack........."

Adam Johnson is a cowboy.

Datalife wrote on Jun 17^th, 2014 at 5:40pm:

|dev|null wrote on Jun 17th, 2014 at 5:22pm: So, do you condemn Christianity's so-called "Honour" Killings, DL or will we put you down as another apologist?   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I am an equal opportunity hater, I condemn all acts of buggerbuggery committed in the name of sky pixies.  You won't see distractions, diversions, red herrings or fingers pointing the other way from me.

The search function on this forum is absolute crap, the old debate and relate was much better.  But here is one for you Hotsocks, anytime you like I will condemn the religious head loppers and murderers.  Unlike first responder Brain who maintains he cannot criticise or condemn.  :D

It is now the second day and still no "hey look over there" posts from the first reponders, the permanently on patrol for heresy and critisism of Islam and always poised to swarm with Google links to christian atrocities.  "Hey look over there".  All sorts of statements about mental illness, not representative, only a minority, not a monolith, etc etc till exhaustion.

But now silent.  The bias is obvious bozos.

Keep digging clowns.  8-)

Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 2:36pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:31pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:15pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion. I don't know what the purpose of the thread is, I was talking about the inconsistent response.  Am I allowed to do that? That's strange. When you posted this, there was no response at all. Shurely shome mishtake, eh?

Read Gandalfs response contained in this post.  You may work it out, or just keep maintaining the repetive static.  Whichever is easier for you.   

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 4:21pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 2:36pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:31pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:15pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion. I don't know what the purpose of the thread is, I was talking about the inconsistent response.  Am I allowed to do that? That's strange. When you posted this, there was no response at all. Shurely shome mishtake, eh? Read Gandalfs response contained in this post.  You may work it out, or just keep maintaining the repetive static.  Whichever is easier for you.

G’s post above is a response to your post about responses.

You like repetitive static, no?

Miam miam.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:15pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion.

Islam is a religion stuck in the dark ages just like the old days of the Inquisition.

The Inquisition is a natural occurrence when the Bible is read literally -
it would happen again if we allowed the church to control the state.

Churches full of males & access to children encourage pedophiles to join up.
It will still go on unless the church changes & allows female priests & also male priests to marry.

To me all religion involves a mental illness where you throw all
logic out the window & believe in a paranormal friend.
It sees the un-reason of faith as a virtue.

Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:10pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 4:21pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 2:36pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:31pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:15pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Probably because unlike 99% of discussions here, the purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate the innate evilness of one particular religious doctrine - but rather to demonstrate that religious extremism is not unique to just one religion. I don't know what the purpose of the thread is, I was talking about the inconsistent response.  Am I allowed to do that? That's strange. When you posted this, there was no response at all. Shurely shome mishtake, eh? Read Gandalfs response contained in this post.  You may work it out, or just keep maintaining the repetive static.  Whichever is easier for you.    G’s post above is a response to your post about responses. You like repetitive static, no? Miam miam.

It is not that hard, Gandalf said that the thread had a purpose, not being a mind reader as to Wallys intent when posting this thread, I replied to I did not know the purpose of the thread.  It is not at all complicated. 

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:01pm:

Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert.

It’s uncanny, DL. The first person to mention the M word in a thread about Christian extremism is, er, you.

Nothing like a bit of repetitive static, no?

Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:23pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:01pm: Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert.    It’s uncanny, DL. The first person to mention the M word in a thread about Christian extremism is, er, you. Nothing like a bit of repetitive static, no?

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-)

Not all religions are equal to the first responders as you are demonstrating.  Keep it up clown.   8-)

I understand why Gandy wants to protect his faith, why do you and the other first responders not treat this religious inspired excess  with the same energy and using the same template of excuses as you do when you swarm threads about Islamic excesses? 

Although I do appreciate your efforts to deflect.  8-)

Still your deflection is targeted at me, and we both know if the subject of this thread had been an islamic gunman, it would have been excusing and deflecting from islam, explaining that he was mentally ill, not representative, majority of Muslims are etc...you know the drill.  8-)

None of that happened.  Just pointing out the bias is all.

;D

Keep at it clowns. 

Datalife wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:44pm:

But I don't believe you, if this had been posted exactly as it is, but in reference to an Islamicgunman, yourself and the usual "hey look over there" first responders would be making excuses and posting links to christian inspired excesses.

I take it from this you've not really noticed the 10 thousand 'Islamicgunman' threads started by Yadda and Sprint that I don't respond to.

Nevertheless, I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say your "I'm not here to discuss anything relevant to the topic - just want to troll other members" posts are greatly valued here.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 11:17pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:44pm: But I don't believe you, if this had been posted exactly as it is, but in reference to an Islamicgunman, yourself and the usual "hey look over there" first responders would be making excuses and posting links to christian inspired excesses.  I take it from this you've not really noticed the 10 thousand 'Islamicgunman' threads started by Yadda and Sprint that I don't respond to. Nevertheless, I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say your "I'm not here to discuss anything relevant to the topic - just want to troll other members" posts are greatly valued here.

Hardly anyone responds. They are both religious nutters, it is like responding to lights work.  Although to be fair it seems some people do like engaging with lights gear. 

I am more interested in why the usual first responders treat a thread about a christian gunman differently to one if it detailed a muslim gunman.

After all the template is well rehearsed and exactly the same, but only activated in the case of one religion.  I understand your bias, it is your faith, you want to protect it.  But the other first responders profess atheism and ideals to address and protect persecution of the many based on the actions of the few.  Maybe Christianity does not qualify for them. 

I don't know why, it is that explanation I am exploring.

Why in a thread about a christian gunman do the first responders react so differently, or indifferently depending on your perspective?

Ample time so far yet not a whit of the usual excuses, explanationions, or the Googlefoo deflections, the "look over there" postings. 

Why the bias and different treatment?  A question that has been posed frequently in this thread but no one has attempted an answer.

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 11:38pm:

Why the bias and different treatment?  A question that has been posed frequently in this thread but no one has attempted an answer.

::) really DL?


polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:37pm:

If HB had garnished this story with irrelevant bible quotes and/or references to some unrelated incitement by some extreme christian "leaders" - or even some inane comment at the end of the story like "christianity always begets violence" - as the discussions on muslim crimes always are - then you might have a point. And yes, in such a situation I would be pouncing on it to say no, this has nothing to do with christian doctrine.

You might not like my answer, but don't pretend that no answer was ever attempted.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 11:47pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 11:38pm: Why the bias and different treatment?  A question that has been posed frequently in this thread but no one has attempted an answer. ::) really DL? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:37pm: If HB had garnished this story with irrelevant bible quotes and/or references to some unrelated incitement by some extreme christian "leaders" - or even some inane comment at the end of the story like "christianity always begets violence" - as the discussions on muslim crimes always are - then you might have a point. And yes, in such a situation I would be pouncing on it to say no, this has nothing to do with christian doctrine. You might not like my answer, but don't pretend that no answer was ever attempted.

Oh cmon, that was not an answer.  You are not a dill, you know the question I am asking.  You do read this forum right?

Scenario, this post, exactly as posted, Christian gunman, first responders...nothing. 

Scenario, this post, almost exactly as posted, substitute Muslim gunman.  You and I and I suggest everyone on the forum would know that the first responders would immediately  wade in with the usual well rehearsed responses, almost rote now, the mentally sick, not representative, a minority, majority are peace loving, yadda yadda then post some Googlefoo references as a "hey look over here" deflection and distraction. Throw in some crusades blame to garnish if feeling feisty. 

My question is why do the  first responders treat the same circumstance so differently?  Bias is my obvious answer.

There may be another but it is yet to be explained. 

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:23pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:01pm: Oh dear, the "hey look over there first responders" appear frazzled, still no mention yet of this christian gunmen  being a minority, not representative, or posts of islamic excesses to distract and divert.    It’s uncanny, DL. The first person to mention the M word in a thread about Christian extremism is, er, you. Nothing like a bit of repetitive static, no? Datalife wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:09pm: Well this post has been up for more than 5 minutes, why hasn't it been swarmed yet by Gandy, Hot Socks and Brain pointing out that it was only one person, maybe mentally ill, not representative, that the majority of Christians are peaceful and posting examples of islamic atrocities?  Etc etc etc,  the usual hey look over there routine.  8-) Not all religions are equal to the first responders as you are demonstrating.  Keep it up clown.   8-) I understand why Gandy wants to protect his faith, why do you and the other first responders not treat this religious inspired excess  with the same energy and using the same template of excuses as you do when you swarm threads about Islamic excesses?  Although I do appreciate your efforts to deflect.  8-) Still your deflection is targeted at me, and we both know if the subject of this thread had been an islamic gunman, it would have been excusing and deflecting from islam, explaining that he was mentally ill, not representative, majority of Muslims are etc...you know the drill.  8-) None of that happened.  Just pointing out the bias is all. ;D Keep at it clowns.

You’re frying to turn a legitimate thread on Christian extremism into a Muselman thread.

How’s that for deflection?

Not to mention repetitive static.

Stop the boats indeed.

Karnal wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 8:05am:

You’re frying to turn a legitimate thread on Christian extremism into a Muselman thread. How’s that for deflection? Not to mention repetitive static. Stop the boats indeed.

The ironing is delicious.  :)

You cannot have a "legitimate" thread about islamic extremism without it being instantly swarmed by the first responders who immediately set up perimeter defences, and "hey look over there" actions, along with the usual, not representative, only a tiny minority, possibly mentally ill, the vast majority are peace loving, etc etc, the whole roll out of distraction, deflection, refusal to criticise, to examine, instead it is maximum effort to defend.

But here was a thread about christian extremism and the first responders are silent, no comparisons, no rediculous equivalences. 

Why the bias?  Why are only the islamic extremists defended? 

Keep at it clowns.  8-)

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 8:24am:

Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 8:05am: You’re frying to turn a legitimate thread on Christian extremism into a Muselman thread. How’s that for deflection? Not to mention repetitive static. Stop the boats indeed. The ironing is delicious.  :) You cannot have a "legitimate" thread about islamic extremism without it being instantly swarmed by the first responders who immediately set up perimeter defences, and "hey look over there" actions, along with the usual, not representative, only a tiny minority, possibly mentally ill, the vast majority are peace loving, etc etc, the whole roll out of distraction, deflection, refusal to criticise, to examine, instead it is maximum effort to defend. But here was a thread about christian extremism and the first responders are silent, no comparisons, no rediculous equivalences.  Why the bias?  Why are only the islamic extremists defended?  Keep at it clowns.  8-)

Why are you talking about Islamic extremism, DL? No one has mentioned it except you.

Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-)

Why the bias? Why do the first responders treat christian extremism differently to Islamic extremism? 

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 11:59pm:

Scenario, this post, exactly as posted, Christian gunman, first responders...nothing.  Scenario, this post, almost exactly as posted, substitute Muslim gunman.  You and I and I suggest everyone on the forum would know that the first responders would immediately  wade in with the usual well rehearsed responses, almost rote now,

What crap. The 'first responders' to the muslim gunman threads are islamophobes going to great pains to explain how intrinsically connected this lunatic is to islamic doctrine. The people you accuse of double standards then respond to these leaps in logic and refute them. In this thread, no one even suggested this is an intrinsic part of Christian doctrine, so no one needs to refute it. That is the difference you are trying so desperately hard to ignore.

But I'm happy at least that we've moved on from "no one attempted to answer" to "actually an answer was attempted - I just don't like it".

You're just trolling DL, either do some actual research of the discussions you are referring to before shooting your uninformed mouth off, or piss off.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:17am:

Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 11:59pm: Scenario, this post, exactly as posted, Christian gunman, first responders...nothing.  Scenario, this post, almost exactly as posted, substitute Muslim gunman.  You and I and I suggest everyone on the forum would know that the first responders would immediately  wade in with the usual well rehearsed responses, almost rote now, What crap. The 'first responders' to the muslim gunman threads are islamophobes going to great pains to explain how intrinsically connected this lunatic is to islamic doctrine. The people you accuse of double standards then respond to these leaps in logic and refute them. In this thread, no one even suggested this is an intrinsic part of Christian doctrine, so no one needs to refute it. That is the difference you are trying so desperately hard to ignore. But I'm happy at least that we've moved on from "no one attempted to answer" to "actually an answer was attempted - I just don't like it". You're just trolling DL, either do some actual research of the discussions you are referring to before shooting your uninformed mouth off, or piss off.

Unlike you I am not psychic, so I do not know Wallys intent on posting this thread about a Christian extremist.

But there is an obvious difference in the actions by the first responders.  Post about christian extremist.  Nothing, none of the usual defences.  If there had been the exact same post but about an Islamic extremist, you know that the first responders would be swarming all over it, pointing in every direction.

Why the bias?   ;D. Your bias is explainable.  The other first responders would have you believe they battle racism and unfair labelling of the many because of the actions of the few.

Not always though eh? 

Oh and piss off yourself, or explain the bias, or ignore the thread, or have me banned.  All actions available to you. 

I guess the first responders at feeling a bit hot under the collar. A bit uncomfortable staring at the bias.    8-).   

Your just spouting the exact same crap you said before - even though I refuted it.

Its like I'm talking to a freaking brick wall.

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:03am:

Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-)

Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:32am:

Your just spouting the exact same crap you said before - even though I refuted it. Its like I'm talking to a freaking brick wall.

Refuted nothing, some extreme tap dancing going on or rocks between your ears if you think this thread was treated in the same way by the first responders as would an equivalent one posted about an Islamic gun man. 

Observe for yourself the next thread that is posted about islamic extremism, compare and contrast.  Watch the swarm descend pointing in every direction. 8-)

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:46am:

Observe for yourself the next thread that is posted about islamic extremism, compare and contrast.  Watch the swarm descend pointing in every direction.

I can tell you now it will be started by either Yadda or Sprint (which according to you somehow don't count). If its Yadda he will embelish it with the usual Quranic quotes and statements from silly imams to prove the link between muslim atrocities and islamic doctrine. If its Sprint, he will make some inane comment like "islam always produces terrorists" or simply "I hate Islam". THAT is a difference right there - no such embelishments are included in this thread. But more that likely the "swarm" will come from the usual suspects jumping on the "islam = being a thug" bandwagon. It is only then that you will get HB, Brian et al responding to this islamophobia.

So needless to say you have it completely backwards. You're a bit like FD - you rabbit all day about people for daring to respond to attacks against muslims and accuse them of hypocrisy - but completely ignore the hypocrisy of these people who dedicate their life smearing islam (including regularly making sh*t up or citing blatantly fake material), and who turn a blind eye to any atrocities that are non-muslim.

Rather than make the same bs post over and over and over like a broken record, why don't you either put up or shut up? Show me evidence of what you claim. You can't, because if you actually investigated the threads you talk about, you would quickly see that the reality is exactly as I have described.

Karnal wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:34am:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:03am: Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-) Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism?

Sorry, DL, you didn't answer.

Are you practicing Taqiyya?

tapdancing K - thats the correct term.

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Not all religions are equal

According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists?

As far as I am concerned, the believers of all religions deserve to be equally respected as long as they behave themselves and undertake their worship within the law.  Then those believers who aren't working within the law should be held responsible for their actions, individually.  Their co-religionists are not responsible for their actions.

Do you agree DL or do you still believe in Guilt by Association?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

Do you agree DL or do you still believe in Guilt by Association?

They're muslims, ipso facto they're evil. Case closed, tie to stake, light torches...

Makes a change from the usual muslim nutjobs the litter the worlds news.

Karnal wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 10:29am:

Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:34am: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:03am: Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-) Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism? Sorry, DL, you didn't answer. Are you practicing Taqiyya?

I had never heard of taqiyya till I came to this forum, judging from the context it seems to be an islamic thing, maybe you can explain it.  I didn't respond because I thought it was stupid and pointless, like most of your posts that I ignore.  But if you insist I don't think much of christian extremism, same as I don't think much of islamic extremism.   

Hope that helps. 

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists?

You are as dishonest as your brother.  Contemptible effort.  Complete the quote that you conveniently truncated to totally change its meaning. Pathetic effort. 


Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Not all religions are equal to the first responders as you are demonstrating.  Keep it up clown.

Is that the sort of debating technique you have been reduced to?  Dishonesty and lies are strong in your family obviously.

Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 4:18pm:

Datalife wrote on Jun 17th, 2014 at 5:40pm: |dev|null wrote on Jun 17th, 2014 at 5:22pm: So, do you condemn Christianity's so-called "Honour" Killings, DL or will we put you down as another apologist?   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D I am an equal opportunity hater, I condemn all acts of buggerbuggery committed in the name of sky pixies.  You won't see distractions, diversions, red herrings or fingers pointing the other way from me. The search function on this forum is absolute crap, the old debate and relate was much better.  But here is one for you Hotsocks, anytime you like I will condemn the religious head loppers and murderers.  Unlike first responder Brain who maintains he cannot criticise or condemn.  :D It is now the second day and still no "hey look over there" posts from the first reponders, the permanently on patrol for heresy and critisism of Islam and always poised to swarm with Google links to christian atrocities.  "Hey look over there".  All sorts of statements about mental illness, not representative, only a minority, not a monolith, etc etc till exhaustion. But now silent.  The bias is obvious bozos. Keep digging clowns.  8-)

Ah, gee, how everybody else manages to find stuff DL?  Looks to me that it's very convenient for you.

You claim you condemn the excesses of other religions but I can't remember ever seeing you condemn anything other than what Muslims have done, usually by condemning all Muslims, hence "guilt by association"!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 1:05pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 11:14am: Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists? You are as dishonest as your brother.  Contemptible effort.  Complete the quote that you conveniently truncated to totally change its meaning. Pathetic effort.  Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal to the first responders as you are demonstrating.  Keep it up clown.   Is that the sort of debating technique you have been reduced to?  Dishonesty and lies are strong in your family obviously.

I asked a question about the point you'd raised DL.  It wasn't "dishonest" it merely referenced the part I wanted to question.

So again I'll ask,


Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Not all religions are equal

According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists?

It's a shame Brian doesn't read your posts any more DL because I'm sure he'd be able to supply more than enough examples of where all religions are as bad as each other!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 9:17am:

What crap. The 'first responders' to the muslim gunman threads are

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1417564999/0#0

Kernal, You, Kernal, Hot Breath, Then Brian. Not having a good trot are you Gandalf?

Is it a case of Send in the Clowns or call in the Trolls ::) ;D ::)

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 1:30pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 1:05pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 11:14am: Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists? You are as dishonest as your brother.  Contemptible effort.  Complete the quote that you conveniently truncated to totally change its meaning. Pathetic effort.  Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal to the first responders as you are demonstrating.  Keep it up clown.   Is that the sort of debating technique you have been reduced to?  Dishonesty and lies are strong in your family obviously. I asked a question about the point you'd raised DL.  It wasn't "dishonest" it merely referenced the part I wanted to question. So again I'll ask, Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:37pm: Not all religions are equal According to whom?  The believers?  Objective observers (which you claim to be which I have my doubts about)? Atheists?

No you dishonest bugger, you changed it to me stating that not all religions are equal from the statement that the first responders do not treat all religions equally.

Not everyone is as dopey as you are, your dishonesty is obvious.

DL you actually answered the question!  Pity you had to surround it with your usual torrent of abuse.  Just goes to show how childish you that you react so emotionally to anything asked of you.  You must have been a real ball in the Army.  I wouldn't think such an emotional person would have made a good soldier.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D

now lets not get off track DL - how about you put or shut up?


Datalife wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 11:59pm:

Scenario, this post, almost exactly as posted, substitute Muslim gunman.  You and I and I suggest everyone on the forum would know that the first responders would immediately  wade in with the usual well rehearsed responses, almost rote now, the mentally sick, not representative, a minority, majority are peace loving, yadda yadda then post some Googlefoo references as a "hey look over here" deflection and distraction. Throw in some crusades blame to garnish if feeling feisty.  My question is why do the  first responders treat the same circumstance so differently?  Bias is my obvious answer.

Give me evidence that the "first responders" are those who jump in with these "well rehearsed" apologetics - and not the islamophobes pinning islam and islamic doctrine to these lunatics. If you can, then you might have a point. But it is not the case - they are the second responders -  responding to the islamophobes unfairly tarring all muslims with the same brush. This is important to acknowledge - and is at the heart of the distinction you demand - but refuse to listen to when explained to you. And this is why this thread (with no inference that christianity and christian doctrine is to blame) does not attract the kind of apologetics you are demanding.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

DL you actually answered the question!  Pity you had to surround it with your usual torrent of abuse.  Just goes to show how childish you that you react so emotionally to anything asked of you.  You must have been a real ball in the Army.  I wouldn't think such an emotional person would have made a good soldier.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I thought your comprehension fails were feigned but I can see now that they are probably actual.  You might want to read my last post again, or not, I care not.

Your dishonesty in truncating  my post then questioning the changed meaning of that post is blatant and obvious.  Brain is a liar and you're deviously dishonest. What a family, what a tag team pair.  Gandy must be so pleased to have you both in his corner.   ::)

So why do the first reponders not respond to threads about christian extremists in the same way they do to islamic extremists? 

Page four now and still no answer.  Lots of dishonesty though.   ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:02pm:

now lets not get off track DL - how about you put or shut up? Datalife wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 11:59pm: Scenario, this post, almost exactly as posted, substitute Muslim gunman.  You and I and I suggest everyone on the forum would know that the first responders would immediately  wade in with the usual well rehearsed responses, almost rote now, the mentally sick, not representative, a minority, majority are peace loving, yadda yadda then post some Googlefoo references as a "hey look over here" deflection and distraction. Throw in some crusades blame to garnish if feeling feisty.  My question is why do the  first responders treat the same circumstance so differently?  Bias is my obvious answer. Give me evidence that the "first responders" are those who jump in with these "well rehearsed" apologetics - and not the islamophobes pinning islam and islamic doctrine to these lunatics. If you can, then you might have a point. But it is not the case - they are the second responders -  responding to the islamophobes unfairly tarring all muslims with the same brush. This is important to acknowledge - and is at the heart of the distinction you demand - but refuse to listen to when explained to you. And this is why this thread (with no inference that christianity and christian doctrine is to blame) does not attract the kind of apologetics you are demanding.

First responders are the first to an emergency.  The emergency being any thread that points to or describes an islamic excess.  The first responders mitigate, the well rehearsed form of words are tiny minority, not a majority, possible mental illness, majority of peaceful, then Googlefoo pointing at christian excesses. 

You can deny this happens but only at the risk of looking as foolish and dishonest as HotSocks.

Now here is a thread that describes a christian excess, you of course are excused, you are protecting your faith, but, if the other first responders are to be believed they do not care about the religion, they want fairness, not having the many painted by the actions of the few. 

If the first responders were as impartial as they pretend, they would be stating this gunman was probably mentally ill, only a minority, majority of christians are peaceful, yadda yadda, you know the drill.  You have seen it and participated in it many times. 

But nope, the first responders did not erect the barricades. 

Why the bias?    8-)

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 12:57pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 10:29am: Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:34am: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:03am: Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-) Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism? Sorry, DL, you didn't answer. Are you practicing Taqiyya? I had never heard of taqiyya till I came to this forum, judging from the context it seems to be an islamic thing, maybe you can explain it.  I didn't respond because I thought it was stupid and pointless, like most of your posts that I ignore.  But if you insist I don't think much of christian extremism, same as I don't think much of islamic extremism.    Hope that helps.

Thanks, DL, but it sounds like a diversion to me. Here you are in a thread on Christian extremism telling everyone to condemn Muslim extremism. You think a lot of Muslim extremism. We all know you do.

If you were as good as your word, shouldn't you be howling a littler harder at the Christians who are the subjects of the thread?

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:04pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 1:52pm: DL you actually answered the question!  Pity you had to surround it with your usual torrent of abuse.  Just goes to show how childish you that you react so emotionally to anything asked of you.  You must have been a real ball in the Army.  I wouldn't think such an emotional person would have made a good soldier.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought your comprehension fails were feigned but I can see now that they are probably actual.  You might want to read my last post again, or not, I care not. Your dishonesty in truncating  my post then questioning the changed meaning of that post is blatant and obvious.  Brain is a liar and you're deviously dishonest. What a family, what a tag team pair.  Gandy must be so pleased to have you both in his corner.   ::) So why do the first reponders not respond to threads about christian extremists in the same way they do to islamic extremists?  Page four now and still no answer.  Lots of dishonesty though.   ;D

I enjoy how you brand disagreement as "dishonesty".  Typical of your thinking though.  Obviously Skyhooks was your favourite band as a kid, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbQbmbNTyXU

;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:13pm:

If the first responders were as impartial as they pretend, they would be stating this gunman was probably mentally ill, only a minority, majority of christians are peaceful, yadda yadda, you know the drill.

they only state it when responding to someone saying they are not. No one made any such claim in this thread, therefore no responses. Its pretty straightforward DL - but do keep trolling

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:04pm:

I care not.

Its becoming increasingly obvious from this thread that this is not the case at all.

Karnal wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:48pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 12:57pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 10:29am: Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:34am: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:03am: Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-) Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism? Sorry, DL, you didn't answer. Are you practicing Taqiyya? I had never heard of taqiyya till I came to this forum, judging from the context it seems to be an islamic thing, maybe you can explain it.  I didn't respond because I thought it was stupid and pointless, like most of your posts that I ignore.  But if you insist I don't think much of christian extremism, same as I don't think much of islamic extremism.    Hope that helps.  Thanks, DL, but it sounds like a diversion to me. Here you are in a thread on Christian extremism telling everyone to condemn Muslim extremism. If you were as good as your word, shouldn't you be howling a littler harder at the Christians who are the subjects of the thread?

I am not telling anyone anything.  I am demonstrating the bias of the first responders.  It has been a wonderful thread I think.  First responders looking a bit frazzled, if not blatantly dishonest and devious. 

Compare and contrast the reactions between a thread about Christian extremism and the swarm that islamic threads instantly attract.  Hell you are on patrol yourself 24/7.

Nearly 500 views of first responder clowns attempting to deny what is evident.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:54pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:04pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 1:52pm: DL you actually answered the question!  Pity you had to surround it with your usual torrent of abuse.  Just goes to show how childish you that you react so emotionally to anything asked of you.  You must have been a real ball in the Army.  I wouldn't think such an emotional person would have made a good soldier.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought your comprehension fails were feigned but I can see now that they are probably actual.  You might want to read my last post again, or not, I care not. Your dishonesty in truncating  my post then questioning the changed meaning of that post is blatant and obvious.  Brain is a liar and you're deviously dishonest. What a family, what a tag team pair.  Gandy must be so pleased to have you both in his corner.   ::) So why do the first reponders not respond to threads about christian extremists in the same way they do to islamic extremists?  Page four now and still no answer.  Lots of dishonesty though.   ;D I enjoy how you brand disagreement as "dishonesty".  Typical of your thinking though

What I branded dishonest and devious was your truncating a post to change its meaning then attempting to interrogate that changed meaning. 

Dishonesty and stupidity writ large. 

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:56pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:04pm: I care not. Its becoming increasingly obvious from this thread that this is not the case at all.

Another dishonest poster attempting to misrepresent by truncating a post and interrogating a different meaning.

In case your comprehension is as dismal as Hotsocks  my "I care not " was in response to Hotsocks failure to comprehend that post and an invite to reread, I cared not if he reread it or not.  His failure was due to stupidity or feigned idiocy, either way he was not about to correct himself.

Was your failure dismal dimness or devious dishonesty?   ;D

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:54pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:04pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 1:52pm: DL you actually answered the question!  Pity you had to surround it with your usual torrent of abuse.  Just goes to show how childish you that you react so emotionally to anything asked of you.  You must have been a real ball in the Army.  I wouldn't think such an emotional person would have made a good soldier.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought your comprehension fails were feigned but I can see now that they are probably actual.  You might want to read my last post again, or not, I care not. Your dishonesty in truncating  my post then questioning the changed meaning of that post is blatant and obvious.  Brain is a liar and you're deviously dishonest. What a family, what a tag team pair.  Gandy must be so pleased to have you both in his corner.   ::) So why do the first reponders not respond to threads about christian extremists in the same way they do to islamic extremists?  Page four now and still no answer.  Lots of dishonesty though.   ;D I enjoy how you brand disagreement as "dishonesty".  Typical of your thinking though What I branded dishonest and devious was your truncating a post to change its meaning then attempting to interrogate that changed meaning.  Dishonesty and stupidity writ large.

Yet your spray was more general.  So you're not calling Gandalf "dishonest" then?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 3:17pm:

Looks like DL has jumped the gun.  I'm away for a few minutes and missed it. Of course, we could say he's a lone-wolf gunman, who is mentally deranged and his beliefs have nothing do "wiv"* mainstream Christianity.  However, we are reliably informed, time after time by many here that this viewpoint is wrong, that religious inspiration is what motivates such people all the time, that mental illness has nothing "to do wiv nothin'"*, so therefore we must claim that his views are in fact illustrative of what the majority of Christians believe in their hearts.   Now DL we wouldn't want to be inconsistent, now would we?   I fully expect to see Yadda, Sprint, Soren, Freediver, Baron, etc., all leaping to the same conclusion and accepting that this man was divinely inspired by his Christian beliefs about the superiority of white people over all them coloured folks!   I also expect, when they fail to make that leap, to see you criticising them for failing to do so!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Which Biblical chapters inform the belief in white superiority? Remind us.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:56pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:04pm: I care not. Its becoming increasingly obvious from this thread that this is not the case at all.

Ah, selective, distorting quoting.


Google: taqiya??

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 3:02pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 2:48pm: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 12:57pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 10:29am: Karnal wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:34am: Datalife wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 9:03am: Keep at it Karnal, you couldn't be more transparent if you tried...or more rediculous in your efforts.  Keep at it clown.  8-) Thanks, DL. What do you think about Christian extremism? Sorry, DL, you didn't answer. Are you practicing Taqiyya? I had never heard of taqiyya till I came to this forum, judging from the context it seems to be an islamic thing, maybe you can explain it.  I didn't respond because I thought it was stupid and pointless, like most of your posts that I ignore.  But if you insist I don't think much of christian extremism, same as I don't think much of islamic extremism.    Hope that helps.  Thanks, DL, but it sounds like a diversion to me. Here you are in a thread on Christian extremism telling everyone to condemn Muslim extremism. If you were as good as your word, shouldn't you be howling a littler harder at the Christians who are the subjects of the thread? I am not telling anyone anything.  I am demonstrating the bias of the first responders.  It has been a wonderful thread I think.  First responders looking a bit frazzled, if not blatantly dishonest and devious.  Compare and contrast the reactions between a thread about Christian extremism and the swarm that islamic threads instantly attract.  Hell you are on patrol yourself 24/7. Nearly 500 views of first responder clowns attempting to deny what is evident.

But , DL, the first responder was you.

Soren wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 4:56pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 3:17pm: Looks like DL has jumped the gun.  I'm away for a few minutes and missed it. Of course, we could say he's a lone-wolf gunman, who is mentally deranged and his beliefs have nothing do "wiv"* mainstream Christianity.  However, we are reliably informed, time after time by many here that this viewpoint is wrong, that religious inspiration is what motivates such people all the time, that mental illness has nothing "to do wiv nothin'"*, so therefore we must claim that his views are in fact illustrative of what the majority of Christians believe in their hearts.   Now DL we wouldn't want to be inconsistent, now would we?   I fully expect to see Yadda, Sprint, Soren, Freediver, Baron, etc., all leaping to the same conclusion and accepting that this man was divinely inspired by his Christian beliefs about the superiority of white people over all them coloured folks!   I also expect, when they fail to make that leap, to see you criticising them for failing to do so!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D Which Biblical chapters inform the belief in white superiority? Remind us.

I’m not sure, old boy. How did you come to this belief?

As a Lutheran, I mean.

Was it correlation or causation?

Soren wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 4:56pm:

[ Which Biblical chapters inform the belief in white superiority? Remind us.

Quote:

Will The Real Armageddon Please Stand Up? Appendix A: Is White Supremacy Scriptural? by Pastor Mark Downey It is curious as to how this expression 'White Supremacy' has become such a bugaboo, how it invokes images of some sort of exaggerated cult and how the average citizen reacts to the utterance of this phrase. We know the enemy perverts language and is the author of confusion, therefore it would behoove us to research words that are so loosely bandied about that are causing us so much trouble...

[http://kinsmanredeemer.com/SupremacyScriptural.html]

You should read the whole article Soren.  It should make you feel right at home, knowing there are people who think like this with their Christian teachings...   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D


Quote:

Psalm 123:2 (New International Version (NIV)): As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy. Ephesians 6:4-6: Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Ephesians 6:5:Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Ephesians 6:9:And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. Colossians 3:22:Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Colossians 4:1:Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven. Titus 2:9:Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 1 Peter 2:18:Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. Slaveowners would read these verses to slaves as part of the worship services that they allowed (and controlled) as a means of encouraging the proper attitude among their slaves. Based upon these isolated verses, slaveowners claimed that the Bible supported slavery and taught slaves to be obedient to their masters.

[http://www.reunionblackfamily.com/apps/blog/show/7183511-biblical-verses-used-by-slave-masters-to-justify-slavery]

;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Datalife wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 3:27pm:

my "I care not " was in response to Hotsocks failure to comprehend that post and an invite to reread, I cared not if he reread it or not.

I repeat - its becoming increasingly obvious from this thread that this is not the case at all.

Also your glaring inability to address the actual relevant point here has been noted:


polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:54pm:

they only state it when responding to someone saying they are not. No one made any such claim in this thread, therefore no responses.

Put up or shut up DL - prove your BS claims. You're only here to troll, that is the one thing you have been able to prove here.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 5:17pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 4:56pm: [ Which Biblical chapters inform the belief in white superiority? Remind us. Quote: Will The Real Armageddon Please Stand Up? Appendix A: Is White Supremacy Scriptural? by Pastor Mark Downey It is curious as to how this expression 'White Supremacy' has become such a bugaboo, how it invokes images of some sort of exaggerated cult and how the average citizen reacts to the utterance of this phrase. We know the enemy perverts language and is the author of confusion, therefore it would behoove us to research words that are so loosely bandied about that are causing us so much trouble... [http://kinsmanredeemer.com/SupremacyScriptural.html] You should read the whole article Soren.  It should make you feel right at home, knowing there are people who think like this with their Christian teachings...   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D [quote] Psalm 123:2 (New International Version (NIV)): As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy. Ephesians 6:4-6: Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Ephesians 6:5:Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Ephesians 6:9:And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. Colossians 3:22:Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Colossians 4:1:Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven. Titus 2:9:Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 1 Peter 2:18:Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. Slaveowners would read these verses to slaves as part of the worship services that they allowed (and controlled) as a means of encouraging the proper attitude among their slaves. Based upon these isolated verses, slaveowners claimed that the Bible supported slavery and taught slaves to be obedient to their masters.

[http://www.reunionblackfamily.com/apps/blog/show/7183511-biblical-verses-used-by-slave-masters-to-justify-slavery]

;D ;D ;D :D :D :D[/quote]
And yet - slavery in the West was abolished on the basis of Christian principles, by Christians.

It is still not abolished in Islam.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 5:17pm:

Quote: Psalm 123:2 (New International Version (NIV)): As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy. Ephesians 6:4-6: Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Ephesians 6:5:Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Ephesians 6:9:And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. Colossians 3:22:Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Colossians 4:1:Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven. Titus 2:9:Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 1 Peter 2:18:Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. Slaveowners would read these verses to slaves as part of the worship services that they allowed (and controlled) as a means of encouraging the proper attitude among their slaves. Based upon these isolated verses, slaveowners claimed that the Bible supported slavery and taught slaves to be obedient to their masters. [http://www.reunionblackfamily.com/apps/blog/show/7183511-biblical-verses-used-by-slave-masters-to-justify-slavery] ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

SLAVERY, IN THE BIBLE ?

Do you - imagine - that lawful 'slavery' doesn't exist today, in Western nations, like Australia ???

Everyone who draws breath, is usually a slave of/to at least one of their desires.

Romans 6:16
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?



e.g.
Anyone [in a Western nation like Australia] who has a mortgage on his/her home, has made himself/herself a bond slave, to the person [the lender of the money] who [actually] bought and owns their house/home.

THE BORROWER HAS SIGNED A LEGALLY BINDING AGREEMENT TO THAT EFFECT!


The borrower has legally made himself a 'bond slave' by signing a mortgage agreement.

[And there is [was] usually a clause in mortgage agreements that the lender can demand 'immediate' repayment of the balance of the amount owed. !! ]

i.e.
In the legal agreement they have signed, the borrower promises to pay back, the money that they have borrowed, plus interest.

If the borrower defaults on that promise, the lender or bank, can take legal possession of 'your' property. !!!




And yes, in those verses, in the NT, that refer to persons who find themselves in a circumstance where they are LAWFULLY slaves, the advice from Paul is that slaves should obey their masters!

Is that advice 'wrong' ?

In a modern 'context' why is it wrong, to expect someone to honour their legal agreements [as a 'mortgage slave'] ?


Yadda said....

Quote:

The two most important characteristics which define the personality of a person [imo]; 1/ are we honest ? 2/ are we reliable ?                    ....[e.g. if we give someone an undertaking to do something, or to behave in a certain way, will we keep to the [verbal] agreement that we have made ?] More than that, is superfluous, imo.

Yet in Moses law;

Deuteronomy 23:15
Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee:
16  He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.



And of course, there is;

Quote:

Exodus 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him... Exodus 23:9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger... Leviticus 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34  But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself... n.b. .....and thou shalt love him as thyself Deuteronomy 1:16 And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Deuteronomy 10:17-19 For the LORD your God... loveth the stranger, ...Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. Deuteronomy 24:17 Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow's raiment to pledge: 18  But thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee thence: therefore I command thee to do this thing. Deuteronomy 27:19 Cursed be he that perverteth the judgment of the stranger...

Soren wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 5:53pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 5:17pm: Soren wrote on Dec 4th, 2014 at 4:56pm: [ Which Biblical chapters inform the belief in white superiority? Remind us. Quote: Will The Real Armageddon Please Stand Up? Appendix A: Is White Supremacy Scriptural? by Pastor Mark Downey It is curious as to how this expression 'White Supremacy' has become such a bugaboo, how it invokes images of some sort of exaggerated cult and how the average citizen reacts to the utterance of this phrase. We know the enemy perverts language and is the author of confusion, therefore it would behoove us to research words that are so loosely bandied about that are causing us so much trouble... [http://kinsmanredeemer.com/SupremacyScriptural.html] You should read the whole article Soren.  It should make you feel right at home, knowing there are people who think like this with their Christian teachings...   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D [quote] Psalm 123:2 (New International Version (NIV)): As the eyes of slaves look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid look to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he shows us his mercy. Ephesians 6:4-6: Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Ephesians 6:5:Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Ephesians 6:9:And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him. Colossians 3:22:Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Colossians 4:1:Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven. Titus 2:9:Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 1 Peter 2:18:Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. Slaveowners would read these verses to slaves as part of the worship services that they allowed (and controlled) as a means of encouraging the proper attitude among their slaves. Based upon these isolated verses, slaveowners claimed that the Bible supported slavery and taught slaves to be obedient to their masters. [http://www.reunionblackfamily.com/apps/blog/show/7183511-biblical-verses-used-by-slave-masters-to-justify-slavery] ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

And yet - slavery in the West was abolished on the basis of Christian principles, by Christians.

It is still not abolished in Islam.
[/quote]

Mmm, obviously the Muslim leaders who met in Rome two days ago on World End to Slavery Day to jointly declare with Catholic, Anglican and Orthodox Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish leaders appeared to understand differently, Soren.  Did you miss that news item?

And then we have this response about the issue of slavery within Islam, Soren.  Makes interesting reading...    ::)

Four Iraqi Christian children, who were all beheaded by the Islamic State, refused to betray Jesus and graciously died in his name when the ISIS militants gave them one last chance to say the Islamic words of conversion, the Rev. Canon Andrew White revealed in a recent interview.

In an interview last week with the Christian Broadcast Network published on the Orthodox Christian Network, White, who is the only Anglican vicar in Iraq and is know as "The Vicar of Baghdad," detailed the plight of Christians in Iraq and recounted two instances when Islamic State's forceful conversions directly pulled the strings of his heart.

Speaking on ISIS' brutal mistreatment of religious minorities, White recounted the recent incident when ISIS militants beheaded four kids, all of whom were under the age of 15, when the kids refused to say that they would follow the Prophet Muhammad and told the ISIS fighters that they will always "love" and "follow" Jesus.

Free Sign Up CP Newsletter!


RELATED

Iraqi Christian Village in Nineveh Hosts First Mass Since ISIS Takeover


Teenage Girl Who Escaped ISIS Tells of Rape, Forced Conversion by Islamic Militants


90 Percent of Iraq's Orthodox Christians Are Displaced, Only 30 of 600 Orthodox Families Remain in Baghdad


Vicar of Baghdad: 'Americans Have to Realize All of Their Intervention Has Totally Been Wasted'


Baghdad Church Vicar on ISIS Closing in on Capital: Being British, Pro-Israel Makes Me a Big Target


'Every Single Christian Wants to Leave' Iraq, Says Vicar of Baghdad

"ISIS turned up and they said to the children, 'you say the words that you will follow Muhammad.' The Children, all under 15, four of them, they said, 'no, we love Yasua [Jesus]. We have always loved Yasua. We have always followed Yasua. Yasua has always been with us.'" White said. "[The Militants] said, 'say the words!' [The Children] said, 'no, we can't do that.' They chopped all their heads off."

"How do you respond to that?" White asked. "You just cry. They are my children. That is what we have been going through. That is what we are going through."

White spoke of another instance, which happened a few days prior to the children's beheading, where a male Christian adult was forced to say the Islamic words of conversion, or else all of his children were going to be beheaded. With his children's lives at stake, the man could not afford to be bold and caved in saying said the words of conversion.

White said that later that day, the man called him to ask if Jesus still loved him even though he had said the Islamic words of conversion.

"[Militants] say to one man, an adult, 'you say the words of conversion or we will kill all of your children.' He was desperate. He said the words," White said. "Then he phoned me and said '[Father], I said the words, does that mean Yasua doesn't love me anymore? I have always loved Yasua. I said those words because I couldn't see my children be killed.' I said, 'Jesus still loves you. He will always love you.'"

White, who is now staying in Israel after fleeing from Baghdad after receiving personal death threats from the Islamic State, said that it is "impossible" for Christians to live in Iraq because of the Islamic State's brutal mistreatment of religious minorities.

"They have threatened to kill me. They are after me. They wanted that Abuna [Father] from England," White said. "So the Archbishop of Canterbury said 'you've got to leave now.'"

White further notes that over 250,000 Christians have now fled from the caliphate and are living as refugees in the Kurdish North.

ISIS mistreatment of children and religious minorities goes well beyond just the forced Islamic conversions. White noted that many children, not just the four he previously mentioned, are being either beheaded and their bodies cut in half.

In addition, Yazidi refugees interviewed by the Daily Mail say that ISIS not only systematically kills yazidi and Christian men and women, they have also brutally cut the throats of babies. One 13-year-old Yazidi from one particular Yazidi village claims that the militants killed over 100 kids from his village.

ISIS militants are also kidnapping and selling off baby girls as sex slaves. A recent pricing guide released by Islamic State leadership reveals that Christian and Yazidi girls aged 1 to 9 years old are being sold as sex slaves for just $172.

Although ISIS recruits kids and other young adults to join the caliphate by advertising a false sense of Islamic Purpose, the ISIS leadership are also said to brutally treat their rank-and-file fighters.

Testimony from one 15-year-old former ISIS fighter says that ISIS leaders drugged fighters to make them more likely to commit a suicide bomb attack in battle. Additionally, a United Nations report states that ISIS militants are using kids as human shields in battle and also force them to donate blood to wounded ISIS fighters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs5ZdmGNeR8#t=14

And what is the relevance of these two posts to the questions I asked, Soren about your apparent ignorance on the topic you were proclaiming?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 3:46pm:

And what is the relevance of these two posts to the questions I asked, Soren about your apparent ignorance on the topic you were proclaiming?   ::)

Yeah, I totally missed the bit where it says that there are still slaves in Europe, North America, Australia, NZ.

In the newest state, on the other hand, the Islamic STate, there are plenty and there is a price list. Girls between birth and 9 years fetch the highest price. The income funds the nation building efforts of the Islamic State.

How about that.

Yet, Soren it appears to have passed you by that mainstream Muslim Leaders were proclaiming that Slavery is wrong and not a part of mainstream Islam.   Another sign of your obvious bigotry towards all things Muslim, I think.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 7:40pm:

Yet, Soren it appears to have passed you by that mainstream Muslim Leaders were proclaiming that Slavery is wrong and not a part of mainstream Islam.   Another sign of your obvious bigotry towards all things Muslim, I think.   ::)

Mainstream Muslim leaders are two faced pricks, like you. They condemn something out of one corner of their mouth and endorse it out the the other corner. They are like you. Spineless, untrustworthy, squishy and dishonest.

Soren wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 8:45pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 7:40pm: Yet, Soren it appears to have passed you by that mainstream Muslim Leaders were proclaiming that Slavery is wrong and not a part of mainstream Islam.   Another sign of your obvious bigotry towards all things Muslim, I think.   ::) Mainstream Muslim leaders are two faced pricks, like you. They condemn something out of one corner of their mouth and endorse it out the the other corner. They are like you. Spineless, untrustworthy, squishy and dishonest.

So many adjectives?  All for just little ol' me, Soren?  I feel honoured.

Perhaps like me, mainstream Muslim leaders try and be objective, which of course you can never lay claim to!   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 9:43pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 8:45pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 7:40pm: Yet, Soren it appears to have passed you by that mainstream Muslim Leaders were proclaiming that Slavery is wrong and not a part of mainstream Islam.   Another sign of your obvious bigotry towards all things Muslim, I think.   ::) Mainstream Muslim leaders are two faced pricks, like you. They condemn something out of one corner of their mouth and endorse it out the the other corner. They are like you. Spineless, untrustworthy, squishy and dishonest. So many adjectives?  All for just little ol' me, Soren?  I feel honoured. Perhaps like me, mainstream Muslim leaders try and be objective, which of course you can never lay claim to!   ::)

Don't be proud. They are not adjectives of praise.


You do not want to live under sharia. Nor do I. But you are dishonest enough to pretend that there is no more sharia in Australia now than there was 100 years ago and that there will be no more sharia in a 100 years than there is now.

This is what makes you an enemy of every single thing that I would wish for my children. You are a dishonest activist.  You are not naive. You are actively agitating for a worse society.

Soren wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 10:01pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 9:43pm: Soren wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 8:45pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 7:40pm: Yet, Soren it appears to have passed you by that mainstream Muslim Leaders were proclaiming that Slavery is wrong and not a part of mainstream Islam.   Another sign of your obvious bigotry towards all things Muslim, I think.   ::) Mainstream Muslim leaders are two faced pricks, like you. They condemn something out of one corner of their mouth and endorse it out the the other corner. They are like you. Spineless, untrustworthy, squishy and dishonest. So many adjectives?  All for just little ol' me, Soren?  I feel honoured. Perhaps like me, mainstream Muslim leaders try and be objective, which of course you can never lay claim to!   ::) Don't be proud. They are not adjectives of praise. You do not want to live under sharia. Nor do I. But you are dishonest enough to pretend that there is no more sharia in Australia now than there was 100 years ago and that there will be no more sharia in a 100 years than there is now.

I cannot predict what will happen in the next year with any accuracy, Soren, let alone what will happen in the next 100.   Unlike you, I don't leap at every shadow and cower at every sound.

All I can do is talk about what has happened in the last 100 years and what is happening now.   We have no more Sh'ria in Australia now, than we had 100 years ago, Soren.   Individuals can live and order their lives how they like and if they wish to live by the principles of Sh'ria that is up to them and nothing you can do will stop it.   You appear to want to though, through I suspect draconian measures, which persecute innocent people merely because they profess to being worshippers of Islam.  Yet, you're surprised when I suggest you wish to engage in religious persecution.  It's almost as if there is a disjoint between what you think and and what you type.  You never seem to consider the consequences on innocent people.   Instead you decree that we must all march to the beat of your drum, in lockstep with you and nothing else will be tolerated.

What happens in 100 years will be of no concern of me or you, Soren.  We will be both be long dead, long buried or burnt.   You need to let go and let your children inherit and order their society as they see fit.  Hopefully they will be far more tolerant than you are.   One would hope they will not follow your lead and will throw off the shackles of your narrow-mindedness.    ::)


Quote:

This is what makes you an enemy of every single thing that I would wish for my children. You are a dishonest activist.  You are not naive. You are actively agitating for a worse society.

I am, Soren?  Perhaps you'd care to point out where I have agitated for Sh'ria to be introduced in Australia?   Somewhere?   Of course, you won't apologise, now will you?   If you want to talk about honesty, I think you need to look carefully in the mirror before accusing others of dishonesty, Soren.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 10:15pm:

We have no more Sh'ria in Australia now, than we had 100 years ago, Soren.

You know full well that this is a lie, yet you say it.  You are dishonest to an amazing degree. You have no sense of decency. You will utter falsehoods and believe that by uttering, it will somehow be accepted.



Sh'ria??? Sh'ria?
Where the hell did you get THAT from?  Sh'ria?? So f Vcking meticulous about Sh'ria for someone who knows nuffin' about it, aren't you?

Soren wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 10:59pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 7th, 2014 at 10:15pm:  We have no more Sh'ria in Australia now, than we had 100 years ago, Soren.  You know full well that this is a lie, yet you say it.  You are dishonest to an amazing degree. You have no sense of decency. You will utter falsehoods and believe that by uttering, it will somehow be accepted.

Perhaps you'd care to point to the Australian legislation which recognises Sh'ria law, Soren?

I look forward to the results of your search.   ::)


Quote:

Sh'ria??? Sh'ria? Where the hell did you get THAT from?  Sh'ria?? So f Vcking meticulous about Sh'ria for someone who knows nuffin' about it, aren't you?

I suspect I know more about Australian law than you do, Soren, particularly as you appear to keep posting bullshit like this, all the time.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 8^th, 2014 at 11:34pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 7th, 2014 at 10:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 7th, 2014 at 10:15pm:  We have no more Sh'ria in Australia now, than we had 100 years ago, Soren.  You know full well that this is a lie, yet you say it.  You are dishonest to an amazing degree. You have no sense of decency. You will utter falsehoods and believe that by uttering, it will somehow be accepted. Perhaps you'd care to point to the Australian legislation which recognises Sh'ria law, Soren? I look forward to the results of your search.   ::) Quote: Sh'ria??? Sh'ria? Where the hell did you get THAT from?  Sh'ria?? So f Vcking meticulous about Sh'ria for someone who knows nuffin' about it, aren't you? I suspect I know more about Australian law than you do, Soren, particularly as you appear to keep posting bullshit like this, all the time.   ::)

I know you are wrong on this as on almost everything else.

That's your role in life, Brain, to be wrong.

Soren wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 10:59pm:

You know full well that this is a lie, yet you say it.  You are dishonest to an amazing degree. You have no sense of decency. You will utter falsehoods and believe that by uttering, it will somehow be accepted.

would you say this is a good description of this post?:


Soren wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2013 at 9:42pm:

The 'protest' was about the Swedish police shooting a knife-wielding would-be honour killing old bastard. That's why the 'yoofs' of no particular culture erupted into action. The police shot an Islamic dickhead who was hot to implement Sharia law in his own family and the Mulims took exception to the Swedish law enforcement guys shooting him. It is still against the law to honour kill in Sweden and that infuriates all these 'yoofs' of no particular religion (ie Muslims).

needless to say, everything you describe here about this "islamic dickhead" was a lie - right down to the fact that he wasn't even muslim.

Do you really think you're the one to be grandstanding about being "dishonest to an amazing degree"?

Or there’s the one about those awful Kurdish Muslims who the old boy was ever so certain.bombed the Turkish Consulate in Melbourne.

Only they happened to be Armenian Christians.

Stupid or mendacious?

Sometimes an.old boy is just an old boy.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 12^th, 2014 at 9:21pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 7th, 2014 at 10:59pm: You know full well that this is a lie, yet you say it.  You are dishonest to an amazing degree. You have no sense of decency. You will utter falsehoods and believe that by uttering, it will somehow be accepted. would you say this is a good description of this post?: Soren wrote on Jun 2nd, 2013 at 9:42pm: The 'protest' was about the Swedish police shooting a knife-wielding would-be honour killing old bastard. That's why the 'yoofs' of no particular culture erupted into action. The police shot an Islamic dickhead who was hot to implement Sharia law in his own family and the Mulims took exception to the Swedish law enforcement guys shooting him. It is still against the law to honour kill in Sweden and that infuriates all these 'yoofs' of no particular religion (ie Muslims). needless to say, everything you describe here about this "islamic dickhead" was a lie - right down to the fact that he wasn't even muslim. Do you really think you're the one to be grandstanding about being "dishonest to an amazing degree"?

Oh, dear.  I do believe Soren needs to clean the bottom of his kettle.   ;D

One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim.
And so the slate of the thousands of Muslims is now wiped clean. The Muslims can carry on now because there was one South American in Malmo who did something mostly Muslims do while nonMuslim.

The patter remains, though.

Soren wrote on Dec 15^th, 2014 at 5:39pm:

One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim.

You mean the incident you grand standed on, proudly displaying your hatred and bigotry towards Muslims for all to see Soren?  You know, the one where you lied and made stuff up?   ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 15^th, 2014 at 5:47pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 15th, 2014 at 5:39pm: One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim. You mean the incident you grand standed on, proudly displaying your hatred and bigotry towards Muslims for all to see Soren?  You know, the one where you lied and made stuff up?   ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D :D

Yeah, they guy acted like a Muslim and turned out to be a nonMuslim.

The pattern remain.

Soren wrote on Dec 15^th, 2014 at 5:39pm:

One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim. And so the slate of the thousands of Muslims is now wiped clean. The Muslims can carry on now because there was one South American in Malmo who did something mostly Muslims do while nonMuslim. The patter remains, though.

He was talking?

Soren, doesn't it worry you ever that you are looking more and more like a lunatic?   ::)

Soren wrote on Dec 15^th, 2014 at 5:39pm:

One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim. And so the slate of the thousands of Muslims is now wiped clean. The Muslims can carry on now because there was one South American in Malmo who did something mostly Muslims do while nonMuslim. The patter remains, though.

I say, old boy, are you admitting to be stupid or mendacious?

You didn’t say which.

Karnal wrote on Dec 15^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 15th, 2014 at 5:39pm: One out of the thousands of incidents like this turns out to be a non-Muslim. And so the slate of the thousands of Muslims is now wiped clean. The Muslims can carry on now because there was one South American in Malmo who did something mostly Muslims do while nonMuslim. The patter remains, though. I say, old boy, are you admitting to be stupid or mendacious? You didn’t say which.

I think you are both. So is Brain.

Mendacious was a big word for the Karnel toe I wonder what will be next.

#Illridewiththatnonmuslemanhotchick