There president is not extreme enough and want him to be more evil or they will kill him


Israelis Threaten Their President With Death For Condemning The Burning Alive Of A Palestinian Baby

Israeli President Reuven Rivlin is facing a barrage of hateful comments, including death threats, from Israeli citizens after he condemned the burning to death of a Palestinian baby by Jewish-Israeli settlers.

In the early hours of Friday, July 31, Jewish-Israelis firebombed a Palestinian home in the West Bank town of Duma, just south of Nablus. 18-month-old Ali Dawabshe was burned alive in his own cot. His mother, father and brother remain in critical condition. The killers spray-painted a Star of David on the charred walls of the house, and added the word “Revenge.”

The morning after the Dawabshe family were burned in their beds, another Jewish-Israeli attacked Tel Aviv’s Gay Pride event, stabbing several LGBT people. 16-year-old Shira Banki was critically injured, and later died from her injuries.

It was clear to many of those who have watched with concern while mainstream Jewish-Israelis have continued to incite hatred and violence against non-Jews in Israel over recent years, that these acts of violence were not shocking aberrations. Instead, they are the tragic, inevitable consequence of such incitement.

As veteran Jewish-Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote in July 2014:

    “All the seeds of the incitement of the past few years, all the nationalistic, racist legislation and the incendiary propaganda, the scare campaigns and the subversion of democracy by the right-wing camp – all these have borne fruit, and that fruit is rank and rotten. The nationalist right has now sunk to a new level, with almost the whole country following in its wake. The word “fascism,” which I try to use as little as possible, finally has its deserved place in the Israeli political discourse.”

A year later, President Rivlin has raised the same issue, calling the killings a ‘wake up call’ to Israel. He challenged Prime Minister Netanyahu and other leaders in Israeli society to go further than condemning the attacks, by challenging the whole narrative that make Palestinian life so cheap in Israel and the Occupied Territories.

    “An atmosphere has been created here that has allowed leniency towards what is naively called ‘weeds,’” Rivlin stated.

    “Every society has extremist fringes, but today we have to ask: what is it in the public atmosphere which allows extremism and extremists to walk in confidence, in broad daylight? What is it that has enabled these weeds to threaten the safety of the entire garden of flowers?” he asked.

The speech, published in the Israeli press, received thousands of comments, with Rivlin widely condemned as an internal traitor to the Jewish State.

    “Dirty traitor. Your end will be worse than (Ariel) Sharon’s,” reads one comment.

    “In Russia you would have been found by this point cut up inside a shoe box.” Wrote another.

Gods chosen people


This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out.


http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg

wally1 wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 5:15pm:

There president is not extreme enough and want him to be more evil or they will kill him Israelis Threaten Their President With Death For Condemning The Burning Alive Of A Palestinian Baby Israeli President Reuven Rivlin is facing a barrage of hateful comments, including death threats, from Israeli citizens after he condemned the burning to death of a Palestinian baby by Jewish-Israeli settlers. In the early hours of Friday, July 31, Jewish-Israelis firebombed a Palestinian home in the West Bank town of Duma, just south of Nablus. 18-month-old Ali Dawabshe was burned alive in his own cot. His mother, father and brother remain in critical condition. The killers spray-painted a Star of David on the charred walls of the house, and added the word “Revenge.” The morning after the Dawabshe family were burned in their beds, another Jewish-Israeli attacked Tel Aviv’s Gay Pride event, stabbing several LGBT people. 16-year-old Shira Banki was critically injured, and later died from her injuries. It was clear to many of those who have watched with concern while mainstream Jewish-Israelis have continued to incite hatred and violence against non-Jews in Israel over recent years, that these acts of violence were not shocking aberrations. Instead, they are the tragic, inevitable consequence of such incitement. As veteran Jewish-Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote in July 2014:     “All the seeds of the incitement of the past few years, all the nationalistic, racist legislation and the incendiary propaganda, the scare campaigns and the subversion of democracy by the right-wing camp – all these have borne fruit, and that fruit is rank and rotten. The nationalist right has now sunk to a new level, with almost the whole country following in its wake. The word “fascism,” which I try to use as little as possible, finally has its deserved place in the Israeli political discourse.” A year later, President Rivlin has raised the same issue, calling the killings a ‘wake up call’ to Israel. He challenged Prime Minister Netanyahu and other leaders in Israeli society to go further than condemning the attacks, by challenging the whole narrative that make Palestinian life so cheap in Israel and the Occupied Territories.     “An atmosphere has been created here that has allowed leniency towards what is naively called ‘weeds,’” Rivlin stated.     “Every society has extremist fringes, but today we have to ask: what is it in the public atmosphere which allows extremism and extremists to walk in confidence, in broad daylight? What is it that has enabled these weeds to threaten the safety of the entire garden of flowers?” he asked. The speech, published in the Israeli press, received thousands of comments, with Rivlin widely condemned as an internal traitor to the Jewish State.     “Dirty traitor. Your end will be worse than (Ariel) Sharon’s,” reads one comment.     “In Russia you would have been found by this point cut up inside a shoe box.” Wrote another.

Source??

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/08/03/israelis-threaten-their-president-with-death-for-condemning-the-burning-alive-of-a-palestinian-baby-images/

Its 'About us' page?
Error 404 - Nothing Found
The page you are looking for could not be found.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/?page_id=28

You want another source S?


Quote:

JERUSALEM — Israeli police launched an investigation Monday into incitement charges after a wave of social media users threatened President Reuven Rivlin, calling him a “traitor” and “Arab terrorist” after he condemned two attacks by Jewish Israelis that roiled the country.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/08/03/israeli-president-flooded-death-threats-condemning-jewish-terror/31059657/

But of course its not like this sort of culture is endemic in Israeli society - and even politics is it? I mean the Israeli foreign minister didn't call on Israeli-arabs to be executed if they didn't pledge loyalty to the Israeli flag, as well as calling for Palestinian civilians to be bombed, and there's no way Israel elected two known terrorists - one who masterminded the assassination of a Swedish dimplomat, and the other who planned the bombing of a hotel that killed more people than any other single terrorist act in the whole conflict...

did they?

I guess it just shows that one mans terrorism is another mans foreign policy.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 7:04pm:

I guess it just shows that one mans terrorism is another mans foreign policy.

I like that - I might use it now and then.

wally1 wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 5:18pm:

Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg

Is that like cutting peoples heads off, pouring gasoline on them in a cage and burning them alive, crucifying them upside down, cutting small children and babies in half in front of their parents, murdering helpless women and children,  like the muslims do in 2015 on a scale that make that one heinous incident pale in comparison on a daily basis ?

I want to be clear on my stance here that one heinous crime is just not an incident it is a sick heinous crime and could only have been done by total utter sick demented psychopaths. Just like the muslim ones we hear about daily to be fair.

I don't know how any human could do what either of these sick psychopaths do. Further more I will mention I don't know why anyone would follow a psychopathic book that actually supports these sick psychopaths like the quran does. It only breeds evil and division where ever it surfaces.
Surely muslims can see this.

According to Gandalf, Muslims believe that Muhammed represents peace and tolerance.

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 11:09pm:

wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg Is that like cutting peoples heads off, pouring gasoline on them in a cage and burning them alive, crucifying them upside down, cutting small children and babies in half in front of their parents, murdering helpless women and children,  like the muslims do in 2015 on a scale that make that one heinous incident pale in comparison on a daily basis ?

Yes, it is just like that.


LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 11:09pm:

wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg I want to be clear on my stance here that one heinous crime is just not an incident it is a sick heinous crime and could only have been done by total utter sick demented psychopaths. Just like the muslim ones we hear about daily to be fair.

Do you think this is the only atrocity committed by the Jews against Arabs?
   

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 11:09pm:

wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg I don't know how any human could do what either of these sick psychopaths do. Further more I will mention I don't know why anyone would follow a psychopathic book that actually supports these sick psychopaths like the quran does. It only breeds evil and division where ever it surfaces. Surely muslims can see this.

This people who committed the relevant atrocity were Jewish.

I can't stop you spreading your patented brand of christian hate, but I can request that you confine it to the numerous Islam specific threads.

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:21pm:

According to Gandalf, Muslims believe that Muhammed represents peace and tolerance.

FD cannot tolerate any muslim advocating a peaceful Islam.

He actually wants them to be terrorists.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 7:04pm: I guess it just shows that one mans terrorism is another mans foreign policy. I like that - I might use it now and then.

Don't forget the copyright fees.

*******

Living in a pressure-cooker geo-political environment as the Israelis do, it's no wonder the constant hostility bearing down upon them from all sides has given rise to pockets of 'Islamic-extremist' attitudes.

If you keep poking the Israelis with a stick through the bars of the virtual cage they are living in - surrounded by Muslim countries - then you're bound to provoke and incite just the kind of extreme violence that's been reported here.

These 'Extremist Israelis' have a long way to go before they catch up with the mass-atrocities of Islam's extremists.

Come on guys, it took you a whole 6 posts before a non-Islamic thread got turned into a muslim-hate thread. Tighten up your game!

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:49pm:

Come on guys, it took you a whole 6 posts before a non-Islamic thread got turned into a muslim-hate thread. Tighten up your game!

You can run but you can't hide, gandalf. You too Wally.

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:47pm:

Living in a pressure-cooker geo-political environment as the Israelis do, it's no wonder the constant hostility bearing down upon them from all sides has given rise to pockets of 'Islamic-extremist' attitudes. If you keep poking the Israelis with a stick through the bars of the virtual cage they are living in - surrounded by Muslim countries - then you're bound to provoke and incite just the kind of extreme violence that's been reported here. These 'Extremist Israelis' have a long way to go before they catch up with the mass-atrocities of Islam's extremists.

Could this be the long awaited proof that that extremist actions are an expression of deeper socio-economic issues rather than a comment on the particular religious affiliation of the perpetrators?

Or will the dashing knights of freedom defeat this seditious thought with their expertly wielded arsenal of repetition and deflection?

Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion kids..........

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 5^th, 2015 at 7:03pm:

You want another source S? Quote: JERUSALEM — Israeli police launched an investigation Monday into incitement charges after a wave of social media users threatened President Reuven Rivlin, calling him a “traitor” and “Arab terrorist” after he condemned two attacks by Jewish Israelis that roiled the country. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/08/03/israeli-president-flooded-death-threats-condemning-jewish-terror/31059657/ But of course its not like this sort of culture is endemic in Israeli society - and even politics is it?

You mustn't have read the Torah, G. These people are ordered to do these things by their sinister prophets.

Not that there's anything wrong with this - if you're not a Muselman.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:59pm:

Could this be the long awaited proof that that extremist actions are an expression of deeper socio-economic issues rather than a comment on the particular religious affiliation of the perpetrators?

... er ... no.

Nice attempt at conflation there, but it doesn't pass the pub test.

Please pass the dice and box to the player to the left of you and forfeit a turn.

The dashing knights of freedom defeat this seditious thought with their expertly wielded deflection!


p.s you must have a fair bit of spare time if your pub testing concepts on a weekday?

Mayhaps seek employment then promulgate?

Unless you run a pub.
I which case I retract the statement, apologize and go back to arguing semantics.

Do you run a pub?

"Oh, but the jails around Sydney are full of Muslim youths, Pacific Islanders and Aborgines because they're poor ... and they have no jobs ... and they're disaffected and marginalised by the White Majority ... and they're the victims of racism, and ... and ...  "

Pig's arse!!

As males in their community, they're culturally offended at having to take orders from White Folk in the workplace where they're expected to do a little work for their wages.

The Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, and the Indians arrive here with a work ethic.

It's all a matter of cultural attitude.

The rampaging of the Muslim hordes over there in the Middle East has nothing to do with poverty, disaffection, or being marginalised - it's all a product of a cultural and religious attitude of effortless entitlement.

It's the Leftwing luvvie apologists such as yourself who go fossicking about looking for any damned excuse to rationalise their behaviour as ultimately being the fault of White Anglo 'oppression', racism, insensitivity, imperialism, marginalisation - you name it. 

Sensei, what does what other peoples do have to do with what Jewish people do?   ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 2:57pm:

"Oh, but the jails around Sydney are full of Muslim youths, Pacific Islanders and Aborgines because they're poor ... and they have no jobs ... and they're disaffected and marginalised by the White Majority ... and they're the victims of racism, and ... and ...  " Pig's arse!! As males in their community, they're culturally offended at having to take orders from White Folk in the workplace where they're expected to do a little work for their wages. The Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, and the Indians arrive here with a work ethic. It's all a matter of cultural attitude. The rampaging of the Muslim hordes over there in the Middle East has nothing to do with poverty, disaffection, or being marginalised - it's all a product of a cultural and religious attitude of effortless entitlement. It's the Leftwing luvvie apologists such as yourself who go fossicking about looking for any damned excuse to rationalise their behaviour as ultimately being the fault of White Anglo 'oppression', racism, insensitivity, imperialism, marginalisation - you name it.

I would be fascinated to know who your replying too, I cant see any posts in the thread that have any relevance to your reply.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 4:41pm:

I would be fascinated to know who your replying too, I cant see any posts in the thread that have any relevance to your reply.

Then as an IQ test you've failed.

The dashing knights of freedom defeat this seditious thought with their expertly wielded deflection!


p.s If being able to connect your post to another post is difficult enough to be considered an IQ test, than you should maybe consider providing more context.

|dev|null wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 3:32pm:

Sensei, what does what other peoples do have to do with what Jewish people do?   ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D

That is hilarious, as surely as night follows day, the first response to any mention of an Islamic inspired atrocity is the apologist "what about ers...." usually dredging back to ancient history and the crusades to find an appropriate comparison, and now it is "what does what other people do have to do with..."

Absolute classic.  Think I will use that next time the whatabouters wheel in the usual deflections and mitigations.

Thanks for the laugh.   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:45pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 12:21pm: According to Gandalf, Muslims believe that Muhammed represents peace and tolerance. FD cannot tolerate any muslim advocating a peaceful Islam. He actually wants them to be terrorists.

Muhammed killing 800 innocent Jews in a single day? Peace and tolerance.

Muhammed lighting a fire on a Jewish man's stomach to get him to reveal where the Jew gold is? Peace and tolerance.

Muhammed congratulating a soldier for preventing women from escaping after they slaughtered their husbands? Peace and tolerance.

Muhammed ethnically cleansing large areas of Arabia of all non-Muslims? Peace and tolerance.

Muhammed failing to respond to a woman who begged him to intervene when she was beaten by her husband until her skin was green with bruises? Peace and tolerance.

Perhaps you should give us the Islamic definition of peace and tolerance Gandalf. I can put it on the wiki.

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 7:37pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 12:45pm: freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 12:21pm: According to Gandalf, Muslims believe that Muhammed represents peace and tolerance. FD cannot tolerate any muslim advocating a peaceful Islam. He actually wants them to be terrorists. Muhammed killing 800 innocent Jews in a single day? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed lighting a fire on a Jewish man's stomach to get him to reveal where the Jew gold is? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed congratulating a soldier for preventing women from escaping after they slaughtered their husbands? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed ethnically cleansing large areas of Arabia of all non-Muslims? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed failing to respond to a woman who begged him to intervene when she was beaten by her husband until her skin was green with bruises? Peace and tolerance. Perhaps you should give us the Islamic definition of peace and tolerance Gandalf. I can put it on the wiki.

wow,800 in one day.

Thats better than 70,000 killed by christians in one day in the jerusalem crusade.

Crusader armies were mobilised to fight a “just war” to retake Jerusalem form Muslim Turks, earning them remission of sins and a ticket to heaven. They massacred Jewish communities on the way, and after besieging and sacking Nicea, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople, they slaughtered their Muslim and Jewish populations. Rummel estimates the death toll at 1 million. The world had around 400 million people at the time, about a sixth of the number in the mid-20th century, so the death toll of the Crusader massacres as a proportion of the world’s population would today come out at around 6 million, equivalent to the Nazi’s genocide of the Jews (The Better Angels of Our Nature, p.140).

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 12:43pm:

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 11:09pm: wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg Is that like cutting peoples heads off, pouring gasoline on them in a cage and burning them alive, crucifying them upside down, cutting small children and babies in half in front of their parents, murdering helpless women and children,  like the muslims do in 2015 on a scale that make that one heinous incident pale in comparison on a daily basis ? Yes, it is just like that. LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 11:09pm: wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg I want to be clear on my stance here that one heinous crime is just not an incident it is a sick heinous crime and could only have been done by total utter sick demented psychopaths. Just like the muslim ones we hear about daily to be fair. Do you think this is the only atrocity committed by the Jews against Arabs?     LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 11:09pm: wally1 wrote on Aug 5th, 2015 at 5:18pm: Gods chosen people This heinous act of violence come just a year after Jewish-Israeli settlers kidnapped Palestinian teen Mohammed Abu Khdeir, drove him to a Jerusalem forest, beat him, poured gasoline down his throat, and burned him alive from the inside out. http://i.imgur.com/wPxSwn7.jpg I don't know how any human could do what either of these sick psychopaths do. Further more I will mention I don't know why anyone would follow a psychopathic book that actually supports these sick psychopaths like the quran does. It only breeds evil and division where ever it surfaces. Surely muslims can see this. This people who committed the relevant atrocity were Jewish. I can't stop you spreading your patented brand of christian hate, but I can request that you confine it to the numerous Islam specific threads.

I can't stop you spreading your patented brand of christian hate as well, but I can request you put a pot plant on your head and water it , Karnal. Further more I will mention I don't know why anyone would follow a psychopathic book that actually supports these sick psychopaths like the quran does. It only breeds evil and division where ever it surfaces.

wally1 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 9:44pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 7:37pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 12:45pm: freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2015 at 12:21pm: According to Gandalf, Muslims believe that Muhammed represents peace and tolerance. FD cannot tolerate any muslim advocating a peaceful Islam. He actually wants them to be terrorists. Muhammed killing 800 innocent Jews in a single day? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed lighting a fire on a Jewish man's stomach to get him to reveal where the Jew gold is? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed congratulating a soldier for preventing women from escaping after they slaughtered their husbands? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed ethnically cleansing large areas of Arabia of all non-Muslims? Peace and tolerance. Muhammed failing to respond to a woman who begged him to intervene when she was beaten by her husband until her skin was green with bruises? Peace and tolerance. Perhaps you should give us the Islamic definition of peace and tolerance Gandalf. I can put it on the wiki. wow,800 in one day. Thats better than 70,000 killed by christians in one day in the jerusalem crusade. Crusader armies were mobilised to fight a “just war” to retake Jerusalem form Muslim Turks, earning them remission of sins and a ticket to heaven. They massacred Jewish communities on the way, and after besieging and sacking Nicea, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople, they slaughtered their Muslim and Jewish populations. Rummel estimates the death toll at 1 million. The world had around 400 million people at the time, about a sixth of the number in the mid-20th century, so the death toll of the Crusader massacres as a proportion of the world’s population would today come out at around 6 million, equivalent to the Nazi’s genocide of the Jews (The Better Angels of Our Nature, p.140).

What religion did the crusader armies start Wally? Who do you know today who takes the utterances of these warmongers as the word of God and their deeds as the will of God and the eternal example for mankind to follow?

freediver wrote on Aug 6^th, 2015 at 7:37pm:

Muhammed killing 800 innocent Jews in a single day? Peace and tolerance.

Muhammad executing 800 men who broke the treaty they had with Muhammad's state, and conspired with an army who was trying to overrun their city.

Can muslim's have a different perspective on the same event - which makes their beliefs compatible with peace and tolerance?

tut tut gandalf of course they can't.

Lets get back to FD wondering how on earth this could ever be a circular argument.

We don't have a different perspective. You agree that they were not individually tried and punished, or even guilty in an individual sense. You agree that it was collective punishment.

Right?

Nope.

They were all given the opportunity to disown the betrayal and repledge their loyalty to their city.

But here's a timely analogy:

do you support the bombing of Hiroshima? Did all the little kiddies that were burnt alive in an instant get an individual trial?

But more importantly, do you believe that anyone who does believe it was justified can also be a proponent of peace and tolerance? Personally I think it was wicked terrorism, but I don't doubt the sincerity of anyone who has a different perspective.

And don't bring in the "oh but the hiroshima bombers were not the founders and prophets of their religion" argument - its still a valid analogy to use.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 10:31am:

Nope. They were all given the opportunity to disown the betrayal and repledge their loyalty to their city. But here's a timely analogy: do you support the bombing of Hiroshima? Did all the little kiddies that were burnt alive in an instant get an individual trial? But more importantly, do you believe that anyone who does believe it was justified can also be a proponent of peace and tolerance? Personally I think it was wicked terrorism, but I don't doubt the sincerity of anyone who has a different perspective. And don't bring in the "oh but the hiroshima bombers were not the founders and prophets of their religion" argument - its still a valid analogy to use.

'Hiroshima' and 'Nagasaki' are estimated to have saved countless more lives than died in these bombings - both Japanese and allies.

I somehow doubt the ISIS and other Islam-inspired slaughterings we've been witnessing these past few years has had anything to do with saving lives.

Avoiding being honest in order to give a spurious 'credibility' to a pet notion of yours does not become you, gandalf. It really is time you divested yourself of this penchant for 'taqiyyah' whenever you find yourself being painted into a corner by your opponents.

"... little kiddies .... ". Please, spare us such cheap, tear-jerking propagandising.

Countless parents both Japanese and American had their sons come home to them only as a result of those strategic bombings.

'Terrorism' indeed. Improve your game, please, gandalf.

And for those here who don't read a book from one end of the year to the next - all over Japan the Japanese had coal mines that were worked by allied PoWs in horrendous conditions, and next to every air-vent above these mines there were 44-gallon drums of petrol placed there by the prisoners themselves under orders of their captors.

The Japanese camp commanders had orders that in the event of 'the enemy' making landfall on Japanese soil - the prisoners were to be herded into the coal tunnels and the drums of petrol were then to be poured down the ventilation shafts and set alight.

It was only 'Hiroshima' and 'Nagasaki' that prevented this from happening.

"... little kiddies ... ".

You should be embarrassed, gandalf, to utter such cheap nonsense.

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

I somehow doubt the ISIS and other Islam-inspired slaughterings we've been witnessing these past few years has had anything to do with saving lives.

Herb you've just regurgitated some well-worn utilitarian justification for slaughtering tens of thousands of innocents in the blink of an eye. Now given that before every grizzy execution video released by ISIS they show footage of previous air strikes and mangled kids and explain how those about to be executed were responsible, and that such executions will prevent more deadly air strikes in the future - exactly what is the difference? Apart from the differences in scale of course (Islamists can only dream of inflicting the level of death and terror the US has inflicted over the years). Both of you are justifying terror and slaughter in the name of saving lives, and both of you probably believe it. Personally I think you are both full of crap, but it doesn't mean you are not sincere in your belief.


Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 11:36am:

"... little kiddies ... ". You should be embarrassed, gandalf, to utter such cheap nonsense.

Truth hurts don't it?

Personally I think you are full of crap. You babble on about the poor muslim terrorists like the poor muslims never started it in the first place. I personally think they should let ISIS top the lot of you muslims in the middle east then go in later and finish them off. At least everyone else will be able to live in peace. Thats the difference civilized man in the civilized world is happy to live in peace. They don't need to follow a fictitious prophet and book that tells them to spread hatred and murder. They just kick their asses every time the muslim tries to implement it.

Cry us all a river, muslims have no one else to blame except themselves.

The truth doesn't hurt you as you are ignorant of it by choice.

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 12:32pm:

Personally I think you are full of crap. You babble on about the poor muslim terrorists like the poor muslims never started it in the first place. I personally think they should let ISIS top the lot of you muslims in the middle east then go in later and finish them off. At least everyone else will be able to live in peace. Thats the difference civilized man in the civilized world is happy to live in peace. They don't need to follow a fictitious prophet and book that tells them to spread hatred and murder. They just kick their asses every time the muslim tries to implement it. Cry us all a river, muslims have no one else to blame except themselves. The truth doesn't hurt you as you are ignorant of it by choice.

Christian hypocrisy overwhelming. Advocates genocide to allow her to "Live in peace", :'(

Nice fruit Why, so much love and compassion.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 12:32pm: Personally I think you are full of crap. You babble on about the poor muslim terrorists like the poor muslims never started it in the first place. I personally think they should let ISIS top the lot of you muslims in the middle east then go in later and finish them off. At least everyone else will be able to live in peace. Thats the difference civilized man in the civilized world is happy to live in peace. They don't need to follow a fictitious prophet and book that tells them to spread hatred and murder. They just kick their asses every time the muslim tries to implement it. Cry us all a river, muslims have no one else to blame except themselves. The truth doesn't hurt you as you are ignorant of it by choice. Christian hypocrisy overwhelming. Advocates genocide to allow her to "Live in peace", :'( Nice fruit Why, so much love and compassion.

Where did Christinity do that Karnel ?

You are the hypocrite, you call yourself a Christian well a Catholic actually. Not bad for a Muslim eh. ;D

What is Vile is the atrocities done because of Islam instructing muslims to commit it. Now thats sickening and you wonder why we are all sick and tired of you lot in our countries trashing the place and all you can do is sook about not being accepted well get used to it. ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 11:58am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 11:13am: I somehow doubt the ISIS and other Islam-inspired slaughterings we've been witnessing these past few years has had anything to do with saving lives. Herb you've just regurgitated some well-worn utilitarian justification for slaughtering tens of thousands of innocents in the blink of an eye. Now given that before every grizzy execution video released by ISIS they show footage of previous air strikes and mangled kids and explain how those about to be executed were responsible, and that such executions will prevent more deadly air strikes in the future - exactly what is the difference? Apart from the differences in scale of course (Islamists can only dream of inflicting the level of death and terror the US has inflicted over the years). Both of you are justifying terror and slaughter in the name of saving lives, and both of you probably believe it. Personally I think you are both full of crap, but it doesn't mean you are not sincere in your belief. Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 11:36am: "... little kiddies ... ". You should be embarrassed, gandalf, to utter such cheap nonsense. Truth hurts don't it?

You're a better escape artist than Houdini was. If I was running a circus I'd have you as one of my main acts. And on that theme - you've risen from the 'dead' here after being crucified on these forum pages more times than Christ ever did after Calvary ... 8-)

sorry, you misunderstood me why..I wasn't saying that christianity is hypocritcal.

iI was saying you are a hypocrite.

You impune others who plead understanding of others for not being a christian , and advocate genocide while acting as though you are somehow a follower of christ.

i know he threw the money lenders out of the temple, im pretty sure he never advocated genocide.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 1:15pm:

sorry, you misunderstood me why..I wasn't saying that christianity is hypocritcal. iI was saying you are a hypocrite. You impune others who plead understanding of others for not being a christian , and advocate genocide while acting as though you are somehow a follower of christ. i know he threw the money lenders out of the temple, im pretty sure he never advocated genocide.

No you were implying you are the hypocrite.

Yea ole Islamic genocide. If muslims try genocide and someone comes and kicks there ass it is genocide by the other team. Not genocide as promoted in the Quran. Never :D

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 1:15pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 11:58am: Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 11:13am: I somehow doubt the ISIS and other Islam-inspired slaughterings we've been witnessing these past few years has had anything to do with saving lives. Herb you've just regurgitated some well-worn utilitarian justification for slaughtering tens of thousands of innocents in the blink of an eye. Now given that before every grizzy execution video released by ISIS they show footage of previous air strikes and mangled kids and explain how those about to be executed were responsible, and that such executions will prevent more deadly air strikes in the future - exactly what is the difference? Apart from the differences in scale of course (Islamists can only dream of inflicting the level of death and terror the US has inflicted over the years). Both of you are justifying terror and slaughter in the name of saving lives, and both of you probably believe it. Personally I think you are both full of crap, but it doesn't mean you are not sincere in your belief. Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 11:36am: "... little kiddies ... ". You should be embarrassed, gandalf, to utter such cheap nonsense. Truth hurts don't it? You're a better escape artist than Houdini was. If I was running a circus I'd have you as one of my main acts. And on that theme - you've risen from the 'dead' here after being crucified on these forum pages more times than Christ ever did after Calvary ... 8-)

Aint that the truth.

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 1:26pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 1:15pm: sorry, you misunderstood me why..I wasn't saying that christianity is hypocritcal. iI was saying you are a hypocrite. You impune others who plead understanding of others for not being a christian , and advocate genocide while acting as though you are somehow a follower of christ. i know he threw the money lenders out of the temple, im pretty sure he never advocated genocide. No you were implying you are the hypocrite. Yea ole Islamic genocide. If muslims try genocide and someone comes and kicks there ass it is genocide by the other team. Not genocide as promoted in the Quran. Never :D

It's like someone is running a random word generator through a logic screen to prevent anything rational from accidentally appearing.

.

Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7^th, 2015 at 1:36pm:

LifeOrDeath wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 1:26pm: Pho Huc wrote on Aug 7th, 2015 at 1:15pm: sorry, you misunderstood me why..I wasn't saying that christianity is hypocritcal. iI was saying you are a hypocrite. You impune others who plead understanding of others for not being a christian , and advocate genocide while acting as though you are somehow a follower of christ. i know he threw the money lenders out of the temple, im pretty sure he never advocated genocide. No you were implying you are the hypocrite. Yea ole Islamic genocide. If muslims try genocide and someone comes and kicks there ass it is genocide by the other team. Not genocide as promoted in the Quran. Never :D It ::)s like someone is running a random word generator through a logic screen to prevent anything rational from accidentally appearing.

I feel the quran is like that too at least we agree on something I guess. I am starting to warm towards you.

Quote:

do you support the bombing of Hiroshima? Did all the little kiddies that were burnt alive in an instant get an individual trial?

Gandalf, contrary to your repeated assertions, this massacre did not take place in the context of an ongoing war. The war was over. The Meccan army had gone home before Muhammed even laid siege to the tribe of Jews. That siege had come to an end, without casualty, before Muhammed got round to slaughtering them, because they had surrendered unconditionally.

The bombing of Hiroshima did take place in an ongoing war. There was no possible way to offer them a trial first because they were not under the authority of the Americans. Nor was it justified as punishment. You however frequently do justify the slaughter of this Jewish tribe as punishment for treason. I do realise that you offer a long list of often contradictory excuses and justifications, but you can hardly use your own tapdancing as an argument.

Yes, indeed ... tap-dances better than Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers ever did.

Maybe even better than Bojangles.

Or a cat on a hot tin roof.  8-)

bummer

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Gandalf, contrary to your repeated assertions, this massacre did not take place in the context of an ongoing war. The war was over.

Interesting - a war ends with the ending of one battle does it?

Did hostilities with the Quraysh end that day? No.

Did the Quraysh continue attacking the Medinan state either directly or through proxies? Yes they did.

FD on what basis can you claim that the war between Medina and The Quraysh ended with the conclusion of the battle of the trench?

Did Muhammed continue robbing their caravans?

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 6:17pm:

Did Muhammed continue robbing their caravans?

Is that your way of quietly conceding the point?

What treaty was signed that ended the war? When was the treaty of Hudaybiyyah - the first settlement signed between Medina and the Quraysh FD? Was it 4 years after the battle of the trench?

When an invading army withdraws intact after failing to defeat their enemy - with no diplomatic overtures by either side to conclude a settlement - does it make sense to declare that the war had ended?

It might perhaps make sense for Muhammed to stop raiding their caravans, if he thought they were such a grave threat the the existence of his Islamic state. You can't really have it both ways - they were such a grave threat that he had to slaughter an entire tribe, but not such a grave threat that he had to stop raiding their caravans and find some way of supporting himself independently. Muhammed was belligerent from the moment he gained a position of power. You cannot use his ongoing belligerence as justification for his belligerence.

Just so we're clear FD - is that your way of maintaining your silly claim that the war had ended?

Or are you now trying to disown that?

I am not trying to disown it.

Gandalf, if you would prefer, we can make this thread about the issue of whether Muhammed engaged in collective punishment, and make the new thread I started about your efforts at moral equivalence with Hiroshima. Is that what you want?

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2015 at 7:16pm:

I am not trying to disown it.

So why can't you come up with a single credible argument for why it must have ended?

My points about a) no treaty until 4 years later b) no end to hostilities c) no sort of political settlement - that you ignored - puts something of a dampener on that claim wouldn't you say?

Do you have any argument to support your rather dramatic claim FD - apart from silly quips about Muhammad continuing the raids?

Jeez its carrying on in here too. Boring.

Quote:

So why can't you come up with a single credible argument for why it must have ended?

The Meccan army packed up and went home.

armies a long way from home tend to do that when they run out of supplies and don't defeat their enemy in a timely fashion. Its so they don't, you know, starve and stuff.

So wars end whenever an army retreats from a failed campaign do they? Tell me thats your argument for why the war ended.

I think even you are seeing how stupid you are being here.

It will be interesting to see in future if this BS argument is used when you next dig up this topic.

Quote:

So wars end whenever an army retreats from a failed campaign do they?

It depends how far they retreat. The Meccan army went all the way home. That's usually how wars end Gandalf, if there is an army left.

Wars usually stop when hostilities stop.

Hostilities between the Quraysh and Medina continued through Quraysh proxies, infiltrators, informers etc. Muslims were banned by the Quraysh from entering Mecca - about as clear a declaration of war as you can get. Hostilities did not end until the Treaty of Hudaybiyya (which was then broken by the Quraysh).

FD's attempt to deflect and obfuscate the sheer idiocy of his position in the usual way - by starting a new thread and pretending its an issue about something else - has been noted, and the thread duly deleted.

Feel free to address the idiocy of your argument here FD.

Why, you are not the moderator of this members forum.

If you are going to delete his threads and use that as your excuse why don't you do it to your own threads in your members board that you moderate. The one called "Islam".

The thread was in the Islam board matty.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 10^th, 2015 at 1:06pm:

FD's attempt to deflect and obfuscate the sheer idiocy of his position in the usual way - by starting a new thread and pretending its an issue about something else - has been noted, and the thread duly deleted. Feel free to address the idiocy of your argument here FD.

I can see that particular tangent taking on a life of it's own Gandalf. At the very least, I would like to explore it in more detail without hijacking Wally's bad joo thread. Rest assured that I have no intention of evading the topic. Consider my new thread as a gesture of my intention to bring more attention to this discussion.

freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2015 at 12:27pm:

Rest assured that I have no intention of evading the topic. Consider my new thread as a gesture of my intention to bring more attention to this discussion.

You had every intention of evading the topic - because you decided to no longer address the inconvenient fact that you have no justification whatsoever to claim that the war had ended.

Otherwise you would have simply addressed my points instead of unnecessarily making it into an entirely different topic about me - as you always do.

Allow me to illustrate the point:

your claim that the war had ended merely because the battle ended, and the (intact) army retreated a long way falls flat when confronted with:


polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 10^th, 2015 at 7:49am:

Hostilities between the Quraysh and Medina continued through Quraysh proxies, infiltrators, informers etc. Muslims were banned by the Quraysh from entering Mecca - about as clear a declaration of war as you can get. Hostilities did not end until the Treaty of Hudaybiyya (which was then broken by the Quraysh).

Inconvenient little facts that you can't address.

And just so we're clear, sustaining this claim (that the war had ended) is a central pillar to FD's argument about why executing the Banu Qurayza was the most horrific thing that ever happened - comparable to nothing (not even the deliberate slaughter of 10s of thousands of women and children at Hiroshima).

Quote:

You had every intention of evading the topic - because you decided to no longer address the inconvenient fact that you have no justification whatsoever to claim that the war had ended.

Correct. Other than the fact that the Meccan army had packed up and gone home, there was nothing at all to indicate it was over.


Quote:

your claim that the war had ended merely because the battle ended, and the (intact) army retreated a long way

All the way Gandalf. They went home.


Quote:

Hostilities between the Quraysh and Medina continued through Quraysh proxies, infiltrators, informers etc.

You left out the bit about Muhammed robbing trade caravans to Mecca at every opportunity.


Quote:

Inconvenient little facts that you can't address.

You mean, other than starting a new thread to address them?

freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2015 at 6:45pm:

You left out the bit about Muhammed robbing trade caravans to Mecca at every opportunity.

careful FD - it almost sounds like you're saying hostilities continued. Don't forget that the war ended purely by virtue of the fact that an army retreated - remember? Best not bring up inconvenient facts about hostilities continuing.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 11^th, 2015 at 7:27am:

The thread was in the Islam board matty.

No need to have a hissy fit and roll out the old matty salman.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 11^th, 2015 at 8:24pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 11th, 2015 at 6:45pm: You left out the bit about Muhammed robbing trade caravans to Mecca at every opportunity. careful FD - it almost sounds like you're saying hostilities continued. Don't forget that the war ended purely by virtue of the fact that an army retreated - remember? Best not bring up inconvenient facts about hostilities continuing.

So Muhammed slaughtered all those Jews because the war was not over, and he knew the war was not over because he had no intention of ceasing his highway robbery?

many blessings

alex jones looks very uncomfortable here

as david duke exposes his hidden zionist agenda,

start at 57 mins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRGAXt6qIn0

great viewing

namaste