I'm not the one building a facade, FD. But you've introduced a new question into the mix.

Did the Meccans behave immorally towards the Muslims?

Did the Meccans steal from the Muslims?

Frank wrote on Mar 31^st, 2017 at 10:09pm:


Sometimes a question is just a question.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 1^st, 2017 at 6:40am:


Can you quote me Gandalf?

Are you asking me whether all the Meccans acted this way? Or are you asking me whether they were a collective, hence Muhammad's collective punishment of them?

Are you referring to a single incident or multiple instances Gandalf?

Can you quote Muhammad's hate preaching?

Or am I supposed to lump it all together and pass judgement on all the Meccans at once for a variety of different incidents like Muhammad did, and like you are compelled to do?

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 31^st, 2017 at 3:39pm:


Would it be fair to say this is another example of collective punishment by Muhammad, and unquestioning support of collective punishment by Muslims?

Quote:


But Muhammad did punish the Meccans as a collective?

Quote:


So it wasn't collective because Muhammad was not able to get them all?

Quote:


When you say attacking, do you mean stealing and murdering?

Quote:


What did you get?

Quote:


It depends what you say. Muhammad for example combined it with destroying pagan idols and slaughtering pagans, so I expect there was a bit of vitriol and frothing at the mouth involved.

Quote:


This is what I actually said: Muhammad's own tribe was in charge of the pagan Kaaba and deriving a significant income from it. Muhammad's preaching was a threat to that income. In the end he figured out how to take it all for himself.

Quote:


Which actions? When he marched on Mecca with 10000 soldiers?

Quote:


No. I think when he first fled to Medina, he was in a weak position, and his actions amounted to theft and murder. This talk of a "declaration of war" is just post-hoc weasel words by Muslims in a vain attempt to give legitimacy to his theft and murder. There was not two states at there was not a war. There was one man with a small following fleeing his own tribe, then launching his rape and pillage career by robbing Meccan caravans and murdering Meccan traders, then afterwards trying to justify his actions because he eventually grew powerful to wage actual war, after he got rid of the Jews.

You are no less ludicrous than previous Muslims we have had here who say these crimes, and lying about Islam, is only justified in a state of war, and that the west has been at war with the Muslim world for over a century.

You justify Muhammad's genocide of the Jews by saying they never officially declared war, but you also justify Muhammad's career of theft as murder by saying war is automatically declared against Muslims if you, or anyone else from your city, does wrong by them. You are a hypocrite.

Everything you say in defense of Muhammad's vile actions drips with hypocrisy and lies, because your religion is built on hypocrisy and lies.

I have no idea what you are talking about Gandalf. I keep asking you but you won't say, because to say would be to acknowledge that Muhammad's retribution for whatever wrongdoing your refer to was collective punishment. It was theft. It was indiscriminate murder of innocent people. All because one religious extremist got chased out of a religiously tolerant Mecca by his own family. So in typical Muslim fashion you continue this absurd tapdance around the issue.

They didn't boot him out. He fled because someone was trying to kill him. Also, children bit him and dogs spat on him.

You appear to be attempting to ascribe the incident, or incidents, to the entire city of Mecca as a collective.

Quote:


Gandalf am I right that this is another attempt by you to justify collective punishment, in the form of opportunistic theft and murder?

Do you only do this for your fellow Muslims?

Did you only develop your fondness for collective punishment after converting to Islam? Or did you grow up stealing poo to get back at the man?