Quote:Will you at least admit that you are trying to wedge me into saying something that makes me sound like a racist bigot? Be honest here FD.
Not sure why you keep thinking this is about racism Gandalf. Are you suggesting it is OK to slaughter innocent people so long as you put a politically correct spin on it?
Quote:Yes they were treacherous, but thats not what you are asking is it?
First I asked if they were treacherous Jews, but you argued that the racist connotations somehow changed the facts. So then I asked if they were Jews. Then I asked if they were treacherous.
Quote:A 7th century ruler - even a religious prophet - executing a group of men for actual treachery wouldn't rate a mention.
How did he know that all 800 of them were "actually treacherous"? You have personally argued that their belonging to the group of treacherous Jews made them individually treacherous, by invoking the rule of Borg. Not sure how you can differentiate this from racist bigotry.
Quote:But make them victims of jewish bigotry, then we've got the perfect basis for a smear don't we?
Of course. It's hard to criticise someone for executing 800 innocent people without trial in a single day. But you get upset if we portray Muhammed as a racist bigot....
Quote:If you were honest you would admit that you want me to say "treacherous jews" because you are acutely aware that the phrase is synonymous with racist bigotry
Wrong. As I pointed out, it is synonymous with Islamic apologism. You even demonstrated this yourself when you cited "scheming Jew" as the western stereotype.
Quote:Sorry FD, I won't bite - I won't accept that the Banu Qurayza were killed because Muhammad had a grudge against jews, he killed them for conspiring with an enemy which was attempting to commit genocide against them - and breaking the treaty they had with Muhammad. They being jewish (itself an arguable historical point anyway) shouldn't even come into the debate.
So why did Muhammed bring it into the debate?
Quote:What this boils down to is you cannot accept that a muslim can be true to his religion at the same time genuinely believe that Muhammad was not acting as a racist bigot. Muslims are either a) supporters of racist bigotry or b) being dishonest. You simply cannot countenance an honest muslim who is honest in their support for tolerance and peace. And thats the prevailing theme throughout this little forum community.
This is how Muhammed publicly addressed the second of two powerful Jewish tribes in Medina that stood between him and absolute rule, prior to getting rid of them. The other tribe he references is the first of the powerful Jewish tribes he got rid of.
O Jews, beware lest God bring on you the like of the retribution which he brought on Quraysh. Accept Islam, for you know that I am a prophet sent by God. You will find this in your scriptures and in God's covenant with you.Do you support this Gandalf?
BTW, I accept that people believe all sorts of crazy things. In order to deceive others you must first deceive yourself.
Quote:There is no other explanation - as you said so yourself - you want me to admit to a turn of phrase that you yourself would not even use - while at the same pretending that its a perfectly reasonable turn of phrase to use.
Because it is unfamiliar to me, except coming from Islamic apologists in the exact context we are now discussing.
Quote:The context of this little stunt of yours is well known to both of us: saying a group of men were treacherous and were executed for it would barely rate a mention
If Australia executed 800 Jews without trial I think it would rate a mention Gandalf. In Muhammed's case, this was the majority of the Jewish men still under his authority. If we managed a similar feat today it would be rightly considered genocide.
Quote:But describing it as executing "treacherous jews" gives it entirely new dimensions
You have some very warped sense of priority here Gandalf.
Quote:It clearly implies that the group was killed because of their jewishness, and not their treachery, and so yes, it takes on an entirely different meaning.
How did Muhammed know they were treacherous, other than by the fact they belonged to the tribe of treacherous Jews?
Quote:Playing dumb like you are now and insisting that its merely putting two words that are true together is just a pathetic little game of yours.
Are you saying they were indeed treacherous Jews?
Quote:So again, why would you insist that I must adopt this racist bigotry
I am not asking you to adopt anything. I am asking a simple question. Were the treacherous Jews?
Quote:I dispute your second claim - I think it can be argued that Moses was the founder of a major religion, and the "crimes" of Muhammad pale in comparison to his.
In what sense are you qualify the term crime as applied to Muhammed's actions?
Quote:I'm genuinely curious as to what place you and FD think there is for muslims who are neither mendacious nor bloodthirsty bigots
You have plenty of options open to you Gandalf.
Forum
Pages: 
The 'Extremists' are not committing heresy ... (Read 8473 times)
