Australian Politics Forum - treacherous Jews

Phemanderac Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 3507 Gender:	Re: treacherous Jews Reply #30 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:09pm freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:03pm: Can you give other examples where people consider it fair to be judged guilty by default? Refugees in Australia...
Back to top	On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day... "They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean.. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49308 At my desk.	Re: treacherous Jews Reply #31 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:12pm Refugee applicants are either let in or sent home without being considered guilty of anything.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #32 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:18pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:12pm:

Refugee applicants are either let in or sent home without being considered guilty of anything.

So what, it is still considered fair by "people" to judge them guilty by default, as you asked... You made no mention of any other "systems" in place.

Further to that though, you overlooked detention - there is the elephant in the room...

Effectively they are now (more so than ever) imprisoned and worse incommunicado... Tell me that isn't at least, treated as guilty by default as I suspect you will. It will only demonstrate perfectly where you stand as a "balanced" commentator on these human conditions.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49308
At my desk.

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #33 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:23pm

Quote:

So what, it is still considered fair by "people" to judge them guilty by default

Phem, we are not talking about people's opinion. We are talking about the decision of an authority and a punishment - in this isntance death. What most people would consider to be the most serious punishment demanding the most serious consideration, Gandalf is happy to judge by default based on age and sex alone. You are guilty by default for being male and over a certain age. Death.

Quote:

Further to that though, you overlooked detention - there is the elephant in the room...

People are frequently detained prior to being judged. Are you saying that our treatment of refugees is equivalent to Muhammed executing 800 innocent people?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #34 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:36pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:03pm:

Quote:

They were soldiers (all males of military age were by default soldiers) and the moment they conspired with the enemy, they became 'enemy soldiers'.

Can you give some other examples of people being executed by default?

Quote:

But if you want an equivalent example of the confessed traitors getting a fair hearing, and judged according to their own laws, and given the opportunity to re-pledge their loyalty and be welcomed back into the state they betrayed, and have the women and children spared - you're right, I would be struggling to find such an equivalent. Rarely were the victors ever so generous.

Do you support this?

Quote:

But if you want an equivalent example of the confessed traitors getting a fair hearing

Can you give other examples where people consider it fair to be judged guilty by default?

Quote:

and given the opportunity to re-pledge their loyalty and be welcomed back into the state they betrayed

Can you quote the relevant bit?

So FD, are you still running with the line that it was completely unheard of for victorious armies to execute enemy soldiers en masse - except when Muhammad did it? I find this position rather fascinating.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49308
At my desk.

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #35 - Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 10:14pm

They were not soldiers. They never went into battle. Muhammed laid siege to their home until they surrendered to him without a fight.

I am not saying Muhammed was the only one. If your position is that Muhammed was just another cruel warmonger from a long history of them, I am happy to leave it at that.

I am unaware that they were offered freedom in exchange for re-pledging loyalty to Muhammed's new state. Can you back this up?

Do you think it is fair to be judged guilty and handed a death penalty by default because of your age and gender?

Do you have any examples since Muhammed's time of something equivalent?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #36 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 11:52am

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 10:14pm:

Do you have any examples since Muhammed's time of something equivalent?

Probably not - as I said mostly it was far worse. Mostly they were slaughtered along with their women and children - with no option of repenting and re-pledging their loyalty.

This really is an extraordinary line you are running with FD - that executing enemy soldiers men of military age en-masse was completely unheard of in all of history - with the exception of Muhammad. Are you standing by that?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Raven

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2981
Around

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #37 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 12:34pm

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 8:46pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 7:02pm:

Can you give some examples of people slaughtering large numbers of innocent, unarmed people because they feel threatened by them?

A good place one could start...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_Indigenous_Australians

An exceptionally good place to start.

Back to top

Quoth the Raven "Nevermore"

Raven would rather ask questions that may never be answered, then accept answers which must never be questioned.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: treacherous Jews Reply #38 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 12:40pm freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 7:02pm: Can you give some examples of people slaughtering large numbers of innocent, unarmed people because they feel threatened by them? Requoted for the lolz
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #39 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 3:49pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:23pm:

Quote:

So what, it is still considered fair by "people" to judge them guilty by default

Phem, we are not talking about people's opinion. We are talking about the decision of an authority and a punishment - in this isntance death. What most people would consider to be the most serious punishment demanding the most serious consideration, Gandalf is happy to judge by default based on age and sex alone. You are guilty by default for being male and over a certain age. Death.

Quote:

Further to that though, you overlooked detention - there is the elephant in the room...

People are frequently detained prior to being judged. Are you saying that our treatment of refugees is equivalent to Muhammed executing 800 innocent people?

I see, well, you asked a question that I openly answered - your response - shift the goal posts....

It is actually all about opinion presently with a random smattering of select facts to suit particular agenda and/or bias.

It is noteworthy as well you have overlooked the slaughter of indigenous people in our own country. Ironically, this also very pointedly fits the description you gave and some questions that you asked.

The point is, Muslims do bad things because they are human beings - if nothing else, history consistently demonstrates that humans can be both divine and devils at any given time, regardless of morals, religion, skin colour, social structures, social constructs, laws and the list goes on.

Rather than the narrow (myopic) view targetting one specific group - it may behoove you to recognise this as part of the human condition broadly.

It might not invalidate your argument, which, interestingly enough is not my intention. The argument is and always will be much bigger than the little boxes people try to put it in. It is the little box fittings that cause the conflict to be ongoing, because, you guessed it (hopefully), people put in the box tend to get a bit out of sorts and immediately put their opponents into boxes - and so it goes around and around...

People throughout history have done every evil imaginable - to even attempt to compare acts as being better or worse or perhaps less evil is to justify at least one or more evils. An evil act is simply evil - there is not justification.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49308
At my desk.

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #40 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 6:51pm

Gandalf do you think it is fair to be judged guilty and handed a death penalty by default because of your age and gender?

Can you come up with a similar example of such a slaughter of innocent people that you support?

Can you give any other example of people being found guilty 'by default' and facing the death penalty?

What happened to your "refusal to disown" justification for this slaughter?

Quote:

and given the opportunity to re-pledge their loyalty and be welcomed back into the state they betrayed

Can you quote the relevant bit?

Quote:

This really is an extraordinary line you are running with FD - that executing enemy soldiers men of military age en-masse was completely unheard of in all of history - with the exception of Muhammad. Are you standing by that?

Where did I claim that Gandalf?

Quote:

It is noteworthy as well you have overlooked the slaughter of indigenous people in our own country.

I haven't overlooked it. I just don't see anyone trying to justify it because they are compelled by their religion to come up with some kind of excuse. If someone did try that, would you be tripping over yourself to change the topic and divert criticism in case they felt pigeon-holed?

Quote:

The point is, Muslims do bad things because they are human beings - if nothing else, history consistently demonstrates that humans can be both divine and devils at any given time, regardless of morals, religion, skin colour, social structures, social constructs, laws and the list goes on.

So all those Aussie Muslims travelling to the other side of the world to take part in the Muslim rape and pillage festival are doing this because it is in their nature as hguman beings - nothing to do with Islam?

Quote:

Rather than the narrow (myopic) view targetting one specific group - it may behoove you to recognise this as part of the human condition broadly.

We are discussing the slaughter of about 800 Jews by Muhammed, and Gandalf's efforts to excuse it. Being able to stick to the topic is not a bad thing Phem. Why do you feel compelled to try to change it?

Quote:

It might not invalidate your argument, which, interestingly enough is not my intention. The argument is and always will be much bigger than the little boxes people try to put it in. It is the little box fittings that cause the conflict to be ongoing, because, you guessed it (hopefully), people put in the box tend to get a bit out of sorts and immediately put their opponents into boxes - and so it goes around and around...

Is that why they are raping and pillaging their way across the middle east?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #41 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:31pm

freediver wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 6:51pm:

Where did I claim that Gandalf?

By demanding that I come up with a single other example - as if you are certain nothing like it has ever happened more than once.

If you agreed, like me, that it was standard fair throughout human history for victorious armies to (at the very least) mass slaughter all enemy men of military age (but usually far more than that) - it seems rather silly to seek proof that it happened more than once - agreed?

So what is it FD - are you claiming that nothing in the whole of history was comparable with what Muhammad did - or not? And if not, why the stupid song and dance about "find me just one example of it happening before"?

freediver wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 6:51pm:

We are discussing the slaughter of about 800 Jews by Muhammed, and Gandalf's efforts to excuse it.

Indeed - strange then that its you, not phem, who is demanding us to cite examples in history that were at least as bad as what Muhammad did - and then, when one of the gazillion instances of such behaviour is pointed out to you, suddenly declaring "oh no, we're not talking about that, we're talking about the slaughter of jews by the muslims".

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49308
At my desk.

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #42 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:52pm

Quote:

By demanding that I come up with a single other example - as if you are certain nothing like it has ever happened more than once.

So you can tell what I am really saying by the way I ask a question?

Quote:

If you agreed, like me, that it was standard fair throughout human history for victorious armies to (at the very least) mass slaughter all enemy men of military age (but usually far more than that)

It happened a lot, but so did armies refraining from slaughtering innocent people. I would not describe it as 'standard fair'. Even by historical standards Muhammed was brutal.

Quote:

it seems rather silly to seek proof that it happened more than once - agreed?

I was not asking for proof Gandalf. Did you make up the story about Jews slaughtering Christians?

Quote:

So what is it FD - are you claiming that nothing in the whole of history was comparable with what Muhammad did - or not? And if not, why the stupid song and dance about "find me just one example of it happening before"?

No. The point was that you would rightly condemn every other example as barbaric cruelty - except when Muhammed did it.

Quote:

Indeed - strange then that its you, not phem, who is demanding us to cite examples in history that were at least as bad as what Muhammad did - and then, when one of the gazillion instances of such behaviour is pointed out to you, suddenly declaring "oh no, we're not talking about that, we're talking about the slaughter of jews by the muslims".

That is not what happened Gandalf. Phem actually brought up the example of boat people. Hardly the same thing. Then when he brought up aboriginal slaughter I pointed out that no-one is compelled to defend it in the same way you are compelled to defend Muhammed slaughtering innocent Jews. Do you see yet where I am going with this?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: treacherous Jews Reply #43 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:56pm freediver wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:52pm: It happened a lot Right, so no need to demand we cite other examples. freediver wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:52pm: Even by historical standards Muhammed was brutal. Then you obviously know nothing about history.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 8:09pm by polite_gandalf » A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49308
At my desk.

Re: treacherous Jews
Reply #44 - Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 9:37pm

Gandalf do you think it is fair to be judged guilty and handed a death penalty by default because of your age and gender?

Can you come up with a similar example of such a slaughter of innocent people that you support?

Can you give any other example of people being found guilty 'by default' and facing the death penalty?

What happened to your "refusal to disown" justification for this slaughter?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged