Just contrast the post of Spendulus above with the one of TECSHARE before it and BADecker after it. I highlighted a few points to make it easy to see the difference in quality. Believe whatever you want, but I don't understand why you guys aren't just embarrassed. For example, BADecker is implying that it is highly improbable for the Twin Towers and Building 7 to collapse in the manner they did. (I'm assuming you guys actually believe they collapsed, but who knows.) Well, probabilities can be calculated based on assumptions. What are your assumptions and what are the calculations? How low is that probability based on your assumptions? It's rhetorical, I'm not expecting you to show any actual work.

Thanks!

It's a nice day. People got to see (again) that crazy Jihadis are willing to kill over cartoons, instead of cartoonists being killed two Jihadis were killed, and one of my old threads got brought back to life. I'm happier than Muhammed was when he was fucking a 9 year old.

I agree. "Propagandist" is more accurate.

By the way, Muslims do have the pursuasive power to make people pretend to believe what you say. The power is threatening to kill people who question it, and ultimately killing some of them. That's why most people pretend to believe it or at least pretend to respect it. Otherwise, Islam would be treated more like other kooky belief systems, like Scientology.

You see, statements like these are why I say you are a liar. It's obviously false that "no innocents were killed" in Muhammed's many battles. It's also equally obvious that terrorists can point to the teachings and life of Muhammed to justify what they do. I believe you also know that, but one of your purposes in life is to say untrue things to cover up Islam's bloody teachings and bloody history.

By the way, if the world is successful in killing the message of Muhammed, no innocents will be killed.

By the same standard Muhammed incited his followers to kill a hell of a lot of people. Too bad he's dead or we could kill him.

The teachings of Muhammed even outlived him and incited his followers to kill and enslave millions of people. Maybe we could kill his teachings. The first step is exposing his teachings as bullshit.

I was being a bit sarcastic in my post, but probably this did not come across due to language issues. Let me be very clear:

I believe Muslims lie about aspects of their religion and history. Most Muslims are simply ignorant of their religion and history, but those Muslims usually do not talk about it. You do, and I believe your purpose in threads like this is simple: lie to non-Muslims about Islam. I am calling you a liar.

Just as I cannot know the specifics of Asma bint Marwa case, you also cannot know that it is a fabrication. It is disputed. Still, you do not have any difficulty asserting it is a "fabricated report." In fact, you cannot know that it is fabricated. All you know is that this is what you have been taught to assert in this case. You say "It didn't happen." You cannot know it didn't happen. Whether it did or not, it is not the only case of Mohammed and his followers murdering people.

Well, it was a long time ago, so I can't say if its true or not. I admit that killing a female poet who says something bad about Mohammed doesn't sound like something Muslims would do.

...Wait...

PS: I'd like to ask you also not to spread false things. Not everything in your Qu'ran is true.

I took the time to watch this. Here's a partial summary with a few points thrown in. It's of a Muslim dude preaching against killing cartoonists. It's in English but with some Arabic thrown in. (The first minute or so is in Arabic.)

He claims to be equally offended by cartoonists and murderers (6:13 - 7:00). That's better than a lot of Muslims. I personally find murderers more offensive than cartoonists.

He then (7:07 - 9:40) talks about the case of Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, a poet at the time of Mohammed. Dude talks about how Ka'b wrote not only verses against Mohammed, but also dirty verses about the Muslim women. Finally Mohammed says, "Who will rid me of Ka'b?" and then he was killed. Dude is like, no, the real reason Muslims killed Ka'b was not because he was a poet writing dirty verses about that 9-year old Mohammed was fucking, but actually because Ka'b tried to kill Mohammed (multiple times!). I found more at Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ka%27b_ibn_al-Ashraf


To the dude's credit he makes the point that people who interpret this story as kill-those-who-insult Muslims are stupid (11:29). That is the kind of things Muslims need to hear from other Muslims. We non-Muslims can tell them they're stupid all we want, but that just seems to make them more stupid.

As part of that point he says Mohammed was insulted many times to his face and never stopped smiling. I'm not sure how true that is, but it would make an interesting cartoon.

Then he talks about how Muslims are right to be offended by cartoons and seems to be against free speech. It's not clear what he thinks Muslims should do against people who criticize Islam/Mohammed, but it's clear he neither accepts killing the cartoonists nor accepting the cartoonists.

At around 14:35 he asks "Why do people insult Islam?" (16:00) Look in the mirror. Back in Mohammed's time he says people mocked Islam as a tactic to try to stop the spread of Islam, because it called for justice and shit. That's not the case now. Now Islam is being mocked because of what Muslims are doing today. They're corrupt and bad and stuff. (18:40) "What are you going to quote now? What have we done? What have we produced as a people? How have we contributed to the world? The only time we make it on the news is when we blow something up." He argues Western Muslims have low moral standards. Muslims have to transform themselves. This seems to be the main point. In short, pay your taxes and give to charity.

(24:30) He says Muslims shouldn't try to convince non-Muslims they're not crazy because non-Muslims will think they're crazy no matter what. (I can confirm this. The only time I start thinking a Muslim isn't crazy is when they stop believing crazy shit, which means they're an ex-Muslim.)

Then he goes on to talk about how Muslims are great because they believe in reason, intelligence and justice. Or something. Muslims don't need swords, their best weapons are words and stuff. Islam is open-minded and encourages dialogue, but Muslims today are too closed-minded.

All in all, I can say this video is J.J.-endorsed. If Muslims were like this guy, I wouldn't think they were a bunch of violent lunatics. In other words, my guess is that this dude will be beheaded.

Apparently this was the winning entry in yesterday's Draw Mohammed contest:


Surprisingly, it seems to be the work of Ed Miliband, head of the U.K. Labour Party.

Spendulus has been the only participant on this thread who has used mathematics and physics in his arguments. The rest of you argue like Baghdad Bobs.

Regarding whether or not Islam is in favor of murdering artists, I just saw this online:


The Muslims on this thread are lying. They know they're lying. And they know some of the rest of us know they're lying. Lying about this shit is just part of what they do to serve their religion. It's called Taqiya.

I couldn't find this information. However, with 2 Jihadis dead, I'd say the winner is everyone who values free speech.

It's finally good to see one of these stories with a happy ending. Maybe since governments are more committed to ending free speech than fighting Jihadis, this demonstrates an effective way for ordinary citizens to fight Jihadis:

1. Host a Mohammed cartoon event.
2. Wait for Jihadis to show up to attack.
3. Kill them.

And since our Muslim friends here keep assuring us that such attacks have nothing to do with Islam, they should be OK with it. After all, those Jihadis being killed aren't really Muslim, right? Right?

In an effort to advance this part of the thread, I watched part of the first video. It asserted Flight 93 landed at an airport in Cleveland on the morning of 9/11. Apparently that's what Netpyder believes but for some reason Netpyder doesn't want to say it. Maybe because it's nonsense. On the other hand, I get the impression that the people who believe nonsense about 9/11 think they're the smart people because they had the intelligence to question the official story. Seems like he should own it.

Edited to add: Below Netpyder says "your avatar says everything about your thoughts and hate". Since avatars change, for the record, this is how it looked at the time:


This avatar makes Netpyder vewy, vewy sad because he wants people to believe that Muslims in general and Palestinian Muslims specifically are vewy peaceful people who had nothing what-so-ever to do with any violence. Especially not 9/11. No Muslim could do or even celebrate such a thing. Inconceivable to someone like Netpyder.

As I said before, it's fine with me if you want to believe this. You guys already believe a shitload of false things, so what's one more. Understand though, it really means you think the majority of people who support and defend Israel are Jews and being paid off. That's not only false, it's batshit insane.


Sounds like you're frustrated at people calling you a Jew hater. Maybe it happens because you post things like this:



Sorry I couldn't find a more recent photo of you. If you point me to one I can update it.

To bring the thread back to Hillary and her trustworthiness, I made a couple of relevant myjihad/mystruggle/meinkampf ads.

I am under the impression CAIR had already been able to run their ads. Is this wrong?

In any case, I'm sure if CAIR wanted to run more ads the MTA would reverse themselves. Or, more likely, simply say the CAIR ads are not advocating anything, but are just "public service announcements." It's obvious the MTA is pro-CAIR/Hamas and opposed to anyone against them.

I think this is the most sensible interpretation of the thread.