I'm a retired biologist, not a history whiz, so I cannot confirm these exact dates, but knowing what I know about Islam and the koranic commandment to conquer the world, violently in the name of the pedophile cultist Mohammad, I'm going with it.
Is it time for another round of Crusades? Let's ask France, Belgium, and Sweden.
10 comments:
Leave it to "Christian" Ed to admire the Crusades. Good grief!
They rid Europe of the scourge of Islam, sending the pestilent vermin back to the sandy shitholes they came from, until now that is. What's not to admire?
Those dates seem to early for me. Old "Mo" didn't go to his reward until 630 and there was violent civil war for another 100 years. Of course "plundered Italy" could be a few pirates.
"They rid Europe of the scourge of Islam, sending the pestilent vermin back to the sandy shitholes they came from, until now that is. What's not to admire?"
LOL, thanks.
Help me here, Ed. A radical, fractional element of the Muslims that you excoriate with such vigor and delight kills innocent men, women and children. No one disputes that. The rank and file of your brand of “Christianity” revels in the killing of innocent men, women and children and daily does so. How is your religion better than the one you revile with such enthusiasm? Inquiring minds want to know.
Wait, where in the Bible are Christians ordered to convert the world to Christianity or kill them?
And where are people being killed, as a world-wide movement, in the name of Christ? Surely you're not drawing a moral and religious equivalency between Christianity and Islam?
Whoa, big guy. Slow down. One thing at a time.
The U.S. is, and has been for a long time, indiscriminately murdering innocent men, women and children in far off lands both directly and via client actors. The "Christian" community cheers wildly and brays for more.
So my question is, how is that religion better than Islam?
So you believe that the US government indiscriminatly kills innocent middle-east women and children because we believe our Lord commands us to do that, even if it is in the debateable name of national security?
I knew you were delusional, but dude!
Unfortunate collateral damage in the process of killing a cowardly enemy who wears no uniform except dirty night shirts and intentionally hides among civilians, is a far cry from beheading, stoning, immolation, drowning, crucifixion, etc., in the name of a cult.
I have to hand it to you, Ed. You are very adept at changing the premise of a question to suit the answer you want to give. It is a logical fallacy and you are good at it. Very good. Bravo, big guy.
BTW, you need to know that when you resort to logical fallacies, Ed, you telegraph that your position is indefensible. If your position were defensible you would do that and skip the intellectual legerdemain.
Post a Comment