Again ...Palestinian terror Hamas fire rocket on Israeli city 'Beersheba'.

Muslims did not take over the Middle East by being "accepting and moderate".

Thee only difference between then and now is that Muslims have the financial capacity, through oil, to spread their religion throughout the world. And of course they are using force, violence and coercion to do it, just as they've done for centuries.

 

That's correct, however not following them in Islam, can cause you to lose your head.

 

Don't blame me that you can not figure out what a blood feud is.

 

So if your government came to you and charged you 100 dollars per head, per week, to be allowed to live in peace, or they would kill you.

Would you brag to all, you are living in peace with your masters.

 

Yes, he allowed the Churches to begin functioning again, after having most of them shot during the previous decades, in order to inspire many Russian people and help defeat the Germans. What is your point?

 

Don't blame me you need to repeat it, to avoid the subject.

 

What a nonsense comment. No one takes over anywhere by being accepting an moderate. It is not like the US was taken over by "acceptance and moderation", however the US was accepting and moderate by relative standards.

You are far out of context. We are talking about how the Jews were treated and how the rulers ruled - not about what they were doing in war.

There are many differences between now and then. You just have not studied history.

 

Not in all Muslim nations but certainly in our favorite Muslim nation - KSA.

 

And Anwar Sadat, a brave and noble man and his fellow Laureate, was later murdered by fanatical Muslims hands. That was a very sad day.

 

I have no clue what you are talking about. This has zero to do with what I have posted.

 

I have no problem discussing the subject. You are the one that runs to the playground to stick head deep in the sandbox of denial when confronted with the fact that Israel targets innocent civilians and does nasty things.

So desperate are you to avoid this reality that you have been blubbering on about things some Muslim 800 years ago.

 

I never said Mussolini was a Christian. You seem to be confusing posters.

 

Indeed. I remember that day very well.

 

And yet you claimed that "There are big differences between then and now. Islam (at least parts of it) for example was far more accepting and moderate in relation to Jews than today".

Look at a map of the Middle East and you'll see that most of it, with the small exception of Israel, is Muslim. They did not drive out the Jews and Christians, or gain control of them, by being 'accepting and moderate'.

They are still attacking Jews, and committing genocide against Christians, today. It's in the headlines over most of the world and there is no real reason you should not know this.

 

I agree 100% that they are attacking the Jews today. What does this have to do with 800 years ago ? I am the one that educated you on many of the evils of Islam today.

If it were not for me you would still be thinking the Islamist extremist rebels in Syria ( the one's committing genocide against the Christians) were "Moderates".

The fact of the matter is that WE - as in out lovely Establishment - armed and supported those nut jobs who are killing Christians. Trump admin/Nikki Haley cried like a baby when Russia and Assad were going to wipe out the last stronghold of Al Nusra and other extremist Islamist nut jobs from Idlib.

https://gabbard.house.gov/news/pres...ump-administrations-protection-al-qaeda-syria

 

Hell, you can't even understand English.
This is not a "Blood Feud".
And I never said one thing about what Muslims did 800 years ago, it has nothing to do with that. You just made that up.
This is solely on the written orders of the religion.

 

This has nothing to do with anything 800 years ago.

And I doubt you are in a position to "educate" anyone on the evils of Islam.

 

Of course this is a "Blood Feud" in every sense of the word - you said so yourself. And yes you have been talking about 800 years ago or more.

Did you forget your own words ? When you stop contradicting yourself I may be able to make sense out of what you are saying.

 

LOLOL

You called it a "Blood Feud", I pointed out that your "Blood Feud, goes back 1200 to 1400 years ago, depending on how you calculate it.

Now we can erase the "Blood Feud" from the equation, because it is not a "Blood Feud"
We can erase the 800 years you keep claiming, because that has nothing to do with it.


But wait, there's more.

Please "Educate" me on Islam.

 

You were the one that brought up events 800 years ago or more - in an attempt to conflate the situation back then with the blood feud that is going on today.

You are the one that does not understand the root cause of the evils of Islam today. I rail against the extremist elements within Islam on almost a daily basis. You have probably given my posts a few "likes" but, just do not remember.

So if you want to impress me with your understanding of the subject.

1) Explain to me what an Islamist is (as opposed to a Muslim who is not an Islamist)
2) Explain why this is an evil ideology - from the perspective of classical liberalism - the principles on which this nation was founded -principles you may not know very well or understand so I will give you a hint - Individual liberty is "ABOVE" the legitimate authority of Gov't - and Consent of the Governed.

 

Of course it is a blood feud. Obviously you do not know what a blood feud is.

I would be happy to educate you on the evils of Islam. Post 146 is a start to this conversation.

 

I don't recall bring up anything 800 years age.
I'm sure I mentioned when the jews sided with the Muslims, but that has nothing to do with this.

and I have no intention of writing an essay, on the evils of Islam.

 

No essay is required - you asked me to educate you on the evils of Islam. You claim to know a fair bit already so I did not want to go over things you already know which is why I asked you to explain what you think the difference between an Islamist and a Muslim who is not an Islamist.

So - do you know the difference or would you like me to explain ?

 

Cut the BS, An Islamist in a western term for a muslim who follows the teachings of Islam.

It is used to mislead, as a person who accepts the radical part of Islam.

 

You're not using the term 'blood feud' correctly. This is a religious 'feud', though 'war' would be more appropriate..