Al Qaeda Serves Baked Boys To Their Families For Lunch

Originally posted by BO XIAN
It was an absurd analogy. It was off the wall to begin with. It was useless as an illustration to begin with. It could not apply in anything remotely in the same galactic cluster as sensible and fitting. I thought that was obvious.

I know it was a bad analogy but it made the point.
You can't believe in it cause its just not right,
well same goes for me and this story of the baked kids.

The story from Yon is absurd and OFF THE WALL as well.
As you say
"I really do not understand what's so difficult about that plain English."

Let me ask this
if this story is correct

then why was it moved to Skunk works?

Originally posted by neformore
Which refers to Boznia and has nothing to do with Iraq, and as such has no bearing on this thread, which is dealing with a supposed situation there.

You missed my point, on purpose? From that link, I meant this (amongst other nuggets, which I clearly stated was my purpose):

Those who claim to oppose war but who are not prepared to resist warmongers by force of arms if necessary can in truth neither create peace nor protect human rights.

neformore
I am currently trying to verify your story of children being run over and kiled and people asking for cows as recompense. I'm sure there will be appropriate records in the UN archives. Maybe you haev some links?

No links, but I'm sure you'll find some. Personally, I'm honestly too lazy, and see no need. Some stories cannot be verified, unless you were there. But I trust the person who told me this, and others who told me more, because they had no reason to lie. They're not capitalizing on their experiences, they're not writing books, guiding tours, etc - they are just people dealing with these images day after day. They were actually there, and had their own values, beliefs and morals challenged. They went there for good reasons, which they still uphold today, inspite of many things they have witnessed.
Btw, the villagers in Somalia, did not ask for the cows at first, they were offered. Cows in their society means wealth. The family with a lot of cows were/are considered wealthy. They took the few incidents where families were offered a compensation to be a rule/regulation.
The NATO, (he was on a NATO peacekeeping mission)as an organization, did not distribute cows, as far as I know. But officers/soldiers do have a little leeway in how they handle certain "small" local things, without all the trappings of bureaucracy we are so used to...I'm sure you realize this?
That's why I said, believe it or not. This world is too big for the straight and narrow.

Again, not really to do with the topic, but I see the point you are trying to make...

Thanks for seeing what I was trying to say.
With that link, I meant this:

Due to obstacles to reporting from the emergency region, the program of village destruction has gone underreported in the Turkish and world press. In July 1997, then Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit announced that 3,185 settlements had been completely or partially depopulated since fighting broke out in the region in August 1984. This has not been an orderly evacuation procedure, but a punitive measure, frequently conducted with considerable brutality, and villages are still being cleared. The exact number of displaced is unknown because no independent group has been able freely to conduct research in the region. In any case, hundreds of thousands of Kurdish villagers from the southeast have been displaced to shanty-towns throughout Turkey.

I wanted to show how atrocities are not always reported. And, because of that, maybe people think they are few and far between. So when they hear about something absolutely mind-blowing, they find it very hard to believe. So I do think it is relevant.

In the end we're on the same page, as I said in my above post:

Soraia
The only reason I was interested in this thread, is because of the atrocities...people are not helped if we deny it or them, automatically.... there are still real people that suffer real things. And these things we can't just ignore, and say they are not true.

Many of these atrocities, there is no way to verify...unless you go there and see for yourself. Or believe one propaganda over the other.

To EvilBat

I know it was a bad analogy but it made the point.
You can't believe in it cause its just not right,
well same goes for me and this story of the baked kids.

The story from Yon is absurd and OFF THE WALL as well.

Ahhhhhh . . . guess I had given your assertions more of the benefit of the doubt than they now seem to deserve.

Essentially, you are saying the following columns (A) and (B)

ARE EQUAL--IN VALUE, IMPORTANCE, USEFULNESS SAY IN $USDOLLARS.

(A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B)

0,999,876,543,310,777.0 . . . . . . 0.0000012
0,888,987,678,888,777.0 . . . . . . 0.0000001
0,999,876,543,310,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,987,678,888,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000010
0,777,888,777,999,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000030
0,888,777,888,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000040
0,999,999,999,999,999.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,888,888,888,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000001
0,777,777,777,777,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,789,987,789,987,789.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,888,888,777,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
______________________ . . . .___________
7,901,074,123,409,670.00 . . . . . 0.00000253

Wellllllllll, personally, You are welcome to spend the $0.000000253.

I choose to spend the $7,901,074,123,409,670.00

because to me, they are EXCEEDINGLY DIFFERENT.

But given that your construction on reality declares that they are EQUAL,

have it your way!

It's supposedly a free country . . . until the puppet masters or the Jihadi's gain display more overt control and start shuffling folks off to the death camps.

Wellllllllll, Dear Rasputin13,

More evidence has come in about such goings on. Your instincts and observations are spot on, in terms of the biases so liberally spewed far and wide hereon--especially about the nature of the evil represented so glowingly and proudly by the Jihadi's.

I wish we could quote more from the sources . . . maybe I can quote what's allowed and then summarize in my own words the raw stats.

The most readable form of the doc is at FR:

www.freerepublic.com...

The original is at WMD--I think it's the original:

wnd.com...

More cases of terrorists 'baking' children cited

Yon, who has earned widespread respect as an independent journalist, reported that Iraqi officials told him about al-Qaida terrorists baking children and serving them to their families.

He confirmed independently to WND that an Iraqi official had recounted for him instances in which the terrorists would bake a young boy, then invite his family to have lunch, with the baked child as the main course.

Officials with the Barnabas Fund, an international Christian group working to help persecuted Christians, particularly those in Muslim-majority contexts, then confirmed Yon's report aligns with one of their own reports about such an atrocity

#####################################

DEAR MODS . . . as far as I understand the law AND ATS rules etc. the below is more than kosher. If I'm wrong, happy for a deletion. Just please let me know.

#####################################

SUMMARY OF BASIC STATS from the article in IN MY OWN WORDING (As I understand the law and the rules--ideas and information are not copyrightable--just the particular wording used to convey them):

1. Evidently common Muslim history books include the history of Mohammed ibn Abu Bekre (related to Mohammed, as I understand it) being involved in killing a rival, wrapping his body in a dead donkey's skin and baking it--then sending it as a gift to the dead man's wife.

2. It has been confirmed that a toddler was kidnapped in OCT 2006. When the mother could not pay the ransom, the child was beheaded, roasted and returned to the mother on a bed of rice.

3. Sources of such incidents stand by their stories.

4. The Barnabas Fund had two different sources reporting on one such story.

5. International Christian Concern has far more reports to contend with than it would prefer, by far. It was not shocked by Yon's report, at all.

6. In one case of Christian martyrdom, the victim was disemboweled. Then their bowels were sliced and diced before their own eyes. I think that case also involved 100's of stab wounds. That's right--HUNDREDS.

That's enough for my stomach to relate. The article is well worth reading at either link above.

DENYING SUCH FACTS is the OPPOSITE OF

DENYING IGNORANCE.

Originally posted by Rasputin13
Something tells me that if this same source had said that American soldiers were feeding Iraqi children to their families, you would give it a lot more credibility.

Why is it that those who are anti-America, anti-Bush, anti-war, etc. (bear in mind I am not accusing any particular person of being any of these. I'm speaking in general terms here) will gladly accept information from even the most unreliable of sources, so long as it supports their personal beliefs/agendas? I've seen the most obscure and illegitimate websites, newspapers, etc. being quoted on here with stories bashing the US, the military, the war and so much more. But if someone on here posts a story that speaks well of the above mentioned people/nation/military from a reputable news organization like the AP, Reuters, CNN, then everyone calls it propaganda.

[edit on 20/7/2007 by BO XIAN]

This is the ultimate in propaganda, and i'll have to see the roasted kid to beleive it.

Got pictures?

This is absurd. I know they can be barbarics, but i also know they value their lives and live in families and try to live their humble lives as best they can. I have an Iraqi in-law and i know his parents and they are loving, peaceful people who just want whats best for their family and the world.

I suppose they put an apple on their mouths, just for that Martha Stewart touch.

BS.

This is the ultimate in propaganda, and i'll have to see the roasted kid to beleive

This was an expected respnse.

In my own experience with my own similar attitudes, perspective, blind bias stubbornness in that era of my life . . . not much could have changed me but God Almighty in a burning bush making my feet hot.

Thankfully, I've matured from that narrow rigidity.

But, there will be more evidence. Such activities are headed for neighborhoods near and dear to a lot who read such forums as this one. This level of evil is not going away certainly in less than 7 years and probably not in less than 10 or 12 or 15 years.

Thankfully, such evil is slated to be wiped off the earth--but not before it multiplies, deepens, worsens and becomes far more widespread.

I believe that You will remember these words; this thread and these posts. I believe that You will remember your attitude and perspective with great grief, remorse and despairing devastation. Now you will likely consider these words those of a raving lunatic.

Then you will very likely consider them much otherwise.

It has been convincingly predicted that when a devastating famine reaches the USA, that families will be eating aborted babies as well as relatives who've just died. Indeed, that relatives will be hastening the deaths of others just to have something to eat.

But that's not what this is about. This sort of goings on from the founding of the belief system is a kind of glorying in brutal gore--and a kind of vengeful rubbing the worst sort of hideous gore in the faces of the victims' closest relatives.

The historical original case at the very earliest days of the belief system is a commonly accepted fact of the history. Check it out.

DENIAL of such historical facts is the OPPOSITE OF DENIAL OF IGNORANCE.

BO

Sorry but i would have to see it to beleive it.

Maybe i will see it in the future, but i cant swallow this right now.

Maybe i'm naive, but this sounds like the ultimate in propaganda as i said.

I know about beheadings, evil, bla bla bla bla bla, we have evil here in the USA every day.

People cooking children in microwaves, for one. Humanity is lost.
But it is not confined to AL QAEDA.

Originally posted by dgtempe

i also know they value their lives and live in families and try to live their humble lives as best they can. I have an Iraqi in-law and i know his parents and they are loving, peaceful people who just want whats best for their family and the world.

I certainly affirm that there are a significant number of Muslims who are not Jihadi's nor Jihadi sympathesizers.

But, if the experts estimation around the world is that 70% of Muslims support the Jihadi's either in practical terms with money, safe houses or at least philosophically--if that's true . . . then the problem is much bigger than most folks are admitting--including you.

I also have known wonderful Muslims. May they have peaceful fulfilling lives.

But you seem to fail to appreciate that much of this gore flooded brutality is against FELLOW MUSLIMS who happen to not share the Jihadi perspective.

I don't know how old you are or what your education, travel and other experiences have entailed. But I seriously encourage you to broaden your criteria for assessing truth. You still seem to be chronically addicted to TYPE II errors with a blind sort of assumption that they are less deadly than TYPE I errors. That's a very IRRATIONAL assumption that can be a very deadly, assumption, indeed.

People cooking children in microwaves, for one. Humanity is lost.
But it is not confined to AL QAEDA.

Quite true enough--as the teen girls dousing the kitten in flamable fluid and setting it alight demonstrated recently.

What alarms me seriously with the perspective you espouse so chronically is that you and others of similar bent seem to be utterly unable and/or unwilling to read the blazing neon lit writing on the wall.

Failing to read the tea leaves appropriately, I can understand . . . but we are well past that.

Now, the evidence is in neon lights on many walls and billboards and folks still are in lala land about it. That's almost mystifying . . . though I realize there are massive demonic forces flooding the planet to keep people conditioned to treat such as nothing.

Then who knows what's truth about the passive stuff of the government mind control evils.

Even BEGINNING TO EQUATE the Jihadi's brutality with any other . . . save maybe satanists, KGB, some Hindu attacks on Buddhists and Christians--but even the latter are all rather rare incidents and often still don't approach the Jihadi bruatlity levels. Certainly NO OTHER GROUP or belief system approaches the long history of such

NOR THE CURRENT FREQUENCY AND WIDE-SPREAD EXAMPLES OF SUCH.

NO other group comes remotely close.

And for folks such as you to fail to see that--to believe so intensely otherwise is absolutely mystifying. Almost as shocking as the brutality itself.

I'm old enough and i've been around. I dont live under a rock

What i'm saying is that humanity as a whole is LOST and not all that is bad is AL CIADA.

Capiche?

What i'm saying is that humanity as a whole is LOST and not all that is bad is AL CIADA

Again, that lack of proporationality seems evident even in that line.

No one has said Al Qaeda is the only evil or only example of evil.

I do assert with tons of justification that the Jihadi's are an enormously serious threat to . . . all that is good . . . all around the world.

Whether the NWO puppet masters who set them up to be so have much control over them or not--they are hell-bent on destroying all that is not them.

That SHOULD BE CONCERNING TO EVERYONE WHO'S NOT THEM.

Instead, there's all manner of appeasers and rationalizers who seem to think that they are just a bunch of disadvantaged boys high on testosterone in need of a good lay and some joint singing of KUMBYA.

Doesn't wash logically. Doesn't jive with the facts.

These jokers are VERY SERIOUS ABOUT THEIR WORLD CONQUEST GOALS AND ABOUT BLODDILY DESTROYING ALL WHO WILL NOT BECOME TOTALLY LIKE THEM IN BELIEF AND BEHAVIOR.

Which part of that is so hard to understand?


[edit on 20/7/2007 by BO XIAN]

I was not going to reply to this topic after
this post
should link to the

Essentially, you are saying the following columns (A) and (B)
ARE EQUAL--IN VALUE, IMPORTANCE, USEFULNESS SAY IN $USDOLLARS.

But I figured why bother I'll just still read any new posts to it to see when my question would be answered or the thread would die off or just get trashed.

But I can't help myself and had to post.

Bo , I am not an Idiot,
I know what larger/smaller numbers are. You still not have replied to my question.

I agreed that my analogy was bad , as in bad taste. But it made my point.
No need to go into the whole lecture about how I think column B would be better. because of reality I know that the answers you gave for each column is wrong also

(A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B)

0,999,876,543,310,777.0 . . . . . . 0.0000012
0,888,987,678,888,777.0 . . . . . . 0.0000001
0,999,876,543,310,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,987,678,888,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000010
0,777,888,777,999,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000030
0,888,777,888,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000040
0,999,999,999,999,999.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,888,888,888,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000001
0,777,777,777,777,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,789,987,789,987,789.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,888,888,777,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
______________________ . . . .___________
7,901,074,123,409,670.00 . . . . . 0.00000253

Lets straighten up the Columns

(A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B)

0,999,876,543,310,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000120
0,888,987,678,888,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000010
0,999,876,543,310,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,987,678,888,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000010
0,777,888,777,999,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000030
0,888,777,888,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000040
0,999,999,999,999,999.00 . . . . . 0.00000020
0,888,888,888,888,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000001
0,777,777,777,777,777.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,789,987,789,987,789.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
0,888,888,777,777,888.00 . . . . . 0.00000002
______________________ . . . .___________
7,901,074,123,409,670.00 . . . . . 0.00000253

and add the last 4 zeros real answers ?

A) 9,789,938,345,609,225

B) .00000257


Whats my point of this post?
I am waiting to find out why if this is so real as you say it is why
is this in the skunk works now.

I answered that question upthread some time ago.

I am powerless to force people to understand, accept, appreciate, respect . . . face, deal with . . . explanations etc.

I can say, your seeming assumptions about why the thread is in skunk works are inaccurate according to what the powers that be related to me.

But I don't think all that matters much. You seem exceedingly inclined to believe 100% only what you wish to believe regardless of the facts, anyway.

I see no--absolutely no--evidence of any rational acceptance of the importance of proportionality in assessing criteria AT ALL.

Given that, I doubt we share enough common vocabulary or experiences to really have a very significant meaningful exchange anywhere remotely close to dialogue.

I think the number colums are a very good analogy. You have declared that something enormously larger, worse, more intense, by galactic margins, so to speak, is absolutely EQUAL or near so, to something that is proportionally, microscopic.

That notion is, to me, utter idiocy gone to seed. I find it absolutely beyond all reason, rationality, good reality testing etc.

I also can't imagine that such a perspective is very practical in terms of helping one sort out the complexities--the very convoluted complexities of modern life in our increasingly crazy world.

Making a long post short
... numpty much?

Well I kind of hoped that this thread had died the death it deserved, but it hasn't.

Interesting to note that Micheal Yon is/was US special forces.

The issue has come into focus following a report from Michael Yon, a Special Forces soldier now in Iraq to report on the successes there

That was convieniently missed out from the original reports where he was put across as a "completely independent self supported journalist". No bias there then.

The whole thing - including the Barnabas Foundation report and the Worldnet Daily one (which refers back to the Barnabas one which refers back to - you guessed it - Michael Yon) smacks of Urban Legend, and the Worldnet Daily article actually shows the root of it.

In fact, in the same article, Yon says this

Yon told WND he reported what he was told – no more or less. "Perhaps it's urban legend. I have no idea. But my reporting was spot on. ... I quoted someone and offered zero opinion," he said.

So in fact the main supposed source for this doesn't even know if it was true or not.

So to summarise, using the available information.

There is a historic story - which is not verifiable as its just that, of a child beign baked inside a donkey in medieval times, which serves the basis of an urban legend.

After that, there is a series of chinese whispers and opinions on it, and no reports picked up by mainstream media operations to confirm them.

In the meantime the right wing-christians want to score as many points as possible as they can over the muslim faith and revel in the fact that they can use this urban legend as a tool.

But in reality I suspect that this is about as valid as children being told the "bogeyman" will come and get them.

This is an usual zone of war, coupled with a whole lot of superstition. Take away the bullets and bombs and war is about psychology and fear. Its all about dehumanisation, and propaganda. Stories spread like wildfire, regardless of their basis in truth or not.

I'm still calling this right-wing propaganda, and BS.


[edit on 21/0707/07 by neformore]

[edit on 21/0707/07 by neformore]

I didn't expect that the . . . . appeasement . . . or . . . denial-of-evidence perspective would be altered.

I'm not sure how much Iranian born Amil Imani's perspective below as a former Muslim below relates--but I think quite a lot--more than a little, anyway:

From:

www.americanthinker.com...

Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning poeple are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. There is no such thing as secular Islam or a secular Muslim. It's the nature of the faith to deny any separation of religion and the state or religion and society. There are numerous sects within Islam. One and all are extremes and not in the least amenable to change. Keep in mind that Islam claims that it is the perfect eternal faith for mankind. Splits have occurred and will continue to occur in Islam. Yet, reformation has not happened in nearly 1400 years and is not going to happen. Islam is carved in granite, just the way it is. No change. Allah's book is sealed.


There are indeed some Muslims who are moderate in the way they practice their religion. These people, for the most part, are culturally Muslims. They don't practice Islam the way it is mandated. They pick and choose. Therefore, "moderate Islam," is no Islam at all. It is not possible.



(Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website.)

The paragraph following the above 3 is also very pregnant with important meaning.

It talks about the mercilessness of Jihadi's to fellow 'Muslims' who, essentially, are not identical in beliefs and practices.

Of course, I expect the above perspective of one raised in Islam to be dismissed, derided, rationalized away in the fine and historic tradition of willfully ignoring facts and appeasing crocodiles.

I understand a cardinal doctrine of that perspective is

THROW BUBBA TO THE CROC FIRST . . . maybe he'll eat you last.

DENIAL OF VALID EVIDENCE; DENIAL OF FACTS; EVEN, AT SOME POINT, DENIAL OF REASONABLE CLUES REGARDING CONSISTENT PROBABLE BEHAVIORS

IS

THE OPPOSITE OF DENIAL OF IGNORANCE.

So when presented with a counter argument where the source himself acknowledged that the original story may be an urban legend, the argument gets changed huh?

And as for this....

Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning poeple are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.

What a total crock of rubbish. I mean, like Christianity doesn't have these things and is better?

This is propaganda at work again. Association by design. The point the guy was trying to make could have been made without the inclusion of the thieve, misogynists..... part but no, its there because it subconciously drags the image into the mind that all muslims are those things by openly comparing those traits to the muslim belief system. Its cleverly written by someone with a clear agenda.

But still.

Hitler was a Christian you know.

Theres some association by design.

Lets get on to ignorance denial.

Ignorance can only be denied if all sides of an argument are presented and fairly weighed. Dismissing one side of an argument is not denying ignorance, its promoting it. Completely dismissing moderate muslims and what they say as irrelevant is the height of ignorance.

Originally posted by neformore
So when presented with a counter argument where the source himself acknowledged that the original story may be an urban legend, the argument gets changed huh?

No. Not at all, really. The story is the same. That Jihadi's have been and are ruthlessly, outrageously, gore-filled-ly brutal (it turns out--since the beginnings of Islam). Yon merely notes that technically, folks can consider it an urban legend, if they wish--he's just reporting what an Iraqi official has declared.

That assertion itself is beyond an urban legend. I think you know that. But the phrase serves your bias. An urban legend is sort of like common gossip. This story originated as a report by an Iraqi official in a formal meeting to American officials. That's hardly common gossip. The report, evidently, was by an Iraqi official who had first hand personal investigatory knowledge of the facts. That's significantly more than common gossip.

I think you know that. But the outrageous 'common-gossip-urban-legend' accusation serves your bias.

Bo Xian:
Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning poeple are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.

What a total crock of rubbish.

I guess some outrageous rubber dictionary is in use here. A total crock of rubbish? Here we have a former reared as and life-long Muslim who is asserting firmly from many years of personal experience INSIDE the belief system. And this lifelong Muslim is spouting a crock of rubbish but you in your esteemed expert status on Jihad's and Islam are in the lofty Supreme Court position of judging this life-long Muslim as full of rubbish???

And we are supposed to consider this LOGICAL???? And you probably write this with a straight face and actually mean what you said!

Please excuse my until I stop rolling around on the floor holding my laughing sides and guffawing to the max.

Please, tell me--what is the list of courses documenting your expert status on Islam?

I'm guessing there's not a one. I'm guessing that the "crock of rubbish" "expert opinion" perspective comes from 0.00000000000000000% expert status and 1,000% from narrow, rigid, unaware bias.

I mean, like Christianity doesn't have these things and is better?

Ahhhhhh, more "expert opinion" assertions! Consider me underwhelmed.

No! CHRISTIANITY HAS NEVER HAD SUCH A HISTORY. Your outrageous unwarranted and historically inaccurate biases are showing to the extreme max.

1. Your double standard is screaming at top volume, AGAIN.

2. You seem to construe that the reported reality of 70% or so of Islam being supportive of the Jihadi's leaves Islam wholesale intact as a benign, wonderful, innocuous RELIGION OF PEACE vs a ROBP--a Religion of Bloody Pieces.

3. Further, that the reported 70% or so of Islam in support of and in cahoots with the Jihadi's (according to the Islam expert's polling of high level Imams and other WITHIN ISLAM TRUE ISLAM EXPERTS on C2C repeatedly) are

4. ACCORDING TO !!!YOUR!!! TOP FLIGHT EXPERT STATUS AS AN ISLAMIST EXPERT--NOT TRUE ISLAMISTS IN ANY MEANINGFUL SENSE OF THE WORD. Therefore, they cannot really and truly represent Islam in any useful sense of the word. And we are supposed to consider such outrageous assertions as serious, meaningful and logical!!!

Please excuse me until I can stop rolling around on the floor holding my sides from aching from laughing and guffawing to the max.

5. IN CONTRAST, the what . . . 1-3% of SO CALLED "Christians" EVER IN 2,000 YEARS who committed any kind of atrocity IN ANY KIND OF CONTEXT--whether provoked, or not--such a minority of SO CALLED "Christians" 100%

(according to you as a DOUBLE EXPERT ON CHRISTIANITY)--these minute percentages of SO CALLED "Christians" TOTALLY REPRESENT ACCURATELY AND FULLY--according to your expert judgment--

THE WHOLE OF CHRISTIANITY quite reasonably, logically, fully, appropriately etc.

And I'm supposed to consider this a REASONABLE AND LOGICAL assertion more or less free of outrageous bias????

Excuse me but rolling around on the floor holding my sides from guffawing to the max is just an inadequate response to such an absolutely off the wall assertion.

It's difficult to understand how YOU could believe YOURSELF with a straight face in front of your mirror. It boggles my mind.

The point the guy was trying to make could have been made without the inclusion of the thieve, misogynists..... part but no, its there because it subconciously drags the image into the mind that all muslims are those things by openly comparing those traits to the muslim belief system.

I guess you FAILED TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE. Yet, you' presume to offer your EXPERT opinion.

Consider me underwhelmed to the max.

1. The inclusion of examples such as thieves was deliberate as a very needful comparable class of person and behavior. Let's consider the full sentence:

"Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe?"

2. THIS IS AN EXCEEDINGLY FITTING QUESTION.

3. You are essentially asserting that Jihadi's et al must be allowed to live out their 'perfectly normal and reasonable' ROBP Religion of Bloody Pieces unfettered, unmaligned, unquestioned, unbothered, unhindered, . . . and seemingly . . . even with applause and encouragement compared to the hideous Hitler-bedfellows Christians.

4. So the former Ilsamist--a MUCH MORE EXPERT ON ISLAM THAN YOU BY A CONSIDERABLE MARGIN from all the evidence I have . . . quite reasonably asks . . . BY YOUR LOGIC--should not also thieves, misogynists, rapists, child molesters etc. be similarly applauded, encouraged, BETTER UNDERSTOOD and comforted?

Evidently your perspective is still trying to scream

YES!

No! CHRISTIANITY HAS NEVER HAD SUCH A HISTORY. Your outrageous unwarranted and historically inaccurate biases are showing to the extreme max.

You got to be joking right?

VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH