Idiots protesting mosque near Ground Zero attack two Christians

[Mr.Fitnah]

Jihad begot Crusades.

Crusades begot Jihad

Gil further elaborates on the initial wave of jihad conquests, and details the lasting destruction they wrought:

…at the time of the conquest, Palestine was inhabited by Jews and Christians….The Arab tribes were to be found in the border areas, in keeping with arrangements made with the Byzantine rulers….

one can assume that the local population suffered immensely during the course of the war [i.e., jihad conquests] and it is very likely that many villages were destroyed and uprooted in the frontier regions, and that the lot of these local populations was very bitter indeed.

It appears that the period of the conquest was also that of the destruction of the synagogues and churches of the Byzantine era, remnants of which have been unearthed in our own time and are still being discovered.

The assumption is based both on what is said in a few Christian sources…and on Muslim sources describing ‘Umar’s [Umar b. al-Khattab] visits to al-Sham. There is no doubt that one of the main purposes of these visits was to establish order and put an end to the devastation and slaughter of the local population…Towns in the western strip and the central strip (the region of the red sand hills and the swamps) in the Sharon, decreased from fifty-eight to seventeen !

It is estimated that the erosion of the soil from the western slopes of the Judaean mountains reached – as a result of the agricultural uprooting during the Muslim period – the gigantic extent of 2,000 to 4,000 cubic meters….

We find direct evidence of the destruction of agriculture and the desertion of the villages in the fact that the papyri of Nessana are completely discontinued after the year 700. One can assume that at the time the inhabitants abandoned the place, evidently because of the inter-tribal warfare among the Arabs which completely undermined the internal security of the area. 42
FrontPage Magazine - The Legacy of Jihad in Palestine
FrontPage Magazine - The Legacy of Jihad in Palestine (Continued)

 

[bodecea]

Jihad begot Crusades.

Crusades begot Jihad

Bat Ye’or summarizes the Arab Muslim conquest of Palestine as follows:

…the whole Gaza region up to Cesarea was sacked and devastated in the campaign of 634. Four thousand Jewish, Christian, and Samaritan peasants who defended their land were massacred.

The villages of the Negev were pillaged…Towns such as Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Cesarea, Nablus, and Beth Shean were isolated and closed their gates. In his sermon on Christmas day 634, the patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, lamented…that the Christians were being forcibly kept in Jerusalem: ‘…chained and nailed by fear of the Saracens,’ whose ‘savage, barbarous and bloody sword’ kept them locked up in the town…Sophronius, in his sermon on the Day of the Epiphany 636, bewailed the destruction of the churches and monasteries, the sacked towns, the fields laid waste, the villages burned down by the nomads who were overrunning the country.

In a letter the same year to Sergius, the patriarch of Constantinople, he mentions the ravages wrought by the Arabs. Thousands of people perished in 639, victims of the famine and plague that resulted from these destructions. 40


According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost... 41

Tell us what the Christians did to the people in the towns (including Jerusalem) that they conquered. What did Richard I do to his Muslim Prisoners?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

This thread started with a some idiots yelling at some Christians which has been described as an attack. When I think of attack I think of blood and bruises not just simply being yelled at. How we got from yelling at someone to religious zeolotry is quite fascinating.

 

[sangha]

SO you have nothing to say about the christian terrorists who have committed hundreds of acts of terrorism?

In other words, you made an idiotic statement and now you can't back it up (again) so you want to change the subject?

Listen moron, I can guarantee you that if a group of Christians hijacked a plane and flew it into a skyscraper in downtown Mecca I would condemn them, I would further condemn anyone caught on camera cheering about the deaths of people who were committing the crime of , gasp, going about their daily lives. The fact that you don't condemn Muslims for the same doesn't mean I would follow your lead in regards to Christians.

Did you condemn the guy who flew a plane into a building in Austin TX? OR is that somehow "different"?

Are you kidding? He still hasn't condemned the terrorist violence against abortion clinics.

 

[ConHog]

SO you have nothing to say about the christian terrorists who have committed hundreds of acts of terrorism?

In other words, you made an idiotic statement and now you can't back it up (again) so you want to change the subject?

Listen moron, I can guarantee you that if a group of Christians hijacked a plane and flew it into a skyscraper in downtown Mecca I would condemn them, I would further condemn anyone caught on camera cheering about the deaths of people who were committing the crime of , gasp, going about their daily lives. The fact that you don't condemn Muslims for the same doesn't mean I would follow your lead in regards to Christians.

Did you condemn the guy who flew a plane into a building in Austin TX? OR is that somehow "different"?

And are we to condemn ALL Muslims for the acts of some radical, mislead crazies?

Obviously I was not on this board when that incident occurred, but absolutely I condemned him, and will continue to do so, he was a nut bag terrorist. To my knowledge he did not do so out of religious reasons though.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I'm still waiting for you to get my point.

I'm not defending radical Muslim terrorist anymore than I would defend the radical Christian terrorists I posted. Both sides are terrorists willing to use anything as justification for their radical ways. They're both wrong for it, as well. No religion is worse or better than another one.

Actually you are defending Islamic jihad, You are making a moral equivalency argument where non exists
Try to wrap your mind around this.
Its a rough thumbnail but in general accurate
When a " Christian kills it is against the teaching of Christ."
When a "muslims kills a non believer ,he is doing and act of piety sanctified by scripture "

See the difference?

But any Christian terrorist will say it is with the teachings of Christ and God and the Bible, just as a Muslim terrorist will do the same with Allah, Muhammad and the Koran. They are terrorists and radicals, not to be taken as the majority of their religions. Which has been my point for many pages now.

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

 

[sangha]

Actually you are defending Islamic jihad, You are making a moral equivalency argument where non exists
Try to wrap your mind around this.
Its a rough thumbnail but in general accurate
When a " Christian kills it is against the teaching of Christ."
When a "muslims kills a non believer ,he is doing and act of piety sanctified by scripture "

See the difference?

But any Christian terrorist will say it is with the teachings of Christ and God and the Bible, just as a Muslim terrorist will do the same with Allah, Muhammad and the Koran. They are terrorists and radicals, not to be taken as the majority of their religions. Which has been my point for many pages now.

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

Maybe you can't, but Thomas Aquinas could, and did

 

[ConHog]

Crusades begot Jihad

Bat Ye’or summarizes the Arab Muslim conquest of Palestine as follows:

…the whole Gaza region up to Cesarea was sacked and devastated in the campaign of 634. Four thousand Jewish, Christian, and Samaritan peasants who defended their land were massacred.

The villages of the Negev were pillaged…Towns such as Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Cesarea, Nablus, and Beth Shean were isolated and closed their gates. In his sermon on Christmas day 634, the patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, lamented…that the Christians were being forcibly kept in Jerusalem: ‘…chained and nailed by fear of the Saracens,’ whose ‘savage, barbarous and bloody sword’ kept them locked up in the town…Sophronius, in his sermon on the Day of the Epiphany 636, bewailed the destruction of the churches and monasteries, the sacked towns, the fields laid waste, the villages burned down by the nomads who were overrunning the country.

In a letter the same year to Sergius, the patriarch of Constantinople, he mentions the ravages wrought by the Arabs. Thousands of people perished in 639, victims of the famine and plague that resulted from these destructions. 40


According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost... 41

Tell us what the Christians did to the people in the towns (including Jerusalem) that they conquered. What did Richard I do to his Muslim Prisoners?

That's funny, you think Richard I was a Christian? He was a homicidal homosexual.

But yes , of course Christians committed atrocities, in a WAR fought during the middle ages BAHAHAHHAHAHa, are you suggesting that we Westerners deserve the terrorists acts based on a war that occurred 900 years ago that MUSLIMS started?

 

[ConHog]

In other words, you made an idiotic statement and now you can't back it up (again) so you want to change the subject?

Listen moron, I can guarantee you that if a group of Christians hijacked a plane and flew it into a skyscraper in downtown Mecca I would condemn them, I would further condemn anyone caught on camera cheering about the deaths of people who were committing the crime of , gasp, going about their daily lives. The fact that you don't condemn Muslims for the same doesn't mean I would follow your lead in regards to Christians.

Did you condemn the guy who flew a plane into a building in Austin TX? OR is that somehow "different"?

Are you kidding? He still hasn't condemned the terrorist violence against abortion clinics.

I notice you haven't accepted my challenge. Wonder why?

For that matter, where I have said anything about I won't condemn abortion clinic bombers and such? Terror of any kind is WRONG.

Funny though that you started out this thread by suggesting that certain New Yorkers shouldn't have their first amendment rights.

 

[Woyzeck]

Actually you are defending Islamic jihad, You are making a moral equivalency argument where non exists
Try to wrap your mind around this.
Its a rough thumbnail but in general accurate
When a " Christian kills it is against the teaching of Christ."
When a "muslims kills a non believer ,he is doing and act of piety sanctified by scripture "

See the difference?

But any Christian terrorist will say it is with the teachings of Christ and God and the Bible, just as a Muslim terrorist will do the same with Allah, Muhammad and the Koran. They are terrorists and radicals, not to be taken as the majority of their religions. Which has been my point for many pages now.

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

 

[sangha]

Bat Ye’or summarizes the Arab Muslim conquest of Palestine as follows:

…the whole Gaza region up to Cesarea was sacked and devastated in the campaign of 634. Four thousand Jewish, Christian, and Samaritan peasants who defended their land were massacred.

The villages of the Negev were pillaged…Towns such as Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Cesarea, Nablus, and Beth Shean were isolated and closed their gates. In his sermon on Christmas day 634, the patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, lamented…that the Christians were being forcibly kept in Jerusalem: ‘…chained and nailed by fear of the Saracens,’ whose ‘savage, barbarous and bloody sword’ kept them locked up in the town…Sophronius, in his sermon on the Day of the Epiphany 636, bewailed the destruction of the churches and monasteries, the sacked towns, the fields laid waste, the villages burned down by the nomads who were overrunning the country.

In a letter the same year to Sergius, the patriarch of Constantinople, he mentions the ravages wrought by the Arabs. Thousands of people perished in 639, victims of the famine and plague that resulted from these destructions. 40


According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost... 41

Tell us what the Christians did to the people in the towns (including Jerusalem) that they conquered. What did Richard I do to his Muslim Prisoners?

That's funny, you think Richard I was a Christian? He was a homicidal homosexual.

But yes , of course Christians committed atrocities, in a WAR fought during the middle ages BAHAHAHHAHAHa, are you suggesting that we Westerners deserve the terrorists acts based on a war that occurred 900 years ago that MUSLIMS started?

No, the modern oppression of muslims is why the terrorists are attacking westerners

OBL was quite clear in his statement about why he attacked the US (ie our support for the Saudi regime, the stationing of troops in SA, etc)

 

[ConHog]

But any Christian terrorist will say it is with the teachings of Christ and God and the Bible, just as a Muslim terrorist will do the same with Allah, Muhammad and the Koran. They are terrorists and radicals, not to be taken as the majority of their religions. Which has been my point for many pages now.

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

 

[sangha]

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

SO what? We live under American laws. That doesn't stop the xtian terrorists from claiming the Bible supports their terrorism.

ANd it's obvious you didn't read the article. It also mentions violence in the New Testament

 

[Woyzeck]

For those too lazy to actually click my link and read the long article, I'll quote some bits about Muslims and Christians:

The Koran often urges believers to fight, yet it also commands that enemies be shown mercy when they surrender. Some frightful portions of the Bible, by contrast, go much further in ordering the total extermination of enemies, of whole families and races - of men, women, and children, and even their livestock, with no quarter granted. One cherished psalm (137) begins with the lovely line, "By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept"; it ends by blessing anyone who would seize Babylon's infants and smash their skulls against the rocks.

We don't have to range too far to find passages that horrify. The Koran warns, "Those who make war against God and his apostle . . . shall be put to death or crucified" (Koran 5.33). Other passages are equally threatening, though they usually have to be wrenched out of context to achieve this effect. One text from Sura (Chapter) 47 begins "O true believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads."

The richest harvest of gore comes from the books that tell the story of the Children of Israel after their escape from Egypt, as they take over their new land in Canaan. These events are foreshadowed in the book of Deuteronomy, in which God proclaims "I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh" (Deut. 32:42). We then turn to the full orgy of militarism, enslavement, and race war in the Books of Joshua and Judges. Moses himself reputedly authorized this campaign when he told his followers that, once they reached Canaan, they must annihilate all the peoples they find in the cities specially reserved for them (Deut. 20: 16-18).

Joshua, Moses's successor, proves an apt pupil. When he conquers the city of Ai, God commands that he take away the livestock and the loot, while altogether exterminating the inhabitants, and he duly does this (Joshua 8). When he defeats and captures five kings, he murders his prisoners of war, either by hanging or crucifixion. (Joshua 10). Nor is there any suggestion that the Canaanites and their kin were targeted for destruction because they were uniquely evil or treacherous: They happened to be on the wrong land at the wrong time. And Joshua himself was by no means alone. In Judges again, other stories tell of the complete extermination of tribes with the deliberate goal of ending their genetic lines.

Mm mm good. God's such a great guy. The Christians? Nicest chaps around! Never committed any atrocities whatsoever in their 2000 year history. The Koran is full of slaughter and murder, while the Bible is full of sugar, spice and everything nice.

 

[ConHog]

Tell us what the Christians did to the people in the towns (including Jerusalem) that they conquered. What did Richard I do to his Muslim Prisoners?

That's funny, you think Richard I was a Christian? He was a homicidal homosexual.

But yes , of course Christians committed atrocities, in a WAR fought during the middle ages BAHAHAHHAHAHa, are you suggesting that we Westerners deserve the terrorists acts based on a war that occurred 900 years ago that MUSLIMS started?

No, the modern oppression of muslims is why the terrorists are attacking westerners

OBL was quite clear in his statement about why he attacked the US (ie our support for the Saudi regime, the stationing of troops in SA, etc)

So here you are finally admitting your true self. You feel the Muslims are justified...

Fucking Muslim sympathizer, but at least you finally admitted it.

Oh, and of the 3,000 Americans, some of whom were Muslims, killed on 9/11 approximately how many every oppressed a Muslim do you think?

By the way , do you know that in 1991 we stationed troops in SA at the request of the King, who was obviously afraid that that other crazy Muslim, you remember Saadam don't you, would come after HIS oil? So if your old buddy OBL was pissed at anyone about that, he should have been over blowing up shit in Mecca.

Like I said shit for brains, you don't even want to debate history with me.

 

[Woyzeck]

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

Fitnah said Muslim scripture and not Christian scripture allowed terrorists the moral high ground.

I proved him wrong.

 

[ConHog]

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

SO what? We live under American laws. That doesn't stop the xtian terrorists from claiming the Bible supports their terrorism.

And those that do are wrong, now can you admit that the ratio of Muslim terrorists to Christian terrorists is at least 50000:1? You have ZERO integrity if you can't.

 

[bodecea]

Well ,I can point to the verses in the Quran and in the traditions to show the "terrorist" have the high moral ground in Islam, The orders to fight and until non exist but muslims are repeated many times and are very clear .

I cant do that with the Christians scripture.

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

We aren't...thank goodness...because if we were living under Mosaic law, we'd be in the same boat as living under Sharia law. Thank you for continuing being on our side on this issue with your posts.

 

[ConHog]

I could very well show you the more violent portions in the Bible. You'll love the bits about stoning women. And genocide. And incest. And lots of other family-fun things. Take a link and a look:

Violent passages in the Koran and the Bible - The Boston Globe

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

Fitnah said Muslim scripture and not Christian scripture allowed terrorists the moral high ground.

I proved him wrong.

That's a matter of interpretation. I happen to agree with you that the correct interpretation of the Koran does not allow for violence. I happen to disagree with you that the majority of Muslims don't interpret the Koran incorrectly.

 

[bodecea]

Which part of we don't live under Mosaic law do you not understand?

SO what? We live under American laws. That doesn't stop the xtian terrorists from claiming the Bible supports their terrorism.

And those that do are wrong, now can you admit that the ratio of Muslim terrorists to Christian terrorists is at least 50000:1? You have ZERO integrity if you can't.

At this time... you are correct. In the past that was not the case. Who knows what it will be in the future.