The anti-semite squad

[AzogtheDefiler]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

Bingo. surada is a typical zombie Islamist

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

I think that SURADA meant that Muhummad did not go out of the ARABIAN PENNINSULA to do his murder, rape and pillage. He left that to his followers and successors who did so BY HIS
WORD

 

[surada]

You would do the same thing if people had stolen your home and murdered your relatives.

Uh, no I wouldn’t. Every time we think you’ve reached the pinnacle of stupidity, you take it to a whole new level.

The Palestinians are not going to other places and murdering or stealing, then are just trying to get their homes back and for people to stop abusing them.

There isn’t an 18 - 45 year old terrorist (average age) who had their home stolen because the UN granted that land in 1948 (which is 73 years ago for those of you who can’t do math.

None of these filthy animals were even alive when Israel was founded. Therefore, they couldn’t have had anything “stolen” from them.

Wrong.
The UN did not grant any land to anyone.
What the UN did was to decide what political body had jurisdiction only.
What Israel then did was to use that political body that was wrongly given jurisdiction, to murder land owners and steal their land.

And clearly you have not been following the news at all, because Israel has been constantly doing this.
It did not stop in 1948, but there are half a dozens traditional Arab homes that Israel is attempting to confiscate right now.
That is what all the fighting on the Temple Mount and all the rockets was about.
So then clearly you have not been paying any attention at all and know nothing about the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

No one is confiscating anything. Another lie by Rigby5. All disputes go to land court for the justice system to opine on. Funny how the Arabs hate Israel but desperately want to live there. Why not go to Syria, Lebanon, Egypt or Jordan? Of yes because those countries treat “Palestinians” worse than dogs and we all know Islamists hate dogs. Any religion that hates dogs is by definition immoral. God loves dogs. He told me. Prove me wrong you fucking crazy asshole.

Palestinians don't want to move because they have beliefs about the value of land where the bones of the ancestors are buried.
Dogs have fleas that spread disease, so are a danger in a hot climate.

LOL. No such thing as a Palestinian and they don’t want to move because no one wants them. Not all dogs have fleas not all Islamist climates are hot. Nice try though. Dogs are smarter than you, that is undisputed.

Palestinians have never moved.
They are the oldest known civilizations in the entire world.

There is no such thing as a Palestinian. Find one mention of that word before 1967 and post it here!

Sorry AZOG-----lots of PALESTINIAN before 1967----in fact it was in the EARLIER 1960s that
ARAFART decided to call himself a palestinian. Before that ----all PALESTINIANS were jews
living in what the Romans began to call PALESTINA ---around 100 AD. My hubby was a
PALESTINIAN in the early 1940s -----Arafart was not. Ben Gurion was a PALESTINIAN
too. Even BEGIN was a PALESTINIAN......and still ARAFART was not. A personal anecdote.
I was walking in a broken down part of Manhattan and noticed faded painted hebrew lettering
on the brick wall of an abandoned building. Very long words. I tried to read it-----
phonetically------Hebrew words are generally short----like 3-5 letters. so this had to
be Yiddish, The words turned out to be PALESTINIAN RESTAURANT. The place had
actually been a zionist meeting hall from 1920

Jews were a tiny minority in Syria-Palestine until the early 1930s. The majority of Palestinians were Muslim and Christians. See the Ottoman census of 1870 or read the travel jurnals of Ibn Battuta or Rabbi Benjamin Tudela.

Ben Gurion claimed the Arab Palestinians were descended from 1st century Jewish farmers.

By the birth of Christ most Jews lived outside of Palestine in Damascus, Persia, Rome, Elephantine Island, Alexandria, Aleppo and all around the Med Sea.

No such thing as a Palestinian until 1967. You ugly liar. Link one post with the word “Palestinian” in it before 1967. LOL

And you keep dodging. Why is every mostly Muslim country a humanitarian disaster?

50,000 Palestinians worked in Arabia in the early 1950s.. mostly in housing and residential services. Some went to the Catholic Mass... a few attended my Protestant Fellowship and others were Muslims.

In fact, one of our houseboys was a Palestinian.

You have just been so caught up in Zionist lies and justifications that you ignore the actual history of the region.

Read the Palestinians Papers, Avalon Project at Yale. The documents (without commentary) refer to the people of Palestine as Arabs .. Muslims and Christians.

The first to organize in protest of the influx of European Jews in 1920 were Palestinian Jews who didn't like the way the newcomers treated them , nor did they like their socialist politics.

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

Bingo. surada is a typical zombie Islamist

Don't be stupid. I am just more honest and better educated than you.

Muhammed protected the Christians of Najran and Tarut from the Jewish king of Yemen. The Jews in Arabia were a minority and evidently big on breaking treaties.. Most of them eventually returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen.

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

 

[irosie91]

You would do the same thing if people had stolen your home and murdered your relatives.

Uh, no I wouldn’t. Every time we think you’ve reached the pinnacle of stupidity, you take it to a whole new level.

The Palestinians are not going to other places and murdering or stealing, then are just trying to get their homes back and for people to stop abusing them.

There isn’t an 18 - 45 year old terrorist (average age) who had their home stolen because the UN granted that land in 1948 (which is 73 years ago for those of you who can’t do math.

None of these filthy animals were even alive when Israel was founded. Therefore, they couldn’t have had anything “stolen” from them.

Wrong.
The UN did not grant any land to anyone.
What the UN did was to decide what political body had jurisdiction only.
What Israel then did was to use that political body that was wrongly given jurisdiction, to murder land owners and steal their land.

And clearly you have not been following the news at all, because Israel has been constantly doing this.
It did not stop in 1948, but there are half a dozens traditional Arab homes that Israel is attempting to confiscate right now.
That is what all the fighting on the Temple Mount and all the rockets was about.
So then clearly you have not been paying any attention at all and know nothing about the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

No one is confiscating anything. Another lie by Rigby5. All disputes go to land court for the justice system to opine on. Funny how the Arabs hate Israel but desperately want to live there. Why not go to Syria, Lebanon, Egypt or Jordan? Of yes because those countries treat “Palestinians” worse than dogs and we all know Islamists hate dogs. Any religion that hates dogs is by definition immoral. God loves dogs. He told me. Prove me wrong you fucking crazy asshole.

Palestinians don't want to move because they have beliefs about the value of land where the bones of the ancestors are buried.
Dogs have fleas that spread disease, so are a danger in a hot climate.

LOL. No such thing as a Palestinian and they don’t want to move because no one wants them. Not all dogs have fleas not all Islamist climates are hot. Nice try though. Dogs are smarter than you, that is undisputed.

Palestinians have never moved.
They are the oldest known civilizations in the entire world.

There is no such thing as a Palestinian. Find one mention of that word before 1967 and post it here!

Sorry AZOG-----lots of PALESTINIAN before 1967----in fact it was in the EARLIER 1960s that
ARAFART decided to call himself a palestinian. Before that ----all PALESTINIANS were jews
living in what the Romans began to call PALESTINA ---around 100 AD. My hubby was a
PALESTINIAN in the early 1940s -----Arafart was not. Ben Gurion was a PALESTINIAN
too. Even BEGIN was a PALESTINIAN......and still ARAFART was not. A personal anecdote.
I was walking in a broken down part of Manhattan and noticed faded painted hebrew lettering
on the brick wall of an abandoned building. Very long words. I tried to read it-----
phonetically------Hebrew words are generally short----like 3-5 letters. so this had to
be Yiddish, The words turned out to be PALESTINIAN RESTAURANT. The place had
actually been a zionist meeting hall from 1920

Jews were a tiny minority in Syria-Palestine until the early 1930s. The majority of Palestinians were Muslim and Christians. See the Ottoman census of 1870 or read the travel jurnals of Ibn Battuta or Rabbi Benjamin Tudela.

Ben Gurion claimed the Arab Palestinians were descended from 1st century Jewish farmers.

By the birth of Christ most Jews lived outside of Palestine in Damascus, Persia, Rome, Elephantine Island, Alexandria, Aleppo and all around the Med Sea.

No such thing as a Palestinian until 1967. You ugly liar. Link one post with the word “Palestinian” in it before 1967. LOL

And you keep dodging. Why is every mostly Muslim country a humanitarian disaster?

50,000 Palestinians worked in Arabia in the early 1950s.. mostly in housing and residential services. Some went to the Catholic Mass... a few attended my Protestant Fellowship and others were Muslims.

In fact, one of our houseboys was a Palestinian.

You have just been so caught up in Zionist lies and justifications that you ignore the actual history of the region.

Read the Palestinians Papers, Avalon Project at Yale. The documents (without commentary) refer to the people of Palestine as Arabs .. Muslims and Christians.

The first to organize in protest of the influx of European Jews in 1920 were Palestinian Jews who didn't like the way the newcomers treated them , nor did they like their socialist politics.

"ORGANIZE PROTEST" -----not quite-----jews being jews---jews do argue with each other
about just about everything. ---not only in "palestine" but even in Brooklyn. It was never
over the fact that "palestine" is ---"eretz yisrael" nor was there an issue
over how "palestinian jews" were treated by the people you call "european refugees" ------just wishful thinking on your part. Some of the issues were very specific issues of religious
observance. I am married to a "palestinian jew" The non jews of palestine were called
"ARABS" sometimes "syrians if they were muslims" and if christians---often ARMENIANS"
1920 was not THE FIRST experience that the jews of palestine had with arabs.

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

I was born in the USA. None of the highly educated muslims I have met in the USA
ever read the koran-----not in arabic ----nor in their native languages --some FARSI and
some URDU. I read the koran------the "golden rule" is lightly alluded to and the ten
commandments are all but ignored. Easy to understand why muslims do not seem to know
them. Just as shariah law DENIES THE RIGHT OF JEWS to own or use any of the standard
implements of self defense----to wit weapons and horses (and camels) so did the Canon
law of Europe. How did you get so ignorant? You seem about at the level of most of
the catholic school kids I grew up with-------they read neither the OT or the NT and never heard
of the koran. Theft and murder are, INDEED, justified in the koran. Try reading the book

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

try reading it again-----Abraham did not attack, conquer, murder, pillage and enslave as did
your leader, Muhummad. The destruction of Sodom was an act of nature-----which in OT
lingo is called "AN ACT OF GAWD" Abraham rescued some hostages

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You would do the same thing if people had stolen your home and murdered your relatives.

Uh, no I wouldn’t. Every time we think you’ve reached the pinnacle of stupidity, you take it to a whole new level.

The Palestinians are not going to other places and murdering or stealing, then are just trying to get their homes back and for people to stop abusing them.

There isn’t an 18 - 45 year old terrorist (average age) who had their home stolen because the UN granted that land in 1948 (which is 73 years ago for those of you who can’t do math.

None of these filthy animals were even alive when Israel was founded. Therefore, they couldn’t have had anything “stolen” from them.

Wrong.
The UN did not grant any land to anyone.
What the UN did was to decide what political body had jurisdiction only.
What Israel then did was to use that political body that was wrongly given jurisdiction, to murder land owners and steal their land.

And clearly you have not been following the news at all, because Israel has been constantly doing this.
It did not stop in 1948, but there are half a dozens traditional Arab homes that Israel is attempting to confiscate right now.
That is what all the fighting on the Temple Mount and all the rockets was about.
So then clearly you have not been paying any attention at all and know nothing about the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

No one is confiscating anything. Another lie by Rigby5. All disputes go to land court for the justice system to opine on. Funny how the Arabs hate Israel but desperately want to live there. Why not go to Syria, Lebanon, Egypt or Jordan? Of yes because those countries treat “Palestinians” worse than dogs and we all know Islamists hate dogs. Any religion that hates dogs is by definition immoral. God loves dogs. He told me. Prove me wrong you fucking crazy asshole.

Palestinians don't want to move because they have beliefs about the value of land where the bones of the ancestors are buried.
Dogs have fleas that spread disease, so are a danger in a hot climate.

LOL. No such thing as a Palestinian and they don’t want to move because no one wants them. Not all dogs have fleas not all Islamist climates are hot. Nice try though. Dogs are smarter than you, that is undisputed.

Palestinians have never moved.
They are the oldest known civilizations in the entire world.

There is no such thing as a Palestinian. Find one mention of that word before 1967 and post it here!

Sorry AZOG-----lots of PALESTINIAN before 1967----in fact it was in the EARLIER 1960s that
ARAFART decided to call himself a palestinian. Before that ----all PALESTINIANS were jews
living in what the Romans began to call PALESTINA ---around 100 AD. My hubby was a
PALESTINIAN in the early 1940s -----Arafart was not. Ben Gurion was a PALESTINIAN
too. Even BEGIN was a PALESTINIAN......and still ARAFART was not. A personal anecdote.
I was walking in a broken down part of Manhattan and noticed faded painted hebrew lettering
on the brick wall of an abandoned building. Very long words. I tried to read it-----
phonetically------Hebrew words are generally short----like 3-5 letters. so this had to
be Yiddish, The words turned out to be PALESTINIAN RESTAURANT. The place had
actually been a zionist meeting hall from 1920

Jews were a tiny minority in Syria-Palestine until the early 1930s. The majority of Palestinians were Muslim and Christians. See the Ottoman census of 1870 or read the travel jurnals of Ibn Battuta or Rabbi Benjamin Tudela.

Ben Gurion claimed the Arab Palestinians were descended from 1st century Jewish farmers.

By the birth of Christ most Jews lived outside of Palestine in Damascus, Persia, Rome, Elephantine Island, Alexandria, Aleppo and all around the Med Sea.

No such thing as a Palestinian until 1967. You ugly liar. Link one post with the word “Palestinian” in it before 1967. LOL

And you keep dodging. Why is every mostly Muslim country a humanitarian disaster?

50,000 Palestinians worked in Arabia in the early 1950s.. mostly in housing and residential services. Some went to the Catholic Mass... a few attended my Protestant Fellowship and others were Muslims.

In fact, one of our houseboys was a Palestinian.

You have just been so caught up in Zionist lies and justifications that you ignore the actual history of the region.

Read the Palestinians Papers, Avalon Project at Yale. The documents (without commentary) refer to the people of Palestine as Arabs .. Muslims and Christians.

The first to organize in protest of the influx of European Jews in 1920 were Palestinian Jews who didn't like the way the newcomers treated them , nor did they like their socialist politics.

Zero Palestinians. No such thing before 1967. Still waiting for your lying Islamist ass to show one link with the word “Palestinian” in it describing the people there before 1967. Keep dodging.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

Don’t need me to vilify it. Islamists have been murdering for centuries. Ever read about the Crusades and El Sid?

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

Don’t need me to vilify it. Islamists have been murdering for centuries. Ever read about the Crusades and El Sid?

spanish spelling alert------I think it was EL CID. You don't even need the crusades---
READ THE KORAN. review history-----one genocide after the other compliments of
the INVADING MINIONS OF AL NABI -----most recently----genocide in Biafra, genocide
in East BENGAL both circa 1970 the pakistani sunnis are still murdering the
pakistani shiites--------as did the Baathist sunni pig Sadaam .......... all in the NAME OF ALLAH

 

[Kondor3]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

I think that SURADA meant that Muhummad did not go out of the ARABIAN PENNINSULA to do his murder, rape and pillage. He left that to his followers and successors who did so BY HIS
WORD

Yep. Muhammed only facilitated rape, murder and pillage within the confines of the Arabian peninsula before he died.

The rest over the centuries can be traced to him and his bloodthirsty, sick and twisted interpretation of the Will of God.

 

[Kondor3]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

---------

In the context of peace and violence...

Christians go to war when they IGNORE the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth...

Muslims go to war in OBEDIANCE to the teachings of Muhammed...

The difference is profound.

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

 

[Kondor3]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Oh Brother, What is your experience with Islam?

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Bible? LOL stop it. Link it from a credible source not an ancient book of faith.