Can The Mods Undertake Action Against The Wave Of Islamist Threads?!

I'm too busy laughing at the emotional hand-wringing.

_

 

Yep.

Many churches are burned down, and when the root is traced back, it is a single deranged man with mental issues, little different from arsonists who burn down homes are other buildings.

I see no reason to call what is normally a mental health issue terrorism, its arson. the local police can handle it. When you start needing SWAT teams and more than that? That is when you have a terrorism problem on your hands. When you have a narrative and source of funding and logistics to carry on multiple attacks to acheive a political end? That is when you have terrorism on your hands.

Emotional hyperbole does not usually help either police work or problem solving. The context of each case is different and should be treated accordingly - as recognized by our system of jurisprudence.

Now, what does that have to do with the context of churches in Iraq and the attacks on them?

 

I am to provide "evidence" of my personal views?
I am telling you what my views are. Perhaps you would like to provide any eividence contradicting what i say I believe and maybe, just maybe, then your post might make sense.

BTW in my post you quote above I call for seperating all individuals from religion or ideology. That says it all.

 

There is bigotry of all types on the forum and in all directions. I think that you should calm down and take it for what it is. A place for people to exchange views anonymously. What esle do you expect? And don't do that which you claims others do, such as break rules by calling others stupid. It weakens your case.

 

#1 - I haven't participated in one of DCC's threads in months. Its pointless, as the intent is clearly not to debate, merely malign.

#2 - I have often said that ignoring problems simply does not make them go away. Clearly, others are tired of being SPAMMED by DCC and others like him.

#3 - This is not an insult:

It is a sarcastic Summary of the arguementation that is being repeatedly thrown at people who disagree with the extreme Islamophobes on this forum. As in:

a. You see Islam is evil, it just is!

b. What's wrong with you? Why can't you see how evil Islam is? Are you stupid?

Please re-read - that is not a comment aimed at any particular poster, it is a summary of the arguementation being lobbed at SEVERAL posters repeatedly.

#4 - Again, nice to ignore the problem, but the problem remains.

OJleb came into the reigion forum, as he does from time to time, and offers explanations and answers questions about Islam. He portrays it as moderate, uses Koranic scriptures and Suras to back up his claims, and is well aware of the diversity of extreme to practically Westernized Islam.

So, when these discussion are REPEATEDLY interrupted by someone calling him a liar in the name of Islam, a stealth jihadists with the intent to malign ... well, you would think that an admonition would be in order? Some chastizement for not just having the arguement but INSISTING that the arguement be brought to every Muslim everywhere on the forum.

and when you defend the Muslim? Well, despite being a US Army Ranger, despite training both US and foreign military and police officials to combat extremists, despite direct experience in the region, a long study of Islam, I should probably be reported to US and Canadian officials for a counter terrorism examination - and clearly, I support Hamas and Hezbollah to boot (probably Al Qaeda as well - you know how us Army guys are after all).

It is simply wrong.

The community sees it, and twisting the context to say, "Dont cal people stupid!" Well, who exactly is calling who stupid? Uneducated? Terrorists?

What exactly is the standard?

 

Why don't you whine about the 1,000 anti-israel/anti-jewish threads?

 

The Klan was misinformed however, because Schwerner was actually in Oxford, Ohio. Frustrated at not finding the activist, the Klan began to beat the church members and burned the wood-framed church to the ground. Schwerner learned of the fire and he, James Chaney, and Andrew Goodman, who were all attending a three-day CORE seminar in Oxford, decided to return to Longdale to investigate the Mount Zion Church incident. On June 20, the three, in a blue CORE-owned Ford station wagon, headed south.

http://crime.about.com/od/history/p/ms_burn.htm


16th Street Baptist Church bombing

The 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama was bombed on Sunday, September 15, 1963. The explosion at the African-American church, which killed four girls, marked a turning point in the U.S. 1960s Civil Rights Movement and contributed to support for passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Although city leaders had reached a settlement in May with demonstrators and started to integrate public places, not everyone agreed with ending segregation. Bombings and other acts of violence followed the settlement, and the church had become an inviting target. The three-story 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama had been a rallying point for civil rights activities through the spring of 1963, and was where the students who were arrested during the 1963 Birmingham campaign's Children's Crusade were trained. The church was used as a meeting-place for civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Ralph David Abernathy and Fred Shuttlesworth. Tensions were escalated when the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and the Congress on Racial Equality (CORE) became involved in a campaign to register African Americans to vote in Birmingham. Still, the campaign was successful. The demonstrations led to an agreement in May between the city's African-American leaders and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) to integrate public facilities in the country.

In the early morning of Sunday, September 15, 1963, Bobby Frank Cherry, Thomas Blanton, Herman Frank Cash, and Robert Chambliss, members of United Klans of America, a Ku Klux Klan group, planted a box of dynamite with a time delay under the steps of the church, near the basement. At about 10:22 a.m., twenty-six children were walking into the basement assembly room to prepare for the sermon entitled “The Love That Forgives,” when the bomb exploded. Four girls, Addie Mae Collins (aged 14), Denise McNair (aged 11), Carole Robertson (aged 14), and Cynthia Wesley (aged 14), were killed in the attack, and 22 additional people were injured, one of whom was Addie Mae Collins' younger sister, Sarah.[1] The explosion blew a hole in the church's rear wall, destroyed the back steps and all but one stained-glass window, which showed Christ leading a group of little children.[2]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Street_Baptist_Church_bombing


This is similar to the Islamic terror attacks on churches and rival mosques. Your attempt to pretend that they are just the acts of the mentally ill is silly at best.


_

 

FALSE ! OJLeb is an Islamist who does NOT offer explanations and answer questions about Islam. He deliberately lies and distorts the subject of Islamization, as Islamists routinely do, especially the suras of the Koran. I cite the suras too. The main difference between OJLeb and me is that I am not a biased Muslim, and I read the suras and explain them for what they are, not how I would like others to perceive them, like OJLeb does.
And no, an admonition would certainly NOT be in order. Why would there be ? Because someone (and I'm certainly not the only one) has been exposing his continual distortions of reality ? Quite the contrary, I will accept congratulations for protecting the forum members from a continually deceiving Islamist.

And as far as discussion being interrupted, that's like saying someone doesn't have the right to speak and discuss a subject along with everyone else. Strange idea. Why wouldn't they ? Why is it all of sudden called "interrupting" when somebody joins the conversation. Actually, in many of the debates I've had with OJLeb, I was the author of the OP and introduced the subject.

 

First of all, the list of names and things are not from some random web site, they are from scholarly written books that I've read + thousands of footnoted reports from those very informative books. And I notice that you are referring to the Quiz list of names as if you thought they were all terrorists. HA HA. You sure do have terrorism on your mind. The title of the lists states that it is Stealth Jihad (AKA Islamization). I don't think you even know what that means let alone the 360 items of the Quiz.

Fact is , you're just another Islamapologist KNOW-NOTHING when it comes to Islamization, and just like all the other big mouth KNOW-NOTHINGS, you too now have a whopping ZERO on the Quiz. In your case though I'm going to make an exception, only ecause you said you were an Army guy, as I am an Army veteran (102nd Corps of Engr Btln, 42nd Infantry Div), and I'll just take your word for it.

If you can stuff your ego for a few minutes I'm going to give you the basics on this. This is your first week of Islamization boot camp. Here we go :

First, there are 2 basic kinds of Islamic extremism. (so far you've been addressing only one of them). There is violent jihad (al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, al Shabaab, etc). Then there is the other jihad >NON-Violent. This is a somewhat covert jihad, very subversive designed to change society from what it is into an Islamist state, step by little step. There is one primary group running this (with thousands of front organizations, hundreds in the USA alone). It is called the Muslim Brotherhood. It is operative in 80 countries around the world. Some of its front groups in the US are CAIR, ISNA, MSA, MAS, ICNA, MPAC, AMC, etc.

Many of the names and things in the Quiz are part and parcel of the Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups. They were taken from primarily 2 books :

They Must Be Stopped by Brigitte Gabriel, and Stealth Jihad by Robert Spencer. If you don't believe it , and you think I'm jiving you, you are free to quiz me on any of the 360 items of the quiz, and I will tell you which book I pulled them from, and the page numbers, and you can go check them yourself. LOL. I could have given you 10 quizzes like this one from more than 2 dozen books that I've read on Islamization, over the past 10 years + hundreds of reports from the books' footnotes. And most all of it all has to do with Islamization (not terrorism) ie. Non-violent jihad.

If you make a serious effort to inform yourself about Islamization, (read the books I listed in Post # forty-eight), you will cease to use stealth jihadist words like "bigot" and "Islamaphobe", and you will get a very clear (disturbing) realization of the real fix this country is in, and how Islamapologists like you are now, are one of the biggest obstacles we have of defending ourselves from it. Your choice.

PS - I haven't maligned someone because of his faith. I pointed out the times when OJLeb misleads forum readers by misrepresenting what is in the Koran with all of his tyical suger-coating talk. In a few cases, I criticized him for following the Koran where he was OKing (as the Koran certainly does) wife-beating, and some other bad things.

 

FALSE ! I neither went out of my way to "to follow OJ into the religion section" nor do i think he went out of his way to follow me into threads that I stated and/or was engaed in.

Your speech here is so garbled, that I can't even follow what you're talking about, and I can only respond to the few parts of it that I can understand.
So let me get this straight. You are saying that I called someone a "terrorist" ? I don't recall ever doing that. Do you have a link to such a thing ?

So who is saying that we can't "allow a Muslim in a debate forum to get in a word edge wise" ? I don't recall that either. Got a link to that one ? I notice you're making accusations, but there's no links to the stuff you're talking about.

Looks like there's a lot of questions (?????????) about your post here. Here's another one > You said "..spurious connections to support untenable positions regarding a very diverse faith,.." What spurious connections ? What does that mean ? Can you be specific and say what it is you're talking about ? Again, got a link to it (or them) ?

 

I've seen OJLeb share various views on various issues in a professional manner. Yet, to claim this or that about OJLeb simply because one doesn't know jack about the forum member, is highly unprofessional.

 

It is unique that you argue that most hatred of Islam is heavily tied to Israel or Jews. Technically, a Muslim extremist is likely oppose to all things Western, including Christianity, democracy and so on and so fourth. Yet, you seem to argue that hate-bashing against Muslims is heavily tied to illegal settlement expansion activities. I bet that you are probably correct that most of the criticism expressed against Islam and Israel would slowly vanish once Israel accepts the nation of Palestine.

 

You are responding to my quote, so are you saying that I don't know jack about OJLeb ?

 

Because there are not nearly that many.

Because no one if chasing Jews around the forum to denounce and belittle them and call other posters terrorists, deny standard Jewish teachings, and threatening to report them to the counter-terrorism officials.

The simple fact of the matter is that Israel has a problem with Palestine, that issue, as I stated earlier, has had both sides deliberately drag religion into the fold - there are instances of BOTH sides using the commonalities of the Abrahamic religions to bridge gaps in the peace process and there are people on both sides that are using religion to embitter the conflict and make it even more intractable.

I have debated both sides of that arguement, having worked with Muslims and the IDF and having profound respect and appreciation for both peoples.

Do you know what I have found out form that process? Well, if my standard is the killing innocent people is wrong, then there is some legitimate critcism of Israel for their actions during Operation Caste Lead. When I give this critcism, even with military options that are proven in our TWO war zones to reduce civilian casualties, I am routine blasted as a supporter of terrorism by people who clearly view all Arabs as terrorists with not delineation required (who cares what our legal obligations are?), and when that does not deter, all manner of personal attacks, etc. follow.

Now, when I apply the same standard to Hamas, its deliberate targeting of civilians and chastize them for doing it - well, no one has EVER called me a debotched, blind supporter of Israeli settlers. Never.

I see this time and time again. I respect, admire, value, and am fully committed to Israel and its place in the middle east. However, its policy IMO, since BB took over, has been fundamentally counter productive to Israel's long term strategic interests - which requires a long term, equitable peace between Palestinians and Israelis. That process has gotten SIGNIFICANTLY better of late, but BB road to office promising peace - well, we are waiting?

However, when you demonize your enemy to such an extent that you paint him as monolithic, intractable, and dneounce all disagree as apologists to terrorism? Well, you cannot cry when someone does it back.

the simplest way I can say this is that there is a HUGE difference with taking on the policy of a single country which are found distateful, and applying a generalized extremism to over a Billion people with multiple denominations and ideologies and then - not discussing it, but shoving it down people's throats. SPAMMING it.

I find comparative excuses to be tiresome and immature. The fact that there are many posts on Israel in no way shape or form means we need 500+ threads from ONE poster to discuss the effects of extremism on/in Islam.

After all, how would you react to posters combing the AP and looking for everything a Jew anywhere did wrong, and then posted it as proof of Jewish terrorism?

Well, given that this is what the extreme Islamophobe side is doing ... do you really think the other side of this will not hit back?

 

Really? This is why it is conspiracy theory.

GREAT BIG LETTERS do not change the accuracy of the quote, nor the fact that you addressed absoutely none of the issues that I have thrown out in a managerie of excuses and demands for evidence - even after it has been repeatedly provided.

Indeed, despite providing a source for teh rebuttal to stealth jihad BS, you clearly didn;t even bother to read it, just like you didn't bother to read teh Sura's that OJLeb provided and that you simply dismissed as lies of Islam anyway.

So, basically, its a conspiracy.

No provided evidence is even acknowledged, while the extremists demand evidence as if none is provided - exactly like I claimed a few posts ago, correct?

No points are rebutted, as not a single one ofthe excuse factories of Islamophobia has addressed the simple arithmatic problem given to them several time. Points that hit them are simply ignored, and the same silly exaggerations are made again ... and again ... and again, while the standard as applied anywhere else, indicating a FAR less severe problem, are just ignored.

And of course, the tell tale sign of conspiracy, we are all just liars gosh darnit! And gosh darn it if I don;t report you liar!!

Do we need to repeat this 500 ore times?

 

Stop right there.

The author of your source is a well known extremists and his advice is avoided by almost all serious policy makers. FACT.

FACT. We had out a LOT of books on Islam to deploying Soldiers and Officers, guess whose books we do not hand out to Soldiers going in after the extremists. You guessed it.

But you read the foot notes, noted. Irrelevant to the accuracy of the book.

Fact is you are getting pissy and personal, and are behaving like a simple internet bully.

I am glad you were in the National Guard. Clearly you have deployed then? Clearly you were with us on the lines in Iraq?

Guess what slick? Youa re getting a zero on the quiz involving anything in Islam.

Is anyone else noticing how he has already responded to criticism by calling me an apologist for Islam - because he says so, read one book he did!

How about you go screw yourself? You are out of line and will be reported.

That is funny, because the groups I go after are called the Quetta Shura, Al Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, Hezb-e-Islami, Al Shabbab, AQI, the Madhi Army, Jamiah-e-Islami, etc.

Yes, they have finance organizations, and guess what we target to get to them?

Guess what the Muslim Bortherhood is for most of its practitioners? An alternative to corrupt, closed, dictatorial systems throughout the Middle East, who wish to return to something less corrupt and in line with Muslim teachings. the Bortherhood itself is further borken down into factions and is no more monolithic than than is Islam under the guise of Suna and Shia.

But then, if you watched what happened in Iraq, you would know that we targetted JAM and its special groups in particular, making violent resistance futile while inviting them and their constituency into the political process in Iraq. Hezbollah, now responsible to government in Lebanon seems less that eager to take on Israel again does it not?

And if you had had bothered to study anything on insurgency and counter terrorism you would know that the vast majority of these groups are driven and fed by local grievences and power struggles - indeed Al Qaeda attacked us because they believed, falsely, that it was merely us propping up teh Saudi government.

You know nothing of these grievences because it is all monolithic to you.

Who the hell cares if Islam spreads non-violently? If they do a better job of selling their religion than you do, well, you lose. That is how the world works.

Now, when you make them look reasonable by comparison? Nice isn't it.

maybe you should sell what you got, rather than just bash what they got?

No, you took a series of Sura's on a subject, Muslims judgements on the issue, and called him a liar and worse.

Now, how many Muslim families have you been with? I have been with hundreds, and the vaste majority of families I witnessed would never harm their wives, quite the opposite.

Guess what? We have wife beaters in this country without the benefit of Islam. You may want to read the Old testament as well.

You are simply exaggerating.

 

There is no such thing as Islamaphobia. That is a BS creation by Islamapologists who either are Islamists trying to convert a secular state into an Islamic one, or by KNOW-NOTHINGS like you, who haven't done their homework, and wouldn't recognize a facet of Islamization if it fell on their heads. Before you can talk about protectionists and give them any kind a name, you have to become informed about Islamization, MR QUIZ ZERO.

 

Having issues with Israel (The Tiny Jewish State ) is trendy with Progressives & the Far Left & Left these days ...

 

So instead of informing yourself about Islamization, with the books I suggested, you choose to just ramble on, and on making things up, pretending that I have no sources, when I just gave you 8 entire books full of thousands of footnoted references + a 360 item Quiz which you flunked with a zero (and pretended that I copied and pasted it - I already challenged you on that).

As for the Suras that you say OJLeb provided, HA HA HA. Before OJLeb ever provided any suras to me, I had already provided those suras to him, in 3 or 4 different threads. Then, what he does is he takes those suras and applies the typical Islamapologist defense tactics to them. 1. Claiming out of context (I refuted that) 2. Interpretation (I refuted that) 3. Invalidation (HA HA - that's the funny one. A guy trying to get away with claiming an invalid source of a book he never laid eyes on. LOL - He refuted himself there) Invalidation is hardwired into Islamapologists (so are ther "out of context" and "interpretation" defenses) I also totally refuted his really lamebrain BS that the 4:34 sura (wife beating) was somehow taken out of context. No it's not. There's nothing in the sura to disclaim it in any way, and suras 4:33 and 4:35 are completely unrelated to wife-beating. Just more of OJLeb's typical Muslim taqiyya (deceit which they consider acceptable as long as it benefits Islam).

No you don't need to repeat all your BS 500 times, because everything you claim that the protectionists do, is exactly what YOU DO, and what you're doing right now.

 

HA HA HA You're actually going to try to use invalidation on me, after I've already exposed that as nothing but a crude, pathetic, dumb as a box of rocks, defense tactic that is hardwired into Islamapologists like you ? This is pathetic. Well, FYI, I've been told that all the authors of all the books I've suggested were "extremists" (Ho hum - what else is new ? Yawn***) And each and every time the fools think they can get away with that, I then compel them to SHOW EVIDENCE where any of the authors have ever said anything that could be defined as extreme, or innaccurate, or bigoted, or whatever other looneytune words you freaks can dredge up. Well, sure, the facts are not on your side, so you don't have them. So what's left ? If you can't defeat the message, you go after the messenger, and hope the uninformed (like you) won't know the difference.

And what do you mean that the footnotes are irrelevant to the accuracy of the book ? What kind of BS is that ? Of course footnote references are relevant to the accuracy of the books. They are relevant to all books. Like this footnoted reference (noted in red) which appears in most (if not all) of the books I suggested :

"The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all that the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood in North America] must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands, and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated, and Allah's religion is made victorious over all religions."

Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, United States vs. Holy Land Foundation, et al. 7 (21).

And how do you know if the Muslims you know would (or do) beat their wives ? Do you go into their bedrooms at night with them to see what they do ? You have no way of knowing what they do, and you are talking out of your butt. Maybe the reason they get they get their wardrobes at Bed & Bath is to cover up all those bruises all over them. The Koran tells them it's OK to beat their wives. Even OJLeb acknowledged he thought it was OK, right here in this forum. Look it up.

I'm not going to bother to answer the long list of attacks you have stupidly made here, because it is obvious you are very unpolished, unsophisticated, and ignorant of Islamization (and you still haven't figured out that I'm talking about Islamization in the USA, not terrorism in the Middle East).

And now I get a zero on the quiz, huh ? LOL.
Oh, that's good. No, little boy. Your teacher doesn't get a zero on the quiz, just because you're mad that YOU GOT A ZERO ON THE QUIZ, SHOWING EVERYONE WHAT A BIG-MOUTH KNOW-NOTHING YOU ARE. LOL.

And then you ask "Who the hell cares if Islam spreads non-violently?" Well, the people (protectionists) who have informed themselves about it, and thereby know the HARM of it, that's who. As for those like you, who haven't paid their dues to this subject by poring through book after book, report after report, website after website, for years, like we have done, no you wouldn't care. Not at all. Like they say > "Ignorance is bliss". LOL.

 

#1 - OJLeb provided a dozen Suras that backed his claim, he also provided sources for them, and they clearly indicate the moderate majority of Islam that your refuse to acknowlegde exists.

I will let you figure out why Turkey is in NATO.

#2 - Islam prostelyzes - guess what? So do Christians. I fail to see how another religion doing the exact same thing we Christians are is some how nefarious.

Unlike extremists, I do not fear healthy competition, nor is my insecurity in my faith so overwhelming that I fear the prescence of other faiths.

#3 - You continue to offer up emotional demonization. Why? Because it is all you got. You have no facts, your presentations are based in evidence from known extremists every bit as brain washed as Al Qaeda, and, left with the inability to debate, we are left with vitriol and SPAM.

A sure sign of an unhinged, conspiracy theory.

 

Oh look, more invective and a source dated 1991. The rest of the world has moved on, its 2011, and you may want to check the date of the Counter-Insurgency Manual that GEN Petreaus and GEN Mattis co-authored.

Once again, more conspiratorial demonization and Crusadereque visions of evil in anything that disagree with them.

And we seriousy need to SPAM the forum with the mouth foaming hatred? Is this really debate? Everyone else, even though that have vastly more experience with the subject than I do, is actually a raving idiot! But not me see, I figured it all out! If I just ignore the mountain of countering evidence and focus on slim picking and use the biased sample fallacy, why I can take a single 20 year old memorandum written by a defunct group and translate that into Koranic expertise on the ENTIRE, and obviousy monolithic, religion of Islam! What? What maniacal laughter? I blanked out there for 30 seconds or so ... didn't hear a thing

BTW - you may want to pay more attention to your own deusions of destruction toward Islam. Somehow though, the prescence of Muslims that are the EXACT opposite of you is a dire threat! Not you of course. Your delusions of dominion are perfectly healthy. Theirs? Evil incarnate.

Maybe we should jusy lock the extremists in a room together and let them have at it - then the rest of the world can move out without constant prattle and insults while bark at each other .... my guess is such a scenario would probably degenerate into some kind homoerotic love fest any way ... It will probably start with the thought, "I wonder if that beard would itch if kissed that lovely mounth of his?"

 

Are you kidding?

You aren't even trying to be taken seriously...

So now you're changing your tune? Make up your mind already

 

Here's a suggestion, if you don't like threads about Muslims and Islam, be a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing adult and don't read them. Instead of acting like a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing child and crying to mods to close threads you don't like.

Grow the (*)(*)(*)(*) up.

 

You're repeating yourself, Mohammed, or whatever your real Muslim name is.
Not only that, but you are continuing to discredit yourself by trying to pass off invalidation on stuff you haven't researched. Oh, my presentations are based in evidence from well known extremists, huh ? HA HA HA. "Extremists"'as defined by whom ? CAIR ? ISNA ? MAS ? or some other Muslim Brotherhood group ? Or some Jewish guy in New England somewhere. Well, every time you insult Political Forum readers with that kind of BS, you enable me more and more to expose you for the phony, taqiyya-talking. propaganda spewing Islampaologist that you are. So here we go again (you are making my day) > Brigitte Gabriel's books are New York Times bestsellers as are the books of Robert Spencer. EARTH TO MOHAMMED, or whatever your real Muslim name is : you don't get to have your books become new York Times bestsellers if you are a "known extremist". No my deluded foe. Your books become New York Times bestsellers when you are the highly, scholarly respected authors that Brigitte Gabriel and Robert Spencer are, when you call well-known and long-respected authors "known extremists" you haven't discredited them one iota. They have their credentials. The only one whose credentials to the truth that are up for grabs is YOU, oh unenlightened one.
And when you run around carelessly trying to discredit well-known and long-respected authors, all you really do is discredit yourself, and your words become a victory for me, and for those authors. All that really comes of your (HO HUM) oh so typical invalidation attempts is you looking stupid.

As for OJLeb, HA HA HA, NO he didn't provide sources I DID - the Koran. Like sura 4:34 that he said the words "beat them" was being taken "out of context" (Islamapologist talking point # 2) - and I showed there was nothing "out of context" whatsoever. Nothing in the sura or the adjacent suras (4;33 or 4:35). Again, again, again, again I have to repeat over and over, because you insist on trying to make already refuted arguments over and over again. You must be a Muslim Islamist. No one else acts in this irrational looney way.
Well, as a protectionist I'll match all your BS ravings, shot for shot,, until you turn blue. So keep on. Go ahead, Make My Day.