Swedish Man Who Insulted Muslim For Threat to “Take Over Your Fucking Country” Charged With Hate Crime

[Babalu]

@montecresto1

Again you’re justifying killing innocent woman and children. In this case, targeting and killing them.

Just remember, if the US ever suffers the grave misfortune of a nuclear missile from North Korea or somewhere else to land on one of our cities. They too will justify the targeting and killing of the innocent.

So?

That is the way hearts and minds are won and disputes are settled when diplomacy fails.

ALWAYS.

Get used to the idea. It never changes.

@montecresto1

Sure, all the ones that we had no involvement in.

Don’t like those fingers pointing back do ya.

If you are ever lucky enough to be a parent, you will realize that we always do the best we can.

The governance of a nation is subject to the same limitations.

The government and the leaders do the best they can.

Even the leaders of Sharia ruled nations only do the best they can.

The idea is to have worthy goals and be clear on what you do and why you do it.

[montecresto1]

Except for one thing, American exceptionalism and the masquerading as the country which is the shinning city on a hill.

[montecresto1]

@Babalu

If you are ever lucky enough to be a parent,

What gives you cause to be presumptuous?

[montecresto1]

@Babalu

Get used to the idea. It never changes.

Your calloused attitude towards the targeting and killing of the innocent is duly noted.

[Jimsouth]

Right to the point Mr. Warner. I also recommend looking at day to day Islam. Islam: The Politically Incorrect Truth - TheReligionofPeace

https:// thereligionofpeace .com

[Babalu]

Duly note whatever you want.

But the tactic of using a patriot’s supposed attitude in favor of wanton violence is not going to work when you look at it realistically.

If we can use enough violence and avoid as much as possible any collateral deaths of innocents, the enemy will eventually give up or be rendered unable to continue fighting.

Example.

In this thread, we have a difference of opinion.

If one of us makes the cost of exchanging posts too costly to the other, the exchanges of opinions will stop.

It is really that simple and that complex.

[Jimsouth]

We are exceptional; even with all our warts. What Churchill said ( more or less ): America has the worst system in all of recorded history; except for all the rest.

[Jimsouth]

I guess life just ain’t fair. Then again, show me a time in history when it ever was fair. Man’s inhumanity to man has existed since day one. It will never ever stop. Best you can do is crawl through life with minimal lumps.

[montecresto1]

More justification for the targeting and killing of innocent people.

Furthermore, targeting the innocent as was done is a crime, a war crime, that General Curtis LeMay knew would get him tried for it if the US lost the war, much as Germans were tried for war crimes because they lost the war.

Additionally, you cannot target an entire city for obliteration, flying an airplane hundreds of miles to deliver the destruction, and then claim that those innocents killed, were collateral damage.

[Jimsouth]

And what was 9/11? More people died that day than Pearl Harbor. Only one degree of death you know.

[montecresto1]

Well that’s a lousy defense of America’s targeting and obliteration of innocent people. I guess you don’t realize that the US would never do so again without consequence. The world is far beyond such barbaric warfare, and the UN was created following that god awful war to ensure such would never happen again.

[montecresto1]

An act of terror as all targeting of civilians is

[Babalu]

@montecresto1

An act of terror as all targeting of civilians is

You are playing the “Holier Than Thou” card?

Here ya go.

From, The Religion of Peace . com

The Prophet Mohammed murdered 800 ■■■■ in one event.

The Banu Qurayza

From Discover the Truth:

The evidences shown proves that the Banu Qurayza broke the pact they had, they sided with enemy against the Muslims. They attacked Muslims, waged war against the Muslims… given these facts, we can safely state that, what those treacherous Banu Qurayza warrior-men got was justice of the highest order demanded for them to be their fate.

(January 1, 2016)

What the Apologists Want You to Believe

The story of Muhammad beheading all of the men (and boys as young as 12) of a tribe known as the Banu Qurayza is one of the most embarrassing for contemporary apologists. It occurred after the Battle of the Trench. Those who were not beheaded were mostly enslaved, mainly the children and women.

The challenge for Discover the Truth is to shift blame from Muhammad to the victims. DTT poses that the Qurayza broke a treaty and “fought” Muhammad, even “openly taking sides” during the Battle of the Trench. In other words, they were treacherous and posed a threat that had to be eliminated.

Since the punishment (of mass execution) was excessive, DTT argues that it was determined by someone other than Muhammad, who was simply performing his humble duties in carrying it out. Enslaving the women and children was an act of humanitarianism, since their men had been executed and could no longer take care of them.

What They Offer as Proof

Discover the Truth posts several articles to mitigate the slaughter, rape and enslavement of the Banu Qurayza. The most detailed frames the argument with snippets of Ibn Ishaq, al-Tabari, Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Abu Dawud and sahih verses from Sunan an-Nasai’i and Jami at-Tirmidhi - which are accepted as generally reliable sources.

History is written by the winners, however, and each of these sources is a devout Muslim who wants to portray Muhammad in a flattering light. Understanding what really happened sometimes means reading between the lines and considering events from the persepective of the other side.

In the Islamic texts, anything Muhammad does, no matter how worldly or cruel, is dressed up in rhetoric denoting Allah’s approval, while non-Muslim characters are disparaged in highly bigoted terms. When Muhammad breaks a treaty, for example, we are told that he has “permission from Allah” - which constitutes thin reasoning in the real world. When there is even a hint that someone else hasn’t lived up to the letter of an agreement, however, it’s called “treachery” and the entire tribe is subject to eviction or extermination.

The conclusions reached by DTT with which we disagree are as follows:

1. The Banu Qurayza broke an agreement unjustifiably

2. The Banu Qurayza fought Muslims at the Battle of the Trench

3. The Banu Qurayza helped other tribes kill Muslims

4. The Banu Qurayza were deserving of their fate

5. Muhammad was powerless to stop the beheadings and thus bore no blame

Obviously, if one or more of these is false, then the apologist case collapses.

What They Leave Out and Why They are Wrong

When Muhammad arrived in Medina, he had his hosts sign an agreement i…

Countering Islamic Propaganda: The Banu Qurayza

[Jimsouth]

Part of the human condition: An eye for an eye, until the whole world is blind. Anyway, I promise I will not start any wars. It’s all about greed, in some way, shape, or form. Greed is the root of all human misery.

[Babalu]

It’s part of my nature to be kinda jerky sometimes.

I resist it as much as I feel I must.

[Babalu]

Although many Americans interpret the term, American Exceptionalism to mean we are better than everyone else, the reality is that it originally referred to how our government was a departure from all other governments that had ever existed until we came along with Government of the people, by the people and for the people.

IINM.

[montecresto1]

@Babalu

You are playing the “Holier Than Thou” card?

I don’t know how to interpret that. Other than you disagree that the 9/11 attacks were acts of terror.

[montecresto1]

Well that’s certainly contradictory…

[Jimsouth]

Shortly before the US dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, the United Stated showered the Japanese cities of Nagasaki, Hiroshima, and 33 other potential targets with over 5 million leaflets warning civilians of the impending attack. In Japanese, the back of the pictured leaflet read:

“Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend. In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes. So, in accordance with America’s humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people. The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately.”

An American-controlled radio station on Saipan was broadcasting a similar message to the Japanese people every 15 minutes. Five days after the fliers were distributed, Hiroshima was destroyed by the “Little Boy” atomic device. Following the first attack, the U.S. air force dropped even more leaflets:

America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet. We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate.

We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city.

Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better and peace-loving Japan.

You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.

[montecresto1]

Which you’ll never see again. Namely because you cannot target entire cities for destruction. That is the epitome of war crime.

Before US engagement in WW2, many in the US felt differently about the bombardment of cities. But then seemed to have lost that moral courage when it seemed beneficial to destroy cities in Germany and Japan.

On the eve of World War II, American leaders strongly condemned the bombing of civilians. Following Japanese air strikes in China and fascist bombing in Spain, the U.S. Senate issued its own “unqualified condemnation of the inhuman bombing of civilian populations” in 1938. When Germany invaded Poland in 1939, President Franklin D. Roosevelt urgently appealed to all sides in the hostilities to affirm publicly that their armed forces “shall in no event, and under no circumstances, undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian populations or of unfortified cities.”

Following WW2 in various Geneva conventions this practice has been codified as war crimes.