Challenge to metta and all other Muslim sympathizers

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 4:04 PM GMT
    In the interest of fair play, please scour the Internet and post links to articles highlighting the persecution of Christians and followers of religions other than Islam in areas of the world where Muslims are in power.

    I'm sure you'll take up the challenge with the same fervor in which you defend them. icon_rolleyes.gif

    The peaceful majority are irrelevant.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YnOF7y-KuHE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 4:16 PM GMT
    Here I'll help get it started.

    http://www.danielpipes.org/1050/disappearing-christians-in-the-middle-east
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 5:06 PM GMT
    If you were interested in fair play, you wouldn't be using an idiotic Trump-esque phrase like "Muslim sympathyzers"[sic]. Don't you find it telling that Southbeach is the first to pat you on the back?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 5:39 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    No idea who started thread, came in thru the contents page. Not even sure what the issue is: but by what SB quoted, that there's not enough Christian persecution in the News? Seems an odd complaint.

    I haven't noticed an overabundance of "Muslim sympathizing" here but certainly it would be reasonable to highlight where abuses might occur during a time when a faction of Muslim society has become so destructive because certainly there are good people who happen to also be Muslim.

    One of the greatest assets and blessings of this country is its foundation, infrastructure, ability and when not perverted, its willingness to be inclusive. Having just gained marriage rights, should we be able to appreciate that.

    But speaking of the self-deluded, imagining (fantasizing?) themselves persecuted, wow, what an overflowing crock of shit by SB. Oh you poor victimized thang you. That's some self-important position of yours to be the fulcrum of political balance in the online world. We're so lucky to have you. How ever would we be able to consider varying sides of an issue were it not for your enlightening threads.

    RJ should send you and your stretched foreskin a t-shirt in appreciation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 6:28 PM GMT
    I have him on ignore.

    What would you call those who explicitly and tacitly support Islam and its followers in the face of all its atrocities. They sure have no problem trumpeting Christianity's atrocities.

    Don't you find it interesting that metta hasn't taken up the challenge?
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2936

    Nov 21, 2015 6:34 PM GMT
    "The peaceful majority are irrelavent [sic]."

    Not to the peaceful majority.

    "explicitly and tacitly support Islam"

    Or simply believe in fairness and the sanctity of the lives of the "peaceful majority"? Your phrase is not unlike right-wingers who yell about "promoting" homosexuality.

    Why should Metta "take up the challenge"? He's under no obligation to do so. He posts links of general interest and that strike him as useful or interesting; he hasn't posted any position on editorial neutrality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 6:45 PM GMT
    tazzari said"The peaceful majority are irrelavent [sic]."

    Not to the peaceful majority.

    "explicitly and tacitly support Islam"

    Or simply believe in fairness and the sanctity of the lives of the "peaceful majority"? Your phrase is not unlike right-wingers who yell about "promoting" homosexuality.

    Why should Metta "take up the challenge"? He's under no obligation to do so. He posts links of general interest and that strike him as useful or interesting; he hasn't posted any position on editorial neutrality.


    you call one sided propaganda non stop editorial neutrality? facepalm
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 6:49 PM GMT
    Yes. I had a good laugh at "editorial neutrality" also. He hasn't posted any because he hasn't any. icon_rolleyes.gif

    It's obvious he has an agenda.

    I bet if I or anyone else here posted links to articles highlighting the persecution of Christians and the atrocities committed against them in Muslim countries, ad nauseum, we would be castigated to no end.

    The hypocrisy is palpable.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    Nov 21, 2015 7:17 PM GMT
    In general he posts one side and misleading articles , then deletes alot of his threads.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 9:40 PM GMT
    Still no metta, eh?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 9:44 PM GMT
    http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6426/muslim-persecution-christians
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2015 11:42 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidStill no metta, eh?
    smart boy!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 12:45 AM GMT
    http://tribune.com.pk/story/994999/rest-in-peace-church-blast-survivor-dies-days-before-birthday/
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    Nov 22, 2015 4:40 AM GMT



    [url][/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 5:11 AM GMT
    tazzari said"The peaceful majority are irrelavent [sic]."

    Not to the peaceful majority.

    "explicitly and tacitly support Islam"

    Or simply believe in fairness and the sanctity of the lives of the "peaceful majority"? Your phrase is not unlike right-wingers who yell about "promoting" homosexuality.

    Why should Metta "take up the challenge"? He's under no obligation to do so. He posts links of general interest and that strike him as useful or interesting; he hasn't posted any position on editorial neutrality.


    They are irrelevant.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YnOF7y-KuHE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 5:17 AM GMT
    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=742
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 4:48 PM GMT
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/christianattacks.htm

    Note the atrocities committed against children and the "honor" killings of family members. Barbaric!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 4:56 PM GMT
    pellaz said
    UndercoverMan saidStill no metta, eh?
    smart boy!


    Not so much smart as it doesn't advance his agenda.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 5:08 PM GMT
    I wasn't aware metta was a Muslim sympathizer. Only you nutjob Right Wingers would invent that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 5:32 PM GMT
    Then you haven't been seeing or reading all the links he's been posting. I'm just posting links too yet you call me a nut job. Nice.

    When their intellect fails them the intellectually lazy resort to ad hominem attacks.

    Would you be happier if I referred to him as a Muslim apologist?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 5:38 PM GMT
    http://www.emannabih.com/muslim-brotherhood-massacres-against-christians-in-egypt/
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    Nov 22, 2015 7:11 PM GMT
    There is going to be increasing effort to try to bend public opinion at the end of Obamas term.

    Fortunately the major distractions are either blocker or having lackluster success.

    His immigration plan is going no where because key administration officials are worried about contempt of court jail time.

    The healthcare law amount to a "meh" for the people who attained insurance and a costly headache for the people who are paying more.

    I expect people to pick articles they are interested about.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 7:46 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidThen you haven't been seeing or reading all the links he's been posting. I'm just posting links too yet you call me a nut job. Nice.

    If metta is a Muslim sympathizer then you are a Right Wing nut job. It's all a matter of balance & equivalency. icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 7:50 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidI wasn't aware metta was a Muslim sympathizer. Only you nutjob Right Wingers would invent that.


    Since when did you turn into a "nutjob Right Wingers"


    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1087699/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Mauritania?forumpage=0

    Art_deco said:

    "And a rare moment when I happen to DISagree with Obama. Muslims have no business being within 100 miles of the WTC. In fact, as avowed enemies of everything the US stands for, the vast majority proponents of our destruction as a Democratic nation, I don't think they should be in this country at all. And how's THAT for a statement from an alleged ultra-liberal, left-wing socialist, as I am often called here? "

    And the below I actually agree with:

    "Certainly I am opposed to combative Christian fringe groups as I am to Muslims. The significant difference is one of degree. SOME Christians believe in an armed takeover of the US to impose a Bible-based government. Whereas MOST Muslims believe in the violent imposition of Islamic law.

    And those Muslims who do not actively agree with such a goal, do not actively OPPOSE it either. As compared to most Christians, who do not support a US theocracy as fundamentalist Christians and Muslims do."


    "The significant difference is one of degree"

    Especially this ^^^^^ as I've stating repeatedly over the last few days.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2015 8:00 PM GMT
    And yes, I'm well aware you apologized for your comment once other leftist RJ members made you well aware of how un-PC it was to say what you did. However, you were apologizing for something you meant.