|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 20, 2016 22:49:20 GMT
Anna, in the first place I apologise for the language in some of the bits I cut and pasted. I did try to edit out the vulgarity but obviously missed some.
What I posted was a mixture of the Southern Poverty Law Centre, the Socialist Workers Party and a reddit site.
Now I am anything BUT an admirer of the SWP and the SPLC also seems to me rather politically biased.
But when you're dealing with FACTS - with PROVABLE, CONFIRMABLE FACTS - then the source of those facts is irrelevant.
I'd no more reject a source just because it's from a site with political views I disagree with or despise if the source gave FACTS.
And all three of the sources gave FACTS to show that Bill French alias Bill Warner is factually WRONG - at times on a truly unbelievable level of stupidity.
I also interspersed some of my own comments in the articles I cut and pasted. (The bad language came from the reddit site).
But the essential point is, as I showed in my original post and the one I made subsequently, is that French alias Warner is simply factually WRONG and also tells a number of PROVABLE LIES.
So frankly HE is the 'source' with zero credibility rather than the leftist sites who critiqued his diatribe (on the whole quite reasonably to my surprise given the source).
So basically French alias Warner is a busted flush who makes schoolboy howlers and who also lies through his teeth.
PROVABLY, DEMONSTRABLY wrong and downright FALSE.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 20, 2016 22:52:17 GMT
And it's true of ideologies (such as Islamophobia) where separating fact from fiction is not always possible. Warner is factually WRONG when he attributes the fall of 'classical civilization' to Islam. Not least because it happened two hundred years BEFORE Islam was even invented! But of course he has his own agenda (and he's made a LOT of money out of pushing his hatred and lies) so he never lets TRUTH and FACTS get in the way of his prejudices. I'm going to post some of what I've found about this con-artist and it's very revealing. Big Lin I like many people am not accostumed to using the expression: Classical civilisation en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Classical_civilisation&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktopAt a glance it doesn't seem like there was a world power that we could call "Classical civilisation" after the Islamic conquests. We may have problem with semantics too. No one denies that the Roman empire was attacked by Goths and other European nationalities during it's downfall. Were the Romans fighting a 2 Front war? The role of the Islamic empire appears to be greatly downplayed or ignored in Standard Western history. The point is that there wasn't one BEFORE Islam either. The Romans NEVER fought Islam any more than Cortez did. Honestly, as someone who has a degree in history and an absolute passion for it I despair at the lack of knowledge of the reality of the past.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 21, 2016 7:58:04 GMT
Big Lin I like many people am not accostumed to using the expression: Classical civilisation en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Classical_civilisation&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktopAt a glance it doesn't seem like there was a world power that we could call "Classical civilisation" after the Islamic conquests. We may have problem with semantics too. No one denies that the Roman empire was attacked by Goths and other European nationalities during it's downfall. Were the Romans fighting a 2 Front war? The role of the Islamic empire appears to be greatly downplayed or ignored in Standard Western history. The point is that there wasn't one BEFORE Islam either. The Romans NEVER fought Islam any more than Cortez did. Honestly, as someone who has a degree in history and an absolute passion for it I despair at the lack of knowledge of the reality of the past. We apparently have a semantic problem with "classical civilisation". Whoever resisted the Muslim attack in Rome could be called "Romans" as Wikipedia does. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_raid_against_Rome This all occurred in the so called "Dark Ages" which is a difficult period to study. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography) We do know that the Muslims occupied Sicily and Southern Europe kidnapping many Europeans, especially women into their empire. Wikipedia does not use the word "Italians" to describe the later history of the Roman empire which you suggest no longer existed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire QUOTE: During the 6th century, Justinian briefly reconquered Northern Africa and Italy, but Roman possessions in the West were reduced to southern Italy and Sicily within a few years after Justinian's death.[26] In the east, partially resulting from the destructive Plague of Justinian, the Romans were threatened by the rise of Islam, whose followers rapidly conquered the territories of Syria, Armenia and Egypt during the Byzantine-Arab Wars, and soon presented a direct threat to Constantinople.[27][28] In the following century, the Arabs also captured southern Italy and Sicily.[29] Slavic populations were also able to penetrate deep into the Balkans.
The Roman (Byzantine) Empire c. 1263. The Romans, however, managed to stop further Islamic expansion into their lands during the 8th century and, beginning in the 9th century, reclaimed parts of the conquered lands.[30] In 1000 AD, the Eastern Empire was at its height: Basileios II reconquered Bulgaria and Armenia, culture and trade flourished.[31] However, soon after the expansion was abruptly stopped in 1071 with their defeat in the Battle of Manzikert. The aftermath of this important battle sent the empire into a protracted period of decline. Two decades of internal strife and Turkic invasions ultimately paved the way for Emperor Alexius I Comnenus to send a call for help to the Western European kingdoms in 1095.[27] UNQUOTE
It's only sensible that Bill Warren like Salman Rushdie and these cartoonists that Muslims have been killing use pseudonyms. The fact that SPLC and other "pro political correctness hate groups" reveal his identify and enable potential Muslim assassins to track him down show that they are willing to be an accessory to murder for their political agenda.
Wikipedia also classifies the Byzantine emperors as "Roman emperors" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors . Apparently they were viewed as the legimate continuation of the Roman empire. I see no substance to SPLC's smear that Dr. Warren is trying to lie here.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 21, 2016 8:12:53 GMT
As I pointed out in my earlier post, rape is specifically CONDEMNED in the Quran (whether it's Muslim or non-Muslim women, so that is yet another LIE; secondly, Sweden has NOT forbidden the police to collect data about Muslim rapists. Yet another LIE - two LIES in one paragraph! I will only respond to this claim that the Quran forbids rape which is mistaken and refrain from using SPLC's tactic of calling every alleged mistake an intentional lie. www.answeringmuslims.com/2014/02/does-islam-allow-muslims-to-rape-female.html QUOTE: Does Islam Allow Muslims to Rape Female Captives and Slave Girls?Critics of Islam and Sharia frequently claim that the Qur’an allows Muslim men to rape their female captives and slave girls (i.e. those "whom their right hands possess"). Westernized Muslims, however, are appalled at the thought of their religion allowing rape, so they insist that Islam prohibits this practice. Unfortunately, Islam isn't defined by Westernized Muslims; it's defined by Allah and Muhammad in the Qur'an and the Hadith. So instead of inventing a religion based on the feelings of Westernized Muslims and calling it "Islam," let's turn to the Qur'an and the Hadith to see what Allah and Muhammad have to say about this issue. As Muhammad's armies raided town after town, they captured many women, who would often be sold or traded. Yet, since the Muslim men were a long way from their wives, they needed wisdom from Allah to guide them in their treatment of their female captives. Allah revealed: Qur’an 23:1-6—The Believers must (eventually) win through—those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess—for (in their case) they are free from blame. Qur’an 70:22-30—Not so those devoted to Prayer—those who remain steadfast to their prayer; and those in whose wealth is a recognized right for the (needy) who asks and him who is prevented (for some reason from asking); and those who hold to the truth of the Day Of Judgement; and those who fear the displeasure of their Lord—for their Lord’s displeasure is the opposite of Peace and Tranquility—and those who guard their chastity, except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess—for (then) they are not to be blamed. Notice that Allah commands Muslims to abstain from sex, except with their wives and with "those whom their right hands possess." Allah gave the same sexual rights to Muhammad: Qur’an 33:50—O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war ... The Muslim practice of having sex with captured women is reported often in the Hadith, where we learn that Muhammad's only objection to sex with captives was his condemnation of birth control. Sahih Muslim 3371—We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing azl (withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. Sahih al-Bukhari 4138—We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the invasion of Bun Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus [same as "azl" above]. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said: "How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us? We asked (him) about it and he said: "It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul till the Day of Resurrection is predestined to exist, it will exist." Sahih Muslim 3384—Jabir bin Abdullah reported that a person asked Allah’s Apostle saying: I have a slave-girl and I practice azl with her, whereupon Allah’s Messenger said: This cannot prevent that which Allah has decreed. The person then came (after some time) and said: Messenger of Allah, the slave-girl about whom I talked to you has conceived, whereupon Allah’s Messenger said: I am the servant of Allah and His Messenger. Clearly, Muslims were taking full advantage of Muhammad's teachings about female captives and slave girls. Nevertheless, Muslims eventually captured women along with their husbands, so they wondered if Allah would allow them to have sex with these married captives (since adultery is otherwise forbidden in Islam). Allah gives his answer in the Qur'an: Qur’an 4:24—Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess ... Here's the historical background for this verse: Sunan Abu Dawud 2150—The Apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. Thus, the Qur’an allows men to have sex with their female captives and slave girls, and the Hadith provides numerous examples of how this was practiced. Yet we must follow this fact through to its logical conclusion. Muslims decided to have sex with their captives, whom they were later going to sell. Some of these captives were women whose husbands and families had been slaughtered by Muslims. Others had husbands who had been captured by Muslims. Would these women gladly consent to sexual intercourse with men who had killed their families or taken their families captive, and who were simply going to sell them into slavery when they arrived at the next town? Certainly not. But since the Qur’an and Muhammad authorized sex with these women (and said nothing about seeking their permission), we can only conclude that Muhammad allowed his followers to rape their captives.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 21, 2016 8:28:13 GMT
I don't have much time or energy with all the worry about my husband. Mike of course comes first and we all respect that. I responded to a few of your or SPLC's claims, but you should not be in any hurry to answer them. We all hope that Mike will be better soon.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 21, 2016 14:21:15 GMT
The point is that there wasn't one BEFORE Islam either. The Romans NEVER fought Islam any more than Cortez did. Honestly, as someone who has a degree in history and an absolute passion for it I despair at the lack of knowledge of the reality of the past. We apparently have a semantic problem with "classical civilisation". Whoever resisted the Muslim attack in Rome could be called "Romans" as Wikipedia does. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_raid_against_Rome This all occurred in the so called "Dark Ages" which is a difficult period to study. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography) We do know that the Muslims occupied Sicily and Southern Europe kidnapping many Europeans, especially women into their empire. Wikipedia does not use the word "Italians" to describe the later history of the Roman empire which you suggest no longer existed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire QUOTE: During the 6th century, Justinian briefly reconquered Northern Africa and Italy, but Roman possessions in the West were reduced to southern Italy and Sicily within a few years after Justinian's death.[26] In the east, partially resulting from the destructive Plague of Justinian, the Romans were threatened by the rise of Islam, whose followers rapidly conquered the territories of Syria, Armenia and Egypt during the Byzantine-Arab Wars, and soon presented a direct threat to Constantinople.[27][28] In the following century, the Arabs also captured southern Italy and Sicily.[29] Slavic populations were also able to penetrate deep into the Balkans.
The Roman (Byzantine) Empire c. 1263. The Romans, however, managed to stop further Islamic expansion into their lands during the 8th century and, beginning in the 9th century, reclaimed parts of the conquered lands.[30] In 1000 AD, the Eastern Empire was at its height: Basileios II reconquered Bulgaria and Armenia, culture and trade flourished.[31] However, soon after the expansion was abruptly stopped in 1071 with their defeat in the Battle of Manzikert. The aftermath of this important battle sent the empire into a protracted period of decline. Two decades of internal strife and Turkic invasions ultimately paved the way for Emperor Alexius I Comnenus to send a call for help to the Western European kingdoms in 1095.[27] UNQUOTE
It's only sensible that Bill Warren like Salman Rushdie and these cartoonists that Muslims have been killing use pseudonyms. The fact that SPLC and other "pro political correctness hate groups" reveal his identify and enable potential Muslim assassins to track him down show that they are willing to be an accessory to murder for their political agenda.
Wikipedia also classifies the Byzantine emperors as "Roman emperors" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors . Apparently they were viewed as the legimate continuation of the Roman empire. I see no substance to SPLC's smear that Dr. Warren is trying to lie here.
There's NO 'problem with semantics' - the problem lies with TRUTH. I've shown that French has made NUMEROUS absolute SCHOOLBOY howlers plus a number of PROVABLE LIES. He's obviously an ignorant moron but he's also a DELIBERATE LIAR too. He has ZERO CREDIBILITY. He's both a con artist and an idiot. As for the Arab raid on Rome, 'classical civilization' had long since perished in the West. So as usual the lying toerag is FACTUALLY WRONG.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 21, 2016 16:56:44 GMT
We apparently have a semantic problem with "classical civilisation". Whoever resisted the Muslim attack in Rome could be called "Romans" as Wikipedia does. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_raid_against_Rome This all occurred in the so called "Dark Ages" which is a difficult period to study. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography) We do know that the Muslims occupied Sicily and Southern Europe kidnapping many Europeans, especially women into their empire. Wikipedia does not use the word "Italians" to describe the later history of the Roman empire which you suggest no longer existed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire QUOTE: During the 6th century, Justinian briefly reconquered Northern Africa and Italy, but Roman possessions in the West were reduced to southern Italy and Sicily within a few years after Justinian's death.[26] In the east, partially resulting from the destructive Plague of Justinian, the Romans were threatened by the rise of Islam, whose followers rapidly conquered the territories of Syria, Armenia and Egypt during the Byzantine-Arab Wars, and soon presented a direct threat to Constantinople.[27][28] In the following century, the Arabs also captured southern Italy and Sicily.[29] Slavic populations were also able to penetrate deep into the Balkans.
The Roman (Byzantine) Empire c. 1263. The Romans, however, managed to stop further Islamic expansion into their lands during the 8th century and, beginning in the 9th century, reclaimed parts of the conquered lands.[30] In 1000 AD, the Eastern Empire was at its height: Basileios II reconquered Bulgaria and Armenia, culture and trade flourished.[31] However, soon after the expansion was abruptly stopped in 1071 with their defeat in the Battle of Manzikert. The aftermath of this important battle sent the empire into a protracted period of decline. Two decades of internal strife and Turkic invasions ultimately paved the way for Emperor Alexius I Comnenus to send a call for help to the Western European kingdoms in 1095.[27] UNQUOTE
It's only sensible that Bill Warren like Salman Rushdie and these cartoonists that Muslims have been killing use pseudonyms. The fact that SPLC and other "pro political correctness hate groups" reveal his identify and enable potential Muslim assassins to track him down show that they are willing to be an accessory to murder for their political agenda.
Wikipedia also classifies the Byzantine emperors as "Roman emperors" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors . Apparently they were viewed as the legimate continuation of the Roman empire. I see no substance to SPLC's smear that Dr. Warren is trying to lie here.
There's NO 'problem with semantics' - the problem lies with TRUTH. I've shown that French has made NUMEROUS absolute SCHOOLBOY howlers plus a number of PROVABLE LIES. He's obviously an ignorant moron but he's also a DELIBERATE LIAR too. He has ZERO CREDIBILITY. He's both a con artist and an idiot. As for the Arab raid on Rome, 'classical civilization' had long since perished in the West. So as usual the lying toerag is FACTUALLY WRONG. Curious that the SPCL doesn't accuse Wikipedia of deliberately lying for referring to the later part of the Roman Empire as the Byzantine phase. The Byzantine empire is as I understand it is part of the "classical civilisation", but I'm not really that interested in semantics. I have never in my life accused someone of lying for understanding a word or a concept differently. Please Big Lin this rant about "classical civilisation" however people use this translated English expression comes straight from the hate mongering SPLC.
We have other authors who include the Byzantine empire as "classical civilisation" and ruling Rome. Whether the Byzantine is classical, medieval or something else appears to be a semantic debate. www.sullivan-county.com/religion/holy_warriors.htm QUOTE: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization QUOTE: Even Pirenne believed that Byzantium had somehow coped better with the Arabs than the West. In his time it was generally assumed that Classical Civilization survived in the East, and that the region was less "medievalised" than the West.We are, or have been until recently, informed by historians that the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries in Byzantium were, in the words of Sidnay Painter, "three centuries of glory," and that during this time "The Byzantine Empire was the richest state in Europe, the strongest military power, and by far the most cultivated."(Sidney Painter, A History of the Middle Ages, 284-1500)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2016 19:48:30 GMT
The Southern Poverty Law Center started with the highest of ideals, over the years it has devolved in to a money making enterprise with its words highly suspect as to any validity. It has become what it initially worked against – a hate group. To use it as a source to make points in a dialog is an exercise in futility as its words mean nothing. Following are a couple of articles about it. Christian groups are celebrating with the news that the Federal Bureau of Investigation appears to have scrubbed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) from its hate crimes webpage, where the controversial group was listed as a resource and referred to as a partner in public outreach. The entire article can be found at: www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/03/26/fbi-dumps-southern-poverty-law-center/ How the Southern Poverty Law Center profits from intolerance Ah, tolerance. Who could be against something so virtuous? And who could object to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Montgomery, Alabama-based group that recently sent out this heartwarming yet mildly terrifying appeal to raise money for its "Teaching Tolerance" program, which prepares educational kits for schoolteachers? Cofounded in 1971 by civil rights lawyer cum direct-marketing millionaire Morris Dees, a leading critic of "hate groups" and a man so beatific that he was the subject of a made-for-TV movie, the SPLC spent much of its early years defending prisoners who faced the death penalty and suing to desegregate all-white institutions like Alabama's highway patrol. That was then. Today, the SPLC spends most of its time--and money--on a relentless fund-raising campaign, peddling memberships in the church of tolerance with all the zeal of a circuit rider passing the collection plate. "He's the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of the civil rights movement," renowned anti- death-penalty lawyer Millard Farmer says of Dees, his former associate, "though I don’t mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye." The Center earned $44 million last year alone--$27 million from fund-raising and $17 million from stocks and other investments--but spent only $13 million on civil rights program, making it one of the most profitable charities in the country. The entire article can be found at: www.americanpatrol.com/SPLC/ChurchofMorrisDees001100.html
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 21, 2016 20:09:34 GMT
Excellent @menantol ! THE SPLC is truly a vicious hate group!
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 21, 2016 21:46:54 GMT
Why are right-wingers so wimpish and such haters of the truth?
Frankly, I've posted stuff on here from sites I TOTALLY find disgusting such as neo-Nazi ones IF they give FACTS.
Now to hell with the SPLC or any other source; I KNOW for a FACT that French alias Warner has made some absolutely SCHOOLBOY level howlers.
To say nothing of telling a LOT of downright, PROVABLE LIES.
If Warner had turned in a scientific paper as full of ELEMENTARY mistakes and so many downright LIES he would not just have had it rejected; he would have been LAUGHED OUT OF COURT.
Now let's concentrate on the FACTS.
French alias Warner has made so many statements that are FACTUALLY, PROVABLY WRONG that he has ZERO CREDIBILITY.
Why don't you right-wingers just ADMIT that he made - either through stupidity, ignorance or perhaps because he was foolish enough to believe OTHERS who ARE conscious LIARS - elementary errors of fact and numerous statements that are downright LIES?
French alias Warner is a complete fake with ZERO CREDIBILITY.
So just have the guts to ADMIT that he HAS made statements that are PROVABLY, DEMONSTRABLY FALSE.
Why are you right-wingers so wimpish about admitting it when you get it wrong?
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 21, 2016 21:51:59 GMT
All I've seen is argumenta ad hominem and attempts to wriggle off the hook that even a politician would find embarrassing.
Why?
The answer is obvious.
Because French alias Warner has been shown up to make NUMEROUS and ELEMENTARY errors of fact; because he's been exposed as telling downright, PROVABLE LIES - well, because they can't DENY that he's got it wrong (because the FACTS show clearly that he IS) they try to shift the goalposts, change the subject, drag in irrelevant arguments about the source.
Look, if a fact is a FACT it doesn't matter a tinkers' cuss what the source of that fact is.
Just stop trying to wriggle out of the fact that French has been exposed as a fool, an ignoramus and a liar.
Just admit it and move on.
Your poster boy has shown himself to be a real bad advert for your cause.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 22, 2016 13:50:33 GMT
Sorry Big Lin Dr. Bill Warren admits on his website that Bill Warren is his nom de guerre ( Name of War ) on his website www.politicalislam.com/author/ . Yes I know only Muslims can call themselves jihadists or warriors and it's politically incorrect for people like us to do anything like that. Where "classical civilisation" ended and "medieval civilisation" began is a semantic argument. No one denies that Rome and the Roman empire was attacked before Islam existed. Why can't Germanic invaders like modern day illegal immigrants have some knowledge of the language of those who they conquer or occupy? More SPLC ranting.
The SPLC's hatemongering, twisting and vilification towards Dr. Warren shows who they are and has no reflection on Dr. Warren. The SPLC is on the hook and wiggling like the serpent it is!
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 22, 2016 23:21:36 GMT
Listen, Anna, French alias Warner IS a merchant of hate.
And as I've said till I'm blue in the face, it doesn't matter a tinker's cuss WHO recounts a FACT.
French - as I have pointed out - has made NUMEROUS errors of FACT - not just on classical civilisation but on imagining that Germans spoke 'Roman' and he's also told DOWNRIGHT, PROVABLE LIES.
He has ZERO credibility as a source and I really wish you'd have the honesty to just ADMIT that he HAS made ELEMENTARY blunders and has told DOWNRIGHT, PROVABLE LIES.
Since I've demonstrated that in regard to quite a few of the FACTUALLY FALSE claims he has made, it really doesn't matter a damn if the SPLC has done so as well.
The FACT is that French alias Warner has made LOADS of statements that are FACTUALLY FALSE.
Now just ADMIT that and get on with it.
It really is pretty pathetic that none of his admirers have had the intellectual or moral courage to ADMIT that he has made elementary blunders and told lies.
Why are right-wingers so wimpish when they're proved wrong?
(And yes, I freely admit left-wingers are just as bad in that respect).
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 22, 2016 23:22:30 GMT
Excellent @menantol ! THE SPLC is truly a vicious hate group! And French is a vicious hate individual.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 22, 2016 23:52:30 GMT
Excellent @menantol ! THE SPLC is truly a vicious hate group! And French is a vicious hate individual. You're entitled to your opinions Big Lin , but all I see are empty accusations and smears pasted from the leftist fascist SPLC.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 22, 2016 23:58:36 GMT
And French is a vicious hate individual. You're entitled to your opinions Big Lin , but all I see are empty accusations and smears pasted from the leftist fascist SPLC. We're all entitled to our OPINIONS, Anna, but we're NOT entitled to deny FACTS. I have posted NUMEROUS examples of where French is FACTUALLY, PROVABLY WRONG. And in many of them HOWLINGLY wrong; so crassly wrong that he looks like the male equivalent of a brainless bimbo. And in many others of them LYINGLY wrong; making statements that are PROVABLY, FACTUALLY FALSE. As for French, all I see are errors of fact, lies and total distortions from the rightist fascist French alias Warner. Why do you find it so hard to ADMIT that the guy has just made RIDICULOUSLY CARELESS errors of FACT? Why do you find it so hard to ADMIT that he's posted numerous PROVABLE, FACTUAL LIES?
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jun 23, 2016 2:14:37 GMT
JUDGE ISLAM BY THEIR ACTIONS, NOT THEIR WORDS Jan 01 to Jun 17, 2016 , 1079 Islamic attacks in 48 countries, 10132 people were killed and 12061 injured. During 2015 there were 2865 Islamic attacks in 53 countries, 27626 people were killed and 26149 injured. During 2014 there were 3001 Islamic attacks in 55 countries, 32863 people were killed and 27522 injured. During 2013 there were 2822 Islamic attacks in 50 countries, 16775 people were killed and 29577 injured During 2012 there were 2480 Islamic attacks in 58 countries, 11546 people were killed and 20254 injured. During 2011 there were 1986 Islamic attacks in 58 countries, 9086 people were killed and 16921 injured. During 2010 there were 2023 Islamic attacks in 48 countries, 9233 people were killed and 17461 injured. During 2009 there were 2131 Islamic attacks in 40 countries, 9176 people were killed and 18612 injured. During 2008 there were 2212 Islamic attacks in 42 countries, 10798 people were killed and 18088 injured. During 2007 there were 3096 Islamic attacks in 45 countries, 20478 people were killed and 27317 injured. During 2006 there were 2779 Islamic attacks in 42 countries, 15245 people were killed and 19496 injured. During 2005 there were 1845 Islamic attacks in 38 countries, 7625 people were killed and 12855 injured. During 2004 there were 1115 Islamic attacks in 37 countries, 7166 people were killed and 14574 injured. During 2003 there were 870 Islamic attacks in 33 countries, 3273 people were killed and 6772 injured. During 2002 there were 667 Islamic attacks in 24 countries, 2849 people were killed and 6055 injured. 2001 after 9/11 there were 177 Islamic attacks in 13 countries, 3537 people were killed and 3561 injured. TOTAL = 28,624 Islamic Jihad attacks from 9/11/2001 to June 17, 2016 Reference Link… www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/christianattacks.aspxFind out WHY they are killing nonbelievers... www.politicalislam.com/Islamic Jihad killed approximately 270 million during the last 1400 years. Reference Link... www.politicalislam.com/tearsofjihad/A chart released by the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest details the surge in immigration to the U.S. from majorityMuslim countries since President Barack Obama took office in 2009. The first six fiscal years of Obama’s presidency (FY 2009 - FY 2014 ), his administration issued 832,014 green cards to migrants majorityMuslim countries. We can expect over 1 million Muslim migrants on Obama’s watch by 2016. Refugees apply for a green card which entitles recipients to access federal benefits, lifetime residency, work authorization, and a direct route to becoming a U.S. citizen. Barack Hussein Obama Quotes: “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. I have made clear that America is not, and never will be, at war with Islam. We will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities. We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation. As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. Islam has the only holy books commanding their followers to LIE & KILL. The written “religious doctrine” is perfect and cannot be changed . Criticism or questions are not tolerated. Leaving Islam is punishable by cruel torture & death. Islam will always be at war because the “doctrine” cannot be changed. So called moderate Muslims don’t have the power to rewrite or change the holy books. The goal is world domination by killing nonbelievers. No one has been able to stop Islamic killing for 1400 years.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 23, 2016 2:54:07 GMT
You're entitled to your opinions Big Lin , but all I see are empty accusations and smears pasted from the leftist fascist SPLC. We're all entitled to our OPINIONS, Anna, but we're NOT entitled to deny FACTS. I have posted NUMEROUS examples of where French is FACTUALLY, PROVABLY WRONG. And in many of them HOWLINGLY wrong; so crassly wrong that he looks like the male equivalent of a brainless bimbo. And in many others of them LYINGLY wrong; making statements that are PROVABLY, FACTUALLY FALSE. As for French, all I see are errors of fact, lies and total distortions from the rightist fascist French alias Warner. Why do you find it so hard to ADMIT that the guy has just made RIDICULOUSLY CARELESS errors of FACT? Why do you find it so hard to ADMIT that he's posted numerous PROVABLE, FACTUAL LIES? Just give me an example of one single provable lie that must have been intentional. Virtually every news media has gotten some facts wrong, but they don't get accused of intentionally lying.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 23, 2016 14:46:43 GMT
I've already posted about eight examples of downright LIES by French.
If you'd bothered to read my post instead of obsessing about the SPLC then you'd have seen them and recognized them.
In the meantime, anyone who can be stupid and crass enough to imagine that Germans spoke 'Roman' is just on that fact alone obviously unworthy of being taken seriously.
NOBODY spoke 'Roman' - Germans OR Romans.
So let's try and be charitable to French.
He has made SO MANY errors of fact - some of them LAUGHABLY absurd - that the only possible explanations (if you don't want to take the view that he's a deliberate liar) are the following:
1 French is a complete idiot
2 French is too lazy to bother to check his facts before he posts what he thinks
3 French simply accepts as gospel the lies he's been fed by sources who agree with his own prejudices.
Now one of those three MUST be the case if you reject the view that he is deliberately LYING.
So what do you think?
Is he a fool? Is he too lazy to check his facts? Does he simply recycle inaccuracies from other people?
Whichever of the four explanations is correct - the fool, the liar, the lazy man or the second-hand recycler of propaganda - any one of them destroys his credibility.
He has ZERO credibility simply because of these FUNDAMENTAL errors both in content and in methodology.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 23, 2016 14:58:26 GMT
JUDGE ISLAM BY THEIR ACTIONS, NOT THEIR WORDS Jan 01 to Jun 17, 2016 , 1079 Islamic attacks in 48 countries, 10132 people were killed and 12061 injured. During 2015 there were 2865 Islamic attacks in 53 countries, 27626 people were killed and 26149 injured. During 2014 there were 3001 Islamic attacks in 55 countries, 32863 people were killed and 27522 injured. During 2013 there were 2822 Islamic attacks in 50 countries, 16775 people were killed and 29577 injured During 2012 there were 2480 Islamic attacks in 58 countries, 11546 people were killed and 20254 injured. During 2011 there were 1986 Islamic attacks in 58 countries, 9086 people were killed and 16921 injured. During 2010 there were 2023 Islamic attacks in 48 countries, 9233 people were killed and 17461 injured. During 2009 there were 2131 Islamic attacks in 40 countries, 9176 people were killed and 18612 injured. During 2008 there were 2212 Islamic attacks in 42 countries, 10798 people were killed and 18088 injured. During 2007 there were 3096 Islamic attacks in 45 countries, 20478 people were killed and 27317 injured. During 2006 there were 2779 Islamic attacks in 42 countries, 15245 people were killed and 19496 injured. During 2005 there were 1845 Islamic attacks in 38 countries, 7625 people were killed and 12855 injured. During 2004 there were 1115 Islamic attacks in 37 countries, 7166 people were killed and 14574 injured. During 2003 there were 870 Islamic attacks in 33 countries, 3273 people were killed and 6772 injured. During 2002 there were 667 Islamic attacks in 24 countries, 2849 people were killed and 6055 injured. 2001 after 9/11 there were 177 Islamic attacks in 13 countries, 3537 people were killed and 3561 injured. TOTAL = 28,624 Islamic Jihad attacks from 9/11/2001 to June 17, 2016 Reference Link… www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/christianattacks.aspxFind out WHY they are killing nonbelievers... www.politicalislam.com/Islamic Jihad killed approximately 270 million during the last 1400 years. Reference Link... www.politicalislam.com/tearsofjihad/A chart released by the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest details the surge in immigration to the U.S. from majorityMuslim countries since President Barack Obama took office in 2009. The first six fiscal years of Obama’s presidency (FY 2009 - FY 2014 ), his administration issued 832,014 green cards to migrants majorityMuslim countries. We can expect over 1 million Muslim migrants on Obama’s watch by 2016. Refugees apply for a green card which entitles recipients to access federal benefits, lifetime residency, work authorization, and a direct route to becoming a U.S. citizen. Barack Hussein Obama Quotes: “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. I have made clear that America is not, and never will be, at war with Islam. We will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities. We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation. As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. Islam has the only holy books commanding their followers to LIE & KILL. The written “religious doctrine” is perfect and cannot be changed . Criticism or questions are not tolerated. Leaving Islam is punishable by cruel torture & death. Islam will always be at war because the “doctrine” cannot be changed. So called moderate Muslims don’t have the power to rewrite or change the holy books. The goal is world domination by killing nonbelievers. No one has been able to stop Islamic killing for 1400 years. There are quite a few inaccuracies in your post, BA. Let's start with the most obvious one. Islam does NOT have 'the only holy books commanding their followers to lie and kill.' The Bible does; so do some of the Hindu scriptures; so straight away that Judaism and Christianity and Hinduism , all of which DO have holy books commanding their followers to lie and kill. Nor is it true that Islamic doctrine cannot be changed. It HAS been and frankly IF what you said was true (which it isn't) then all Muslims would agree when, even to the most ignorant and prejudiced eyes, that's just NOT the case. ISIS for instance does many things that are specifically FORBIDDEN in the Quran. There are also fierce differences over the interpretation of various passages in the Quran and also fierce differences over the interpretation of the Hadiths. So the FACTS show that your statement is simply FALSE. And 'the goal is world domination by killing non-believers' - honestly, what paranoid science fiction fantasy did you drag that up from? The Quran makes it clear that it wants to convert people but a) it does NOT regard Christians, Jews or Zoroastrians as being 'non-believers' - they are 'people of the book' and 'dimmis' but NOT non-believers; yet ANOTHER factual error - deliberate lie? b) it also makes it clear that peaceful conversion is always better than forced conversion and although it certainly gives incentives for conversion it does NOT mandate 'killing non-believers.' Yet another FACTUAL ERROR. Now what's interesting me is how quiet you've gone on French alias Warner since I exposed him as making ELEMENTARY errors of FACT and posting statements that were downright LIES. Why is that? Are you so unwilling to accept that your guru has been found out and exposed as a fool and a liar?
|
|