NC,

Thank you for clarifying that we are at war and Quranic justice prevails i.e. Muslim violence is justified, without cessation, until the world yields to Islam. Forget more references, as if you've satisfactorily dealt with any put to you while you've evangelized here.

Thank you also for clarifying your empty idea of true democracy. I reject Allah and any god, but I remain a first class citizen. You reject secularism, which guarantees citizen status regardless of religion. Secularism is the basis of western democracy, and is inclusive of any belief in any god, while you place Allah above everything and everyone. I don't want Allah's "justice" that you have pre-ordained for me.

Regarding my supposed missionary zeal and incredible power to impose myself, did I cause the Arab Spring? What an idiot to compare my ideals with the ideology of a religion, such as Islam, which marginalizes non-believers, or worse. Bertrand Russell had it right.

You have clearly revealed that questioning your religion is insulting it, so why do you refer to me as "my friend", other than in arrogance.

Enjoy the last word.

"McAdam's (earlier) proud boast <<Less than 2 percent, attacks were committed by Muslims in Europe>> "

It was not my proud boast. This is what I wrote in my post of 17 January:-

"My last post contained an extract of the article written by Dean Obeidallah.
It is good to question his statistics and his conclusions. It is this approach to news that will guard us against being targets of the controlled media."
Obviously this Suspicious Person with Questionable Reliability did not read what I had posted.
This is not the first time, he is taking a stand without reading. He tried to make fun of my statement that "Pakistan was rising up as a nation, against terrorism" by calling it the joke of the year. That statement about Pakistan was proved to be true, as is verifiable even today.

Then this Suspicious Person made this completely innocuous statement contentious that "it would be wrong to put all Christians on the spot for Inquisition .."
No one in his/ her right mind could do such a thing, but this Suspicious Person, because, he has no time to read, reflect and record a researched response. He is always in haste; hoping threads to meet the requirements of his masters who appear to have deputed him for the job.
His contributions have been; cut and paste from other threads or loose non serious remarks, without any regard to accuracy. Not a single response from him reflects seriousness and time consuming reflection; most have been quick reflux, almost instantaneous vomits,
He, through his non serious posts, as recorded on this post, has done to the Forum what a bird does to the car underneath. And that is the worth of his contribution; needs to be wiped off.

"There are people who sincerely view themselves as Muslims who have committed horrible acts in the name of Islam, yet most of those who have committed terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe aren’t Muslims; statistics:

Less than 2 percent, attacks were committed by Muslims in Europe."

Posted by McAdam, Saturday, 17 January 2015 3:46:51 AM

Luciferase,

No references.
No facts.

The same old glossy, shallow and superficial stuff.

The stuff that you have been posting for so long now, in an attempt to impose your secularism on others. Facts convince, NOT the slick words, my friend.

You are free to choose your ‘religion’ but others need YOUR approval for what they choose.

That does not happen any more in this age.

This was your ‘last word’? Too good to believe! Let us see.

What is Going On? Any One Interested?

This is a talk titled Top Secret Military War Plans, professor who researched the subject, has copies of original plans and he wrote a book on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTxaGzm_v8Q

Michio Kaku, American Professor of Theoretical Physics at the City College of New York and author, discloses that President Eisenhower and later President Nixon, both had firmed up plans to drop nuclear bombs on North Korea. Both could not execute their plans for lack of sufficient public support at home.

Can you see what is happening these days?
You at home are being convinced and being prepared to accept the "evil" that the states want to eradicate, for the noble purpose of peace and not for oil and not for providing protection to the beneficiaries of greed of the present dysfunctional and unsustainable system.

Your decision is your choice.
If you feel it is the goodness of Christianity and badness of Islam that is the issue...go ahead...champion the cause. Go ahead with your slurs on Islam. You may..one day...in your own life time, be able to see the real picture...how will you face the mirror then? Is your problem.
Good luck.

"Are All Terrorists Muslims?
It’s Not Even Close.

By Dean Obeidallah"

I posted extract from this article and personal attacks started.
I don't think it is right.
These are views of an academician and following are the links which may help those interested to get in touch with him directly:-

mailto:listserve@twf.org

http://dmanalytics2.com/click?u=http%3A%2F%2Fethreemail.com%2Fsubscribe%3Fg%3D09d7d9cd&i=1&d=VX782VUY-385V-4660-Z51X-8748VUVU2Y1Z&e=shahid_niazi45%40yahoo.com&a=40Z7Z3YY-0974-47WV-Y343-VZY07U7UW040

I find the author right when he says; "when Anders Breivik slaughtered 77 people in Norway to further his anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, and pro-“Christian Europe” agenda as he stated in his manifesto, how much press did we see in the United States?
Yes, it was covered, but not the way we see when a Muslim terrorist is involved. Plus we didn’t see terrorism experts fill the cable news sphere asking how we can stop future Christian terrorists"

Other instances also show that the mainstream media reacts differently where Muslims are involved in violence.

I also find his argument well supported by evidence when he says that
"less than 2 percent terrorist attacks were committed by Muslims over the past five years".
Then he substantiates his conclusion by citing actual official reports like that of
"Europol, the European Union’s law-enforcement agency, noted in its report released last year, the vast majority of terror attacks in Europe were perpetrated by separatist groups. For example, in 2013, there were 152 terror attacks in Europe.
Only two of them were “religiously motivated,” while 84 were predicated upon ethno-nationalist or separatist beliefs."

I also recognized the right of others to disagree and I wrote in my post; "It is good to question his (author's) statistics and his conclusions. It is this approach to news that will guard us against being targets of the controlled media." So where is the ground for personal attack?

Clearly, it is every reader's right to believe in what he/she chooses to. But if any one wants me to agree with his/her conclusion, I require credible evidence. If, instead of providing the requisite evidence, one resorts to personal attacks, it is a proof and confession, in my reckoning, that such a person does not have facts to support the argument.