Quote Originally Posted by DrB0b View Post
If you want to make an argument that Mohammed was not really a very pleasant person, (he wasn't a very pleasant person and nobody has denied that anyway) why don't you do that without resorting to lies and fakes - it's not difficult. It's actually very easy to show the evils of religion and religious people, that can be done with any religion and without resorting to lies but in your desire to show Islam as the most evil of all you're actually destroying any credibilty your anti-Islamic stance might have.
Um, I believe one-fourth of the world's population (plus apologists, lefties etc) would strongly disagree with your outrageous notion that Mohamed was less than perfect. In many parts of the world you could lose your head just by voicing that thought.

Still, I guess your comments are as fair and accurate as your ludicrous claim that the primary target of the fundamentalists is Muslims, and that the fundamentalists are not fighting a war against the West.


Which in turn is just as odd as (*203):

Quote Originally Posted by drbob
The word is ذمي. It means a non-muslim to whom the state has an obligation of protection. That is, it extends to non-Muslims exactly the same rights as Muslims, in other words equal rights. What, exactly, is wrong with that?
...which demonstrates either that as an academic you are not interested in dhimmitude beyond it's etymology, or that you sincerely believe the rubbish you posted about equality between Muslims and non-Muslims under Muslim rule. Not that I expect a straight answer, but which is it?


Meanwhile, *232
Quote Originally Posted by drbob
Judaism predates Akhenaten? That's news. You have some evidence of that? BTW biblical evidence is not evidence.
Would a live video clip suffice? Is conflicting and inconclusive archaeological evidence, better or worse than 'biblical' evidence?

If it is proven to your satisfaction as a reasonable person, without any evidence whatever beyond your own common sense, that Mohamed did not cause by command the moon to separate in two halves, one half to come down to earth and enter the sleeve of his cloak, then leave by the other sleeve to rejoin its partner in the night sky, would you be prepared to claim that whether this tale is a lie or an exaggeration, it demonstrates clearly and conclusively that the Koran is flawed, and therefore not perfect?