Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have referred to the rapes as atrocities repeatedly. I have condemned rape as a horrendous crime. I have condemned rapists as criminals. I have put forward the view that rape is perhaps the epitome of violence and moral depravity. Indeed, it is the fact that rape is so heinous that makes me object to a poster like Dasa suggesting that all Muslims are rapists.
and not a single condemnation of any of the atrocities that he cited, how very very
very very telling. what do you put it down to Gerald, small mindedness, an
unwillingness to face certain facts, attempts to use a pretext to minimise the Islamic
reaction?
25 Oct 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo when you stated this on page 1 of this thread -
actually the lack of condemnation with regard to the actual atrocities where dasa was
fervently chastised speaks volumes and is far more interesting and revealing than your
vile insinuations and attempts not to answer why its the case.
our secular liberal friends will be falling over themselves to excuse these atrocities on some pretext at any moment.
Which atrocities are you referring to exactly?
Originally posted by FMFexcept you cannot find a single reference where you actually condemned these
I have referred to the rapes as atrocities repeatedly. I have condemned rape as a horrendous crime. I have condemned rapists as criminals. I have put forward the view that rape is perhaps the epitome of violence and moral depravity. Indeed, it is the fact that rape is so heinous that makes me object to a poster like Dasa suggesting that all Muslims are rapists.
atrocities, except some vain appeal to a deleted thread.
Originally posted by Proper KnobAtrocities committed by Muslims in general. My statement was made on what I
So when you stated this on page 1 of this thread -
our secular liberal friends will be falling over themselves to excuse these atrocities on some pretext at any moment.
Which atrocities are you referring to exactly?
perceive to be a failure of the secular liberals to decry, condemn or in some instances
fail to recognise the culpability of serious atrocities committed by Muslims. It was
made on the back of Finnegan failing to recognise the legitimacy of some of the points
of the innocence of Muslims which i pointed out were valid facts, Muhammads father
was unknown, he did impose a tax on non Muslims etc etc It appeared to me to be
ultimately telling that while Dasas posting of hate speech was roundly condemned, the
actual accounts which he gave to substantiate his claims were largely ignored, why still
remains a mystery.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf the degree to which I abhor rape as a crime, and how I express it here, do not satisfy you, robbie, that is a matter for you.
except you cannot find a single reference where you actually condemned these
atrocities, except some vain appeal to a deleted thread.
So, now we have established that, what about you now explaining what you meant about fellow posters seeking to excuse the atrocities that were described in the OP? I can't remember anyone on this forum seeking to excuse rape. Do you have any examples you can give us?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDid you read Dasa's deleted thread? There were numerous condemnations of [1] the rapes he mentioned, and [2] the fact that Dasa claimed that these rapes proved that all Muslims are rapists. Did you condemn the rapes described on that deleted thread? Did you condemn them more than other people or less than other people?
It appeared to me to be ultimately telling that while Dasas posting of hate speech was roundly condemned, the actual accounts which he gave to substantiate his claims were largely ignored, why still remains a mystery.
25 Oct 12
Originally posted by FMFHow about this story, not in Egypt, but in Pakistan:
Really? So the OP described some specific atrocities. And then in your reply, the words "these atrocities" did not refer to the atrocities in the OP? Is that what you want us to believe?
http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/headlinenewsd.php?hnewsid=3765
Originally posted by FMFAll you need to do is provide a single shred of evidence FMF, for you or other secular
If the degree to which I abhor rape as a crime, and how I express it here, do not satisfy you, robbie, that is a matter for you.
So, now we have established that, what about you now explaining what you meant about fellow posters seeking to excuse the atrocities that were described in the OP? I can't remember anyone on this forum seeking to excuse rape. Do you have any examples you can give us?
liberals and once again I have not limited my statements to rape, or the rape of
children, but I understand that it suits your insinuations to reduce it to such. The failure
to condemn is in my opinion, telling in itself or perhaps you can provide a reasonable
explanation why there doesn't seem to be any. My own theory is that secular liberals
are fence sitters, in their endeavours to be all encompassing, all inclusive, non
committal, non partisans it appears that condemnation of any kind, no matter how
heinous the crime, is simply lacking, how else are we to account for it.
Originally posted by sonhouseThe area police are silent on this case of abduction and enforced conversion of minor
How about this story, not in Egypt, but in Pakistan:
http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/headlinenewsd.php?hnewsid=3765
Christian girl Aney Tariq.
Perhaps they are also secular liberals, that might explain their silence on the matter.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut you haven't explained it yet. You've been dodging and deflecting since you were called on it. People can go and look at your first post on page one for themselves. Nothing has been 'made up'. You were not being called on the degree to which you condemned the rapes - nor was anyone else's intensity of condemnation the issue - you were simply asked to explain why you thought fellow posters would seek to excuse the rapes described in the OP.
Indeed, you can believe what you want, you make it up as you go long anyway.
Originally posted by FMFI did not mention rapes, you did, I did not say that they excused rapes, you did, I did
But you haven't explained it yet. You've been dodging and deflecting since you were called on it. People can go and look at your first post on page one for themselves. Nothing has been 'made up'. You were not being called on the degree to which you condemned the rapes - nor was anyone else's intensity of condemnation the issue - you were simply asked to explain why you thought fellow posters would seek to excuse the rapes described in the OP.
not provide any type of pretext, you did. I have explained my position, I will not do so
again.