Post 251 (Shankara):
That the post of the faithful from Gujarat is allowed to be published, while yours and that of Mudy don't appear is only to be expected.
After all, (1) christoislamism should not be allowed to look bad, no matter what horrors it gets its followers to commit; (2) somehow other religions have to be smeared when (1) cannot be avoided.
Thought of posting a correction to the thisislondonistan site myself, but then I thought that their title was of course entirely intentional, written/edited by a p-sec if not an islamoterrorist itself. The truth is as far away from what they want to convey as they can make it.
Also, they certainly don't care to report on what caused the Gujarat riots. Only islamic 'retaliations' 'culminating in the Mumbai blasts' can be reported on, though only the p-secs regard these as 'islamic retaliations'. We know that in reality these were the usual acts of terrorism that the faithful resort to to bring to fruition their cherished vision of Mughalistan.
That the Hindus taking part in the Gujarat riots were reacting to the islamic murder of innocent Hindu children and women is of no moment - don't you know, each christoislamic life is worth all the lives of all the unsaved kafirs in the world. Who cares that the Hindus got tired of their community being murdered repeatedly by the faithful? How dare anyone try to understand that as any kind of logical cause for the rioting thereafter...
If there was a clone of India, I'd totally want Indian muslims to get their desired mughalistan with shariah implemented in full force: their islamic pardees, like Bunglingdesh and Pukestan are at the moment. (Where will their refugees migrate to then, like the Bangladeshi muslims do now?) Pukestan is such a success story after all. Yet Indian muslims have it in them to make muggerstan even better: another Afghanistan. The ultimate pardees on earth. That's something for them to aspire to. And they would totally deserve it.
Post 250 (Shankara): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What an irony? The paper suggests that hindus are terrorists, and <i>you are asking for paper protests instead of the traditional islamic reaction of burning embassies</i>. <b>Perhaps this shows how an unconverted Hindu thinks</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->True. And I hope there are fewer converted hindus. Hindus shouldn't be too eager to upstage/displace islam's number one ranking and international image, as the world's most violent and aggressive religion - so far islam's only other competitor constantly contending for the top place in this category has been christianity.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><i>I think</i> that Sunder's point (post 246) in referring to your attempt at correcting thisislondistan is precisely that unconverted Hindus are not terrorists. Basically, he used your statement (as that of a typical Hindu) - where you described writing to correct them instead of advocating/using christoislamic terrorism - as proof that Hinduism is completely unconnected with the islamoterror. Unconverted Hindus (that is, Hindus, the kind that have not become christoislamic) don't think or act the way that the no-longer-a-hindu convert to islam of the news item does.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Firstly, as a Muslim, I categorically condemn the intentions and actions of the Hindu raised terrorist who converted to Islam. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->How quickly this beloved of the islamic demiurge has responded in condemnation of terrorist activities. I hope he vocally expressed the same sentiments for his brethren's recent jihadi actions against the kafir Spanyards, Italians, Americans, Dutch, Germans, Danes and Brits? Or are his criticisms only reserved for the 'Hindu raised terrorist' who converted to islam. A disingenuous statement that, as it makes it sound like the subject was a terrorist before he saw the Light of Islam; while even the misleading title was more like 'Hindu had converted to terrorism (that is, islam) and planned to kill 1000s'.
That the post of the faithful from Gujarat is allowed to be published, while yours and that of Mudy don't appear is only to be expected.
After all, (1) christoislamism should not be allowed to look bad, no matter what horrors it gets its followers to commit; (2) somehow other religions have to be smeared when (1) cannot be avoided.
Thought of posting a correction to the thisislondonistan site myself, but then I thought that their title was of course entirely intentional, written/edited by a p-sec if not an islamoterrorist itself. The truth is as far away from what they want to convey as they can make it.
Also, they certainly don't care to report on what caused the Gujarat riots. Only islamic 'retaliations' 'culminating in the Mumbai blasts' can be reported on, though only the p-secs regard these as 'islamic retaliations'. We know that in reality these were the usual acts of terrorism that the faithful resort to to bring to fruition their cherished vision of Mughalistan.
That the Hindus taking part in the Gujarat riots were reacting to the islamic murder of innocent Hindu children and women is of no moment - don't you know, each christoislamic life is worth all the lives of all the unsaved kafirs in the world. Who cares that the Hindus got tired of their community being murdered repeatedly by the faithful? How dare anyone try to understand that as any kind of logical cause for the rioting thereafter...
If there was a clone of India, I'd totally want Indian muslims to get their desired mughalistan with shariah implemented in full force: their islamic pardees, like Bunglingdesh and Pukestan are at the moment. (Where will their refugees migrate to then, like the Bangladeshi muslims do now?) Pukestan is such a success story after all. Yet Indian muslims have it in them to make muggerstan even better: another Afghanistan. The ultimate pardees on earth. That's something for them to aspire to. And they would totally deserve it.
Post 250 (Shankara): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What an irony? The paper suggests that hindus are terrorists, and <i>you are asking for paper protests instead of the traditional islamic reaction of burning embassies</i>. <b>Perhaps this shows how an unconverted Hindu thinks</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->True. And I hope there are fewer converted hindus. Hindus shouldn't be too eager to upstage/displace islam's number one ranking and international image, as the world's most violent and aggressive religion - so far islam's only other competitor constantly contending for the top place in this category has been christianity.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><i>I think</i> that Sunder's point (post 246) in referring to your attempt at correcting thisislondistan is precisely that unconverted Hindus are not terrorists. Basically, he used your statement (as that of a typical Hindu) - where you described writing to correct them instead of advocating/using christoislamic terrorism - as proof that Hinduism is completely unconnected with the islamoterror. Unconverted Hindus (that is, Hindus, the kind that have not become christoislamic) don't think or act the way that the no-longer-a-hindu convert to islam of the news item does.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Firstly, as a Muslim, I categorically condemn the intentions and actions of the Hindu raised terrorist who converted to Islam. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->How quickly this beloved of the islamic demiurge has responded in condemnation of terrorist activities. I hope he vocally expressed the same sentiments for his brethren's recent jihadi actions against the kafir Spanyards, Italians, Americans, Dutch, Germans, Danes and Brits? Or are his criticisms only reserved for the 'Hindu raised terrorist' who converted to islam. A disingenuous statement that, as it makes it sound like the subject was a terrorist before he saw the Light of Islam; while even the misleading title was more like 'Hindu had converted to terrorism (that is, islam) and planned to kill 1000s'.