tintingz:
Lol, I've told you snakes don't hunt for humans.

Yes, it is on record that large snakes have eaten human in several occasions. Normally lions don't hunt human but have equally eaten human on several occasions.

tintingz:
The Elephants and India part was a sarcasm to your claim, snakes are sacred to anambra people, Elephants are sacred to Hindus, you claim snakes don't hurt anambra people(funny) and I said elephants are friends of Hindus. I don't know how many times I will tell you this, do you have problem understanding a sarcasm or reductio ad absurdum?

Do not muddle things up to cover-up for your mistakes and ignorance. Quality of a good student is humility and readiness to learn and explore certain cultural practices. Pythons and human do share the same habitat harmoniously in Anambra, without any known incidence, for 1000s of years while Burmenese Pythons are threat to both human and the ecosystem. Until you logically explain the rationale behind this opposing and strange relationships, I wont take you serious. You claim that Elephants and human are friends, in India, as a statement of fact (from you) which you later repudiated and turn it into a sarcasm. Someone had already called you out for that misinformation; don't worry about that, you have committed no crime.

tintingz:
Something normal can be dangerous, Christianity dogma is a norm In a society and it is dangerous.

Do you equally imply that atheism can be normal but equally dangerous. Tell me the dangers of Christianity of this modern world and I will list tens of dangers of liberalism/atheism in any society. And FYI, the same west, who you are learning your atheistic values, was built, for thousands of years, on christian values, and not atheistic values.

tintingz:
The early crusaders that invades can back up their atrocities from the Bible, please where is the Atheists holy book these people used for their atrocities? Where is the Atheists book that said they should be killing people?

Atheism is not a religion hence has no religious code. The old soviet union, officially an atheist state, has no religious book but it is the most genocidal and ruthless empire in world history. Under communism, religious people are considered 'enemies of the state' and are marked for extermination. The British has no written constitution but they still maintain law and order. Our traditional African society has no book where laws and orders are written but the community understood the unwritten laws and abide by it, the same way atheist have their unwritten 'religious' codes.

tintingz:
Who created cultures?

You are not kindergarten pupil that is always inquisitive and will always ask his/her mum 'show me my teeth'.

tintingz:
How is homosexuality abnormal when it's part of sexual orientation, so animals that do it are also abnormal?

There is no culture where homosexuality is part of sexual orientation. The word 'sexual orientation' is a new and modern phrase coined by the atheist, the left and the liberals to normalize a socially and biologically abnormal lifestyle.

tintingz:
What do you say about natural disasters, is it abnormal? What about my nipples, is it abnormal for me since It is there for nothing? What about yawning, what is it for?

I am sorry, I don't know if you are taking me on on academic construct or if we are discussing social issues affecting the larger society. I am not here for philosophical or hypothetical discussions but real life challenges affecting the world and the larger society. I don't think I can continue with a mind that has deliberately choosed to be reprobate in the name of atheism.

tintingz:
There are gays that are moral and good than heterosexual people, so I don't understand what moral values they will destroy?

Mad people can be good and very gentle in most cases, that does not make madness normal.

tintingz:
They are not teaching them to be gays but informing them not to be homophobic and not to be depressed when you feel you're gay.

Tailoring an educational curriculum to be sympathetic to gay and transgendered people is a tacit way of promoting the lifestyle to the young and feeble minds. Over 95% of parents do not allow such evil to be taught their young children.

tintingz:
Homosexuality is not taught or is heterosexual taught?

Ok.

tintingz:
They need support, the government is doing it responsibility.

A drunkard who spent all his money on drinks need support. A gambler who wasted all his money on betting needs support. In atheism, according to your logic, one needs not take responsibility for his action. The government would rather be responsible for whatever action you willingly take. I like your logic bro.

tintingz:
What's wrong with abortion?

Check my initial response.

tintingz:
What's the solution to homosexuality?

Check my initial response.

tintingz:
Any source?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-christian-cakeshop-sued-discrimination
An insidious way of forcing everyone to accept an evil lifestyle that is contrary to a religious belief. You accused Christianity as being dangerous but atheist are suing Christians for refusing to acknowledge your evil lifestyle. Where is ones right to the second amendment and religious freedom when one is forcing you to do a job that your religion forbids? When last did a christian sue and atheist for not believing in Jesus?

tintingz:
I don't get.

Parents have to withdraw their children form schools when atheist and liberals try to change the school curriculum to accommodate gays and transgendered teachings, which are 100% against their beliefs and lifestyles. Parents, to the atheist, has no right to teach their children morals again.

tintingz:
I'm pro free speech, people should have rights to criticize any practice but there are some speech that are illegal in some countries like anti-racial speech, homophobic speech, even anti-religious speech, speech that can cause breach of peace in the society are illegal.

You are not pro free speech hence you sued me for my refusal to bake your 'gay cake'.

tintingz:
I can remember the issue of a woman being sued for speaking against Muhammad.

Off the issue.

tintingz:
You are just grasping at straws, who is destroying family values, so gays don't have family? Who construct marriage?

Your LGBT uncles and aunts, in the west, are destroying the family unit and the conservatives, especially in France, are fighting back.

tintingz:
So what morality do you have for gays?

Think for yourself for once and stop using academic script for public debate.

tintingz:
The point is whether there are gays or not it doesn't affect the development of a society, that's the point.

My last response on this issue. My response is not for you but for others who might be reading so that they can avoid dangerous people like you who have been programmed to destroy and disrupt societal order. 'Gayism' is not a sexual orientation the same way 'Transgendersim' is not a 'biological orientation'; it is rather a lifestyle that people deliberately and consciously choosed to live. A elementary biology has it that mammals are born as either a male or female, and sex is only between a man and a woman. Do not subscribe to the atheist and the liberals views which tend to redefine biology in order to reshape and reprogram the mind of the society, whose mission is the complete social and moral destruction of the society.

xxxxx

tintingz:
How is this a societal problem?

And you think adultery always cause these things?

Most of the time. Once one spouse commit adultery, even if their partner did not find out, the marriage begin to suffer. And this leads to all the problems I've cited.

How?

Ignorance is one reason why people commit adultery. For instance, a man may cheat because he ignorantly believes it is unnatural for men to stick with one partner. A woman may cheat because she she thinks of her husband not endowned enough to satisfy a woman.

tintingz:
Was that really the reason U.S sent troops to Iraq?

That's the point. If the US want to invade any nation, all they need is sell a pretext that people'll fall for. For Iraq, it was Weapon of Mass Destruction, for Afghanistan it was 9/11.

The ethnic and cultural replacement of Europeans by Muslims and non-Europeans is taking place today, and in my next post I'll cite mainstream sources proving that this replacement is carefully orchestrated or at least facilitated by sinister forces under the pretext of diversity, tolerance or taking in 'refugees'/'asylee'.

I don't know, maybe helped them with their economy growth.

See? There is not enough job for the locals, yet you think they need immigrants to come boost their economy?

If the immigrants are not offering anything positive to the society, UK or France would have stop them from entering their country.

Oh come on, If the west is being destroyed from within, you don't think its governments could've been infiltrated so that self destructive policies will be enforced?

So?

So, a rift is building, a point may be reached where in some of these countries bloody conflict will ensue over territory and rule. Just wait till Muslims make up as much as 40-50% of population.

How will they alter their culture? Most cultures were altered in history through conquest/invasion. Has the French culture altered, has the English culture altered? Each country protect their culture, they are not dummies.

Already, I've cited demolition of churches to build mosques. Some of these churches are centuries old tourist sites and their architecture are rarities and that reflect the history of ancient Europe or Europeans.

Another thing is limiting freedom of speech. Criticism of Muslims and Islam is increasingly censored now. Freedom of speech is increasingly cut back on to appeal to Muslims. I could go on.

In as much as I don't like the Islamic culture, everyone have the rights to adopt any culture as long as it's a positive one. Cultures are man-made.

I have no issue with people having their culture. But if they are immigrants to a place with different culture, they should respect that culture. But this is not about Muslims expressing their culture. It is about mass migration of Muslims to the west to overshadow western culture with Muslim culture. You got it?

true2god:
Yes, it is on record that large snakes have eaten human in several occasions. Normally lions don't hunt human but have equally eaten human on several occasions.

Which many occasions? Where are the many occasions?

Do not muddle things up to cover-up for your mistakes and ignorance. Quality of a good student is humility and readiness to learn and explore certain cultural practices. Pythons and human do share the same habitat harmoniously in Anambra, without any known incidence, for 1000s of years while Burmenese Pythons are threat to both human and the ecosystem. Until you logically explain the rationale behind this opposing and strange relationships, I wont take you serious. You claim that Elephants and human are friends, in India, as a statement of fact (from you) which you later repudiated and turn it into a sarcasm. Someone had already called you out for that misinformation; don't worry about that, you have committed no crime.

Oh my days, then we go back and forth again.

Ok, are snakes friends of anambra people?

Are anambra people living with snakes inside the bush?

Do you equally imply that atheism can be normal but equally dangerous. Tell me the dangers of Christianity of this modern world and I will list tens of dangers of liberalism/atheism in any society. And FYI, the same west, who you are learning your atheistic values, was built, for thousands of years, on christian values, and not atheistic values.

Does Atheism have dogmas? I would like to see how Atheism is dangerous.

Whether modern world or ancient world the Christianity dogmatism is dangerous, if Christians today live only by Bible laws the society will be filled of barbarism.

Atheism is not a religion hence has no religious code. The old soviet union, officially an atheist state, has no religious book but it is the most genocidal and ruthless empire in world history. Under communism, religious people are considered 'enemies of the state' and are marked for extermination. The British has no written constitution but they still maintain law and order. Our traditional African society has no book where laws and orders are written but the community understood the unwritten laws and abide by it, the same way atheist have their unwritten 'religious' codes.

Seriously? Under religious laws and leadership are there no atrocities committed by religious people using their religious books?

There's no Atheist book that command anybody to kill, nothing to justify their actions under Atheism, they did their evil act for there own greediness for power!

You are not kindergarten pupil that is always inquisitive and will always ask his/her mum 'show me my teeth'.

There is no culture where homosexuality is part of sexual orientation. The word 'sexual orientation' is a new and modern phrase coined by the atheist, the left and the liberals to normalize a socially and biologically abnormal lifestyle.

Lmao, sexual orientation is scientific and has been observed even in animals, it's not Atheistic.

Do you think culture should be some archaic practice?

I am sorry, I don't know if you are taking me on on academic construct or if we are discussing social issues affecting the larger society. I am not here for philosophical or hypothetical discussions but real life challenges affecting the world and the larger society. I don't think I can continue with a mind that has deliberately choosed to be reprobate in the name of atheism.

I guess you can't tell what normal is.

Mad people can be good and very gentle in most cases, that does not make madness normal.

Normal is inter-subjective, it's constructed by the society, if someone you called a mad person behave good and gentle and do what the law said then he/she is normal.

If you're in a mad country called madana and you behave differently then you're not normal to them.

What's normal can be different from scientific fact.

Tailoring an educational curriculum to be sympathetic to gay and transgendered people is a tacit way of promoting the lifestyle to the young and feeble minds. Over 95% of parents do not allow such evil to be taught their young children.

Yes most religious parents are homophobic but saying 95% parents that's inaccurate.

A drunkard who spent all his money on drinks need support. A gambler who wasted all his money on betting needs support. In atheism, according to your logic, one needs not take responsibility for his action. The government would rather be responsible for whatever action you willingly take. I like your logic bro.

This is strawman. What's the responsibility of the government?

Check my initial response.

Check my initial response.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-christian-cakeshop-sued-discrimination
An insidious way of forcing everyone to accept an evil lifestyle that is contrary to a religious belief. You accused Christianity as being dangerous but atheist are suing Christians for refusing to acknowledge your evil lifestyle. Where is ones right to the second amendment and religious freedom when one is forcing you to do a job that your religion forbids? When last did a christian sue and atheist for not believing in Jesus?

You committed fallacy and strawmaning.

Where does the article said the person Is an atheist?

The Philip man that bake was sued twice, he won the first case, while he's sued for the second time for going against their law. Didn't I also told how a woman was sued for speaking against Muhammad?

Mister man, I've said it that I'm pro free speech.

Atleast we didn't see the gay person calling for the bakers head, if it were in a society strictly theocratic, this gay person would have been killed by now.

Parents have to withdraw their children form schools when atheist and liberals try to change the school curriculum to accommodate gays and transgendered teachings, which are 100% against their beliefs and lifestyles. Parents, to the atheist, has no right to teach their children morals again.

How is this an argument?

You are not pro free speech hence you sued me for my refusal to bake your 'gay cake'.

Me or who??

Off the issue.

Your LGBT uncles and aunts, in the west, are destroying the family unit and the conservatives, especially in France, are fighting back.

Think for yourself for once and stop using academic script for public debate.

My last response on this issue. My response is not for you but for others who might be reading so that they can avoid dangerous people like you who have been programmed to destroy and disrupt societal order. 'Gayism' is not a sexual orientation the same way 'Transgendersim' is not a 'biological orientation'; it is rather a lifestyle that people deliberately and consciously choosed to live. A elementary biology has it that mammals are born as either a male or female, and sex is only between a man and a woman. Do not subscribe to the atheist and the liberals views which tend to redefine biology in order to reshape and reprogram the mind of the society, whose mission is the complete social and moral destruction of the society.

Are there gay animals, yes or no?

usermane:


Most of the time. Once one spouse commit adultery, even if their partner did not find out, the marriage begin to suffer. And this leads to all the problems I've cited.

How does this still affect the society?

Someone was caught of adultery and they divorce, please what effect does it have in the society?

Ignorance is one reason why people commit adultery. For instance, a man may cheat because he ignorantly believes it is unnatural for men to stick with one partner. A woman may cheat because she she thinks of her husband not endowned enough to satisfy a woman.

Humans are both monogamous and polygamous, which ever you choose they are natural but polygamy is more rampant, the only thing that limit some men to be monogamous is marriage, marriage is a contract between two people, if a man sleep with another woman then he has violated the contract reason there are other forms of marriages which her open marriage, polygamous marriage etc. So how is this ignorance the cause of this, when he's being natural?

As for you second example, there's no Ignorance there, a woman doesn't think her husband is not endowed to satisfy her, she knows because she has experienced/tested it.

usermane:


That's the point. If the US want to invade any nation, all they need is sell a pretext that people'll fall for. For Iraq, it was Weapon of Mass Destruction, for Afghanistan it was 9/11.

And did they take over Iraq?

Do you know the procedure before a foreign troop can enter a country?

The ethnic and cultural replacement of Europeans by Muslims and non-Europeans is taking place today, and in my next post I'll cite mainstream sources proving that this replacement is carefully orchestrated or at least facilitated by sinister forces under the pretext of diversity, tolerance or taking in 'refugees'/'asylee'.

Ok

See? There is not enough job for the locals, yet you think they need immigrants to come boost their economy?

I'm sure you know what what foreign trade and partnership is.

Oh come on, If the west is being destroyed from within, you don't think its governments could've been infiltrated so that self destructive policies will be enforced?

I don't get you.

So, a rift is building, a point may be reached where in some of these countries bloody conflict will ensue over territory and rule. Just wait till Muslims make up as much as 40-50% of population.

How can that happen?

Already, I've cited demolition of churches to build mosques. Some of these churches are centuries old tourist sites and their architecture are rarities and that reflect the history of ancient Europe or Europeans.

Does cultures changes or not?

Take Africa for example.

And do you think the west were originally Christians?

Another thing is limiting freedom of speech. Criticism of Muslims and Islam is increasingly censored now. Freedom of speech is increasingly cut back on to appeal to Muslims. I could go on.

Yes, I have stated this in true2god response.

Most of the country that reduce free speech on Muslims or islam are doing it to maintain peace. I understand where they are coming from.

I have no issue with people having their culture. But if they are immigrants to a place with different culture, they should respect that culture. But this is not about Muslims expressing their culture. It is about mass migration of Muslims to the west to overshadow western culture with Muslim culture. You got it?

So you believe the west can be Islamic state in the future?

xxxx

tintingz:
And did they take over Iraq?

The point is that they shouldn't have invaded Iraq, going by the U.N. criminal act, but they did any way. If they wanted to take over they could just have done so.

Do you know the procedure before a foreign troop can enter a country?

Why? The problem is that you think the laws that govern will check against war crimes but they won't. Corrupt regimes and governments will often find their way around those laws when is suits their selfish interests.

I'm sure you know what what foreign trade and partnership is.

No nessessity for mass immigration in order to boost foreign trade and partnership.

How can that happen?

Just look up the history of Arab-Israeli conflict.

Does cultures changes or not?

Take Africa for example.

And do you think the west were originally Christians?

This is cultural replacement, not mere changing. And yes, the west were not always Christians but the west became Christians. They didn't import mass population of Christian migrants into their midst.

Most of the country that reduce free speech on Muslims or islam are doing it to maintain peace. I understand where they are coming from.

Yeah, and that is a good thing? Is it right that Muhammad should not be criticized for the sake of peace? How different is that from blasphemy laws?

So you believe the west can be Islamic state in the future?

Yes.

If you don't know this already, then you're not keeping tabs on international political and social discourse.

tintingz:
How does this still affect the society?

Someone was caught of adultery and they divorce, please what effect does it have in the society?

I mentioned the fruits of adultery - divorce, single mothers, broken homes. These things destroy the nuclear family. The nuclear family is the building block of the nation and society.

Humans are both monogamous and polygamous, which ever you choose they are natural but polygamy is more rampant, the only thing that limit some men to be monogamous is marriage, marriage is a contract between two people, if a man sleep with another woman then he has violated the contract reason there are other forms of marriages which her open marriage, polygamous marriage etc. So how is this ignorance the cause of this, when he's being natural?

You don't understand my words.
Do you think monogamy is unnatural? Some men do. And that is why they cheat.

As for you second example, there's no Ignorance there, a woman doesn't think her husband is not endowed to satisfy her, she knows because she has experienced/tested it.

Oh My God! You're one of them. You should read more on the mechanism and dynamics of sex.

usermane:


The point is that they shouldn't have invaded Iraq, going by the U.N. criminal act, but they did any way. If they wanted to take over they could just have done so.

They can't take over Iraq, that will be violating the U.N act.

Why? The problem is that you think the laws that govern will check against war crimes but they won't. Corrupt regimes and governments will often find their way around those laws when is suits their selfish interests.

There must be an approval from a country in need of help before any foreign military troop can intervene.

You can't just bash in a country and start fighting wars in this 21st century.

No nessessity for mass immigration in order to boost foreign trade and partnership.

Ofcos yes but we can't rule out some immigrants contributed to a country development.

Just look up the history of Arab-Israeli conflict.

Arabs and Isrealis are sisters, they share borders.

What you're yet to tell me is, you mean some immigrants will be fighting for territory in countries like England or U.S or France?

This is cultural replacement, not mere changing. And yes, the west were not always Christians but the west became Christians. They didn't import mass population of Christian migrants into their midst.

The west were pagans till some Christian crusade groups came to that region.

Where do you read they were no mass immigrants then, it may probably be an invasion by the crusade militia.

The point is culture changes, Christianity has not always be the western faith.

Yeah, and that is a good thing? Is it right that Muhammad should not be criticized for the sake of peace? How different is that from blasphemy laws?

Ofcos Muhammad should be criticize, I'm pro free speech.

Like I said countries that rule in favor of Muslims on free speech knew Muslims are more violence when it comes to their beliefs, they can't risk that, they need to protect their people and country.

You can remember the Danish cartoon and some other events?

Yes.

If you don't know this already, then you're not keeping tabs on international political and social discourse.

The West can become an Islamic state? Well anything is possible but I think there's no chance for that in this 21st century, with the enlightenment, the increase of irreligious and Islamaphobic on Muslims in the west, it's highly not possible.

Infact from my observation, I can see Muslim countries adopting more of the western culture, I can see muslims becoming more irreligious in the nearest future, the more they have access to the internet the more the chances.

Let's Saudi approve freedom of religion, speech and expression and see people leaving that religion.

I mentioned the fruits of adultery - divorce, single mothers, broken homes. These things destroy the nuclear family. The nuclear family is the building block of the nation and society.

I have said it that marriage is a human construct as a form of contract between two people, no marriage no adultery, a family can exist without marriage and beget a society e.g animals, ants.

A divorce does not mean there can't be a family or a society or form of bond.

So assume humans don't have concept of marriage but open relationship, will there be society?

You don't understand my words.
Do you think monogamy is unnatural? Some men do. And that is why they cheat.

You don't understand mine either.

If a man said monogamy is unnatural yes he maybe ignorant here since he generalized it but at the end he is being natural if he's polygamous, he's not polygamous because he's Ignorant, he's polygamous because it's natural for him.

Oh My God! You're one of them. You should read more on the mechanism and dynamics of sex.

Some people get bored and tired having sex with a long time partner, in fact most people are they just pretend. This does not mean they are Ignorant of their sexuality.

tintingz:
They can't take over Iraq, that will be violating the U.N act.



There must be an approval from a country in need of help before any foreign military troop can intervene.

You can't just bash in a country and start fighting wars in this 21st century.

Yes, you can. Look at the Syrian civil war. Look again at Iraq invasion in 2003. If you want to invade any country, all you need is backing of the global elites, and lots of propaganda to deceive the masses into acquiescence. The law is an ass.

Ofcos yes but we can't rule out some immigrants contributed to a country development.

What is it those immigrants contribute that the locals couldn't have contributed themselves? Europeans don't need foreign workers as they are developed countries, particularly not workers from developing countries like in the middle east and Africa.

The idea of western countries taking in immigrants to contribute to their economy is kind of exploitation. Those immigrants could've been better off in their native countries developing their economies.

Arabs and Isrealis are sisters, they share borders.

Not before 1948. There was mass immigration of non-Arab Jews to Palestine after the Great war. I urge you to look further into this and see the strong parallels with Europe and Muslim immigration and population today.

What you're yet to tell me is, you mean some immigrants will be fighting for territory in countries like England or U.S or France?

Absolutely.

The west were pagans till some Christian crusade groups came to that region.

OK, my bad. But we shouldn't welcome cultural encroachment of today's western culture by Muslim culture because cultural replacement has been part of human history.

Where do you read they were no mass immigrants then, it may probably be an invasion by the crusade militia.

Even if there was mass immigration then, the point is that it was wrong then as it is now. Do you think it is fair to mass immigrate Hausas from the north to the South South?

The point is culture changes, Christianity has not always be the western faith.

Your point is that since cultural changes have happened in the past, we should welcome any change happening today, regardless of the measures employed to effect such changes. This is rather an unappreciative view of culture and heritage, especially when you compare Islamic culture with the western culture of today, which is not just Christianity.

Of cos Muhammad should be criticize, I'm pro free speech.

Like I said countries that rule in favor of Muslims on free speech knew Muslims are more violence when it comes to their beliefs, they can't risk that, they need to protect their people and country.

You can remember the Danish cartoon and some other events?

If anything all of these proves the problem with mass immigration of people into a region with different ethnicity and culture. I believe you see this kind of cultural changes are not ideal. This is backward cultural shift.

The West can become an Islamic state? Well anything is possible but I think there's no chance for that in this 21st century, with the enlightenment, the increase of irreligious and Islamaphobic on Muslims in the west, it's highly not possible.

Infact from my observation, I can see Muslim countries adopting more of the western culture, I can see muslims becoming more irreligious in the nearest future, the more they have access to the internet the more the chances.

Let's Saudi approve freedom of religion, speech and expression and see people leaving that religion.

Even if an Islamic state is not formed eventually, the cost of such mass immigration will be borne by westerners in terms of dilution of their culture as well as significant degree of ethnic replacement. Compare say the culture and ethnic make up of London today vs 40 years ago.

usermane:
Introduction - A brief look at Christchurch Mosque shooter.

Who still remember the Christchurch mosque massacre early this year, where a Caucasian youth open fire and laid to waste 50 Muslims on a Friday Jumaah service in New Zealand?

Although the Muslims bemoaned Islamophobia, this white shooter admit in his manifesto that he had nothing against Islam, but was concerned about the demographic shift threatening to replace whites in New Zealand with South Asians and African migrants, many of whom turned out to be Muslims. In other words, he wants New Zealand to remain predominantly white, just as Pakistan is predominantly brown and Somali is predominantly black.

Consider the Christchurch mosque. This was formerly a church, that had been demolished and a mosque was now built in its place. In the middle ages, when Muslims conquered a Christian territory, they demolished churches or sacred sites of Christians and built mosques in their place. The most famous case of this is Masjid al aqsa in Jerusalem.

Today Muslims don't even need to conquer New Zealand or Germany, Muslim governments like the Wahhabis of Saudi or the neo-ottomans of Turkey can just fund the purchase of sites and erect any mosque in almost anywhere in the western world. Destruction of sacred Christian sites to build Muslim sites is in fact erosion of a significant relics and history of the west, Christianity. It is an aggressive and insulting act associated with invasion.

Oh, here you are. I just asked of you to check on you. How's life now?. You have been absent. I don't have time checking on people's monikers up and down. Anyways, regarding this situation you cited, you have said caucasian shooter had no problem with islam. He was concerned about color of your skin or demography. In that case, your attempt to make this look religious conflict may be inappropriate. Dont you think?.

@bold, yes, you are right. Isnt that better than to forcefully take it plus the country has power to reject to sell any part of the country to Saudi Arabia?. Do you agree with this?. If they sell it to them it means they do so in their best interest. No one forces them. Am i right?. So I see no issue here, sir. Let me give you an example. I heard story about Vatican and King Fahd of Saudi back in the days. It was said that the Pope ( i believe John 2) invited King Fahd to Vatican for "friendly & healthy relationship" btw Vatican and muslim world. But Vatican real intent was actually not revealed until their plan was later bursted. What happened was when King Fahd visited vatican to cut the story, he was offered huge land to build masjid.

Unknown to King Fahd, he happily accepted the offer. Remember this huge land was given for free from the story I heard. King Fahd was excited and accepted the offer. Paperwork was done or almost done when it was Vatican's turn to visit Saudi Arabia. He too welcomed Pope wholeheartedly to homeland of Islam. After their private or official talks, Pope said "when you visited our christian heartland we gave you land for free. Won't you also return favor by giving us hectares of land for free in Mecca to build church?". Immediately King Fahd sensed a trap was set for him and rejected Pope's demand. Not only that, he said (according to the story) that if "you gave me free land just so I could give you land in Mecca in return, then i don't need your land not even for any price. Report says that Pope even demanded to buy this property but King Fahd rejected him.

What I am trying to derive from here is that,

* Pope's intention was questionable and deceitful

* Any authority in any country has the right to reject to sell any part of their land in their own country.


So if Saudi would buy space in ZN and they sell it, that's not Saudi's fault. No one coerce ZN to sell it. And if they sell land to Saud and Saudi builds masjid on it, it is Saudi right to do that provided they obtain necessary permits and follow local laws. If this is the case, no White man has the right to lay racial prejudice on the society. What the guy did was outright damn wrong, period. Meanwhile, I am sure the land where the masjid is built was purchased, whether church was there before or not by muslims community. If they sold the church to them there is no blame on muslims. In UK and US, churches are sold to muslims all the time and muslims convert these places to masajid.

So many funny and delusional comments in this thread!

usermane:
Muslims as tools of the western far Leftists

When we think of warfare, we think of bullets, airstrikes, bomb blasts, bloodshed, property damage, and death. We think of Palestine, Iraq or Syria. But there is a certain type of war going on in the west and its weapon is mass immigration of non-Europeans to European regions in the name of diversity, multiculturalism, or supplementation the declining birthrate of ethnic Europeans.

Many Muslims today would not pass an offer to migrate to the west. To these Muslims, moving to the west is securing a better future for themselves or their families. I was one of such Muslim in the past but I changed my mind because I have seen a demographic/cultural war has been set off in the west by Zionists and Communists to destroy the west from within, and their chosen weapon this time are Muslims and non-Europeans.

I love your comment here. You have eyes with which you see.. it is called "internal eye or eye of the heart". You are very correct. But do we really blame immigrants?. Nope.

usermane:
It has been long postulated that Islam is the future of Europe. We did not know what this meant at the time, but from the mass migration of Muslims into Europe, the rapid population boom of Muslims in Europe, to the criminalization of 'Islamophobia', and to the maligning of Christian and European identity and history, we are in the last days of western civilization.

ummm, this is deep but I don't get the idea of maligning Christianity when in fact, European Christians voluntarily lose interest in religion, especially Christianity.

The enemies of the west at this point have taken Muslims as allies to help displace Christianity with Islam and replace Europeans with non Europeans. Which is why we have the White house hosting Iftaar every Ramadan, politicians condoning niqab & female genital mutilation in the name of freedom of religious expression; while same politicians prefer to say 'Happy holiday' instead of 'Happy Christmas', or refers to the victims of Sri Lankan bombings as 'Easter worshippers', rather than 'Christians'.

Well, I get your point here but it seems they realized they have been fooling themselves about christianity in the first place.

Now this unholy alliance of the enemies of the west - the far Left- and Muslims is built upon a shared goal to destroy the west. The far Left and the Muslims have nothing else in common. Once the west has fallen, the Left and the Muslims will immediately turn against each other.

Perfect. I couldn't have said it better. Where did you learn this from?. The engineers behind these things are Judeo-Christian Zionist alliance.

usermane:
To most Muslims the conservative parties that want to keep Islam and its archaic laws at least from overthrow of secular democracy and laws, is the enemy. Trump, of the conservative party, the republicans, has no support in the Muslim community because he promised to end migration from Muslim countries, while Hilary who wanted to increase immigration from Muslim countries is the friend of Muslims or at least, the lesser of the two evils.

Trump is the enemy of Muslims because he moved the US embassy to Jerusalem but Obama is the friend of Muslims because he refused to use the term 'Radical Islam', even though he bombed 7 Muslim countries. Obama, the democrat became the first US president to legalize homosexual marriage, a union that majority of Muslims abhor. In near future, another democrat president will legalize child marriage and he will be elected by Muslims.

they messed everything up back and forth, forth and back

usermane:
In 2019, Ilhan Omar became the second Muslim and first Muslim female member of US house of Rep., of Minnesota. Ilhan Omar of the democratic party is from Somalia. Her fellow democrat, Obama and his administration launched airstrikes and military raids in Somalia.

Obama administration led the manhunt and killing of Osama bin Laden, a man whom a lot of Muslims see as an hero. Muslims voted Obama because they hated the republican George Bush for attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, but Obama despite promising peace continued the war legacy of Bush.

Summary:

Muslims in the west support the left and thus the liberal anarchists in order to further their selfish goals. They will vote the liberal parties even if such parties protect harams like homosexuality, transsexualism or late term abortion in exchange for tolerance and special privileges for Muslims. This is just one of the means by which Muslims help destroy the west. I will deal with other means in future.

Let's just say it is all by Allaah's Grand Plan. He alone will enforce His Will.

true2god:
I think there is an attempt by some political elements (the atheist left and the liberals) in the US and Europe to destroy the west. It is possible that the sins of the west has become so great that the great empire is about to be overthrown. What seems as evil (like homosexuality, lesbianism, transgender, bestiality, murder, etc) are normalized now and even well protected. The west is currently facing a serious social engineering process whereby Christianity is seen as abnormal while atheist and LGBT group are now normalized, and Islam is highly promoted (in the west) to counter and destroy christian values, upon which the west was built.

The cosmic forces that controls the universe, to me, will destroy the west because of their evils, wars, exploitation of the poor, slavery and Neo-colonization of in/of the so-called third world countries. Just as all great powers (the old Babylon, the old Egypt, the old assyrians, the roman empire, etc) had fallen, the west is also in decline morally hence, as part of God's punishment, Islam might take over the west in the future. The recent LGBT-CNN Democrat National Convention presidential debate will give one an insight into what the future holds for the US and the west in general.

There is no stopping of Muslim migration into the west; it is part of the grand plan for the future destruction of the west. The west created a humanitarian disaster in the Muslim world in order to fill Europe with Arab/Persian population. It a a sort of population replacement strategy being employed by the 'Soros' and the Rothschild-controlled western 'democracy'.

i am just loving the way you and op spoke here. I said these things some 6yrs ago on the pretext of islamic eschatology. So what you guys are saying here is pretty much subject of Islam eschatology. No wonder Christian authority in Nigeria work tirelessly to build up christianity in the country at the expense of Islam and Muslims and poor masses. Unfortunately their form of CHRISTIANITY resembles christianity of the West and it is bound to fall eventually.

usermane:


You didn't mention the Zionists or Jewish supremacists. The primary enemies of Christians are not liberal atheists. They are Jewish, of course not all Jews, but Talmudic Jews, Jewish supremacists. It is time for Christians to stop speaking of Judea-Christian values and supporting Israel.

See you. This is what I warned them of during our debates in 2015. I talked at length about Judeo-Christian Zionist alliance which is hell bent on destroying things.

Recently Benjamin Netanyahoo praised Christians around the world for their support for Jewish state at the time when Trump announced "deal of the century" about Jerusalem which was thrown out by many Arab countries.

These Zionists are in Nigeria. They are pastors, Bishops, Reverends and are engineerers of BH. I heard unconfirmed story that rector of the RCCG donated ambulance vehicles to Israel in an attempt to strengthen Nigerian CHRISTIANs relations with israel. Christians in Nigeria support Israel no matter what. They think it is a holy state of Israel of King David and Solomon. They failed to realize this one is imposter. So Nigerian CHRISTIANs authority, CAN & RCCG are taking Nigerian CHRISTIANs for their last ride to eternal damnation.

.....