[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]oh, dan, you constantly disappoint me with your lack of reading detail. I would never say that I know more about Islam than anybody else. I have never said this in the past.

However, where you and I have contentions is that I do not automatically take liberal historians words as gospel like you do.

The universal calls for violence in Islam stem from these facts: a) the violent verses in the koran b) the affirmation of these verses by the religious authorities of islam through the years. I’m sorry to tell you the facts, but that’s how it is interpreted in Islam. There are people in Islam who say that no the verses aren’t violent or no the verses are misinterpreted, but the fact of the matter is that in Islamic law, these verses are violent and are taught that way. If you could talk to those muslim leaders who wrote that letter, even they would say they have no authority to challenge established Islamic law.

That they ask for peace or request peace, it changes nothing in the core islamic text and the religious authorities who established islamic law.[/quote]

The bible suggests that death can be an appropriate remedy for violating the shabbas and likewise that death can be a just punishment for sodomites (though there is dispute as to that definition).

That does not necessarily make Christianity anti-work or anti-gay.

Quran sections 42:39 and 2:190 seem to say a lot about jihad (struggle) as distinct from quital (fighting).

Ash-Shaifi was the first to bless offensive struggle.
That did not occur until over a century after the Quran was completed.
It occurred when Shaifi was looking for a religious justification for expanding an empire.
I don’t really see how this is different from Constantine’s conversion or saying “praise the lord and pass the ammunition”.

Islam only has 5 basic principles:
-Creed/belief
-worship/prayer
-charity for the poor
-fasting/asceticism
-pilgrimage

Blowing shit up is doesn’t really come into play until it starts getting used as an inexpensive form of resistance.

You make it sound as if one must swear an allegiance to violence at the mosque.

Thats no more true of Muslims than it is of Americans.

In that sense there is a grain of truth in that just like most Muslims (or Christians or black people), if you saw your fellow Americans being held down (lets say a Chinese invasion), then you would probably take up arms to help out. At least I would.

Your simplistic monolithic version of Islam sounds like Glenn Beck and http://www.peopleofwalmart.com had a baby.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]oh, dan, you constantly disappoint me with your lack of reading detail. I would never say that I know more about Islam than anybody else. I have never said this in the past.

However, where you and I have contentions is that I do not automatically take liberal historians words as gospel like you do.

The universal calls for violence in Islam stem from these facts: a) the violent verses in the koran b) the affirmation of these verses by the religious authorities of islam through the years. I’m sorry to tell you the facts, but that’s how it is interpreted in Islam. There are people in Islam who say that no the verses aren’t violent or no the verses are misinterpreted, but the fact of the matter is that in Islamic law, these verses are violent and are taught that way. If you could talk to those muslim leaders who wrote that letter, even they would say they have no authority to challenge established Islamic law.

That they ask for peace or request peace, it changes nothing in the core islamic text and the religious authorities who established islamic law.[/quote]

The bible suggests that death can be an appropriate remedy for violating the shabbas and likewise that death can be a just punishment for sodomites (though there is dispute as to that definition).

That does not necessarily make Christianity anti-work or anti-gay.

Quran sections 42:39 and 2:190 seem to say a lot about jihad (struggle) as distinct from quital (fighting).

Ash-Shaifi was the first to bless offensive struggle.
That did not occur until over a century after the Quran was completed.
It occurred when Shaifi was looking for a religious justification for expanding an empire.
I don’t really see how this is different from Constantine’s conversion or saying “praise the lord and pass the ammunition”.

Islam only has 5 basic principles:
-Creed/belief
-worship/prayer
-charity for the poor
-fasting/asceticism
-pilgrimage

Blowing shit up is doesn’t really come into play until it starts getting used as an inexpensive form of resistance.

You make it sound as if one must swear an allegiance to violence at the mosque.

Thats no more true of Muslims than it is of Americans.

In that sense there is a grain of truth in that just like most Muslims (or Christians or black people), if you saw your fellow Americans being held down (lets say a Chinese invasion), then you would probably take up arms to help out. At least I would.

Your simplistic monolithic version of Islam sounds like Glenn Beck and http://www.peopleofwalmart.com had a baby.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]oh, dan, you constantly disappoint me with your lack of reading detail. I would never say that I know more about Islam than anybody else. I have never said this in the past.

However, where you and I have contentions is that I do not automatically take liberal historians words as gospel like you do.

The universal calls for violence in Islam stem from these facts: a) the violent verses in the koran b) the affirmation of these verses by the religious authorities of islam through the years. I’m sorry to tell you the facts, but that’s how it is interpreted in Islam. There are people in Islam who say that no the verses aren’t violent or no the verses are misinterpreted, but the fact of the matter is that in Islamic law, these verses are violent and are taught that way. If you could talk to those muslim leaders who wrote that letter, even they would say they have no authority to challenge established Islamic law.

That they ask for peace or request peace, it changes nothing in the core islamic text and the religious authorities who established islamic law.[/quote]

The bible suggests that death can be an appropriate remedy for violating the shabbas and likewise that death can be a just punishment for sodomites (though there is dispute as to that definition).

That does not necessarily make Christianity anti-work or anti-gay.

Quran sections 42:39 and 2:190 seem to say a lot about jihad (struggle) as distinct from quital (fighting).

Ash-Shaifi was the first to bless offensive struggle.
That did not occur until over a century after the Quran was completed.
It occurred when Shaifi was looking for a religious justification for expanding an empire.
I don’t really see how this is different from Constantine’s conversion or saying “praise the lord and pass the ammunition”.

Islam only has 5 basic principles:
-Creed/belief
-worship/prayer
-charity for the poor
-fasting/asceticism
-pilgrimage

Blowing shit up is doesn’t really come into play until it starts getting used as an inexpensive form of resistance.

You make it sound as if one must swear an allegiance to violence at the mosque.

Thats no more true of Muslims than it is of Americans.

In that sense there is a grain of truth in that just like most Muslims (or Christians or black people), if you saw your fellow Americans being held down (lets say a Chinese invasion), then you would probably take up arms to help out. At least I would.

Your simplistic monolithic version of Islam sounds like Glenn Beck and http://www.peopleofwalmart.com had a baby.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]oh, dan, you constantly disappoint me with your lack of reading detail. I would never say that I know more about Islam than anybody else. I have never said this in the past.

However, where you and I have contentions is that I do not automatically take liberal historians words as gospel like you do.

The universal calls for violence in Islam stem from these facts: a) the violent verses in the koran b) the affirmation of these verses by the religious authorities of islam through the years. I’m sorry to tell you the facts, but that’s how it is interpreted in Islam. There are people in Islam who say that no the verses aren’t violent or no the verses are misinterpreted, but the fact of the matter is that in Islamic law, these verses are violent and are taught that way. If you could talk to those muslim leaders who wrote that letter, even they would say they have no authority to challenge established Islamic law.

That they ask for peace or request peace, it changes nothing in the core islamic text and the religious authorities who established islamic law.[/quote]

The bible suggests that death can be an appropriate remedy for violating the shabbas and likewise that death can be a just punishment for sodomites (though there is dispute as to that definition).

That does not necessarily make Christianity anti-work or anti-gay.

Quran sections 42:39 and 2:190 seem to say a lot about jihad (struggle) as distinct from quital (fighting).

Ash-Shaifi was the first to bless offensive struggle.
That did not occur until over a century after the Quran was completed.
It occurred when Shaifi was looking for a religious justification for expanding an empire.
I don’t really see how this is different from Constantine’s conversion or saying “praise the lord and pass the ammunition”.

Islam only has 5 basic principles:
-Creed/belief
-worship/prayer
-charity for the poor
-fasting/asceticism
-pilgrimage

Blowing shit up is doesn’t really come into play until it starts getting used as an inexpensive form of resistance.

You make it sound as if one must swear an allegiance to violence at the mosque.

Thats no more true of Muslims than it is of Americans.

In that sense there is a grain of truth in that just like most Muslims (or Christians or black people), if you saw your fellow Americans being held down (lets say a Chinese invasion), then you would probably take up arms to help out. At least I would.

Your simplistic monolithic version of Islam sounds like Glenn Beck and http://www.peopleofwalmart.com had a baby.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=surveyor]oh, dan, you constantly disappoint me with your lack of reading detail. I would never say that I know more about Islam than anybody else. I have never said this in the past.

However, where you and I have contentions is that I do not automatically take liberal historians words as gospel like you do.

The universal calls for violence in Islam stem from these facts: a) the violent verses in the koran b) the affirmation of these verses by the religious authorities of islam through the years. I’m sorry to tell you the facts, but that’s how it is interpreted in Islam. There are people in Islam who say that no the verses aren’t violent or no the verses are misinterpreted, but the fact of the matter is that in Islamic law, these verses are violent and are taught that way. If you could talk to those muslim leaders who wrote that letter, even they would say they have no authority to challenge established Islamic law.

That they ask for peace or request peace, it changes nothing in the core islamic text and the religious authorities who established islamic law.[/quote]

The bible suggests that death can be an appropriate remedy for violating the shabbas and likewise that death can be a just punishment for sodomites (though there is dispute as to that definition).

That does not necessarily make Christianity anti-work or anti-gay.

Quran sections 42:39 and 2:190 seem to say a lot about jihad (struggle) as distinct from quital (fighting).

Ash-Shaifi was the first to bless offensive struggle.
That did not occur until over a century after the Quran was completed.
It occurred when Shaifi was looking for a religious justification for expanding an empire.
I don’t really see how this is different from Constantine’s conversion or saying “praise the lord and pass the ammunition”.

Islam only has 5 basic principles:
-Creed/belief
-worship/prayer
-charity for the poor
-fasting/asceticism
-pilgrimage

Blowing shit up is doesn’t really come into play until it starts getting used as an inexpensive form of resistance.

You make it sound as if one must swear an allegiance to violence at the mosque.

Thats no more true of Muslims than it is of Americans.

In that sense there is a grain of truth in that just like most Muslims (or Christians or black people), if you saw your fellow Americans being held down (lets say a Chinese invasion), then you would probably take up arms to help out. At least I would.

Your simplistic monolithic version of Islam sounds like Glenn Beck and http://www.peopleofwalmart.com had a baby.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Praying for God’s mercy and protection as a Christian is not the same as seeking God’s blessing to kill my enemies[/quote]

I understand this as the case Allan, but would the person dying at the hands of a soldier? If the last thing they saw was a cross hanging from the neck of their killer, what would they think? Is it really any different than a Christian hearing “Allahu Akbar” as his last words?

The point I’m trying to make is that how these symbols are interpreted depends entirely on where you’re coming from. So while hearing “Allahu Akbar” as you die is certainly a horrible thing for a Christian, so too is dying at the hands of a cross-bearing Christian for a Muslim — regardless of intent.[/quote]

Afx: As much as I’d like to disagree with you on this, I can’t. I’m reminded of German soldiers in WWI wearing belt buckles reading “Gott mit uns” (“God is with us”) as they invaded Belgium and then France in 1914.

Hitler repeatedly invoked God, and Germany’s “divine” mission (which, I guess, included killing all the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and mentally handicapped). Of course, Hitler also admitted privately that he did this solely to engage the German people and didn’t really believe it himself.

One of my COs was a hard shell Baptist who loved Jesus, and hated Communism (I hated Communism, too, but not as a Catholic, but as an American) as a result. This was the same guy that kicked off operations with the expression, “Let’s go break things and hurt people”.

War, by its nature, is a filthy, nasty business and between trying to get soldiers to kill and rationalizing that same killing, pretty much anything goes in the “motivational” department. As a Catholic and an American, I’m alternately horrified and proud of those two histories. But both the Mother Church and the US Government are made up of people and thus flawed and fallible. Just like I am.[/quote]

Okay.
Are you or are you not a great big heeb?

You know they can’t go to heaven, right?

In all seriousness, I don’t pretend to understand the personal moral calculus of joining a volunteer army in a time of peace and then becoming a combatant who (necessarily) is called upon to kill humans.

While we all have our price, it would take quite a bit to get me to go that route.

Still, I am thankful that there are people with guns that protect my rights.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Praying for God’s mercy and protection as a Christian is not the same as seeking God’s blessing to kill my enemies[/quote]

I understand this as the case Allan, but would the person dying at the hands of a soldier? If the last thing they saw was a cross hanging from the neck of their killer, what would they think? Is it really any different than a Christian hearing “Allahu Akbar” as his last words?

The point I’m trying to make is that how these symbols are interpreted depends entirely on where you’re coming from. So while hearing “Allahu Akbar” as you die is certainly a horrible thing for a Christian, so too is dying at the hands of a cross-bearing Christian for a Muslim — regardless of intent.[/quote]

Afx: As much as I’d like to disagree with you on this, I can’t. I’m reminded of German soldiers in WWI wearing belt buckles reading “Gott mit uns” (“God is with us”) as they invaded Belgium and then France in 1914.

Hitler repeatedly invoked God, and Germany’s “divine” mission (which, I guess, included killing all the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and mentally handicapped). Of course, Hitler also admitted privately that he did this solely to engage the German people and didn’t really believe it himself.

One of my COs was a hard shell Baptist who loved Jesus, and hated Communism (I hated Communism, too, but not as a Catholic, but as an American) as a result. This was the same guy that kicked off operations with the expression, “Let’s go break things and hurt people”.

War, by its nature, is a filthy, nasty business and between trying to get soldiers to kill and rationalizing that same killing, pretty much anything goes in the “motivational” department. As a Catholic and an American, I’m alternately horrified and proud of those two histories. But both the Mother Church and the US Government are made up of people and thus flawed and fallible. Just like I am.[/quote]

Okay.
Are you or are you not a great big heeb?

You know they can’t go to heaven, right?

In all seriousness, I don’t pretend to understand the personal moral calculus of joining a volunteer army in a time of peace and then becoming a combatant who (necessarily) is called upon to kill humans.

While we all have our price, it would take quite a bit to get me to go that route.

Still, I am thankful that there are people with guns that protect my rights.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Praying for God’s mercy and protection as a Christian is not the same as seeking God’s blessing to kill my enemies[/quote]

I understand this as the case Allan, but would the person dying at the hands of a soldier? If the last thing they saw was a cross hanging from the neck of their killer, what would they think? Is it really any different than a Christian hearing “Allahu Akbar” as his last words?

The point I’m trying to make is that how these symbols are interpreted depends entirely on where you’re coming from. So while hearing “Allahu Akbar” as you die is certainly a horrible thing for a Christian, so too is dying at the hands of a cross-bearing Christian for a Muslim — regardless of intent.[/quote]

Afx: As much as I’d like to disagree with you on this, I can’t. I’m reminded of German soldiers in WWI wearing belt buckles reading “Gott mit uns” (“God is with us”) as they invaded Belgium and then France in 1914.

Hitler repeatedly invoked God, and Germany’s “divine” mission (which, I guess, included killing all the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and mentally handicapped). Of course, Hitler also admitted privately that he did this solely to engage the German people and didn’t really believe it himself.

One of my COs was a hard shell Baptist who loved Jesus, and hated Communism (I hated Communism, too, but not as a Catholic, but as an American) as a result. This was the same guy that kicked off operations with the expression, “Let’s go break things and hurt people”.

War, by its nature, is a filthy, nasty business and between trying to get soldiers to kill and rationalizing that same killing, pretty much anything goes in the “motivational” department. As a Catholic and an American, I’m alternately horrified and proud of those two histories. But both the Mother Church and the US Government are made up of people and thus flawed and fallible. Just like I am.[/quote]

Okay.
Are you or are you not a great big heeb?

You know they can’t go to heaven, right?

In all seriousness, I don’t pretend to understand the personal moral calculus of joining a volunteer army in a time of peace and then becoming a combatant who (necessarily) is called upon to kill humans.

While we all have our price, it would take quite a bit to get me to go that route.

Still, I am thankful that there are people with guns that protect my rights.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Praying for God’s mercy and protection as a Christian is not the same as seeking God’s blessing to kill my enemies[/quote]

I understand this as the case Allan, but would the person dying at the hands of a soldier? If the last thing they saw was a cross hanging from the neck of their killer, what would they think? Is it really any different than a Christian hearing “Allahu Akbar” as his last words?

The point I’m trying to make is that how these symbols are interpreted depends entirely on where you’re coming from. So while hearing “Allahu Akbar” as you die is certainly a horrible thing for a Christian, so too is dying at the hands of a cross-bearing Christian for a Muslim — regardless of intent.[/quote]

Afx: As much as I’d like to disagree with you on this, I can’t. I’m reminded of German soldiers in WWI wearing belt buckles reading “Gott mit uns” (“God is with us”) as they invaded Belgium and then France in 1914.

Hitler repeatedly invoked God, and Germany’s “divine” mission (which, I guess, included killing all the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and mentally handicapped). Of course, Hitler also admitted privately that he did this solely to engage the German people and didn’t really believe it himself.

One of my COs was a hard shell Baptist who loved Jesus, and hated Communism (I hated Communism, too, but not as a Catholic, but as an American) as a result. This was the same guy that kicked off operations with the expression, “Let’s go break things and hurt people”.

War, by its nature, is a filthy, nasty business and between trying to get soldiers to kill and rationalizing that same killing, pretty much anything goes in the “motivational” department. As a Catholic and an American, I’m alternately horrified and proud of those two histories. But both the Mother Church and the US Government are made up of people and thus flawed and fallible. Just like I am.[/quote]

Okay.
Are you or are you not a great big heeb?

You know they can’t go to heaven, right?

In all seriousness, I don’t pretend to understand the personal moral calculus of joining a volunteer army in a time of peace and then becoming a combatant who (necessarily) is called upon to kill humans.

While we all have our price, it would take quite a bit to get me to go that route.

Still, I am thankful that there are people with guns that protect my rights.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=afx114][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Praying for God’s mercy and protection as a Christian is not the same as seeking God’s blessing to kill my enemies[/quote]

I understand this as the case Allan, but would the person dying at the hands of a soldier? If the last thing they saw was a cross hanging from the neck of their killer, what would they think? Is it really any different than a Christian hearing “Allahu Akbar” as his last words?

The point I’m trying to make is that how these symbols are interpreted depends entirely on where you’re coming from. So while hearing “Allahu Akbar” as you die is certainly a horrible thing for a Christian, so too is dying at the hands of a cross-bearing Christian for a Muslim — regardless of intent.[/quote]

Afx: As much as I’d like to disagree with you on this, I can’t. I’m reminded of German soldiers in WWI wearing belt buckles reading “Gott mit uns” (“God is with us”) as they invaded Belgium and then France in 1914.

Hitler repeatedly invoked God, and Germany’s “divine” mission (which, I guess, included killing all the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and mentally handicapped). Of course, Hitler also admitted privately that he did this solely to engage the German people and didn’t really believe it himself.

One of my COs was a hard shell Baptist who loved Jesus, and hated Communism (I hated Communism, too, but not as a Catholic, but as an American) as a result. This was the same guy that kicked off operations with the expression, “Let’s go break things and hurt people”.

War, by its nature, is a filthy, nasty business and between trying to get soldiers to kill and rationalizing that same killing, pretty much anything goes in the “motivational” department. As a Catholic and an American, I’m alternately horrified and proud of those two histories. But both the Mother Church and the US Government are made up of people and thus flawed and fallible. Just like I am.[/quote]

Okay.
Are you or are you not a great big heeb?

You know they can’t go to heaven, right?

In all seriousness, I don’t pretend to understand the personal moral calculus of joining a volunteer army in a time of peace and then becoming a combatant who (necessarily) is called upon to kill humans.

While we all have our price, it would take quite a bit to get me to go that route.

Still, I am thankful that there are people with guns that protect my rights.

[urbanrealtor]

THis is the part where surveyor says he knows more than anyone else about Islam and his knowledge predicted this.

This is akin to the people who read Germania by Tacitus and claim it predicts Hitler.

Truly dumb.

There are nominally Christian preacher who espouse violence and there is violence committed in the name of Christ.
The difference he cites is one of the interpretation of jurisprudence in the name of the lord.

The humor is the part about how the caliphates were so anti-Jewish. Remember he knows more than all those liberal historians.

I spent several weeks this summer roaming around Muslim castles in the old caliphate of Al-Andalus.
Its remarkable to see so many stars of David among Quranic verses.

Note: Sevilla (the last Iberian Muslim stronghold) was finally ceded to the Christians when the Christians swore a blood oath to the Muslim king that they would be tolerant of the Jews.

The inquisitions made the Moors uncomfortable about ceding their subjects over to genocidal conquerors.

Unsurprisingly, the Christians did not keep their word.

[urbanrealtor]

THis is the part where surveyor says he knows more than anyone else about Islam and his knowledge predicted this.

This is akin to the people who read Germania by Tacitus and claim it predicts Hitler.

Truly dumb.

There are nominally Christian preacher who espouse violence and there is violence committed in the name of Christ.
The difference he cites is one of the interpretation of jurisprudence in the name of the lord.

The humor is the part about how the caliphates were so anti-Jewish. Remember he knows more than all those liberal historians.

I spent several weeks this summer roaming around Muslim castles in the old caliphate of Al-Andalus.
Its remarkable to see so many stars of David among Quranic verses.

Note: Sevilla (the last Iberian Muslim stronghold) was finally ceded to the Christians when the Christians swore a blood oath to the Muslim king that they would be tolerant of the Jews.

The inquisitions made the Moors uncomfortable about ceding their subjects over to genocidal conquerors.

Unsurprisingly, the Christians did not keep their word.

[urbanrealtor]

THis is the part where surveyor says he knows more than anyone else about Islam and his knowledge predicted this.

This is akin to the people who read Germania by Tacitus and claim it predicts Hitler.

Truly dumb.

There are nominally Christian preacher who espouse violence and there is violence committed in the name of Christ.
The difference he cites is one of the interpretation of jurisprudence in the name of the lord.

The humor is the part about how the caliphates were so anti-Jewish. Remember he knows more than all those liberal historians.

I spent several weeks this summer roaming around Muslim castles in the old caliphate of Al-Andalus.
Its remarkable to see so many stars of David among Quranic verses.

Note: Sevilla (the last Iberian Muslim stronghold) was finally ceded to the Christians when the Christians swore a blood oath to the Muslim king that they would be tolerant of the Jews.

The inquisitions made the Moors uncomfortable about ceding their subjects over to genocidal conquerors.

Unsurprisingly, the Christians did not keep their word.

[Author]

Posts