Go down


Post  Admin on Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:27 am



One member of Islam, Iftikhar Ahmad , said, “Christian world needs to stop pointing venomous fingers at the Muslim world. Starting with the Crusades, the Inquisition, the wholesale slaughter of native Americans, the religious wars in Europe...Christianity hasn't exactly been a shiny example…” on Facebook on 10/23/2013.

Yes, some counterfeit followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ have committed these evil acts, but genuine true followers of his have not. He deliberately fails to distinguish between the two different groups. An article, Discourse On Determining True Christians from Counterfeit Ones:” says, “Today many claim to be followers of Christ, but many individuals and groups that make that claim are really not his followers as they are not doing righteous works but evil ones.

One Hindu who writes under the pseudonym succinctly noted this fact by saying, "he difference is that the bible alone has caused the deaths of millions of people in the last 2000 years from pogroms, inquisitions and so on. The hundreds of Hindu religious texts put together have not caused any deaths worth mentioning. [source - a Hindu writing under the pseudonym of The Armchair Analyst]. Now remember, the Bible at Isaiah 9:6-7 calls Jesus (Yeshua), "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this." (American Standard Version: ASV); and this Prince of Peace said at Matthew 22:36-40, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 And he said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second like [unto it] is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 40 On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets." (ASV).

Thus, clearly to be a true follower of Christ an individual or an organization must be seeking after peace and living their neighbors, and starting wars against them and/or murdering them would definitely show they were NOT true Christians…” [source - retrieved from on 10/23 /2013]. Clearly, the counterfeit followers are the ones NOT seeking peace.

Now Islam has been violent from its inception as shown in, “Blood, Blood, and More Blood, the Story of Islam,” which states, “…Islam has spilled blood since its foundation in the Seventh Century. Let's look at its very beginnings, a raid on a camel caravan with spilling of blood.
<<<" Raid on B. Qudah at Dhat al-Salasil by Amr b. al-As - September, 629CE
Having suffered a terrible defeat in the hands of B. Qudah at Dhat Atlah, coupled with the ignoble retreat of the Muslim army from Mu'tah, Muhammad's prestige was greatly affected. It is said that he also received intelligence that a number of tribes, including B. Qudah were now preparing to attack Medina. To salvage his reputation he now empowered Amr b. al-As, the new convert of Islam, to push for a decisive raid on the stubborn B. Qudah tribe. Amr b. al-As was very furious that some of these tribes had taken the side of the Byzantine party during the Mu'tah battle. It was time to punish them-Muhammad determined.

So with three hundred (300) men and thirty horses, Amr b. al-As set out to decimate the rebellious B. Qudah who were settled at Dhat al-Salasil. It was at a distance of ten days march from Medina. Amr b. al-As' grandmother (i.e., the mother of al-As b. Wail, the father of Amr b. al-As) was a woman from Qudah or Bali tribe and Muhammad sent Amr b. al-As to convert her and her people to Islam by force. When Amr arrived at Dhat al-Salasil he found that the enemy had heavily outnumbered the Muslims…” [source - retrieved from on 10/23 /2013], and concludes, “…Islam has never changed its SOP and is continuing to spill innocent blood just as it did in its beginning back in 628 CE. Yet this religion that has the distinction of spilling more blood, blood, blood, than any other entity has the nerve to claim it is a peaceful religion. They must define peaceful quite different than anyone else including the dictionary.

Whereas, the founder of Christianity, the Son of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, Jesus (Yeshua), was the "Prince of Peace" and never committed violence against anyone, but preached per Matthew 22:37-40, "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. " (Authorized King James Bible; AV). Quite a contrast between the blood letting SOP of Islam, as preached by Muhammad (pbuh), compared to genuine (true) Christianity preached by Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Really shows which group is truly peaceful.

Footnote, Much blood shed was committed by apostate (counterfeit) so called Christians who to some degree emulated Islam, but of this group, Jesus (Yeshua) said at Matthew 7:23, "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. " (Authorized King James Bible; AV)…” [source - retrieved from on 10/23 /2013]


Reality is that Islam caused the Crusades. Iftikhar is NOT telling the truth. An article, “Evil Empire Out To Remove Freedom and Control Others”, states, “…ISLAM DOES NOT WANT TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS WRONGS:

Before looking at the facts including who was responsible for the Crusades, First a definition of terms to assist the understanding of all.

Cause = Something that brings about an effect or result [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].

Effect = 1. To cause to come into being, 2. To bring about often by surmounting obstacles: accomplish, b. to put into effect. [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].

Result = 1. Something that results as a consequence, issue, or conclusion, [from a cause or action] [source - Webster New Collegiate Dictionary].

Therefor a cause is something that gives rise to effects or results as a consequence. For example, if you light the fuse leading to sticks of dynamite the effect or consequence will be an explosion. How big or destructive the explosion depends on the placement of the dynamite. In an open field, the effect or consequences will be minimal, but in a crowded building the, the effect or consequences could be very significant.

Now this simple principle of cause and effect - the consequences- is something Islam has never been able to understand since the days of Muhammad (pbuh). They have always assumed they can take actions against others, the cause, and that the effects or consequences should be trivial. Of course throughout history this has NOT proved to be the case.

So what does Islam do? They try and blame others for the effects or consequences of their actions since they do NOT want to assume responsibility for them. But he/she who causes something, i.e., lights the fuse is totally responsible for all the effects and/or consequences of his/her actions.

They do not understand they are responsible for what they cause, the effect or results, the consequences. We will now look at an early example in history on this.


Most of Islam blames the apostate (counterfeit) Christians for the Crusades, but in reality Islam caused the Crusades which were the effect or result or consequences of a malicious wrong act by Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah. How so? Well simple, in 1009 this Caliph sacked the pilgrimage hospice in Jerusalem and destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It was later rebuilt by the Byzantine emperor, but this event was remembered in Europe and was the spark or cause for the crusades.

Now let's look at what an encyclopedia says, <<<" This background in the Christian West must be matched with that in the Muslim East. Muslim presence in the Holy Land goes back to the initial Arab conquest of Palestine [[They stole land that did not belong to them from the Hebrews and others.]]in the 7th century. This did not interfere much with pilgrimage to Christian holy sites or the security of monasteries and Christian communities in the Holy Land of Christendom, and western Europeans were not much concerned with the loss of far-away Jerusalem when, in the ensuing decades and centuries, they were themselves faced with invasions by Muslims and other hostile non-Christians such as the Vikings and Magyars. However, the Muslim armies' successes were putting strong pressure on the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire.

A turning point in western attitudes towards the east came in the year 1009, when the Fatimid caliph of Cairo, al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, had the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem destroyed. His successor permitted the Byzantine Empire to rebuild it under stringent circumstances, and pilgrimage was again permitted, but many stories began to be circulated in the West about the cruelty of Muslims toward Christian pilgrims; these stories then played an important role in the development of the crusades later in the century.

The immediate cause of the First Crusade was Alexius I's appeal to Pope Urban II for mercenaries to help him resist Muslim advances into territory of the Byzantine Empire. In 1071, at the Battle of Manzikert, the Byzantine Empire had been defeated, and this defeat led to the loss of all but the coastlands of Asia Minor (modern Turkey)[[Another land theft.]]. Although the East-West Schism was brewing between the Catholic Western church and the Greek Orthodox Eastern church, Alexius I expected some help from a fellow Christian. However, the response was much larger, and less helpful, than Alexius I desired, as the Pope called for a large invasion force to not merely defend the Byzantine Empire but also retake Jerusalem.

When the First Crusade was preached in 1095, the Christian princes of northern Iberia had been fighting their way out of the mountains of Galicia and Asturias, the Basque Country and Navarre, with increasing success, for about a hundred years. The fall of Moorish Toledo to the Kingdom of León in 1085 was a major victory, but the turning points of the Reconquista still lay in the future. The disunity of the Muslim emirs was an essential factor, and the Christians, whose wives remained safely behind, were hard to beat: they knew nothing except fighting, they had no gardens or libraries to defend, and they worked their way forward through alien territory populated by infidels, where the Christian fighters felt they could afford to wreak havoc. All these factors were soon to be replayed in the fighting grounds of the East. Spanish historians have traditionally seen the Reconquista [[Retaking of lands that belonged to them.]] as the molding force in the Castilian character, with its sense that the highest good was to die fighting for the Christian cause of one's country.

While the Reconquista was the most prominent example of Christian war against Muslim conquests, it is not the only such example. The Norman adventurer Robert Guiscard had conquered the "toe of Italy," Calabria, in 1057 and was holding what had traditionally been Byzantine territory against the Muslims of Sicily. The maritime states of Pisa, Genoa and Catalonia were all actively fighting Islamic strongholds in Majorca and Sardinia, freeing the coasts of Italy and Catalonia from Muslim raids. Much earlier, of course, the Christian homelands of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, and so on had been conquered by Muslim armies [[More land grabs by Islam that should be returned]]. [b]This long history of losing territories to a religious enemy, as well as a powerful pincer movement on all of Western Europe, created a powerful motive to respond to Byzantine emperor Alexius I's call for holy war to defend Christendom, and to recapture the lost lands, starting at the most important one of all, Jerusalem itself.">> [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]

So as can readily be seen, the actual cause of the Crusades was the land grabbing [[Stealing.]] by Islam from both the Hebrews and the apostate (counterfeit) Christians, and the final straw was the malicious sacking of the pilgrimage hospice in Jerusalem and the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

Interesting side note, the Hebrews when they retook some of their lands, the whole of Palestine really rightly being theirs, permitted the Al-Aqsa Mosque to remain on their former temple site showing a compassion very different than that exhibited by the land grabbing [[Stealing.]] members of Islam such as Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah. Of course, as we all know, the land grabbers [[Stealers.]] hated the Hebrews for rightly wanting their land back that had been stolen from them centuries earlier by Islam. But of course they do NOT LIKE the effect or consequence of having to pay for their wrong act, the cause, land grabbing of others land, most notably that of the Hebrews…” [source - retrieved from or on 10/23/2013]


Iftakhar is trying to mislead, read reality in the article, “Islam, Violent From The Beginning Using India as An Example.” It states, “…Many religions start out very peaceful, but later branch off into violence such as Christianity which started out on the principal of love and truth, but in the 4 th. Century took two very different paths. One path, went apostate and became very violent and accepted false pagan doctrine, the larger path, called apostate (counterfeit) Christians, and one path remained true to the original teachings of Christ of love and truth, the genuine (true) Christians.

However, some religions start out with a violent charismatic leader and remain violent. A good example if Islam.


Satyameva Jayate, Truth Alone Triumphs, as sponsored by Jai Maharaj, stated the following, <<"
Genocide committed in the name of Allah: 3,000,000 Bangladeshi Hindus Killed during the Pakistan-Bangladesh war in 1971. From 1894 to 1896 Abdul Hamid, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, killed 150,000 Armenian Christians. In India, Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur along with his disciples was burned to death by the Moghul ruler Aurangzeb in 1675. Another Sikh, Bhai Mati Das was sawn into right and left halves while he was still alive. In July 1974, 4,000 Christians living in Cyprus were killed by Fahri Koroturk, president of Turkey and his Islamic army. From 1843 to 1846 10,000 Assyrian Christians including women and children were massacred by the Muslims. From 1915 to 1918 750,000 Assyrians were killed in the name of Islamic Jihad. In 1933 thousands of Assyrian villagers were murdered by the Iraqi soldiers in Northern Iraq. Since 1990 more than 10,000 Kashmiri Hindus have been brutally murdered by Islamic fundamentalists. Over 280,000 Ugandans killed during the reign of Idi Amin from 1971 to 1979. Over 30,000 Mauritanians have been killed by the Islamic dictators since 1960. In 1980, 20,000 Syrians were murdered under the rule of Hafez Al-Assad, President of Syria. Since 1992 120,000 Algerians have been murdered by the Islamic fundamentalist army" [source - Satyameva Jayate, Truth Alone Triumphs, as sponsored by Jai Maharaj, ][/quote]

K. S. Lai, the greatest of all historians in India said, <<"Islam received a definite check in India. In other words, while countries like Arabia, Persia, Mesopotamia and Syria succumbed to the onslaught of Islam and converted en masse, the sword of Islam was blunted in India. This check provided provocation and enthusiasm to some Muslim conquerors and rulers to take to the task of proselytization with great zeal and earnestness. Their exertions and achievements find repeated mention in official and non-official chronicles and similar other works. Sometimes, besides broad facts, actual data and figures in this regard are also available. All this information is very helpful in estimating Muslim numbers as they grew from almost a cipher. ">>.

He went on to quote, <<"By the year 1000 of the Christian Era the extreme north-western parts of India, in the trans-Indus region, had become introduced to Islam. As early as C.E. 664, consequent upon an invasion of Kabul and its environs (which then formed part of India), by Abdur Rahman, a few thousand inhabitants are reported to have been converted to Islam" [source - Ferishtah, Tarikh-i-Ferishtah, Persian text, Nawal Kishore Press, Lucknow 1865, Vol.1, p.16.]>>, and <<"Subuktagin also fought against the Hindus and converted some of them. But all these events took place in the trans-Indus region, and we may, therefore, agree with Lanepoole in saying that in C.E. 1000 there were no Muslims in northern India east of the Indus."[source - Stanley Lane-Poole, Medieval India under Muhammadan Rule (London, 1926), p.1.}>>.

But conversion by the proverbial sword and the stealing of other's land was only to grow worse. <<" However, there were some small settlements of Muslims in Sind, Gujarat and the Malabar Coast. Parts of Sind were conquered by Muhammad bin Qasim Sakifi in C.E. 712. Whichever towns he took, like Alor, Nirun, Debul and Multan, in them he established mosques, appointed Muslim governors, and propagated the Muhammadan religion." [source - Chachnama, trs. in H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Vols., London, 1867-77, (here after as E and D), Vol. I, p. 207.]>>. And to continue, <<"In Debul, for instance, he enslaved and converted some women and children, and left a contingent of 4,000 Muhammadans to garrison the place." [source - Al Biladuri, Futuh-ul-Buldan, trs. E and D, I, p.120]>>.

Forced conversions were to become a way of life and standard operating principle of (SOP) of Islam as shown by, <<" In Multan about 6,000 persons were made to accept Islam. Al Biladuri's narrative indicates that the people of Sawandari, Basmad, Kiraj, and Alor were converted in large numbers." [source - Al Biladuri, Futuh-ul-Buldan, trs. E and D, I, p.122 to 124]>>; another large forced conversion was, <<"by Muhammad bin Qasim Sakifi to Hajjaj also point to large number of conversions." [source - Chachnama, op. cit., pp. 163-64. Also pp. 205-07, 208]>>.

<<"Muhammad bin Qasim remained in Sind for a little more than three years." [source - Elliot's Appendix in E and D, I, p.439]>>. <<"After his recall not only the Arab power in Sind declined rapidly, but also most of the neo-converts returned to their former faith. Al Biladuri informs that 'in the days of Tamim, the Musalmans (had) retired from several parts of India... nor have they up to the present time (he wrote in the middle of the ninth century) advanced so far as in days gone by". When Hakim succeeded Tamim, "the people of India had returned to idolatry excepting those of Kassa, and the Musalmans had no place of security in which they could take refuge"." [source - Biladuri, op. cit., p.126, Also cf. Idrisi, E and D, I, Nuzhat-ul-Mushtaq]>>, <<"Sir Dension Ross also says that "after the recall of Muhammad bin Qasim, the Muslim retained some foothold on the west bank of the river Indus, but they were in such small numbers that they gradually merged into Hindu population. In Mansura (the Muslim capital of Sind) they actually adopted Hinduism." [ source - Dension Ross, Islam, p.18.]>>.

Conversions made at the point of the proverbial sword did not always hold as shown by, <<" In brief, because of the efforts of Muhammad bin Qasim and Caliph Umar II (C.E. 717-24) some Hindus in Sind had been converted to Islam, but by the time of Caliph Hashim (724-43), when Tamim was the governor of Sind, many of these Sindhi converts had returned to Hinduism. Those who continued to retain the new faith remained confined mostly to cities, particularly Multan. After Mahmud of Ghazni's attack on Multan their number seems to have gone up for, writing in the twelfth century, Al Idrisi says: "The greater part of the population (of Multan) is Musalman, so also the Judicial authority and civil administration." [ However, up to C.E. 1000 there were very few Muslims in Sind." [sources - Al Idrisi, p.83. and Elliot's Appendix, E and D, I, p.459]>>.


History shows that around the year 1,000 violence, pillaging, and conversions at the proverbial point of the sword, etc. my Muslims in India gets worse. <<" In the year C.E. 1000 the first attack of Mahmud of Ghazni was delivered. The region of Mahmud's activity extended from Peshawar to Kanauj in the east and from Peshawar to Anhilwara in the South. In this, wherever he went, he converted people to Islam. In his attack on Waihind (near Peshawar) in 1001-3, Mahmud is reported to have captured Jayapal and fifteen of his principal chiefs and relations some of whom, like Sukhpal, were made Musalmans. At Bhera all the inhabitants, except those who embraced Islam, were put to the sword. Since the whole town is reported to have been converted the number of converts may have been quite large. At Multan too conversions took place in large numbers for, writing about the campaign against Nawasa Shah (converted Sukhpal), Utbi says that this and the previous victory (at Multan) were 'witnesses to his exalted state of proselytism'" [sources - Kitab-i-Yamini, Eng. trs. of Utbi's work by James Reynolds, (London) 1858, pp. 451-52, 455, 460, 462-63 and Utbi, Tarikh-i-Yamini, E and D, II, pp.27, 30, 33, 40, 42, 43, 45, 49. Also Appendix in E and D, II, pp.434-78]>>. <<"In his campaign in the Kashmir Valley (1015) Mahmud 'converted many infidels to Muhammadanism, and having spread Islam in that country, returned to Ghazni'. In the latter campaigns, in Mathura, Baran and Kanauj, again, many conversions took place. While describing 'the conquest of Kanauj', Utbi sums up the situation thus: 'The Sultan levelled to the ground every fort..., and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him." In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja. During his fourteenth invasion in C.E. 1023, Kirat, Nur, Lohkot and Lahore were attacked. The chief of Kirat accepted Islam, and many people followed his example. According to Nizamuddin Ahmad, 'Islam spread in this part of the country by the consent of the people and the influence of force'. Conversion of Hindus to Islam was one of the objects of Mahmud. Al Qazwini writes that when Mahmud went "to wage religious war against India, he made great efforts to capture and destroy Somnat, in the hope that the Hindus would then become Muhammadans" [source - Zakaria al Qazwini, Asar-ul-Bilad, E and D, I, p.98]>>; and <<"Sultan Mahmud was well-versed in the Quran and was considered its eminent interpreter."[source - C.E. Bosworth, The Ghaznavids (Edinburgh, 1963), p. 129. Utbi, Reynolds trs. op. cit., pp.438-39 and n.]>>; <<"He ardently desired to play the role of a true Muslim monarch and convert non-Muslims to his faith. Tarikh-i-Yamini, Rausat-us-Safa and Tarikh-i-Ferishtah, besides many other works, speak of construction of mosques and schools and appointment of preachers and teachers by Mahmud and his successor Masud." [source - Utbi, trs. Reynolds, op.cit., pp. 322-25, 462. Utbi, E and D, II, p.37 Ferishtah, op. cit., I, p.44.]>>; <<"Wherever Mahmud went, he insisted on the people to convert to Islam. Such was the insistence on the conversion of the vanquished Hindu princes that many rulers just fled before Mahmud even without giving a battle. "The object of Bhimpal in recommending the flight of Chand Rai was, that the Rai should not fall into the net of the Sultan, and thus be made a Musalman, as had happened to Bhimpal's uncles and relations, when they demanded quarter in their distress." [source - Utbi, E and D, II, p.49.]>>; <<" There is no doubt that the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni brought good crop of converts, and a few more Muslims were added through the influence of Muslim Mashaikh and traders in Gujarat and Malabar. But if the example of Sind provides any precedent, it is possible that many Hindus forcibly converted to Islam during Mahmud's raids returned to their former faith. Very few Muslims were left in Sind after the decline of Arab rule. A local Karmatian Muhammadan dynasty was, however, ruling at Mansura and Multan. Mahmud of Ghazni destroyed it root and branch (1010) and Multan was deserted" [source - Ferishtah, op. cit., I, p.27, M. Habib, Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznin, Delhi reprint, 1951, p.34,]>>….” [Source - retrieved from or on 10/23/2013].


The article, go, , which states, “…Islam today is what it has been fourteen centuries: violent, intolerant, and expansionary. It is folly to think that we, in the course of a few years or decades, are going to be able to change the basic world outlook of a foreign civilization. Islam's violent nature must be accepted as given.

Islams contribution to peace today must be measured in one body at a time. This violent nature of this screwed up religion clearly shows that Islam is NOT like other religions but loves hate, violence, and me ham.

The following consist of recent 2012 violence by members of this hateful religion and a cursory record of this religions promoted violence for the year 2011 one body at a time. Now what other religion has continuous acts of violence committed as part of their religion by some of their members? [[Note, this list is many thousands long, but a small relative sample is here shown to give all and overview.]]

2012 Partial Record of Islams violence:

Date Country City Killed Injured Description
2012.09.18 Afghanistan Kabul 12 11 A female suicide bomber massacres a busload of foreigners "in revenge" for a film about Muhammad that the victims had nothing to do with.
2012.09.18 Pakistan Mastung 3 9 Three Shia pilgrims are sent to Allah in a targeted attack by a Sunni suicide bomber.
2012.09.17 Iraq Baghdad 7 24 Seven commuters are obliterated by a Shahid sucide car bomber during rush hour.
2012.09.17 Thailand Yala 2 0 A Buddhist couple is ambushed in their truck and slaughtered by Muslims with shotguns.
2012.09.16 Afghanistan Gereshk 12 0 A dozen women and young children are destroyed by Taliban bombers.
2012.09.16 Pakistan Jandool 16 7 Three women and three children are among sixteen civilians taken apart by a Sunni hardliner bomb.
2012.09.16 Nigeria Kano 4 0 Islamists enter a home and shoot a 3-year-old girl to death along with her family, which includes a crippled uncle.
2012.09.16 Nigeria Zango 6 9 Islamic radicals attack a group of civilians playing cards, killing at least six. … over a thousand entries…
2011.01.01 India Ramban 2 0 Lashkar-e-Toiba abduct and murder two border policemen.
2011.01.01 Iraq Baqubah 1 1 A woman dies from a bombing in her own home.
2011.01.01 Iraq Baghdad 2 0 Terrorists shoot two Iraqis to death in their car.
2011.01.01 Egypt Alexandra 23 77 Twenty-three parishioners are incinerated by a Shahid suicide bomb attack on a New Year's Day church mass.
[source - retrieved from on 9/19/2012] [source - retrieved from,+to+Islamic+Violence+Is+Continuous+And+Not+An+Anomaly- on 10/23/2013]


A series of seven articles called, “Sequel to 'Nut Case" Islamic Conspiracy Weavers Are A Bane To Truth and Reality, #1 through #7.” Here is an section from this serious of articles, “…Unfortunately we have a bunch of 'Nut Case' members of Islam weaving all kinds of far out conspiracy theories to try and cover up actions by the cohorts of Muslim religious leader, Sheik Osama bin Ladin. I quite frankly am getting very tired of this nonsense. Here is the actual deceptive comments of one of these 'Nut Cases':
One member of Islam actually said the following outright lie and absurd conspiracy theory,
"No commercial aircraft buried itself in Pennsylvania terra firma. The utter public silence from observing the many clips of high energy materials being ejected from the other side of WTC #2, from most probably a projectile with DU-hardening nose characteristics is deafening. Further, the two WTC Towers were explosive demolitions, without any doubts. WTC #7 crumbled under a classic demolition."
Now of course we all well know both of these conspiracy claims are just outright lies, but let me deal with the Pennsylvania false claim (lie) first.
Reality #1: I used to live in Mt. Pleasant, Pennsylvania only about 30 minutes from where the crash site of United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania, was in Somerset County and many of my neighbors went there and saw first hand the wreckage and the motor and fuselage, yet this Muslim "nut case" is seeking to deny this reality as he is trying to cover-up for Muslim wrong doings.
Reality #2: We have all seen pictures of the two different planes that hit the twin towers of the World Trade Center (WTC). In fact, I watched live coverage as it happened of the second plane actually hitting. As to a high energy materials being ejected from the other side of WTC #2 from a projectile with DU-hardening nose characteristics claim by this "nut case" member of Islam, this is of course just is absurd imagination from watching too many movies. He is no longer able to distinguish between movie fantasies and reality. In fact, he even used movie actors and movies as backup evidence for what he said; how utterly absurd. Here is what this Muslim "nut case" actually said,
"Mic hael Moore - Academy Award and Cannes Palme d'Or Award-winning producer, director, writer and author. His film and television projects includes; Sicko (2007), Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004), Bowling for Columbine (2002), The Awful Truth (4 TV episodes, 1999), And Justice for All (1998), TV Nation (1997), The Big One (1997), Canadian Bacon (1995), Pets or Meat: The Return to Flint (1992), Roger & Me (1989). Author of Dude, Where's My Country? (2004), Stupid White Men (2004), Will They Ever Trust Us Again? (2005)…” [source - retrieved from on 10/23/2013]
As can readily be seen, members of Islam clearly try to cover up the wrong doings of Islam with outright lies and conspiracy theories. However, some of these lies have been clearly shown in my above article.
Now to know the truth, go to:








To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to!



Posts : 3078
Join date : 2012-11-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum