SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ilaine who wrote (222929)3/7/2007 7:13:23 PM
From: Sun Tzu  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Once again, you make a futile attempt to change the context mid-discussion. This is very sad for you. Anyone can just go back a few links and follow up on the discussion. Here is the original quote. It is clear that my use of the word "protected" was from an Islamic theological point of view and in *contrast* to Hindus. The point remains valid. Feel free to answer the question, if you can.


Hindus are far far closer to the Islamic concept of infidels than Westerners who are predominantly Christian and therefore a recognized and protected people ("People of Book).

So far from being able to dodge the issue by appeal to geography, there is an even stronger case to be made:

WHY DID THE MUSLIMS NOT GO ON A KILLING RAMPAGE OF HINDUS WHO ACCORDING TO ISLAM ARE BELIEVERS IN FALSE GODS?

If you can't make your case for that, then you are so much worse off trying to make the case they Muslims want to kill followers of a recognized religion, namely Christians.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News