Comments by "VoidX" (@aus-li) on "JRE Clips" channel.

  1. 49
  2. 25
  3. 25
  4. 23
  5. 21
  6. 20
  7. 20
  8. 18
  9. 18
  10. 16
  11. 15
  12. 15
  13. 12
  14. 12
  15. 11
  16. 11
  17. 11
  18. 10
  19. 10
  20. 10
  21. 9
  22. 9
  23. 8
  24. 8
  25. 7
  26. 7
  27. 7
  28. 7
  29. 7
  30. 6
  31. 6
  32. 6
  33. 6
  34. 6
  35. 6
  36. 6
  37. 6
  38. 5
  39. 5
  40. 5
  41. 5
  42. 5
  43. 5
  44. 4
  45. 4
  46. 4
  47. 4
  48. 4
  49. 4
  50. 4
  51. 4
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 3
  57. 3
  58. 3
  59. 3
  60. 3
  61. 3
  62. 3
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. 2
  93. 2
  94. 2
  95. 2
  96. 2
  97. 2
  98. 2
  99. 2
  100. 2
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. Ajmal Ali Islam does not “ban” slavery, however it does ban female slavery. There are tons of contradictions in Islam, so I wouldn’t take Mohammed seriously. Slavery was extremely common back then, so that’s irrelevant. The crusades were indeed about religion. It was in the name of Allah and jihad to wage war against their enemies, who are non-Muslims/disbelievers. The Holy Land was one of many factors in the crusades, it was also about competing on what religion was the best (which was between the Roman Catholics and Islam), and conquering more land. Allah “forbids” a lot of things, doesn’t mean it’s necessarily true. He “forbid” fighting amongst each other, which automatically failed. For example, the Ummayyads were Sunni Islam, while the Abbasids who overthrew them, were Sunni Islam, but relied on Shia support to establish their empire. So no, it wasn’t for “territorial gains”, it was for Allah and Jihad. If you’re looking for a link about the “rules” of practicing under the Ummayyads: https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/spain_1.shtml No, again, Saudi Arabia is the one who is accountable for terrorism, especially in modern times. They teach Wahhabism Salafism, which is from the Quran. But the Hadith does add more fire to the flame, as they talk about killing Jews, while the Quran basically states they’re inferior. You want to talk about minorities? What about the zero-tolerance policy against Jews in Saudi Arabia? While in Israel, Muslims are free to practice their religion (and they’re 18% of the population)? Yes, look above for my link about their stance on non-Muslims. Doesn’t matter, you still agreed with me, so there’s no point in making an argument for no reason when I stated a fact. They were tolerant of others practicing their religion only if they followed the rules. Sorry, I don’t believe that. They still invaded for Allah to compete with the Christians. Radicalism was created in the 12th Century, with an organization called The Assassins. I never said they were “decent folk”, now you’re putting words in my mouth. And you’re contradicting yourself by saying they were “conquering disbelievers” when you said they couldn’t simply do that unless they were “defending” themselves, or they get it from the Hadith. Wrong. It’s for Jihad. Again, Mohammed didn’t like Jews that much, as he thinks they’re inferior and points out that Jesus was in favor of Allah. I don’t understand what you mean by how tolerant they were for “non-Jews” and “non-Christians”? You mean Muslims, then?
    1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. Ajmal Ali Contradictions in the Quran: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Qur%27anic_contradictions https://carm.org/contradictions-quran Stop with the insults. I didn’t “accuse” you of anything. I simply brought up how Muslims are not tolerable for Jews, yet Israel doesn’t mind. The crusades: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/explanation/crusades.html http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/hts/v74n1/09.pdf https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/pegroup/files/blaydespaik2015.pdf European did not “seek” an alliance, unless you can suggest evidence...but here is the reason why they did trade: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01604632/document Operation Condor is Irrelevant in this discussion. However, it is true that the CIA is responsible for aiding Osama bin Laden when the Soviets were occupying Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda (and other terrorist organizations) blames the US for siding with Israel when they stole land from the Arabs, and the Western influence they had on Saudi Arabia. The CIA also created ISIS in Iraq, since they were disorganized and ignorant of the groups who were imprisoned in their camp. They mixed up Sunni and Shia Muslims, therefore creating ISIS. This still doesn’t excuse the fact that Saudi Arabia is responsible for promoting hatred in their teaching methods, which I’ve clearly stated before. Osama bin Laden came from Saudi Arabia. The individuals who were on the plane on 9/11 were all from Saudi Arabia. It’s clear evidence these teaching are from Saudi Arabia.
    1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1