Muhammed was a totally EVIL person, abnd thats why the terrorists are so whacked

You wrote, "You dont get to set the rules here." On the contrary, you had the opportunity to set all your desired "rules" in your initial volley, but you declined. Knowing your pathological habit of gross plagiarism, I felt compelled to enunciate a few ground rules up front to clarify to you that I know about you and will not tolerate it. The first and most important rule of debate, in this forum and everywhere else, is: DO NOT PLAGIARIZE! I didn't even have to say that, but I did, knowing what you would do: Your response is 76% plagiarized. Since you do not know how to follow ethical debating practice, I'm going to reproduce your post, only with the plagiarized portions replaced by their sources. I will *only* respond to your original words. As for the rest, it will be as though you had never said anything, as far as the debate is concerned. SOLARMAN'S ACTUAL CONTRIBUTION: ------------------- You dont get to set the rules here I will use any sources I want This is how muslim terror gets to go on- you avoid the cold, hard facts about your religion and attempt to change the subject, cherry pick verses, and then try and defame me and try to discredit me rather than take on the real arguments This debate is about Muhammed and his life- nothing else it is not about >>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (36 words) These are separate debate topics. Now onto my opening arguments, and I will source things , call it plagarism if you like and act like that makes it less valid, I dont care This is from www.prophetofdoom.net The >>>PLAGIARISM (508 words) from <http://www.venusproject.com...; >>>PLAGIARISM (35 words) from <http://prophetofdoom.net...; >>>PLAGIARISM (351 words) from <http://www.venusproject.com...; Now lets look at the BEHAVIOR of modern day muslims, and the REASONS why they behave so. You seem to blame US for their behavior- I blame Muhammed. You say >>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (15 words) Fine, but what is their STATED REASON for the violence? Muhammed, and Islam, as THEY INTERPRET IT. and Islamic terror has been around from DAY ONE. you say >>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (10 words) So how are WE (the USA) colonialists, as you say? And why did they bomb Indonesia - are they colonialists? And what of the violence in Pakistan ? Is that becuase of colonialism? What did the terrorists say who hijacked the planes and killed 3000+ innocent people "allah ahkbar ! " - God is Great! They all had Qu'rans on the planes and were holding them when they died What is commonly held myths taught to young men who would be suicide bombers? - 72 Virgins to rape in "heaven" Where did they get that idea? Muhammed and the Qu-ran PLAGIARISM (82 words) from <http://prophetofdoom.net...; rest my case ------------------- END SOLARMAN'S ACTUAL CONTRIBUTION Is this debate forum just an opportunity for you to cut and paste giant chunks of Islï¿½mophobic text to try to salve your seething racist hatred of Arabs and Muslims? Or did you really want to share your own *thoughts*? Please bear in mind that your *thoughts* come out in your own words (in case you didn't know). If I felt it made sense to debate you using other people's words, I suppose I could just start launching Qur'ï¿½ns at you, now couldn't I? NOTE: You've written only 273 words. I will only respond to those. Since your last plagiarized post was a verse from the Qur'ï¿½n, what version was it? I'm sure you don't know. Let me start there. If you can't tell me what version your Qur'ï¿½n quote is (and this is quite clear from the fact that you had to plagiarize it from prophetofdoom.net instead of going to a reliable translation from a reliable source), how do you know it is not really the product of an Islï¿½mophobe who has produced a distorted version of the Qur'ï¿½n on purpose, with just enough similarity to the actual Qur'ï¿½n to convince people to buy it? Let's test that verse. Copy the first part and put it in Google. Here is the result: prophetofdoom.net. Surprise? If this were a legitimate translation, I would find a lot of alternative entries from legitimate Islï¿½mic sources. Next, let's assess its accuracy. Here is the actual verse that your plagiarized source sought to cite: Qur'ï¿½n 56:33 [PM]. "Neither ending; nor foridden." Yes, that's the whole verse. Have you never noticed that prophetofdoom.net doesn't list verses correctly? Now, here is the correct passage in full: Qur'ï¿½n 56:33-38 [PM]. "Neither ending; nor forbidden. And raised furnishings. We have made for them those who are special. And made them never previously touched. Perfectly matched. For those on the right side." The verse is part of a much longer passage, which is a metaphor for Heaven. Do you disagree with it somehow? Next, in response to my CHALLENGES, you wrote: "These are separate debate topics." Okay, I understand. You did not want to face my challenges, so you dismissed them all and tried to justify that dismissal by implying that you cannot see the connection. Let me apprise you of the connection, and hence your valid need to respond to them: CHALLENGE 1. Show that there has never been Christian terrorism. You are trying to argue that Muhammad's "life and legacy" are the cause of terrorism, correct? Muhammad produced the Qur'ï¿½n, and the Qur'ï¿½n guided the behavior of the early Muslim community. Therefore, Muhammad's "life and legacy" are the Qur'ï¿½n exemplified. Thus, the cause of terrorism must lie within the message of the Qur'ï¿½n. Conversely, it could *not* be true that terrorism is occurring *despite* the message, correct? Well then, one leg of your syllogism will break if it turns out that there has also been Christian terrorism, assuming that we agree that Jesus (the New Testament) cannot actually be a cause of terrorism. Thus, you must show that there has never been Christian terrorism. CHALLENGE 2. Show that Islï¿½mofascist terrorism would have occurred even without colonialism. Again, you're trying to argue that terrorism is a product of true Islï¿½m, as codified in the Qur'ï¿½n and exemplified in the "life and legacy" of Muhammad. Exogenous forces in history are not the cause, correct? Okay then, you must show that the colonialization of the Islï¿½mic World did not itself spur the movements that are promoting today's terrorism. If it did, then the second leg of your syllogism will break. CHALLENGE 3. Show that Muslim violence throughout history has killed more people than Christian violence. This is a restatement of Challenge #1, but it removes from the argument the necessity to define "terrorism" per se before pursuing proofs of its ostensible connection to a great world religion. It would be too easy to say that when Christians kill people, it's not "terrorism," and thereby get away with a distortion of logic in order to win a debate. Certainly, if you hold to the view that the "life and legacy" of the founder of the religion are what cause violence, then Jesus' "life and legacy" must be the cause of any large-scale Christian violence that we may have witnessed. If so, then the third leg of your syllogism will break. You wrote that the "STATED REASON" for Islï¿½mofascist violence is what definitively links it to the "life and legacy" of Muhammad. You added, "as THEY INTERPRET IT." If that is the case, then the "STATED REASON" for Christian violence throughout history, "as THEY INTERPRET IT," is what definitively links that violence to the "life and legacy" of Jesus. WDJD? - He caused terrorism, based on Solarman's exquisite albeit heavily plagiarized logic. Hmm... Thus, my CHALLENGES stand. Try to answer them this time, if you dare! Allï¿½hu Akbar!