ISIL represents Islam

I will now start my refutation of the rebuttal(s) made by my opponent. I will then start a rebuttal of points. First of all, for my opponent to rebut a comment made to help give a potential help to the viewer/voter, I view this as a semantical refutation that exists not only to exonerate the fallacious arguments made by Pro, but to exceed a boundary that was set between the two parties debating. Furthermore, the rebuttal does not explain why my contention was irrelevant to the topic of debate, but rather as a full blown fallacy, which is incorrect, and only solidifies my points. I have many examples of this. 1. "If the Christians in the Islamic State pay jizyah, they are not harmed in ANY way. I am talking as a student in Class 8 in The religious Institute, Doha, Qatar." ---This is simply irrelevant, for a starting point, as Pro has provided no explanation as to how that point made relevance to the resolution. Secondly, This is an example of a red herring argument, one that seems nice but doesn't provide true explanation. ISIL has taken financial rights away from Christians living in ISIL territory, meaning that according to ISIL's beliefs, Christians must be fought. The word "fight" does not mean to physically kill, but rather teach. 2.My opponent has said, "Then why are you debating if you don't have enough knowledge??" This is a use of semantics and is against the DDO code of conduct. The rules stated that Muslims debate, not Sheiks. As I may remember, my opponent is only a student, and this "rebuttal" has nothing to do at all with the argument at hand. 3."Then, Allah Almighty reproached the Prophet (pbuh) :"It is not for a prophet to have captives [of war] until he inflicts a massacre [upon Allah 's enemies] in the land." According to this argument made by my opponent, ISIL is doing everything wrong. Why do ISIL have prisoners of war before their caliphate is over? Besides, this is a prophet that is mentioned, not a group of civilians. 4. "96% of all of ISIL's victims are Muslim" Woooooooooooooooooooooh!! This is WRONG EXCEPT IF you count Shiite people as Muslims. Unfortunately for my opponent, the whole world says that Shiites are Muslims, including myself, who is Sunni. Just because there are political differences between both sects, both have submitted to Allah and follow the teachings of God and Muhammed. Besides, Shiite people are of book, which contradicts arguments made by my opponent. 5. As for the Jordanian pilot, He burnt (incl. children) people to death by the fighter missiles.. For the voters to know, this pilot has only conducted missions that involved the attack on ammunition bases, and had absolutely NO civilian targets. While I understand that under arbitrary circumstances people may have been hurt, no one was ON PURPOSE. 6. "ISIL ONLY DESTROYED SHIITE MOSQUES" Whether is was Shiite or Sunni, a Mosque is a Mosque, as is a Church or Temple. Politics between sects do not allow the worship of one's God to be disallowed, especially to one of book. I will now start my rebuttal of contentions made by my opponent. 1. "It follows all Islamic teachings." As I have made clear previously, it does not. The point is another that provides no evidence or factual basis to its claim. 2. My opponent thinks that ALL of the infidel are fighting ISIL, making it representative of Islam. This is ridiculous, since there are non-religious people all over the world, who are fighting religion from government. Islam isn't the only religion that faces opposition. This point is also irrelevant, and should not be counted. 3.My opponent stated also that all other nations who claim to be Islamic oppose ISIL. This is by far, representative of a dirth in knowledge of foreign policy and relations which is clearly expressed vividly by my opponent. For example, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E all have Islam as the national religion of the country. However, there are large populations of people who are not Muslim who come to the country and live daily lives while contributing to the construction of religious places, such as mosques, through taxation. I extend my arguments previously made, and I await my opponent to make his conclusion. Sources: https://www.rt.com... http://irusa.org...... http://content.time.com...... http://thinkprogress.org...... http://www.cnn.com......