Shooting at Connecticut Sandy Hook Elementary School

[Shah-i-Kot]

The problem is that these people dont have imaan. If something like this happens in Afghansitan, they blame religion, so why not the opposite. Why is this happening in a non religious society. The problem is not the gun. There have always been guns in american society, actually more before than now. the cause of the this disease is not the gun since that was always present, the cause of it is lack of imaan.

Nations that are built on the bloodshed of others and promote crime as a form of entertainment are the cause of these crimes.

Who committed the Holocaust against the Jews in Europe?

Who enslaved the Africans in America?

Who committed the Holocaust against the Native Americans in America?

What civilization has built an industry out of waging wars on (at first) defenseless nations?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Nations that are built on the bloodshed of others and promote crime as a form of entertainment are the cause of these crimes.

Who committed the Holocaust against the Jews in Europe?

Who enslaved the Africans in America?

Who committed the Holocaust against the Native Americans in America?

What civilization has built an industry out of waging wars on (at first) defenseless nations?

But Khushal's thesis is that it is America's "lack of religion" that motivated. All the examples you mentioned are true and valid. BUT this was when people in AMerica were on the MOST PART centered on RELIGION as a central part of their daily lives,

The Massacres of the Native Americans was justified by MANIFEST DESTINY a BIBLICAL AND RELIGIOUS concept.

Although many factors contributed to the Holocaust; religion was ONE of those factors.


But let's not think Muslims never did the same thing, Abdali Massacred the Marathas, raped women and sold children as slaves. Sultan Mahmud Ghaznawi did the same thing. My ancestors the Hotak brutally butchered many innocent Iranians in Isfahan on the zeal that they were "infidel Shi'a"

the existence of massacres has nothing to do with how much faith a person has but what they do with those.


Many people both of faith and lack of faith, live peaceful gentle lives. Many people don't

[Shah-i-Kot]

BUT IT can, if you mean damage means how many people killed. compared to what happened here.

your argument is incoherent entirely.....and you're straying from the topic. Even if one person was shot there would still be a big fuss on control,

It is not true that if one person was shot that there would be a big fuss on control.

thus it has nothing to do with how many people killed but the fact people were killed by a gunman ...thus the analogy of other weapons is relevant here.

People are shot (murdered) in the US (and the rest of the world mind you) everyday. It is due to the magnanimity of this event, that it is receiving media attention, and now the same talk about gun control. It all relative. As long as it happens outside of the US, gun control and global arms sales (with the US being one of the major arms dealers) goes on. Now that it has hit home, well, now suddenly there is a talk about gun control.

if you can't understand the basic concept of an analogy you're a retard ...and it was already shown to you in the definition; so all that can be said here is that you're stupid and you're obstinately so despite evidence.

If you cant handle a debate in which you feel you are losing, there is no need to start calling the other debater a retard because then it not only shows that you are the retard, but also the loser.

Bottom line: dont debate

[RevolutionThroughReason]

It is not true that if one person was shot that there would be a big fuss on control.

yes it is, because of the circumstances behind and the fact it was mainly children targeted which were the reason for the outcry.

People are shot (murdered) in the US (and the rest of the world mind you) everyday.

Yes but not like this; where a guy walks into a school and shoots. The reason its a big fuss now is because it's a Suburban White kid who came from a well off background. Where as all the other situations you're referring to. They think it's poor kids or brown people. The media has a way of "vamping" concern too.

If you cant handle a debate in which you feel you are losing, there is no need to start calling the other debater a retard because then it not only shows that you are the retard, but also the loser.

Bottom line: dont debate

I handled it fine, I'm very confident that I have won the debate because Khushal's premises were FLAT WRONG. Furthermore Khushal already admitted he was trying to divert the topic into an irrelevant point, so he conceded.

So you admit you fell into my trap.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

By the way ....this isn't apart of the debate; but just to demonstrate your judgement of how well the debate is going is under suspect.

You used the word " magnanimity", this is what that word means

mag·na·nim·i·ty noun \ˌmag-nə-ˈni-mə-tē\
plural mag·na·nim·i·ties

Definition of MAGNANIMITY

1
: the quality of being magnanimous : loftiness of spirit enabling one to bear trouble calmly, to disdain meanness and pettiness, and to display a noble generosity
2
: a magnanimous act

The correct word should be MAGNITUDE

How can an idiot who can't even speak English properly judge what's going on?

[Shah-i-Kot]

But let's not think Muslims never did the same thing, Abdali Massacred the Marathas, raped women and sold children as slaves. Sultan Mahmud Ghaznawi did the same thing. My ancestors the Hotak brutally butchered many innocent Iranians in Isfahan on the zeal that they were "infidel Shi'a"

In regards to this, Ahmad Shah Baba and his army did not rape women and sell children as slaves. Please show the evidence for this claim that you made. In fact, the Marathas were committing crimes against not only the Muslim population, but the Hindu population too. This was what precipitated Shah Waliullah to send messages to Ahmad Shah Baba to help the Muslims in India.

Secondly, Mirwais neeka laid siege to Persia and its capitals after the Persians had started a war by sending Gurgin Khan (a Christian general) to fight against Pashtun in Kandahar.

Mirwais neeka famously massacred Gurgin Khan and his army, and then turned his eyes towards the Shiite Persians who he represented.

It was due to the Shiite Persians initiation of war with Pashtuns that Mirwais neeka gathered the Ghilzai and Durrani to unite in a war against the Persian empire, bringing it under Hotak rule for many years.

There is no report, not by Persians that the Hotak rule was oppressive. On the contrary, Persian literature and arts continued to flourish.


Isfahan was burned to the ground after a siege (its buildings were burned- people were not killed). The only part that can be condemned (from our (todays) informed perspective) was the siege, not the war in itself. The bottom line is the Persians should not have picked a fight with Pashtuns in the first place by sending an army to Kandahar. Dont expect flowers when you are showing your fangs.

Technically speaking, by Mirwais neeka's estimation, the Shiite Persians were Kafirs because they had united with a Christian warlord- Gurgin Khan...and together had started a war against fellow Muslims- Pashtuns- when they sent Gurgin and his army to Kandahar. Obviously, it was the Shiite Persians who did not consider the Pashtuns (who were Sunnis) to be Muslim.

[Shah-i-Kot]

By the way ....this isn't apart of the debate; but just to demonstrate your judgement of how well the debate is going is under suspect.

You used the word " magnanimity", this is what that word means





The correct word should be MAGNITUDE

How can an idiot who can't even speak English properly judge what's going on?

Oh wow, I forgot to say magnitude instead of magnanimity. My fault ( they sound the same), but hey, you learned something from google once again.

Being in post-post-post graduate school for an eternity (as you are in your 40s) has clearly paid off.

good job. I mean it.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

In regards to this, Ahmad Shah Baba and his army did not rape women and sell children as slaves. Please show the evidence for this claim that you made. In fact, the Marathas were committing crimes against not only the Muslim population, but the Hindu population too. This was what precipitated Shah Waliullah to send messages to Ahmad Shah Baba to help the Muslims in India.

Secondly, Mirwais neeka laid siege to Persia and its capitals after the Persians had started a war by sending Gurgin Khan (a Christian general) to fight against Pashtun in Kandahar.Mirwais neeka famously massacred Gurgin Khan and his army, and then turned his eyes towards the Shiite Persians who he represented.

It was due to the Shiite Persians initiation of war with Pashtuns that Mirwais neeka gathered the Gilzai and Durrani to unite in a war against the Persian empire, bringing it under Hotak rule for many years.

There is no report, not by Persians that the Hotak rule was oppressive. On the contrary, Persian literature and arts continued to flourish.

Please do not speak of that you have no knowledge of at all. It is very ridiculous.

Isfahan was burned to the ground after a siege. The only part that can be condemned (from our informed perspective) was the siege, not the war in itself. The bottom line is the Persians should not have picked a fight with Pashtuns in the first place by sending an army to Kandahar.

Technically speaking, by Mirwais neeka's estimation, the Shiite Persians were Kafirs because they had united with a Christian warlord- Gurgin Khan

They did it's documented in History Books .http://books.google.com/books?id=VE7...0women&f=false

And don't try to make Ad-Hominem to discredit historians that's a Logical Fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmud_Hotaki

Mir-Wais Nika did not lay siege on Isfahan; Mir-Wais Nika killed Gurgin Khan and drove the Safawiiyyah from Qandahar. It was Mahmud TWO years AFTER Mir-Wais died in 1715 who went and invaded Isfahan. There was no need to do that since the Safawiyyah were already expelled years prior by his father. And Mir-Wais NEVER united the Ghilzai's or Durranis; in FACT this is what happened. Read the top of page 230 on downward

http://books.google.com/books?id=Mf2cvE5jYrYC&pg=PA230&dq=Abdali+massacred&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wp7QUMaWEMmS0QHG5oG4Cg&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Abdali%20massacred&f=false

The ABdalis were helping the Safawids stop the rebellions against them in Qandahar. Read the part where it says "In 1709, the ABdalis reacted to Mir-Wais' rebellion by offering Military assistance to the Safawids"

So your statement is a clear pathological lie. Talk about speaking about something YOU have no knowledge about; you not only have NO Knowledge about this YOu were EVIDENTLY WRONG and even FABRICATED something Think that people don't have the ability to FACT CHECK. Once again don't dare use the Ad-Hominem LOgical Fallacy to scapegoat by or else you'll lose the debate.

You've been check mated ...good day

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Oh wow, I forgot to say magnitude instead of magnanimity. My fault ( they sound the same), but hey, you learned something from google once again.

Being in post-post-post graduate school for an eternity (as you are in your 40s) has clearly paid off.

good job. I mean it.

Um ...Magnanimity and MAGNITUDE sounds different; for example there is no "animity" in Magnitude, and no "Tude" in Magnanimity .....You won't get by that easily

If you're THIS stupid; your judgement on most things is not credible.

Lot of people are in "post by post" graduate school for "eternity" as you put it; people do their POST Doctorate, many people have careers in University doing research. Doctorates can take years to complete; you act like something that many people do and is not unusual as some sort of anomaly. haha

Again shows how stupid you are and have no idea what you're talking about

[Shah-i-Kot]

They did it's documented in History Books .http://books.google.com/books?id=VE7...0women&f=false

And don't try to make Ad-Hominem to discredit historians that's a Logical Fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmud_Hotaki

Mir-Wais Nika did not lay siege on Isfahan; Mir-Wais Nika killed Gurgin Khan and drove the Safawiiyyah from Qandahar. It was Mahmud TWO years AFTER Mir-Wais died in 1715 who went and invaded Isfahan. There was no need to do that since the Safawiyyah were already expelled years prior by his father. And Mir-Wais NEVER united the Ghilzai's or Durranis; in FACT this is what happened. Read the top of page 230 on downward

http://books.google.com/books?id=Mf2cvE5jYrYC&pg=PA230&dq=Abdali+massacred&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wp7QUMaWEMmS0QHG5oG4Cg&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Abdali%20massacred&f=false

The ABdalis were helping the Safawids stop the rebellions against them in Qandahar. Read the part where it says "In 1709, the ABdalis reacted to Mir-Wais' rebellion by offering Military assistance to the Safawids"

So your statement is a clear pathological lie. Talk about speaking about something YOU have no knowledge about; you not only have NO Knowledge about this YOu were EVIDENTLY WRONG and even FABRICATED something Think that people don't have the ability to FACT CHECK. Once again don't dare use the Ad-Hominem LOgical Fallacy to scapegoat by or else you'll lose the debate.

You've been check mated ...good day

Your so predictable and you read like a book.....google that, wiki this...

Ok, my history is hazy, and I dont spend my whole life on google and wikipedia like you. Is Wikipedia and Googlebooks what you use for fact check?



..but the fact remains the Shiite Persians joined together with the Christian Gurgin Khan to fight against the Pashtuns Sunni Muslims, so clearly, contrary to your pro-Shiite propaganda, it was the Shiite Persians who viewed Pashtuns as non-Muslims because they were Sunni.. and started a war with them.

There is a difference between doing something productive with your life (benefiting others) and being an academician (which you are by your own definition of what you are doing).

The fact is most of the day you are on this forum losing in debates to Barakzai and Khushal and everyone else who tries to talk reason to you. Your ego prevents you from accepting when you are wrong which is most of the time.

[Shah-i-Kot]

Um ...Magnanimity and MAGNITUDE sounds different; for example there is no "animity" in Magnitude, and no "Tude" in Magnanimity .....You won't get by that easily

If you're THIS stupid; your judgement on most things is not credible.

Lot of people are in "post by post" graduate school for "eternity" as you put it; people do their POST Doctorate, many people have careers in University doing research. Doctorates can take years to complete; you act like something that many people do and is not unusual as some sort of anomaly. haha

Again shows how stupid you are and have no idea what you're talking about

I will let Khushal continue to embarrass and expose your stupidity since you are clearly happy that you can derail the original debate away from your own ridiculous argument.


I have never heard of someone being in a post-doctorate program for years on end. It really doesnt go on forever as you pretend it to be.

You know the people who remain at the university doing research, having never been able to find another job after obtaining their doctorates usually are there out of no choice. Post-doctorate is a nice eternal euphemism for "I cant find a job." You know in this terrible US economy, there is no shame in admitting that.

[Shah-i-Kot]

They did it's documented in History Books .http://books.google.com/books?id=VE7...0women&f=false

And don't try to make Ad-Hominem to discredit historians that's a Logical Fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmud_Hotaki
Mir-Wais Nika did not lay siege on Isfahan; Mir-Wais Nika killed Gurgin Khan and drove the Safawiiyyah from Qandahar. It was Mahmud TWO years AFTER Mir-Wais died in 1715 who went and invaded Isfahan. There was no need to do that since the Safawiyyah were already expelled years prior by his father. And Mir-Wais NEVER united the Ghilzai's or Durranis; in FACT this is what happened. Read the top of page 230 on downward

http://books.google.com/books?id=Mf2...sacred&f=false

The ABdalis were helping the Safawids stop the rebellions against them in Qandahar. Read the part where it says "In 1709, the ABdalis reacted to Mir-Wais' rebellion by offering Military assistance to the Safawids"

So your statement is a clear pathological lie. Talk about speaking about something YOU have no knowledge about; you not only have NO Knowledge about this YOu were EVIDENTLY WRONG and even FABRICATED something Think that people don't have the ability to FACT CHECK. Once again don't dare use the Ad-Hominem LOgical Fallacy to scapegoat by or else you'll lose the debate.

You've been check mated ...good day

Ok here is the corrected version. Thank you for fact checking.


"In regards to this, Ahmad Shah Baba and his army did not rape women and sell children as slaves. Please show the evidence for this claim that you made. In fact, the Marathas were committing crimes against not only the Muslim population, but the Hindu population too. This was what precipitated Shah Waliullah to send messages to Ahmad Shah Baba to help the Muslims in India.

Secondly, Mirwais neeka defeated the Persians and Mahmud Hotak (two years later according to your GOOGLE AND WIKI RESEARCH) laid siege to Persia and its capitals. This Persian-Pashtun conflict was initiated by the Shiite Persians.

Mirwais neeka famously massacred Gurgin Khan and his army, and then turned his eyes towards the Shiite Persians who he represented.

It was due to the Shiite Persians initiation of war with Pashtuns that Mirwais neeka gathered the Ghilzai and Durrani to unite in a war against the Persian empire, bringing it under Hotak rule for many years.

There is no report, not by Persians that the Hotak rule was oppressive. On the contrary, Persian literature and arts continued to flourish.


Isfahan was burned to the ground after a siege (its buildings were burned- people were not killed). The only part that can be condemned (from our (todays) informed perspective) was the siege, not the war in itself. The bottom line is the Persians should not have picked a fight with Pashtuns in the first place by sending an army to Kandahar. Dont expect flowers when you are showing your fangs.

Technically speaking, by Mirwais neeka's estimation, the Shiite Persians were Kafirs because they had united with a Christian warlord- Gurgin Khan...and together had started a war against fellow Muslims- Pashtuns- when they sent Gurgin and his army to Kandahar. Obviously, it was the Shiite Persians who did not consider the Pashtuns (who were Sunnis) to be Muslim.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I will let Khushal continue to embarrass and expose your stupidity since you are clearly happy that you can derail the original debate away from your own ridiculous argument.


I have never heard of someone being in a post-doctorate program for years on end. It really doesnt go on forever as you pretend it to be.

You know the people who remain at the university doing research, having never been able to find another job after obtaining their doctorates usually are there out of no choice. Post-doctorate is a nice eternal euphemism for "I cant find a job." You know in this terrible US economy, there is no shame in admitting that you anal retentive individual.



Off course a school will let you stay there forever...like you are. Why would they ever tell you to leave?

What are you a ****ing idiot? do you EVER base any of your conclusions on truiths?

Here there's actually statistics about this

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57468913/12-reasons-not-to-get-a-phd/

1. A PhD takes twice as long as a bachelor's degree to complete. The average student takes 8.2 years to slog through a PhD program

Yes by all means leave lyou're not competency in deciding who's "embarrassing" who is not credible to begin with as clearly demonstrated. You have some sort of cognitive impairment

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Ok here is the corrected version. Thank you for fact checking.

.

there's no "here's the corrected version" ....you can't cherry pick facts that suit you. You were wrong and

crying "google" and "wkipedia" is not a rebuttal; sources are sources, you provided absolutely none to support your argument; you lose.

[Shah-i-Kot]

SO I tell you thank you for correcting my history, give you a corrected version, and you blurt out more crap lol

ok dude..