PearlHowardman

How about the passes that Andre Reed dropped in the first half of Super Bowl XXV? Had Andre Reed caught those passes the Bills would have blown the Giants out in the first half. How about Andre Reed's mental meltdown the following year in Super Bowl XXVI? Andre Reed does NOT belong in the Professional Football Hall of Fame!

End death for apostasy in Islam and Islam will collapse. Expose false-Prophet Muhammad and Godless Islam for the Godless, apostate murdering, fascist, evil death cult that it is and Islam goes away.

"I bear witness that false-Prophet Muhammad was a mass murdering, thieving, looting, war mongering, wife beating, slave owning, adopted son wife stealing, Jew hating, Christian hating, child screwing pedophile, head decapitating, apostate-killing, false prophet, that both deceived and forced untold millions into the false belief that Muhammad was an Abrahamic Prophet of God (a lie) and that Islam is a religion (another lie). Fraud Muhammad's evil soul will burn in everlasting HELL for his SATANIC DECEPTION!!!!!!"

The Psychological Profile Of Islam's False-Prophet Muhammad: 1. Lied about being an Abrahamic Prophet of God. 2. Attracted sexually to young girls. 3. Casual attitude to killing. 4. Capture, rape and sale of slaves. 5. Murder of critics. 6. Torture to obtain goods. 7. Lies are ok to deceive people to achieve your ends. 8. Deep hatred for both Jews and Christians. 9. Favorite killing method was decapitating people. 10.Merciless, ruthless, warmongering, vengeful, narsissistic.

Dear Muhammad, We Christians and Jews are flattered that you want to be one of our Abrahamic Prophets of God but unfortunately (for you) we have decided to REJECT your half-ass request. First of all, these "experiences" that you had in the Hira cave were never witnessed by anyone and by the sounds of what you told us, it was not the angel Gabriel that visited you there. Worse, we Christians and Jews also think that you're both insane and evil. Sincerely, The Christians And Jews P.S. YOU'RE INSANE AND EVIL! Islam is not a religion. Islam is a lie.

Muhammad and his band of immigrants arrived in Medina in 622 completely dependent on the hospitality of the three Jewish tribes that lived there alongside the Arabs. In less than two years, two of the tribes that had welcomed him, the Banu Qaynuqa and the Banu Nadir would be evicted, losing their land and their wealth to the Muslims as soon as their guests gained the power to conquer and confiscate. Muhammad accomplished this by deftly exploiting his opponents divisions. Muhammad chose the order of the doomed tribes carefully. He knew that the other two tribes would not come to the assistance of the first, for example, since they had been aligned against one another in a recent war. He also knew that the third would not assist the second - due to a dispute over "blood money." The last tribe to remain was the Banu Qurayza. Like the others, the Qurayza were a peaceful community of farmers and tradesmen who eventually surrendered to Muhammad without a fight. Although the prophet of Islam had been wise enough not to order the wholesale slaughter of the first two tribes following their defeat (which certainly would have stiffened the resistance of the Qurayza), there was no practical reason for Muhammad to repress his genocidal urges once the last tribe had surrendered their wealth and power. Over 800 surrendered men and boys (and at least one woman) from the Qurayza tribe were beheaded by Muhammad in a bloodbath that is of acute embarrassment to today’s Muslim apologists. It is an episode that is not only completely at odds with the idea that Islam is a religion, but also the claim that it is the heir to Christianity, since even that religion’s most dedicated critics could hardly imagine Jesus and his disciples doing such a thing. It is only in modern times, as Islam finds itself having to compete with morally mature religions in open debate, that the story of the massacre has become controversial. Some Muslims deny the episode, largely on the basis of mere inconvenience. Others are unaware of it altogether. But, not only is the incident well documented in the Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad), there is even a brief reference to it in the Qur’an (verse ). Since Islam makes no apologies, particularly for anything that Muhammad personally did, contemporary Muslims generally try to convince themselves that the victims of Qurayza deserved their fate. They must have turned on the Muslims in battle and inflicted many deaths, forcing Muhammad to yield to the wishes of his people and respond in kind. Unfortunately, the accounts of what happened, as related to the early Muslim historians by eyewitnesses, do not support this myth. In fact, it was the Qurayza who were caught in an impossible situation at the time between the Muslims and their Meccan adversaries. Shortly after arriving in Medina in 622, Muhammad began raiding the merchant caravans traveling to and from neighboring Mecca. He would steal their property and kill anyone who defended it (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 424-425). The Jews of Qurayza had nothing to do with this. Much like the Meccans, the Jews were also traders and they appreciated the value of security in doing business. They neither encouraged Muhammad’s raids nor shared in his ill-gotten gain. After a few years of this, the Meccans eventually realized that they would have to try and capture Medina, since it was being used as a base of operations by Muhammad and his murderous pirates. In 627, they sent an army to the outskirts of the city and appeared poised to take it in what has been called the Battle of the Trench (the Muslims dug a trench around the exposed northern and western parts of the city to stop the Meccan military advance). The Qurayza, who lived to the east of Medina, were thus caught in a bad situation. Not responsible for Muhammad’s war, they were nonetheless drawn into it, particularly when they were approached by a Meccan leader and asked not to assist Muhammad in his defense against the siege (to that point, the Qurayza had contributed digging tools to the Muslims, but not fighters). The chief of the Qurayza did not wish to even entertain the Meccan envoy, but he was tricked into allowing him into his home (Ishaq/Hisham 674). Once there, the Meccan began making his case that the battle was going against Muhammad and that his fall was imminent. The anguish of the Qurayza chief over the trying circumstances of the position that he felt forced into is noted even by Muslim historians: When Ka'b heard of Huyayy's coming he shut the door of his fort in his face, and when he asked permission to enter he refused to see him, saying that he was a man of ill omen... Then Huyayy accused him of [being inhospitable]... This so enraged Ka'b that he threw open his door. [Huyayy] said to him, "Good heavens, Ka'b, I have brought you immortal fame and a great army... They have made a firm agreement and promised me that they will not depart until we have made an end of Muhammad and his men. "Ka'b said, "By God, you have brought me immortal shame and an empty cloud while it thunders and lightenings with nothing in it. Woe to you Huyayy, leave me as I am." (Ishaq/Hisham 674) After much “wheedling” by the Meccans, however, the Qurayza leader finally gave in and agreed to remain neutral in the conflict. He would neither contribute troops to the city’s defense nor to its impending capture at the hands of an army with superior numbers. The Muslims would be left on their own to deal with the conflict they had started with the Meccans. The first twenty days of the conflict passed "without fighting" (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 676) other than a few exchanges of arrows across the trench. A half-hearted effort on that day to breach the defenses proved fatal to the Meccan, thus convincing their leader that they could not win unless the Qurayza joined the battle from the other side. However, the Qurayza refused, ironically enough, thus prompting the Meccans to immediately abandon the siege. With the battle over, however, Muhammad surprised his army by turning them against the Qurayza fortress, claiming that the neutrality of the leader was a breach of the original constitution of Medina which the prophet of Islam had personally drawn up for the tribes five years earlier. The original language of this 'treaty' is not known, however, and later guesses as to what it might have said seem suspiciously tailored. It is unlikely, for example, that the tribes of Medina would have given Muslims the right to slaughter them for merely speaking out against him, yet several prominent Jewish leaders and poets had been assassinated on Muhammad’s order prior to the Qurayza affair. At least one innocent merchant was slain by his Muslim business partner following Muhammad’s order in 624 for his men to “kill any Jew who falls into your power” (al-Tabari ). Muhammad had also attacked the two other Jewish tribes – parties to the same agreement – looting their property and then evicting them from their land. There is little doubt that the troubles Muhammad brought on Medina, through his mistreatment of the Jews and his relentless pursuit of hostilities against the Meccans, were a part of the sales pitch made by the Meccans to the Qurayza leader to win his neutrality - along with the implicit threat of slaughter if the city were taken by the Meccans. From Kab's perspective, it would only be a matter of time before Muhammad found an excuse to attack and plunder his tribe as well. Contrary to popular misconceptions, however, the Qurayza had not attacked the Muslims. In fact, had they attacked, then it surely would have been the end of Muhammad and his band of pirates since the southern end of the city was completely exposed to the Qurayza. In a terrible irony, it was the decision not to engage in violence that later sealed the fate of the Jews, who were only the first in a very long line of victims to horribly overestimate the value that Islam places on the lives of unbelievers. According to Muhammad, it was the angel Gabriel (seen only by himself, of course) who ordered the siege on the Qurayza. After twenty-five days of blockade, the Jews gave in and surrendered to the prophet of Islam. As Ibn Ishaq/Hisham puts it, they “submitted themselves to the Apostle’s judgment” (Ishaq/Hisham 688). Another misconception is that Muhammad did not render the death sentence against the Qurayza and was therefore not responsible for it. There is a partial truth in this, in that Muhammad clearly attempted to offload responsibility on another party. However, from the narrative, it is obvious that Muhammad clearly approved of the subsequent massacre - a fact further verified both by his choice of "arbitrator" and his subsequent reaction. First, the prophet of Islam tricked the Qurayza by getting them to agree to put their fate in the hands of "one of their own." In fact, this was a Jewish convert to Islam, a Muslim who had fought in the Battle of the Trench. Unbeknownst to the Qurayza, Sa’d bin Muadh had also been one of the few Muslims fatally injured in the battle (Ishaq/Hisham 689), which one can reasonably assume to have influenced his judgment. According to the Hadith, he was quite eager to continue slaying "unbelievers" even as he lay dying in his tent (Bukhari 8). Secondly, when Sa’d did render his decree that the men of Qurayza should be killed and their women and children pressed into slavery, Muhammad did not express the slightest bit of disapproval. In fact, the prophet of Islam confirmed this barbaric sentence to be Allah’s judgment as well (Bukhari 8). Consider the contrast between the historical Muhammad and the man of “peace and forgiveness” that today’s Muslims often assure us that he was. In light of the fact that the Qurayza had not killed anyone, wouldn’t a true man of peace have simply sought dialogue with them to try and determine their grievance, find common ground and then resolve the matter with dignity to both parties? Instead, Muhammad had the men bound with rope. He dug trenches and then began beheading the captives in batches. In a scene that must have resembled footage of Hitler’s death squads, small groups of helpless Jews, who had done no harm to anyone, were brought out and forced to kneel, staring down at the bodies of others before their own heads were lopped off and their bodies were pushed down into the ditch. There is some evidence that Muhammad personally engaged in the slaughter. Not only does the earliest narrative bluntly say that the apostle “sent for them” and “made an end of them,” but there is also support for this in the Qur’an. Verse says of the Qurayza, “some you slew, some you took captive.” The Arabic "you: is in the plural, but the Qur’an is supposed to be Allah’s conversation with Muhammad, so it makes no sense that he would not be included. In any event, there is no denying that Muhammad found pleasure in the slaughter, particularly after acquiring a pretty young Jewish girl (freshly "widowed" and thus available to him for sexual servitude) (Ishaq/Hisham 693). Boys as young as 13 or 14 were executed as well, provided that they had reached puberty. The Muslims ordered the boys to drop their clothes. Those with pubic hair then had their throats cut (Abu Dawud 4390). There was no point in trying to determine whether or not they were actual combatants because there were none. There had been no combat! Muhammad parceled out the widows and surviving children as slaves to his men for sexual servitude and labor. The wealth accumulated by the Qurayza was also divided. Since the tribe had been a peaceful farming and trading community, there were not enough weapons and horses taken to suit Muhammad’s tastes, so he obtained more of these by trading off some of the Qurayza women in a distant slave market (Ishaq 693). Yet, there has never been, nor will there ever be in the future, an apology from those who follow Muhammad, since the massacre of infidels was the example personally set by their prophet at Qurayza. http://www.thereligi...-mu-qurayza.htm

Would a Prophet of God have slaves and behead people? No! Was Muhammad a barbaric, slave owning, evil pig? Yes! Is Islam a religion. NO!

Post Summary From A Secular Point-Of-View: 1. Christians and Jews told Muhammad that he wasn't visited by the angel Gabriel in the Hira cave. 2. Christians and Jews rejected Muhammad as an Abrahamic Prophet of God. 3. Christians and Jews had at least 600 years experience in things like the angel Gabriel and who is/isn't a Prophet of God. Therefore: 1. Muhammad was never a Prophet of God. 2. Islam is not a religion. And: 1. Muhammad was a barbaric killer. 2. Islam is a Godless, apostate killing, death cult similar to Nazism and Communism.

Q. How did Muhammad die? A. Muhammad was poisoned by a Jewish woman slave in retaliation for Muhammad torturing and murdering (beheading) the Jews of Khaibar. It is suspected by some that the Jewish woman who poisoned Muhammad collaborated with Muhammad's wife Safiyah. Safiyah was also Jewish. She was one of the Khaibar survivors. Muhammad originally made her a slave then he married her against her will. There is also a theory that Muhammad was murdered by his child-wife, Aisha.

Q. Why did Muhammad curse the Christians and Jews when he was dying on his death bed? A. Because Muhammad always hated the Christians and Jews. Q. Why did Muhammad always hate the Christians and Jews? A. Because the Christians and Jews rejected Muhammad as an Abrahamic Prophet of God. Christians and Jews always knew that Muhammad was a false-Prophet and a liar! Q. Since Muhammad was a proven False-Prophet, is Islam a religion? A. No. Islam is NOT a religion. Islam is a Godless, apostate-murdering, violent, death cult!

". . .he (Muhammad) perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments (Holy Bible) by making them into fabrications of his own (the koran), as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to FORBID his followers to read the Old and New Testaments (Holy Bible), lest these books convict him of FALSITY. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his (Muhammad) words believe FOOLISHLY." ~FATHER THOMAS AQUINAS~

"The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us (Nazis) than, for example, France." ~ADOLF HITLER~

“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the (false) faith he preached.” ~BYZANTINE EMPEROR MANUEL PALEOLOGOS II~

“Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies is in a dog. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.” ~SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL~

NHL outdoor games are bringing in huge audiences, too.

“What is more, no wise man, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him (Muhammad) from the beginning. Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Mohammed FORCED others to become his followers by the violence of his arms.” ~FATHER THOMAS AQUINAS~

Q. Why do Muslims practice the killing or threatening to kill those who want to leave Islam (apostates)? A. Early Islam had few followers because few believed Muhammad when he said that he was visited by the angel Gabriel in the Hira cave. Few believed Muhammad when he said that he was a Prophet of God. Muhammad’s followers forced people into Islam. They then instituted the practice of killing apostates only to prevent the non-believers from leaving Islam which would have collapsed Islam. Even today without the practice of killing apostates or threatening to kill apostates, Islam would collapse. Q. Do any other religions practice the killing of apostates or threatening to kill apostates? A. No. Only fascist cults like Nazism and Communism kill apostates. Islam is also a fascist cult. Islam is NOT a religion. Today Muslims still either kill apostates or threaten to kill apostates only to prevent a mass exodus from Islam which would cause Islam to collapse. Some Muslims have even admitted this. Q. Who visited non-Jew/non-Christian Muhammad in the Hira cave? A. Muhammad either lied about the angel Gabriel visiting him in the Hira cave or, as some believe, it was Satan (the devil) that visited Muhammad in the Hira cave. Either way, it was not the angel Gabriel that visited Muhammad in the Hira cave as Muslims claim. Q. How is it known that it wasn’t the angel Gabriel that visited Muhammad in the Hira cave? A. Muslims claim that the angel Gabriel gave illiterate Muhammad something to read as well as the angel Gabriel holding Muhammad to the point where Muhammad was barely able to breathe. When Jews and Christians learned of Muhammad’s supposed experiences in the Hira cave they instantly knew that the angel Gabriel did not visit Muhammad in the Hira cave. The angel Gabriel was known to the Jews and Christians for at least 600 years and they knew that the angel Gabriel would never ask an illiterate to read nor hold someone, much less hold someone to the point where they couldn’t breathe. Q. Since it wasn’t the angel Gabriel that visited Muhammad in the Hira cave, was Muhammad ever connected to God? A. No. Muhammad never had a connection to God and God never had a connection to Muhammad. By direct extension, Islam has no connection to God and God has no connection to Islam and/or Muslims. Q. How did Muhammad become an Abrahamic Prophet of God that Muslims claim he was? A. Muhammad was never a Prophet of God. Jews and Christians rejected non-Jew/non-Christian Muhammad as one of their Prophets of God. Jews called Muhammad “the mad man” and a False-Prophet. Christians also called Muhammad a False-Prophet – they thought that he was insane and evil. Q. Is Islam, including the quran, a lie? A. Yes. Godless Islam is not a religion - it is a lie - and many active Muslims know that Islam is a lie. The quran was copied from the Bible. When the world realizes that Islam is a lie, Islam will collapse and die.

This^

KC looks good at QB, too!

One knee injury in training camp. Two knee injuries during the regular season. Three knee injuries in one season. The verdict Is In: EJ Manuel has knee injury problems. Knee injury problems which cause EJ to sit out way too much time. The Buffalo Bills need a new QB.

Win one. Then sell it. They're hideous. I like the ring that the Chicago Bears had from their '87 Super Bowl win.

Speaking of rings, does anyone else out there think that modern day Super Bowl rings are completely hideous? http://ifitshipitshere.blogspot.com/2011/02/all-44-superbowl-rings-to-date-and-some.html

Marrone + Manuel does not = short or long term success. Marrone - Inexperienced and in over his head. Manuel - Injury prone/skills-challenged.

2014 Prediction: Syracuse, NY native and Buffalo Bills CEO/President Russ Brandon will have the Buffalo Bills either play a pre-season game or schedule training camp practices at the Carrier Dome in Syracuse, NY. Former SU Orange and now Buffalo Bills coaches Doug Marrone, et al, will be greeted like heroes when they return to Syracuse University.

The Buffalo Bills always play well at home. Especially the defense. But on the road....