MrExcalibur100

Just domestic league only.

What's up bro? Read the next verse, Qur'an 9:30. I think the context to the preceding verse is very clear. The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? It's very clear. The reason why Jews and Muslims must be fought is because of their belief, not because Muslims are fighting back in self defense. This is a common deflective tactic that Imam's use to explain away this verse. And it continues in the next verse. Allah complaining about "unbelief". Nothing about self defense: They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him. "Now, let me also clear out something. A human life is of vast importance to us" -------------- How true is this? Qur'an 48:29 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves… More to the point, Allah certainly doesn't consider Non-Muslims equal to Muslims. Qur'an 8:55: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. And it continues in Qur'an 98:6: Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. "Killing an innocent human life, not a Muslim, not a Jew, not a Christian, A HUMAN LIFE, is like murdering the entire humanity." --------------- Again, this is not very true. This is gotten from Qur'an 5:32, a verse the Qur'an burrows from the Jewish Tanakh and is not applicable to Muslims . It is the favourite verse of Muslim apologists to prove that Islam is a religion of peace when it is not. Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors. The next verse is the command for Muslims. Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment These are the same punishments practiced in Saudi Arabia under Sharia. "Fight back anyone who attacks you including Christians and Jews. ( National Defense)" To get back to the gist of your comment, this is completely false and not true. Anyone who has read Hadith Bukhari or Muslim or that has read the biography of Muhammad knows he and the early Muslms killed innocent people. People who mocked him were killed. Asma Bint Marwan for example. People who didn't convert to Islam were killed. Non-Muslims were persecuted and killed. Jews were exiled from Arabia. Muhammad's words in the Hadith. The context is very clear. It's Hadith afterall: very cle Bukhari (52:177) Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." Muslim (1:30) "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah." It's pretty obvious from just a cursory glance at the Muslim sources that most of what you wrote is incorrect. Islam commands it's followers to fight against unbelievers in order to spread Islam. If they are Jews or Christians, they are given option of Jizya under Dhimmitude. Pagans and Atheists are not so lucky. It's convert or die. Anyway, let's continue this conversation elsewhere. PM me.

.

Golden ball my balls.

First CFC World Cup winner since Desaily and Leboeuf? Amazing moment for him.

Nice moment for the young man.

Is this one squad or an amalgamation of different squads? We're talking about one squad.

Best ever squad? For me, yes. The 2004/05 one was a machine but it can't boast the sheer talent of some of the players on this squad. Let's look at the main players. (1) A back 5 of Cech, Gallas, JT, Carvalho and Paulo is roughly the same strength as one with Courtois, Filipe, JT, Cahill and Azpilicueta. Infact, I'll take the latter. OK let's say, DRAW (2) Midfield is less interesting because our current midfield is much stronger. We had who again? Lampard, Makalele, Tiago, Robben and Duff/Cole. Most of those guys were not in their prime yet. Very balanced. Compare that with Matic, Fabregas, Ramires, Mikel, Hazard, Oscar, Willian, Schurrle. That midfield has everything. Pace, power, technique, everything. Perhaps less balance but more talent. So 2014/2015 wins. (3) Strike force is less clear. We had Drogba, Gudjohnson, Kezman and Mutu. Kezman was awful. Mutu was a beast in the previous season but was a non-factor since he got sacked early in the season and contributed nothing, leaving Didier and Eidur. Didier was not yet world class and Eidur, love him to death but never was. Compare that with Diego Costa, Lukaku, Torres and Ba. I'll still take the latter. One outstanding striker and one super talented striker that has enormous potential and is PL proven. No point commenting too much on Torres or Ba. Both poor quality. Will pick the latter, so 2014/2015 wins again. 2004/2005 was one of the best ever PL sides but the PL was noticeably weaker then and our rivals all had their problems. Arsenal's stars ageing and Man Utd were in a rebuilding process with their old stars ageing and building around Rooney and Ronaldo. Plus Mourinho's tactics were a novelty to the league. We only conceded 15 goals that season. Says it all. Same thing with 2005/2006 with notable inclusions of Essien (who wasn't at his peak) and Crespo. Still this one is stronger. 2009/10 is slightly over-hyped. Yes, it was a strong one and highly entertaining but not as strong as the ones of the past. That squad had a lot of impressive names but it was an ageing squad and had it's problems. We were easily outclassed in the CL by Inter and then next year, we were crushed by Man Utd, beaten easily home and away. We won the league by only 1 point against a Man Utd team that just lost Ronaldo. Avram Grant's Chelsea were stronger than the 2009/10 one. Our best squads under Roman were from 2005-2009. If anything, there has been a steady decline in quality year after year.

Cech, Terry, Carvalho, Lampard, Drogba? And not many others. We won an FA cup and league cup that season and were far too reliant on Drogba. The 2004/05 and 2005/06 squad were more impressive.

He's a good player but we don't need him. He could be a top player in the future but right now he's not on the level of Verratti or Pogba. Like ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ drog.ba said, there's no point signing a prospect when we have so many on our hands already in that same central midfield position.

There's a lot of evidence out there from reputable sources that Costa already took his medical before the World Cup, so we're just waiting for that announcement!

Dope video

Courtois, Filipe Luis, Cesc and Diego Costa! Nothing but world class signings so far. Hopefully Pogba can join as well. Pretty amazing when you add that to what we already have. Filipe Luis Kasmirski. What a cool last name.The guy is also very tall for a full-back, like 6 feet. I'm sure that's something we considered. A back four of Luis, Terry, Cahill and Azpilicueta is an incredibly solid one. It also means we are going to see less of Brana playing right back. He's been a liability trying to attack in that position. Now teams will think twice about isolating our right back.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ About the pictures. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/09/More-False-Images-Hamas-Use-on-Social-Media-Against-Israel/

First off, I'm neither Pro-Isreal or Pro-Palestine. I can say that I do. And are you saying HAMAS is secular? Have you heard of the TV show "Tomorrow's pioneers?" and the mass indoctrination that goes on in Palestine? The more and more you dig into it, the more you realize it has less to do with politics and more to do with religion. That's the bitter pill I had to swallow. The problem is that you speak of propaganda but the reality is that there is a great deal of propaganda from BOTH sides even more so from the Palestinian side. How is it possible to even discuss the issue when there is so much vested interest towards the Palestinians on your part. Speaking of propaganda, a lot of those pictures circulating twitter are old photos of completely unrelated tragedies.

Even Mourinho said it in an interview: http://www.givemesport.com/419691-barcelona-real-madrid-are-easy-options-says-mourinho?&mobile=on "Of course it is easier to succeed abroad. You go to Spain and there are two big clubs; you go to Germany and they have one big club and a little bit more. In Italy now there is one big team, although obviously more than one big club. So it is easier to succeed." Mourinho felt the same applied for players in an individual capacity, claiming it was easier to rack up astonishing records, which some may see as a sly stab at the records of Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo at Barcelona and Real Madrid respectively. “If you are an attacking player and go to Barcelona or Real Madrid, it is easier to score 50 goals than if you’re playing in England. Of course these clubs are a big attraction. You can’t blame a player," he added.

More explosive? Are you sure this is Reus you're talking about and not Messi?

Nice joke Mediator.

I meant in general. Besides, that's for last season only. Chances created are derived from key passes. A key pass is a pass that leads to an intentional assist for a goal. For instance Hazard' pass to De Bruyne for Belgium's 2nd goal vs USA will be considered a key pass. Consider just how wasteful we were last season and then consider how many potential "created chance" stats Hazard lost. Even a target man type striker like Max Kruse had more chances created than Reus, most likely because of the amount of goals his team scored as a result of his knock-downs and whatnot. Like Hazard's assists last season. He created over 100+ chances last season if we are talking all competitions but only had 10 assists. That's bizarre and an indictment on our wasteful finishing which is something Jose lamented. Now Reus on the other hand creates chances and he can be sure Lewa finishes them. Or Aubameyung (sp?). Or the Armenian guy and so on. That's the difference. Plus we are comparing across leagues. Compare Hazard's chances created stats to real playmakers like Silva, Mata and Carzola and he actually is above them. And the guy is not even a playmaker!

No he did not. In fact, he was poor in the first half of last season but exploded in the second. No player has "carried" Dortmund at least since Klopp has been in charge. Not Reus, Lewa, Kagawa. Nobody. They are very much a team with a defined style of play, something we aren't. He also had the benefit of playing alongside Lewandowski in attack, a world class striker who scored 28 goals last season, more than all our strikers combined. Hazard didn't have that.

Ridiculous indeed. But Hazard plays for us so he is under-estimated. I see that a lot. If Hazard was placed on the market today, he will be priced at 70+ million. Reus will be around 45 million at best.

That's just mind-bogglingly wrong but you are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how way off it is. Will Reus win the Player of the year ahead of Luis Suarez? Also wasn't Hazard voted 2nd in the Premier league player of the year ahead of Silva, Toure, Aguero and Sturridge? So that's hardly a good point. What does Hazard do better than Reus? He creates MUCH more chances than him. Like I just posted, their goal-scoring stats for club are roughly equal. Hazard is also harder to deal with than Reus because of just how many weapons he possesses. He draws tons of defenders to him even though he is almost always double-marked (Reus is not) and creates space for others. I can go on but I'll stop there. There's no way Reus could have carried Chelsea on his back the way Hazard did last season. I just don't see him being able to.

Reus 2011/2012: 21 goals 10 assists Hazard 2011/2012 : 20 goals 16 assists Reus 2012/2013 : 17 goals 11 assists Hazard 2012/2013 : 13 goals 17 assists Reus 2013/2014 : 23 goals 17 assists Hazard 2013/14 goals : 17 goals 10 assists These stats are from ESPN. Now I know stats only tell half the story (for instance, Hazard last season was better than 2 seasons ago, but his assists stat 2 seasons ago are more impressive because of our more "conservative" play last season), but there is really not that much difference between the two and this is excluding the "chances created stat" which is the best indicator as to a player's creativity. Hazard FAR outstrips Reus in that department. So as you can see, this is not "blinded" but just a response to your ill-informed post. As for Reus playing better than Ribery, who cares? Ribery was incredibly poor last season after he returned from knee injury.