Beat Your Muslim Wife

abusive muslim wife

Hello Mr. Ali Sina, Please Save my Family.

Thank-you very much for fighting to restore humanity on the earth. I am an indian and married an indonesian muslim girl 10 years before. We are settled in a different country and we have two very cute daughters. Both have indian passport. We were quite happy till two years ago, when my wife met some indonesian muslim women. Since she had few friends i didn’t worry about her going to meet them very often. She started slowly attending reading quran sessions. Things started changing and she became more and more involved with stronger belief in islam and its teachings.

1. She is taught to believe and love islam and quran and don’t try to understand or  question it.

2. My brother is living with us and they taught her that in islam it is not allowed. Then  i had to struggle a lot to convince her.

3. She is told idolatory is against islam and she does not allow my brother or his wife to pray in our home.

4. She thinks that if i don’t follow islam, she will go to hell.

5. She is even ready to divorce for the sake of islam but i had to convince her and show how much i love her to stay with me. She knows that my love is very big for her.

6. Now she is sending my daughters to learn quran which is sending shivers in my body. Because, i feel the islam is a ticking time bomb and dont know when it will trigger. Feel afraid of thinking my daughters future. Only hope is that i have to work hard to save my daughters future. Hope god will give me strength and allows me to live long enough to guide my sweet daughters in the correct path.

7. Why is she believing so much in islam and quran. I showed sura and verses you mentioned, she says that you are amateur and you dont understand. There is a story for it. She says that why you only look bad things, there are good things also.

Please show me where those good things are mentioned. All i can see is that  fear allah or else you will go to hell.

Please help me. I love my wife very much and daughters are so cute and i want them to understand and follow the truth and lead a healthy life than bound by rules and fear. I cant stop crying while writing this mail, oh god, please save my family.

regards

human being

 

 

I am very sorry to hear your story. Sadly, stories like yours are common. Only a couple of days ago I received an email from an ex-Muslim who said once he announced his apostasy to her non-practicing Muslim wife she took their son and left him and  turned into a fundamentalist Muslim.

Families are shattered and children’s lives are destroyed because of Islam.  Innocent people are killed in every country in the hands of Muslims, like the last week’s massacres in Kenya and in Pakistan.

Imagine if Satan was real and he wanted to destroy mankind. What better way he could find than to invent a religion, attribute it to God and with it, destroy love, ruin relationships, bring hatred, and make people kill one another?  Can you find a better plan to make this world a hell?

I always tell people to stay away from Muslims. Don’t trust them. Don’t befriend them. And for your own sake don’t fall in love with them and don’t marry them.   Even if you don’t care about yourself you have no right to destroy the lives of your future children.  It does not matter how irreligious they are, or how wonderful they are. It does not matter how sincere is their love for you. Stay away from Muslims as you’d stay away from bubonic disease.

There are people who are HIV positive, but have no symptoms of AIDS. The virus is dormant in them. The deadly disease can be activated at any time and pass to another person.  This is the case of the so called moderate Muslims.  All Muslims carry in them the deadly virus of Islam.  This virus remains dormant until suddenly it is activated. Then that wonderful person is transformed into a hate mongering, murderous beast.   They become the true embodiment of the Devil himself. Their heart is filled with intense hatred and they happily kill children and innocent people to please their Allah.

Muslims are prohibited to have love for other people. Muhammad has emphatically prohibited his followers to take non-Muslims as friends. He said he who takes them for friends is no longer a Muslim, but one of them, a wrongdoer whom Allah will not guide, and they are losers (Q. 5:51,53).

It is only a matter of time that your wife leaves you. You think your love for her will save your marriage. I am afraid it won’t. Only truth will save her and she is averse to it in the same way that a vampire is afraid of daylight. Light will destroy darkness.

Muhammad began to inseminate hatred in the hearts of his followers from the moment he went to Medina and found the Jews are not willing to accept him as a prophet.

Ibn Ishaq says, “Some Muslims remained friends with the Jews because of the tie of mutual protection and alliance which had subsisted between them, so God sent down concerning them and forbidding them to take them as intimate friends: ‘O you who believe, do not choose those outside your community as intimate friends. They will spare no pains to corrupt you longing for your ruin. From their mouths hatred has already shown itself and what their breasts conceal is greater… Behold you love them but they love not you and you believe in their book… while they deny your book, so that you have more right to hate them than they to hate you.” (Sira, p. 262)

Muhammad was projecting his own narcissistic traits on others.  He accused the Jews of what he himself felt in his heart. God is pure, indiscriminate and unconditional love. There is no hatred in God, just as there is no shadow in sun. We can deprive ourselves from the love of God by filling our hearts with hate, but God loves everyone the same. The light of the sun shines on all objects alike. If you hide yourself in a cave you can’t receive it.

To say God wants you to hate a group of people is a lie and sheer evil. The moment you allow hate to enter into your heart you deprive yourself of the love of God.  Your soul is like a mirror. If it is directed toward God it will reflect His love. This means you will love all people, even the sinners. But if you turn your heart away from God, it will reflect hate. That is what Muhammad asked his followers to do.

Your wife accuses me of not seeing the good things in Islam. What an absurd way of thinking! If Islam were from God there would be no evil things in it.  Every criminal can say good things. It is foolish to look at the good words and close our eyes to their evil deeds. How else can one deceive people if one doesn’t say a few good words like, give alms to the poor, be kind to your parents, don’t be cruel to animals, etc.  Would anyone have believed in Muhammad if he said, don’t give alms to the poor, don’t obey your parents and be cruel to animals?  Muslims don’t realize that Muhammad’s good words are part of his deception. Did he do as he said? He raided and looted and reduced wealthy people to poverty. He told his followers to not obey their parents if they don’t love Islam. Isn’t the way Muslims slaughter animals for meat and for their festivities, extreme cruelty to animals? Muhammad’s good words are not supported by his deeds.

The good teachings of Muhammad are banal and simplistic. Any idiot knows that it is good to be generous to the poor. I am not a Christian and don’t wish to proselytize it. But I will say that the teachings of Jesus are good and he walked his talk. He said forgive people’s sins so yours can be forgiven. He said let the one who has never committed sin throw the first stone. He said, when you feed, clothe, shelter and take care of the least among you is as if you have done these things for God. Why? Because Jesus knew that God is in every person. The only way we can love and serve God is to love and serve our fellow being. And when we abuse others, as Muhammad encouraged his followers to do, we are abusing God.   Jesus told his disciples to spread his message and if they are rejected, to leave and shake the dust from their sandals. This means don’t take anything from those whom you preach to. Compare that with what Muhammad did. He invited (gave ultimatum to) people to submit to him or prepare themselves to die.  He then attacked them, killed the men took their belongings and enslaved their wives and children. Can possibly Jesus and Muhammad be from the same god?

It is not difficult to see Muhammad was a messenger from hell. Your wife has chosen hell and she is bringing it even to this world. You and your daughters will burn in her hell as long as she is part of your lives.

There is nothing you can do for her. Salvation is a personal choice. She has chosen hate and has turned her back to God. You can’t help her. You made a mistake in marrying a Muslim and now you pay for it. Let this be a warning to anyone contemplating dating a Muslim.   I don’t know your circumstances so I can’t give you any advice. If it were not for your children I would have told you to leave her today.

If you are married to a Muslim and have no children yet, and if you think he or she is a wonderful person, give them a copy of Understanding Muhammad. If they read it they will leave Islam for sure and you can have a secure future together. If they refuse to read it, leave them. Don’t play Russian roulette with your life. Muslims are diseased people.  Unless you cure them from their sickness, don’t bring children with them to the world. These wretched souls are programmed to destroy everything, your life, the lives of their children and their own.

Your love cannot save your wife. In fact Muslims are so barren of love that they interpret love as weakness and become emboldened. The more kindness you show, the more aggressive they become. Muslims are peaceful only when they are in a weaker position. As soon as they feel they are strong and are protected by some laws, they will start their oppression and abuse.

If there is a way for you to take your children and leave your wife, I recommend you to do it.  If you stay with her, your suffering will increase and this will affect your children too. Let her go her way. Consider her dead. And that is exactly what she is. She walks and talks and contaminates the world with her Islamic hatred, but spiritually she is dead.

If you don’t want to give up on her yet, here is what I suggest. Tell her that since differences in religions are causing tension and since she has plugs in her ears and is not interested in truth, you have decided to convert to Islam. However, you are not going to be a wishy-washy lukewarm Muslim. You want to be a real Muslim. So the very day you convert, you will take your leather belt out and give her a good beating. As long as you don’t break her bones, you are within the Sharia law. If she asks you the reason for the beating, read to her this hadith.

Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab: “The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.” (Dawud: 11: 2142)

You can also tell her why you beat her if you like. Quote the quranic verse 4:34. “As for those from whom ye fear disobedience, admonish them and banish them from the bed, and beat them.” So all you need as an excuse to beat her is the fear that she may be thinking of disobeying you. She does not have to disobey you or even think of it. Your suspicion that she may be thinking of disobeying you is enough to beat the crap out of her. The good part is that you don’t have to answer to anyone. Allah u Akbar! Don’t forget to say that when you beat her.

Also, tell her that after converting to Islam you plan to take other wives. This is your prerogative and she has no say in it. If she protests, you can beat her more because she is rebelling against you. But if she does not like to have co-wives, you can be kind enough and divorce her. All you have to do is to utter the word “divorce”. She has to pack her clothes and leave YOUR house. Yes the house, according to the same verse 4:34 belongs to you. As a wife, she is a caretaker of your property. She has no right to anything. The children are also yours. In Islam the mother has no right to her children. Once they are weaned, she should hand them to their father. She is just an incubator for his sperms and a nanny for the first year of the life of the child.

A Muslim wife’s rights are similar to that of a dog. “Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guar.” (Q.4:34) A dog’s duty is to protect his master’s property and the master has to feed and maintain him. The same applies to a Muslim wife.   The only difference is that beating dogs is not enjoined in the Quran.

She may ask for her mahr. Don’t worry. Allah is kind to Muslim men. You don’t have to pay her anything. Just beat her every day until she relinquishes her mahr and then you can set her free. This is called Khula’  خلع.  Khula’ is when the wife agrees to forgo her alimony and to repay her husband any dowry, in exchange of having the right to divorce.  It is based on Abu Dawud 12:2220 and other hadiths.

If she thinks it is unfair, beat her because her faith is weak. She is disagreeing with the Prophet and the Quran. As a Muslim husband you should not tolerate such a transgression from your wife.  It is your duty to keep her iman strong, just as she now thinks she has  to abuse you so much until you  give in and convert to Islam.  Islam spreads through coercion and violence, and of course some tricks or taqiyah also comes handy.  After all, how can she know what is right when she admits to be deficient in intelligence? If she does not admit to be deficient in intelligence beat her more because she is calling the Prophet a liar. Read to her this authentic hadith three times so she gets it and stops talking like an apostate.

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: “Allah’s Apostle passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” (Bukhari: 1: 6: 301)

And don’t forget that the place of the Muslim woman is at home. The Muslim matters site on the authority of the Q. 33:33 says, “The Quran Commands Muslim Women: ‘Stay in Your Homes.'”  According to Tafsir ibn Kathir, “And stay in your houses” means “stay in your houses and do not come out except for a purpose.”  Lock the door of the house when you go out and prohibit her from going out or visiting any friend. Yes you can disconnect the phone and take away her mobile.  You decide whom she is allowed to meet and befriend.  You can even prohibit her from seeing her parents and family. If you fear she may be thinking of disobeying you, you know what to do.

As long as you are a non-Muslim she has no regards for you. She can treat you like dirt and there is nothing in the scriptures that would prohibit her to kill you. Oh yeah, there is a story like that that happened in the life of Muhammad.  A woman who had been enslaved by Muslims become pregnant by her Muslim captor. But she was embittered and kept maligning Muhammad. The man pierced her belly with a dagger and killed both the mother and her child. The next day he told Muhammad the reason he killed her was because she maligned the Prophet. Muhammad said, “Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.”  [Abu Dawud, 38: 4348]

However, if you convert to Islam you can order her to lick the ulcers on your body. Anas (not to be confused with anus) narrated the following hadith. Allah’s apostle said, “It is not right that any human being should prostrate to another human being, and if it were right for a human being to prostrate to another human being I would have ordered the women to prostrate to her husband due to the greatness of this right upon her. By Him in whose Hand is my soul, if from his foot to the crown of his head there was a wound pouring forth pus, and she ( the wife ) came and licked that, then she would still not have fulfilled his right….” [ Ahmad 3/159. Its chain of narration is declared to be good by al-Mundhiree in at-Targheeb wat-Tarheeb 3/75]

If you live in a country that has civilized laws you may not have all the freedoms that Allah grants Muslim men. Muslims are also shamelessly hypocrite. While they want to make Islam dominant, they do not hesitate to seek non-Islamic laws to protect their human rights. As stupid as Muslim woman are they can’t see that by promoting Islam they are taking that right away from their daughters.  Just as there is no end to evilness, there is also no end to stupidity.

This solution may sound unorthodox but it works.  When a woman is so stupid that she submits her intelligence to a 7th century  psychopath, she has to be treated the way her misogynist prophet said she should be treated. I assure you they will not like it. Make her taste the “sweetness” of Islam in her flesh without breaking her bones, and in no time she will realize that Islam is not such a good religion after all.

If you want instructions for the The Proper Way To Beat Your Wife  You can find that on Youtube.

But don’t beat her too severely, i.e. don’t break her bones. The Prophet said, “I advise you to take care of the women, for they are created from a rib and the most crooked portion. If you try to straighten it, it will break, and if you leave it, it will remain crooked, so I urge you to take care of the women.” (Bukhari: 7: 62: 114)

Many readers may find my advice funny, but it is really tragic. If your wife agrees to read my book she will come to see the stupidity of Islam and will become embarrassed of her silliness and sorry for giving you so much pain. Sadly, she will not read anything that may open her eyes.  She will rather go to hell and burn with Muhammad than to read anything written against him.

You may also like...

No Responses

  1. dssc7 says:

    Hay, human being. How are you, and your family? Dont be affraid with Islam. Islam came to Indonesia peacefully. Read an article below. http://historyofislam.com/contents/the-post-mongo

  2. rubayasiraj says:

    You are so right!

  3. narcole1919721 says:

    *touched* yes…u have good heart too…forgiving…

  4. Qamar says:

    She has every right to have her own options and a religion this is her human right if you all don't like it tuff .you are all against Islam and blinded and have hatred in your hearts for all Muslim and type cast us all .We are loving kind people with our own minds. The modern day Muslim is not brainwashed I should no I am one I love my religion it's my choice I don't hate anyone I am forgiving and caring and am not against other religions only our lord god can judge us .thank god coz you lot would have us hanged and killed and we would still forgive you . 

  5. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Dear Humza,

    What is the identy of Real Muslim?
    and you have accepted who beats their wife is not real Muslim. But do you know in Sura 4:34 & 38:44 clearly say to beat wife. So how you love your prophet and the Allah who instruct Muslims to beat wife if you will not means you are also a Kaffir.

  6. ihateislam says:

    Phoenix,
    Pretty funny. Where the opportunity exists, Shavkat and his/her cohorts execute their " judgment day and hell-fire" right away.

  7. Phoenix says:

    What is the world coming to when people just can't leave terrorists alone…am I right Shavkat or what?
    Geez,just because muslims are the only group who daily blow up their own brethren and unbelievers does not give Ali Sina the right to bad mouth them.
    I also live with a christian family and I'm sick of all the freedom in their household.Their kids choose to leave home at 18 and find his or her place in the world and just like the parable of the prodigal son,they can return home too…how disgusting.
    I agree,the only way to heaven in Islam for a women is through her husband's hap-PEN!S.
    Keep up the good work Shavkat,and let the rampages keep comin'.No need for rational debate when you can just threaten your opponents with judgement day and hell-fire.

  8. ihateislam says:

    Shavkat,
    Holding a degree in islamic studies is not a necessary condition for understanding muhammadanism. By mere observation the requisite conclusion can be drawn. Let us take two scenarios.
    During the shopping mall siege in Nairobi, some hostages who could prove their muhammadan faith were freed.That was done on purpose to show the religious bias of the terrorists.
    On April 12, 2013, The Assyrian International News Agency carried a u-tube video it had culled from some muhammadan websites. The video showed some Egyptian Coptic women being ganged raped publicly. While the victims cried for help, which did not come, the rapists shouted "allahu akbar" and the shahada, two of muhammadans' most frequently uttered slogans. But before the attacks an imam had issued a fatwa authorizing rape. So the assailants, like their Kenyan brothers, were following official sanction given either by the writ or a "knowledgeable" person. Such actions and sanctions endanger people and make them feel unsafe. You proudly claim to live with a Christian family. But would a Christian living with a muhammadan family feel free to practice his faith in a muhammadan dominated country? There lies the difference between tolerance and intolerance, enlightenment and unenlightenment.

  9. Demsci says:

    //"Addressing the topic that some random guy posted (very likely to be posted by the owner of this site to bad mouth Islam) I just want to say that for women the only way to Heaven is through her husband's happiness."//

    In addressing this topic in the above article; the problem was that the woman in the story had become (very) Islamic and her husband not. Are you saying that Muslima's can only get to heaven when they make their husbands happy, even when the husband is infidel?!

    Because if you are saying that, and of course the husband can claim she makes him unhappy when she divorces him and when she obnoxiously practices Islam, this Muslima will not make it to heaven if she keeps making her husband unhappy like it was described in the article?

    And this goes for the rest of their marriage and so the rest of his life or her life, depending on which one of them dies first?

    Because then you argue in favor of Ali Sina, and you do not contradict and oppose him.

  10. Demsci says:

     //"If I will become more religious I know that I will respect more my mother and women, oh, I forgot, your definition of freedom is leaving your home when you turn 18 and send your parents to elders house (or whatever is that called)"//

    What do you mean with "MY mother and WOMEN" then? That you have or will have polygamy?
    Any way, you think most infidel children don't care enough for infidel parents, but don't you see that most infidel parents want to take care of themselves and do NOT WANT to OBLIGE their children to take care of them?!

    While Muslim parents force their children when they are adult, and BURDEN their children with the upkeep of both their parents AND their own children? We say; let parents take care of themselves all life, through the state if need be, and take care of their children, and let those children in turn take care of their own children only. It is a different and legitimate way of looking at the relation between parents and children.

  11. Demsci says:

    //"In fact, the most knowledgeable people of Islam say that they have only scratched the surface of the knowledge Islam offers."//

    Don't you see that that means that Islam is very hard to understand completely and by all in the same way? And this while the Quran claims it is easy to understand! Any way, it means that Islam is very prone to misunderstanding.

    And when you read what counterjihadists say about Islam, you very often, mostly, will find that

    their interpretation of parts of Quran-Hadiths-Sira is almost exactly the same interpretation of many Muslim preachers, leaders, oppressors, terrorists, killers. As it is nowadays careful monitored and shown what Muslims themselves think and say. The difference is only that  the Muslims endorse interpretation of Islam and the counterjihadists expose some of it.

    This means that first and foremost you also disagree with many different interpretations, misunderstandings of parts of Islam by other Muslims. And it is they, not counterjihadists (who merely echo, report and comment), who ruin Islam for you and Muslims like you.

  12. Demsci says:

    //"They judge, judge, and judge!"//
    First of all when you read this site and the posts on it, you should ask yourself what the motivation of the founder and the posters here is, Shavkat. Then what they are really SAYING.

    You seem to think that it is only to disparage Islam, as if that is all what you see them doing here. And that for that they study Quran-Hadiths-Sira and come to conclusions independently, then judge negatively. That they are only negative.

    But they have as motivation that they want for society, mankind and individual people, esp. women, something better than Islam, something positive.

    They see a part of Islam and a part of the 1,6 billion Muslims (and not all, so maybe not Muslims like you) as a danger, threat and obstacle for better societies, more freedom, democracy and prosperity for us humans in the future.

    There are other lifestyles among Humans with which Islam competes, which Islam tries to conquer and oppress and here you see some followers of the others fighting back. In a legitimate way, without violence or inciting to it. Don't you see it is only natural that among humans different lifestyles compete with each other? Don't you see that Muslims themselves, especially in Islamic countries also badmouth and disadvantage the religions and lifestyles of infidels?

    Just as you protest here, you can read for yourself here and elsewhere that infidels protest against Muslims badmouthing, oppressing, fighting, killing even, infidels. It is a 2-way-street.

    If eventually the counterjihadists succeed, in either severely diminishing Islam or improving Muslims interpretation of it, then in the long run mankind will be better off. And counterjihadists will mostly stop criticizing Islam as Muslims or descendants of Muslims will not care about them.

  13. RahimRam says:

    Dear Shavkat, you said "I just want to say that for women the only way to Heaven is through her husband's happiness". Have you taken an degree in Islamic studies? May i humbly ask, where the heaven is. Your statement does not sound treating men and women equal. Your statement seems totally irrational to any sensible common human being.

  14. Shavkat says:

    All of these people here are talking of Islam as if they have degrees in Islamic studies! They judge, judge, and judge! In fact, the most knowledgeable people of Islam say that they have only scratched the surface of the knowledge Islam offers. Yet, here you gather, talking about being open-minded and I question how many of these people are real and not fake created individuals… I am Muslim and I am trying to follow teachings of Islam, and nobody around me is endangered or feel unsafe. Actually, I live with a Christian family. If I will become more religious I know that I will respect more my mother and women, oh, I forgot, your definition of freedom is leaving your home when you turn 18 and send your parents to elders house (or whatever is that called). You know what, I don't want to have that! Addressing the topic that some random guy posted (very likely to be posted by the owner of this site to bad mouth Islam) I just want to say that for women the only way to Heaven is through her husband's happiness. The only reason these kind of problems, sites, comments occur is being uneducated and being affected by media! How many of you have gone in search of truth? That's right, why to leave your house when you can find out about things on Internet! I do not want to correct anyone or point to someone to blame for things going on wrong. Just don't judge Muslims, be a little patient and there will be the judgement day when we will find out about who was wrong and who was right. If you want to change the world, why don't you start with yourself? If you think there is a misunderstanding in Islam sit down with someone who has GOOD amount of knowledge in Islam and ask your questions! Be brave, what you are doing here is not actions of a brave man!

  15. ihateislam says:

    "NO THEY HAVE NOT..ELSE WHY ARE YOU HAVING SUCH DIFFICULTY?"
    Difficulty about what? That I sometimes do not reply in time does not mean that I am having difficulties. Such delays are caused by my schedule. Where time allows I give on the spot response. The issue of Aisha has been answered which was the only one you brought up. So the onus is on you.
    "YET EVEN MORE ARE KILLED IN THE NAME OF WESTERN DEMOCRACY? FAR MORE".
    I challenge you to present the figures in proof of such a wild assertion. Remember that he who asserts must prove.
    It is not enough to write flowery statements which are lacking in substance.

  16. ihateislam says:

    It has been proved again and again from muhammadan texts that Muhammad was a terrorist. He said so himself. Haven't you read him say that he was made victorious through terror? I bet you have not heard that before. In the quran a whole chapter is devoted to booty which Muhammad claimed was made halal for him for the first time in the history of mankind. His followers would say that this was the motivation for the raids they carried out. As usual you have not heard that before or will activate your denial gear.
    You asked me to prove that Muhammad struck Aisha and I referred you to Muslim 4:2127. Have you cured your ignorance with that?
    It has been shown repeatedly that Muhammad was an incurable liar. That came from the mouth of his own favorite wife, Aisha. Take his ascension to heaven for instance. While he claimed to have traveled from the furthest mosque presumably in Jerusalem with 'Gabriel', Aisha said they were in bed together throughout that night. So how did he leave without her knowledge? While on that miraj/mirage, he claimed to have met allah and personally argued on the reduction of the number of daily prayers for the muhammadans as was prompted by Moses. Yet Aisha countered that Muhammad had never seen allah and anyone who claimed otherwise is a liar.
    While so much evidence has been mounted against Muhammad, you are yet to present anything to show that the facts are wrong. The ball is still in your court.

  17. aminthemystic says:

    Yet . .. you made no point other than this:

    "This because Aminthemystic on the other thread claimed to be more in favor of Western Values than me and Ali Sina. But we are clear about which societal system we want to win over the winner, will Amin be clear about this? Pro democratic system, pro shariah system, like so many violent Muslims, or neutral? "

    See . . the whole point was to have a go at me personally . . .

    Here is WHY I am far more supporter of Democracy and Western Values than you . . . and far better.

    It is the pursuit of truth. . .

    1. Bush and Blair both said their attacks were motivated by God.

    2. There were rampant lies about Iraq and its WMD . . .which led to the innocent death of Dr. Kelly.

    3. And we already know that there were wide spread abuses . . . and those abuses are EVERYTHING against Western Values.

    So . . .if a Western war is wrong . . .kills millions . . .of innocent . . .then you have problem with that?

    And that to him is democratic values . . . hiding the abuses of his side!!!

    – – –

    "will Amin be clear about this? Pro democratic system, pro shariah system, like so many violent Muslims, or neutral? "

    You do not even have the decency to ask me outright . . . I simply want Muslims to adopt good democratic values . . . give up terrorist style attacks. . . and live in peace with other nations.

  18. Demsci says:

    correction: To win over the OTHER! (not winner).

  19. Demsci says:

    "Hardly any day passes without dozens of people being killed in different parts of the world by those brandishing the teachings of Muhammad." 
    //"Yet even more are killed in the name of Western Democracy? Far more. "//

    If we are going to compare the two prime motivations for killing as you put them, I would like us to establish a time-frame in which to compare. As the past was different from the present in many ways and also it is the future that counts and whether the Islamic or the Western Democratic influence is likely to be more detrimental than the other or perhaps that their influences make no difference. I propose to compare out from 9/11. 2001-2013.

    And to also look at the adversaries of both the Muslim killers and the Western Democratic killers and what they did to them and how they threathened them.

    And I like those who do the comparing to declare which societal system they prefer over the other or that they don't care which societal system eventually triumphs, perhaps in an effort to be objective.

    This because Aminthemystic on the other thread claimed to be more in favor of Western Values than me and Ali Sina. But we are clear about which societal system we want to win over the winner, will Amin be clear about this? Pro democratic system, pro shariah system, like so many violent Muslims, or neutral?

  20. aminthemystic says:

    "Evidence from your own texts to show that Muhammad was a mass murderer and a brigand. Has that been refuted? No. "

    Has that been presented? No.

    – – –

    "Where and when did you do that? "

    What are you talking about?

    – – –

    "It is evident who is brainwashed when you are required and actually accept whatever is vomited without the right to question. "

    Precisely . . . hence when I show you "mistakes" of Sina. . . . do I get a comment? Nope.

    When I ask for proofs of your claim . . . do I get an answer . . Nope.

    hence you are brainwashed.

    Thank you for agreeing.

    – –

    "That is precisely what you continue to do in spite of all the atrocities committed by Muhammad and his successors all you have done is to engage in denials. "

    Where?

    Asking you to "prove" your claims is not denial . . . else . . .even in this . . . you have to prove your claim.

    – – –

    Repeated miserable failure. . . . if it Islam is all that evil and you can prove it so easily then . . .it have been several days. . .why have you FAILED so miserably. . .

    You simply claim that it has been established. . .

    By whom?

    Sina?

    If HE is your answer . . .then I have news for you . . .Sina has not established anything . . . other than how mistaken-ridden and incorrect he is.

  21. aminthemystic says:

    "The burden of proof shifts when the facts have been established. In this case the facts have been proved that muhammadanism is evil from the daily activities of its members."

    No they have not . .Else why are you having such difficulty?

    – –

    "Hardly any day passes without dozens of people being killed in different parts of the world by those brandishing the teachings of Muhammad."

    Yet even more are killed in the name of Western Democracy? Far more.

    – –

    " It is for you to prove otherwise. That burden has not been discharged. "

    No merely attempted side pass – which is completely bogus.

    = = =

    It is like someone who says "Earth is a Prism" then when asked to prove it simply says as it is a fact that Earth is a prism . . . it is for you to disprove it.

    – – –

    I do not let such stupidity pass.

  22. ihateislam says:

    On Muhammad striking Aisha violently, I referred you to Muslim 4: 2127. Read things yourself to become acquainted with the teachings and actions of Muhammad instead of relying on what some other person tells you.

  23. ihateislam says:

    You have shown a depth of ignorance about muhammadanism. I have lived with muhammadans and understand muhammadanism from my reading of the texts and interaction with its adherents. I visit muhammadan propaganda sites to obtain information from there as well.

  24. ihateislam says:

    The burden of proof shifts when the facts have been established. In this case the facts have been proved that muhammadanism is evil from the daily activities of its members. Hardly any day passes without dozens of people being killed in different parts of the world by those brandishing the teachings of Muhammad. It is for you to prove otherwise. That burden has not been discharged.

  25. ihateislam says:

    "AND WHAT "ARGUMENTS" HAVE YOU PRESENTED THAT NEEDS TO BE COUNTERED?. NONE".
    Evidence from your own texts to show that Muhammad was a mass murderer and a brigand. Has that been refuted? No.
    "I HAVE ALREADY HAVE…
    Where and when did you do that?
    "TEXT EXAMPLE OF BEING BRAINWASHED-"
    It is evident who is brainwashed when you are required and actually accept whatever is vomited without the right to question.
    "-IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW WRONG YOU ARE… AND WHAT IS SAID – YOU WILL SIMPLY CONTINUE SPOUTING THE LINE".
    That is precisely what you continue to do in spite of all the atrocities committed by Muhammad and his successors all you have done is to engage in denials.

  26. ihateislam says:

    Muslim 4:2127 "HE SAID : WAS IT THE DARKNESS (OF YOUR SHADOW) THAT I SAW IN FRONT OF ME? I SAID : YES. HE STRUCK ME ON THE CHEST WHICH CAUSED ME PAIN, AND THEN SAID—-"
    You can read the entire passage yourself and then come to the same conclusion as I have of your being ignorant of your muhammadan literature.

  27. Phoenix says:

    In short, nearly all discussions about God end up in paradoxes and contradictions. The most logical answer might just be "DO NOT KNOW" . . . but it is the least anyone goes for. People either believe or do not believe."

    This is not true.An argument for God or the First Cause responsible for the Big Bang can be argued for in a sound syllogism,without any paradoxes.

  28. Phoenix says:

    @amin
    you said:The "IF" . . .and no one is saying "All" . . .end of."

    As a student of Philosophy ,like me, I would've expected you to understand my deductive argument.In deductive arguments,the terms "If" and "Then" are commonly used in propositions.My syllogistic format was valid as taught in logic text books and you have failed to show why it's invalid.
    Regarding the term "ALL",,,it implies that the category is distributed,hence the deductive argument as opposed to inductive.For example…All A is B.Meaning the A category is the subset of B category.

    Occasionalism = All of man's deeds is willed by Allah.
    Man's deeds is category A. Allah is category B.

    If you still don't understand I'll try again.

  29. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //Another point . . .it is interesting . . .you did not bother to answer Phoenix. //
    Phoenix didn't ask me the question. How desperate!!!

    //I have not been caugh lying about anything.//
    You can deny as many times as you want.

    And you are yet to come with a single source that says that Accidental Properties are externally sourced. http://www.almaany.com/home.php?language=english&…
    (hopefully the link came up fine). Do I see 'Dependent on External Source'? nah!!

  30. aminthemystic says:

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    You lied . . .and were exposed for it.

    What Philosophy knowledge?

    What Philosophy knowledge?

    What Philosophy knowledge?

  31. aminthemystic says:

    Another point . . .it is interesting . . .you did not bother to answer Phoenix.

    Another epic failure of your supposed Philosophy knowledge

  32. aminthemystic says:

    It is apparent to anyone . . . . I have not been caugh lying about anything.

    I have given you ample opportunity. . . yet:

    1. You cannot state what the lie is.

    2. Prove it.

    – –

    Hence such a baseless claim in itself is a lie.

  33. aminthemystic says:

    "The only person caught lying is you. And people reading these exchanges have been given ample evidence and logic for that claim. Mis-labeling indeed "

    See clearly more STUPIDITY. . . what are you on about? What people?

    More pretense. . .

    – – –

    "Mis-labeling indeed "

    Yes. But the thing is what are you talking about?

    What mislabeling?

    What mislabeling?

    What mislabeling?

    What mislabeling?

  34. aminthemystic says:

    "If Allah's responsible for every causal interaction of mind and body,then he's also responsible for man's evil deeds and fate (hell),which by extension eliminates free will. "

    The "IF" . . .and no one is saying "All" . . .end of.

    – –

    In short, nearly all discussions about God end up in paradoxes and contradictions. The most logical answer might just be "DO NOT KNOW" . . . but it is the least anyone goes for. People either believe or do not believe.

  35. aminthemystic says:

    Ha ha ha ha .. . where is Sina now? Read this . . . . Ha ha ha . . .this is the support!

    Jeeez.

    – –

    This is why no one bought and read Sina's book . . . it is worthless garbage.

    Look the society at large bans people like Sina.

    He aint hidden because of Muslims – that is nonsense . . . he is hidden because of the Western society.

    – –

    Look how they label people like Pamela Geller . . . he wants to avoid that fate. . .

    Oh and he has no ability or stomach for public speaking.

  36. aminthemystic says:

    Dear – this is ALL you will be ever capable of. I do NOT think you are capable of forming an argument. Why don't you look this up? Educate yourself. I can recommend and send you several books [PDF] on how to form an argument!

    My email is:

    [email protected] – send a request – I will send you the books. After you have learned how to form and argument . . . . then come back

  37. Sakat says:

    @Chuck
    I was doing post graduation and i took a room for rent ,there was a big mansion on the corner of a road ,i was supposed to pass through that lane every day to my educational center or for market .One day i saw a fakir (darwesh) in his ugly form of garment standing out side the gate of that mansion shouting at the inhabitants of that big house.He was smoking all kinds of ugly names at the occupants .I thought it was usual for an hermit to deliver such things .But let me tell u ,i was amazed at that Fakir ,not because of his shouting but the "intensity" with which he was shouting at the occupants of that big house.You may not accept it ,but i saw him shouting ugly words and name calling at people of that house for nearly two months without any intervals .However the surprising element is ,all the two months of bashing ,none of of members of that house gave attention at this person .Approximately ,after two months one day that hermit left that place and the business as usual for the people of that big house.All these years i was pondering about the amazing thing which i was a witness that ,the Fakir was doing name calling and cursing at family without any interruptions for two months what had prompted him to do so.Now i knew it was cursing tournament of Mohammedan's (courtesy Ali Sina ). Exactly this mystic is doing the same thing ,but this person cannot be compared to that ignorant fakir who ,innocently believed Mohammed that ,if he curse intensely it will affect the target.This mystic is opportunistic ,when he is cornered he becomes jackal and runs in the hole hahaha. The owner of that big mansion was Ali Sina and hermit shouting in the direction was Amithemystic hahaha……….. ( nothing substantial)

  38. Sakat says:

    I work so hard and earn my lively hood dear ( it is alien to u lot),don't leave on others labor ,you do that (followers of Mohammed ) ,should have some shame (don't leave on the grants of petro-dollors from S.A for your sustenance ,for your gimmicks here ha ha ha.).

  39. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //There is no way on earth . . . that you can cover up on oyur stupid lie . . . that you have "philosophy" knowledge.

    Not a chance . . .

    You lied and were exposed for it. //
    Huh!!
    The only person caught lying is you. And people reading these exchanges have been given ample evidence and logic for that claim. Mis-labeling indeed 🙂

  40. Agracean says:

    Ha! Another stupid braindead zombie…

  41. Phoenix says:

    I can see how muslims would've adpoted Occasionalism…it fits nicely with an authoritarian deity that's completely in control and responsible for every human action.Under scrutiny,there's at least 2 major problems with this viewpoint.Namely,If Allah's responsible for every causal interaction of mind and body,then he's also responsible for man's evil deeds and fate (hell),which by extension eliminates free will.
    Occasionalism is simply determinism masquerading as free will in order to placate dualism.The two cannot co-exist,it's contradictory and therefore false.Every attempt to justify it will lead to more paradoxes and contradtions.

  42. aminthemystic says:

    "You are the shameless coward who runs away because of not having any defense to the facts brought against muhammadanism. "

    And which ones are those? The above is a lie from you nothing more. You have not brought any "facts".

    – –

    Your ranting is not facts . . . and neither are "opinions"

  43. aminthemystic says:

    "Muhammad struck Aisha violently when he discovered that she was suspicious of him cheating on her."

    When you were asked to prove you point . . .you simply pretended that it was me who has to post up some facts . . .

    Yet it is you claim.

    Such shameless pretense is not going to help. . . either put up or shut up.

  44. aminthemystic says:

    Once more . . .all you can do is put up such messages . . . when you are pressed . . .you commit fallacies.

    – –

    You do not know much about Islam other than what you've gleaned from a few propaganda sites.

    – –

  45. ihateislam says:

    They are the real muhammadans who follow both the text and precedents.

  46. aminthemystic says:

    "Yes . . .absolute cowardice. . . anyone can opine. The merit is in backing up in what you say . . . "

    This was for YOU to qualify your nonsense. . .

    – –

    Why don't you look up what Burden of Proof is . . .
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

    If you make a claim . . . up to you to prove it.

    Trying to shift hte burden of proof is a logical fallacy.

  47. aminthemystic says:

    And what "argument" have you presented that needs to be countered? None.

    Why don't you take your own message and act upon it – rather than the usual ranting.

    – –

    " If you think that anything has been falsified about muhammadanism, then present convincing facts to refute such falsehood. Stop barking like a rabies infested dog. "

    I already have . . . pretending and simple denials – simply highlight that you are unable to answer.

    – –

    "Nothing you do or say will stop the evil of Muhammad and his cult from being exposed. "

    Text example of being brainwashed. It does not matter how wrong you are . . .and what is said – you will simply continue spouting the line.

  48. ihateislam says:

    Evidence is not flamboyant noise making, which is what you do, but the presentation of facts. If you think that anything has been falsified about muhammadanism, then present convincing facts to refute such falsehood. Stop barking like a rabies infested dog.
    The internet provides the means to reach out to people across the world with ease. It has nothing to do with bullying. Bullies are those who cut heads, sever limbs and silence anyone who disagrees with them. My people say that the weakling wields the club instead of relying on his fists. Those who kill to prevent opposition are the cowards and you know them. Nothing you do or say will stop the evil of Muhammad and his cult from being exposed.

  49. aminthemystic says:

    Ha! Another one bites the dust. . .

  50. Agracean says:

    Mr/Ms aminthemystic, I'll let you win the argument then and now, you may proceed to hell. Good luck, braindead zombie!

  51. malikhumza says:

    These are not muslims who beats their wife i hate them all 

  52. aminthemystic says:

    Start nonsense again . . . and this is what you are going to get.

    Good.

  53. aminthemystic says:

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

    You lied and got exposed. Shamelessly went a bit berserk.

  54. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //All references are to one chunk . . . mislbeling which I self-corrected and is STILL on my word//
    I think I have seen the end of it. This is sufficiently proven that it wasn't an error of mis-labelling or misspelling one book for another.

    //and you are are arguing over it . . . why? //
    I am not arguing over it. I have proven two things: 1. Your scholarship is rather hollow since you can't make out Book A from Book B, at least one of which you supposedly read, understood and then translated.
    2. You lied.

    //Actually it does.. //
    Well, it doesn't. It only suggests that you might be knowing how to make yourself in English. It doesn't imply that you have a great degree of command over English, many in England don't actually.

  55. aminthemystic says:

    There is no way on earth . . . that you can cover up on oyur stupid lie . . . that you have "philosophy" knowledge.

    Not a chance . . .

    You lied and were exposed for it.

    Further lying is just silly.

    – –

    This is at an end.

  56. aminthemystic says:

    Your ridiculous carrying on is getting silly. . .

    You allege lie after lie . . . when asked for proof. . . .nothing comes back.

    – –
    Your carrying on about my mislabeling . . . wow!

    There is nothing more stupid than that – of which you have said.

    Why?

    What are you on about?

    What?

    What?

  57. aminthemystic says:

    Your stupidity is breathtaking . . .
    All references are to one chunk . . . mislbeling which I self-corrected and is STILL on my word. . . and you are are arguing over it . . . why?

    – –

    "The lie is all yours. You couldn't give a single reference which says something that I am saying an Accidental Property is not (Or not saying an Accidental Property is)."

    Another one to count . . . see this TOO is a lie . . . as this DOES NOT give any lie – mere ANOTHER claim.

    – –

    "That doesn't prove that you have any degree of command over English."

    Actually it does.

  58. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //you can have one line of text and make mistakes in it.//
    And then make reference to that thread after thread. Way to go. Making an error in a piece is one thing but then repeat the same over a cluster of threads. Mislabelling indeed. Quoting from some of your own comments: "I am talking about what Lisan Al Arab says"
    "No it doesn't. As Lisan al Arabid gives the two adjectives to describe"
    "As I have shown my source. Lisan Al Arab"
    "when Lisan says . . . Dhati and Aradi"
    'Lisan talks about the difference between Dhiyah and Noor. "'
    It was only after a lot many responses and counter responses Taj cropped up. Point proven. Pack up.

    //Then why is it you failed so miserably//
    Poor you. Your mind is all jumbled. That was against your commenting upon my 'pretending' knowledge about Physics.

    //You lied about being knowledgeable in Philosophy. //
    The lie is all yours. You couldn't give a single reference which says something that I am saying an Accidental Property is not (Or not saying an Accidental Property is).

    //any illuminating knowledge appear//
    That may be because this is not a high profile discussion on Philosophy or may be because you are blind.

    //Yet, I am native speaker of English. I was born and raised and live in England. //
    That doesn't prove that you have any degree of command over English. I did have a vague idea that you are presently in England (the other vague idea I have is that you are of Pakistani descent). But that is a different story.

  59. aminthemystic says:

    Cop out answer . . . why even bother to reply?

  60. ihateislam says:

    Read your muhammadan literature. It shows how ignorant you are about what you subscribe to.

  61. aminthemystic says:

    Sakat! Dear fellow . . . you aint even a Jackal – that comes to eat the remnants of lions . . . keep it up sonny. . . as nonsensical as ever!

  62. aminthemystic says:

    This is getting really embarrassing for you. . .

    This is like a kid who cannot hold his ground – when at a safe distance . . . THEN hurls abuse.

    When we were in conflict . . . then your alleged "philosophy" did not make an appearance. . .

    Now – you are just hurling petty insults.

    – – –

    Based on what?

    That I self-corrected in something . . . which you are unable to read or determine . . . yet were attempting to argue?

    If you cannot see how that makes YOU look . . . well!

  63. aminthemystic says:

    Sorry dear – but it is your stupidity that is under review . . . you can have one line of text and make mistakes in it. Yet, I am native speaker of English. I was born and raised and live in England.

    – –

    Keep "Ha ha-ing" away . . . it will not hide your shame.

    1. You lied about being knowledgeable in Philosophy.

    2. The carrying on about me . . . it is:

    a) tit-4-tat

    b) Embarrassingly stupid lie. One really has to have given up rationality to believe in it.

    – –

    "Unlike you, I don't have to pretend. "

    Then why is it you failed so miserably . . .and now are simply carrying on?

    Why didn't – as I pointed out – any illuminating knowledge appear . . . you are off topic and being petty. . .

  64. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //Authors have legions proof readers to make sure . . . and even then the best of scholars make mistake//
    Hah!! You need proof reading for a 20 line article which mentions 3 or 4 references. Keep up the pretense.

    //YOU still do not know what I am talking about – and YOU are not even able to determine . . this! //
    Ha ha. Keep the show on.

    //Now go and pretend you have physics knowledge//
    Unlike you, I don't have to pretend.

    //you have ignored them posts//
    Where did you learn your English from?

  65. Sakat says:

    Cool down !!! don't expect lions to exist in Islam ,they kill innocent at sleep ( it is not the habit of lion) ,they don't face enemy in eyeball confrontations ( characters of jackals and swines) .Mohammed raided Jews in night (you are aware of it) ,ranting often from mytic hahaha, ………..no takers.

  66. Sakat says:

    Go for counseling ha ha ha!!! urgently needed for you kind hahaha.

  67. Sakat says:

    First let him define the term "Philosophy" hahaha ,he failed to define the term "Knowledge" long back hahaha.

  68. Sakat says:

    Look how impatient you are!!!! ,really my friend you need some counseling !!!! hahaha.

  69. Sakat says:

    Frustration at its peak …………………hahaha!!!!!!

  70. aminthemystic says:

    "You can blow your trumpet whichever way, its only a lie that you are saying. Nothing more. "

    I have given you repeated chances to "prove" this lie . . . you have not managed it . . .

    Flinging such baseless accusations . . . they equate to you being a lie . . .

  71. aminthemystic says:

    I have – and you are clearly lying . . . pretending I have not answered somewhere else. I have explained this – SEVERAL times . . . you have ignored them posts . . . if you want to join the ranting and raving brigade . . . be my guest.

    Not even your own support is impressed with you shenanigans.

    – –

    " On the other hand it has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt your alleged scholarship of Arabic is rather third grade. "

    More lying. And clearly out right lying.

    My "Arabic" scholarship will long continue . . . your simple lies will not harm it.

    Whenever needed it will come out . . . as it has done in the past. It has shut Sina up for start. . .

    Why don't you email and ask him?

    – –

    "Mislabeling!! Hah.. your source could be in any format, one doesn't mislabel it "

    Authors have legions proof readers to make sure . . . and even then the best of scholars make mistake.

    Here is the REALLY important bit . . . and that is WHY I said – I openly laughing at you . . .

    You did not expose this . . I myself self-corrected. . .

    Here is ANOTHER massive thing . . .

    YOU still do not know what I am talking about – and YOU are not even able to determine . . this!

    Hence WHY I am laughing so loudly.

    – –

    Now go and pretend you have physics knowledge and defend . . .Sina's complete butchery of physics in his new guise of finding god!

  72. aminthemystic says:

    Waxing lyrical and such spiels . . . are just about worthless. The merit is in the argument. Anyone can sit there and write dribble . . .so what? It seems you are nothing more than a ranter and raver.

    Good luck!

  73. aminthemystic says:

    Play games . . . dearie play games . . . but i have already highlighted hem . . . pretending and putting emoticons will not be of any help.

    Here are some:
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    However – they all originate from here.

  74. aminthemystic says:

    No. General philosophy. And it was regarding Chuck's lie that he was knowledgeable in Philosophy.

    1. Occasionalism . . . here is a good article. http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/K057

    2. Known as Jabariayh aw Iktyar . . . Early Muslims, those who propagated Determinism were labelled as Qadariyah and eventually became the Mutazilah – and their viewpoint died out. Those of "free will" the Ashariyah [and Maturidi] are the remnant. However this is just one issue between the two factions.

  75. Phoenix says:

    @amin
    This "knowledge in philosophy" that you mentioned…Is it islamic philosophy?If the answer's yes then please answer the following two questions,using islamic texts reference.
    1)What exactly is the Islamic viewpoint of the mind—–>body relations…Is the mind causally efficacious on the body or causally inert?
    2)Does Islam propogate determinism or free will?

  76. Akshat says:

    @AMinthemystic

    "Look at how many "mistakes" have been highlighted . . . any answer? No. "

    Tell one single mistake in Ali's writing plz that your ultra scientific and philosopher mind has highlighted. :):):)

  77. cchuckc says:

    @amin__//Knowledge in Philosophy . . .and has to lie about a Wiki article . . . yet when other sources from Oxford dictionary and Enc Britannica . . . then shuts up//
    No shutting up yet!! So typical of you… You haven't been able to provide a single source that says that Accidental properties are externally sourced. Crying your lungs out don't prove a thing. On the other hand it has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt your alleged scholarship of Arabic is rather third grade. Mislabeling!! Hah.. your source could be in any format, one doesn't mislabel it and then go around commenting using it for 40-50 replies. You can blow your trumpet whichever way, its only a lie that you are saying. Nothing more.

  78. Agracean says:

    Mr/Ms aminthemystic, I believe that one day, when the scales fall from your eyes, you will humbly my dear Ms Dr Ali Sina, for everything he has done here, to save blind folks like you from hell.

  79. cchuckc says:

    //The great American writer Truman Capote – his MS used be riddled with spelling mistakes//
    Spelling mistakes and mislabelling of a reference AND THEN REPEATING IT OVER A MULTITUDE OF THREADS aren't same.

    //I was looking through a database [Maktaba Samela] and not a physical book. //
    Which is one and same thing. The format of the book doesn't matter.

    //Yes it is . . . the lie was completely ridiculous . . . and on tit-for-tat basis . . . you alleged the above . . . which makes you look silly . . .and petty. //
    How foolish. You don't even know what is petty. 'Petty' was your picking up a small remark from my side and then start character assassination. See how easily you moved away from the main topic and then post after post called me a liar. I just called your bluff about your alleged scholarship from evidences directly verified.

    //Knowledge in Philosophy . . .and has to lie about a Wiki article . . . yet when other sources from Oxford dictionary and Enc Britannica . . . then shuts up//
    I challenged you to show one single source that says that Accidental properties are dependent on external source(s). You couldn't. So?

  80. aminthemystic says:

    If you had such philosophy knoweldge it would have come through . . . it didn't. All you did was a quick Google search and pasted the 1st link of the search . . .a link that did not open – due to the address not copied properly!

    – –

    To hide this shame . . you alleged the above silliness. . . and that is the most idiotic hting you have come out with . . .

    Like I've already said, I will laugh at that . . . forever. Read the further stupidity now . . .it still doesn't make sense. . .

  81. aminthemystic says:

    How absolutely silly! Scholars DO mislabel things . . . with each comment you reveal such stupidities . . . what is it that you corrected? Nothing. I self corrected my self. . .

    And this is going to come as shock. . . . there are e-book [electronic books!] – I was searching through a database of several thousand books . . .
    http://shamela.ws/

    – –

    You were exposed at the for lying . . . you do not have any great knowledge of philosophy. . .that was proven beyond doubt.

    All comments are there . . . it was an epic failure . . .how quickly your story changed . . . having to lie about a Wiki article . . .

    All that knowledge of Philosophy . . . and could not move beyond twisting Wiki.

    Yeah right

  82. aminthemystic says:

    Actually – people do mislabel. And often it is someone else who does the checking . . .

    The great American writer Truman Capote – his MS used be riddled with spelling mistakes . . . [especially towards the end of his life – and according to his agent] yet – he was a great writer.

    Also . . . books these day [this might have missed you!] are in electronic format. . . . I was looking through a database [Maktaba Samela] and not a physical book.

    Also what is it that YOU pointed out?

    After all . . . . it was ME who self-corrected?

    – – –

    "Ha ha. You don't know my qualifications. Your foolish rantings notwithstanding, my knowledge in Philosophy isn't a bit challenged (or you prove what I said that was wrong from a Philosophical stand point). "

    Yes it is . . . the lie was completely ridiculous . . . and on tit-for-tat basis . . . you alleged the above . . . which makes you look silly . . .and petty.

    You DO NOT have any qualifications in Philosophy . . . when challenged at the time . . . you changed your story.

    Knowledge in Philosophy . . .and has to lie about a Wiki article . . . yet when other sources from Oxford dictionary and Enc Britannica . . . then shuts up . . .

    Proof enough.

    You lied – and were exposed for it.

    Deal with it

  83. aminthemystic says:

    There we have it – no defense offered.

  84. cchuckc says:

    //this could no way be a lie of any kind. //
    Yeah, how pathetic!!

  85. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //There is ABSOLUTELY no lie there . . . and claiming this itself is lying on your part. //
    You can scream at the top of your voice if you want. Scholars don't mislabel book A for book B and then argue around book B, even naming it in threads after thread and suddenly realize that they have mislabelled it for book A. You want us to swallow that yarn.

    //that your frivolous lie about knowing philosophy became apparent //
    Ha ha. You don't know my qualifications. Your foolish rantings notwithstanding, my knowledge in Philosophy isn't a bit challenged (or you prove what I said that was wrong from a Philosophical stand point).

  86. aminthemystic says:

    How pathetic . . . this could no way be a lie of any kind.

  87. aminthemystic says:

    No you haven't. Even your attempt was ridiculous and completely foolish. . . it was EVEN worse than the idiotic lie. And you shamelessly pretend that you do not see HOW stupid it was. . . surely you are not that stupid. I do not think you are.

    – –

    There is ABSOLUTELY no lie there . . . and claiming this itself is lying on your part.

    – –

    I myself acknowledged that I had put the wrong name of the book down . . .when it became clear to you that your frivolous lie about knowing philosophy became apparent . . then you threw this in as a last desperate attempt.

    – –

    Shamelessly holding on to this silliness . . . you simply make your self look worse.

  88. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    'Mis-labelling' is your version. I have already explained why it is a lie.

  89. aminthemystic says:

    My darling . . . in the end, 'lying' versus 'mislabeling' which you, yourself correct. . . .

  90. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //pretended to have "philosophy" knowledge//
    Mis-labelling fool. 🙂

  91. aminthemystic says:

    Sakat – dear fellow – as nonsensical as ever! Where did your poor parents go wrong, eh?

  92. aminthemystic says:

    Like I said . . . you people are not capable of it . . .meandering nonsense and cowardice. When you have an argument . . .knock on my door.

    In the meantime . . . keep posting meaningless nonsense. . . .

    – – –

    This site is of a hate monger and a bigot. I have proven that to a good extend. Anyone "decent" tends to look him over and be on their merry way.

    This is why NO ONE reads his articles . . . NO ONE reads his books.

    NO ONE wants to defend his writings. . .

    – –

    All you have his your brainwashed selves . . . and hatred. When Sina could not cut with the Christians and they rejected his drool . . . now he has taken a "Hindu" guise.

    This new flavour . . . . eventually that will pass too.

    – –

    I do not think Hindus en masse are interested in hate . . .neither is Hinduism inherently evil.

  93. Sakat says:

    You are not Joking here man ,you are digging deep into depression ,one day you will not be here to make your acrobat either ,guess why? hahaha, poor fellow.

  94. aminthemystic says:

    "If you follow Islam then you will become Aminthemystic "

    Yeah . . .and when the lion comes out . . .

  95. aminthemystic says:

    You cannot answer anything . . . other than write spiels of nonsense. No one comes here because of you – it is to expose Sina's lies . . . and look how good I am at that . . .

    He does not have the guts to face me.

    Look at how many "mistakes" have been highlighted . . . any answer? No.

    What do you get?

    Nonsense like yours.

    – –

    Bunch of cowards?

    I am right.

    – –

    Look what one your brothers tried to do . . . pretended to have "philosophy" knowledge . . .

    This is why all you will do is post up nonsense . . . in order to avoid answering . . .

    I have highlighted that successfully.

  96. Sakat says:

    Broken disc ha ha ha!!!!!

  97. Sakat says:

    Frustrated animal ha ha ha!!!!

  98. Agracean says:

    Hi Mr/Ms aminthemystic, do you understand the gist of all his messages here? A good or bad tree is judged by the fruits that it bears. It applies to all human beings, beliefs and teachings too.

  99. Akshat says:

    If we are band of coward's then you are coming here to defend Islam ?? Band of coward's don't deserve any attention but it seems your mind is occupied only with band of cowards. 

    Answer is simple 

    No matter how much you pretend to be confident, but you are scared inside that this is the start of end of Islam.. this so called  band of coward's will eradicate Islam from earth's face. That is why you cant stop yourself coming here.

    We are happy that Muslim's are coming here and able to see nonsense comment's of people like you. It will help them to see  the Evil of Islam.

    Just now I realize that We can have a tag line:

    If you follow Islam then you will become  Aminthemystic :):):)
    (If you are a female then you will become a Narcole)  :):):)

     

  100. narcole1919721 says:

    Dost daram…♥

  101. narcole1919721 says:

    So..u wont post ur pic with flowers and toad? :'/

  102. narcole1919721 says:

    Dorood..halet chetore…hehe…i used to debate with persians. all  ranaway…except one persian woman named anahita…hmm…i missed debating with her..is she ur daughter '', how about we debate with sign language? since u cant speak arabic..:{

  103. aminthemystic says:

    Fjordman the blogger whom Sina proudly highlights as . . .a reviewer of his book too is as motivated by hate as Sina, himself.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fjordman

    He was a major force in converting "Anders Behring Breivik" – the Norway "terrorist". . .

    Interesting how "hate" leads down the path of violence . . .

    Sina is nothing more than hate monger. . . this is why any serious scholar has deserted him. Not even someone like Daniel Pipes . . . .will go near him.

    – –

    And the band of cowardly supporters? . . .

  104. aminthemystic says:

    " If they read it they will leave Islam for sure and you can have a secure future together. If they refuse to read it, leave them."

    Anyone with two bit brain can read the book and look at it . . . it is full of er . . . "mistakes". . .
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    – –

    Here is the fascinating thing . . . not even his supporters read that garbage. . . it is so bad no one wanted to publish it.

    Read a review:

    "However, his idea of spending many pages on detailed discussions of what kind of mental or physical illnesses Muhammad did or did not suffer from was sometimes too technical for my taste."
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/10/fjordman-review

    It is such a pile of nonsense. . . even the reviewer whom Sina highlights could not deal with it. Hence, the above excuse.

    – –

    He does his best to push it on to everyone . . . seems to me I might be the only one who has ever read it.

  105. aminthemystic says:

    " Is it cowardice to call Muhammad a mad man to your face? Is it cowardice to say that he was a mass murderer? "

    Yes . . .absolute cowardice. . . anyone can opine. The merit is in backing up in what you say . . .

    – – –

    This is what anonymous trolls do. Swear and insult and bully people online . . . and do you think that is brave?

    Christ!

  106. aminthemystic says:

    You really don't get it do you? Jeeeeeez. . .

    You are anonymous – and saying NOTHING to my face . . . .oh the stupidity one has to deal with.

    – – –

    And then you are BACK to ranting and raving . . .

    – – –

    You are brainwashed . . . whatever . . . now move along. . . you are another waster.

    – –

    Cowardice? It is dealing with lies . . . .let us takes Sina's lies . . . . as this is HIS site and primarily about HIS views on Islam. . .

    He says the same things as you . . . he has a book . . .

    mistaken ridden . . .

    . . . his articles – same.

    So it is your failure to deal with actual issues . . . than ranting and raving.

  107. ihateislam says:

    Is it cowardice to call Muhammad a mad man to your face? Is it cowardice to say that he was a mass murderer?
    What is cowardice in saying that he was a rapist, an armed robber, the highest conman in history?
    No word has been spared to convey that there is no difference between Muhammad and satan. That has been extended to cover all those killing and maiming in his name following the examples he set for them. To the muhammadan calling evil by its proper name amounts to cowardice.
    I am not interested in any dead language. You can write or speak it till hell freezes over, it makes no sense to me as it will not change the facts about Muhammad and the calamity he brought on humanity.

  108. denialisnoproof says:

    will let your 9 year old sister to be raped by 54 year old mohammad ? if no then stop being muslim period.

  109. ihateislam says:

    You are the shameless coward who runs away because of not having any defense to the facts brought against muhammadanism. You keep on spewing nonsense with the hope that such garbage will hide your deficiency. It cannot help you. Many evils perpetrated by muhammadanism against humanity have been highlighted here and all you do is to crawl behind names calling. If you have anything to say, be man enough to do so.

  110. aminthemystic says:

    Inconsequential implies – not important or significant. Sunnah is not that . . in Islam there is bare necessity for someone to be Muslims and those are absolute basic beliefs . . .and it is upon those which Islam rests . . . hence the gradation follows.

    Muslims view Quran fundamentally different than Hadith. I have already pointed this out.

    – –

    "Both, according to muhammadans, were 'divinely inspired'. "

    Incorrect.

    – –

    "Which part of Muhammad's sunnah has been revised? "

    Unanswerable in short sentence . . .

    Start off with this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith

    – –

    Not going to do useless tit for tat . . . end of.

    This time digest the responses and reply accordingly.

    = = =

    And stop turning the quotes into caps . . .

  111. ihateislam says:

    "WRONG. NO ONE SAID SUNNAH WAS "INCONSEQUENTIAL"-
    When something is 'non essential' it means that it can done without. That makes it of no consequence since the process can still go on without it.
    "MUSLIMS DO NOT GIVE HADITH AND QURAN SIMILAR STATUS-".
    Both, according to muhammadans, were 'divinely inspired'.
    "-WHERE AS THE HADITH CORPUS AND HOW LAW IS DERIVED ARE REVISED".
    Which part of Muhammad's sunnah has been revised?
    "AGAIN – TRY READING AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS BEING … RATHER THAN MUTTERING – QUIT RANTING AND RAVING AND CONCENTRATE".
    That applies to you.
    "AGAIN – RIDICULOUS RESPONSE WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS UNDER DISCUSSION".
    Your response typifies that.

  112. aminthemystic says:

    Quit the cowardice – by pretending to answer with spiels and babble . . .

    Either come around to the meaningful discussion else . . . .

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce eu tempus urna, in pretium est. Etiam imperdiet ultricies eleifend. Sed ullamcorper elit dolor, varius elementum velit lobortis non. Proin laoreet volutpat enim ut adipiscing. Quisque ac lacus eu augue fringilla sagittis. Nullam laoreet iaculis rhoncus. Aliquam tincidunt nisi nec tortor ullamcorper cursus. Fusce sodales justo non erat blandit malesuada. Vivamus faucibus ipsum sed enim sagittis, ullamcorper porttitor tellus cursus. Praesent id erat sit amet augue dictum pretium. Cras eget fringilla mi, sed venenatis lectus. Pellentesque velit odio, varius pellentesque pretium eget, fringilla eu dui. Donec vitae varius tortor, non porttitor mi. Donec arcu dolor, viverra id eleifend eget, iaculis et lacus.

  113. aminthemystic says:

    You ain't got the legs . . . hence why the repeated nonsense . . . anything of substance . . . .you cannot stand up.

    Hence – quit babbling. . . it does not work on me.

    – –

    When you have something useful . . . by all means . . . in the meantime go back to the question that I have asked you.

    – –

    I do not want your nonsense . . . as for the pettiness . . . that is your problem.

    – –

    Shameless cowards the lot of them . . . see how they run away . . . funny that! Isn't it!

  114. ihateislam says:

    "READ HOW YOU RANT AND RAVE AND "TWIST" THINGS TO SUIT WHATEVER YOU ARE GOING TO SAY NEXT…THAT IS PROOF THAT YOU COMPREHENSION LEVEL IS NOT HIGH".
    That mirrors you perfectly.
    "ALSO – IT IS THE QUESTION OF OBVIOUS BIAS .. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT IS BEING SAID .. AS LONG AS IT IS ANTI-ISLAMIC .. TRUTH VALUE OF IT – IT SEEMS – DOES NOT MATTER TO YOU".
    Instead of making the usual claim of anti-muhammadanism, which has by now lost its appeal, why don't you bring out that question of obvious bias and misrepresentation? In muhammadanism to quote from its literature is enough to bring all sorts of accusations except it the quotation supports the the straight jacketed stereotype.

  115. aminthemystic says:

    It is up to him to respond . . .as for challenge – I do not speak or understand Persian [not yet anyway].

    However . . . there used to be someone posting in Persian – Sina did not reply back.

  116. aminthemystic says:

    "Muhammad struck Aisha violently when he discovered that she was suspicious of him cheating on her."

    Prove it?

  117. ihateislam says:

    "I AM NOT SURE HE SPEAK FARSI EITHER."
    Why don't you challenge him on that?

  118. aminthemystic says:

    Mwwwwwoah, Mwooooah. Peddle this BS somewhere else kiddo.

    Youse is nothing more than bunch of cowards . . . this is the kind of BS you come out with – when you know you do not have the legs . . . now move on.

    There are plenty of ranters here . . . so join the queue. Anything meaningful . . . that is beyond you.

    – –

    I am going to take Sina's BS apart . . . so watch it . . . no wonder he has turned "pro" Hindu.

    That is ALL he has left . . .few failed Hindus. . . the "white" folk are not playing ball. . .

    – –

    Why is it so difficult to find a supporter of his that has actually read his book or articles?

  119. Akshat says:

    @Aminthemystic,

    I asked you to take cold coffee but it seems you took alcohol that too beyond your capacity.

     In any case we will continue our movement against Evil Islam and Psychopath Muhammad. And presence of People like you and Narcole here is a sign that we are heading in right direction. 

    @Sakat  Muhammad was not only unaware of  Natural justice but justice itself was a alien concept for him.
    For him justice means a new way – for spreading his cult, for getting a female to satisfy his lust, and much more evil..

  120. Sakat says:

    @Akshat
    You are right ,to put it in legal term ,it is said ," HE WHO IS JUDGE TO HIS OWN CAUSE ",this is against the principles of "Natural Justice" .Mohammed was unaware of Natural Justice ,this Mystic is his bye product ha ha ha ,he too unaware of this (which sane human follow ,refered by Sina as one of the Golden Rule).

  121. aminthemystic says:

    Little wee kid wants to play GAMES!!!!!!
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    Keep it here . . . and quit the nonsense. . . or you will get whole load back . . .

  122. aminthemystic says:

    Sakat – you old nonsense . . . English lessons?

  123. aminthemystic says:

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What is it that you exposed?

    What?

    What?

    What?

    – –

    How shameless these people are . . . amazing!

  124. aminthemystic says:

    Ha ha ha . . . post nonsense you will get plenty back . . .

    Jeez – Hindu scholarship has gone down since the old days . . . new one are converting to atheism . . . oh well!

    – –

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    Oh, what shall we do with the drunken sailor.

    – – –

    Now – you do not have it in you . . . go play with lil "Denialisnoproof" and his swearing . . .

  125. aminthemystic says:

    I am not so sure he speak Farsi either.

    How pathetic. . . if you are going to comment about grammar of language to that level – it is EXPECTED that you know the language . . .simple.

    – – –

    This is a requirement for every other topic . . .yet . . . .

  126. akshat9 says:

    It seems Aminthemystic  playing a lawyer and also Playing a judge. He is in too hurry to give a verdict proving Islam a innocent religion. On what point ? after which argument?. Truly speaking he have not argued yet. 

    Islam has a 1400  years old  habit of winning by aggression. Aminthemystic is thinking that aggression will buy him a win as it did for his ancestor's. This is not gonna work now. Now First time in history of mankind pen is mightier then Sword. His aggression will not change anything here, yes it can cause him a headache 🙂
    Time has come for humanity to kill the evil of Islam from our earth. We lost on Sword, We will win on Pen.

    At last a few words to Aminthemystic: Dear I asked you to have a cold coffee so that you can keep calm while defending bullshit religion and rapist Muhammad. But it seem's you took a boiling tea. Dear its not gonna work like this. Anger will only ensure your defeat. You Muslim;s are too old to fight with pen. have Cold coffee this time… In fact have a ice cube massage on head before next reply. All the best. Eagerly waiting for your reply :):):)

  127. Ali Sina says:

    I don't speak Arabic, but I can arrange for an Arabic speaker.

  128. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //This idiotic lie will NOT go away . . .I will laugh at you forever //
    Very true this side. Mis–labelled it!!!! Ha ha!!!

  129. Agracean says:

    Mr/Ms aminthemystic, what have you exposed so far? Can you tell me?

  130. aminthemystic says:

    This is all that such people can muster. . .oh well!

    – –

    He he – telling isn't it how the cowards run off. . . I have exposed one for doing just that. I had to mention Sina's mistakes – he made excuses and left . .

    . . . another clearly lied and . . .

    and there is YOU!

    – –

    So how . . . . about it?

  131. Agracean says:

    Quit babbling nonsense here, aminthemystic. It's time to grow up!

  132. aminthemystic says:

    Read how you rant and rave and "twist" things to suit whatever you are going to say next. . . .that is sufficient proof that you comprehension level is not high.

    Also – it is the question of obvious bias . . it doesn't matter what is being said . . as long as it is anti-Islamic . . . truth value of it – it seems – does not matter to you.

  133. aminthemystic says:

    "It means you are revising the teachings of muhammadanism by making Muhammad's sunnah to be inconsequential. "

    Wrong. No one said Sunnah was "inconsequential" – Muslims do not give Hadith and Quran similar status. How Muslims view Hadith ir radically different that how Muslims view Quran. Mostly – it is the Quran that is absolute – where as the Hadith corpus and how law is derived are revised.

    – –

    "No I cannot see muhammadanism as most muhammadans see it because they deny what muhammadanism truly is. I see it in its proper perspective. "

    Again – try reading and understanding what is being . . . rather than muttering – quit ranting and raving and concentrate.

    – –

    "And what are these 'inventions'? You are the one trying to invent a new muhammadanism which is stripped of all its inhumanity. But that has failed. "

    Again – ridiculous response which has nothing to do with what is under discussion.

  134. ihateislam says:

    "I DOUBT YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAID".
    Prove your point that I did not understand him. Amerxp has presented muhammadanism without the mask put on it by deceitful muhammadans and their ignorant and mischievous apologists.

  135. ihateislam says:

    "WHAT REVISIONISM? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?"
    It means you are revising the teachings of muhammadanism by making Muhammad's sunnah to be inconsequential.
    "EITHER YOU SEE ISLAM AS MOST MUSLIMS SEE IT ELSE…."
    No I cannot see muhammadanism as most muhammadans see it because they deny what muhammadanism truly is. I see it in its proper perspective.
    "-WHATEVER YOU INVENT IN YOUR OWN INVENTION- IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MUSLIMS".
    And what are these 'inventions'? You are the one trying to invent a new muhammadanism which is stripped of all its inhumanity. But that has failed.

  136. aminthemystic says:

    "No sir, that story is hollow. It is not even worth the pixels shooting out of your computer. Your lie stands exposed. "

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What are you talking about?

    What is it that you exposed?

    What?

    What?

    – –

    When it became apparent – YOU – lied about this philosophy knowledge . . . then you chose this to claim – that I am no scholar of Arabic . . .

    Ha ha ha . . . The OBVIOUS stupidity of this still makes me laugh . . .

    Shame? Nope – none there . . .

    Like Sina and his book and all the little "mistakes" . . . . you people are shameless

  137. aminthemystic says:

    Hardly . . this EXPOSES your stupidity and lies . . .

    "Your lie stands exposed. "

    And exactly WHAT lie is that? Hmm . . . what is the lie? Even saying this has made the claim a lie . . . as there is NO Lie there . . .

    – – –

    Nothing made me laugh . . . not even the great dirty lie that you had knowledge in Philosophy . . . as this stupidity.

    Run wherever you want to . . .

    This idiotic lie will NOT go away . . .I will laugh at you forever . . .

    = =

    So how was I er "so confused" . . .

    Did you expose the confusion . . .

    Nope.

    – –

    So what is it that you are talking about?

  138. aminthemystic says:

    Sure! There we go . . . I exposed "denialisnoproof" long ago . . .

    He too lied . . .copied and pasted someones chunk as his own answer . . . shame? Nope!

    – –

    This is WHAT you people are . . .

  139. aminthemystic says:

    " If you think Ali's argument will be able to change every fanatic Muslim into a rational being then we are wrong. "

    How shameless you people really are . . .

    Sina and logic do not go together . . . so what happens to him in these comments sections?

    Why is he not able to defend his views?

    Time and time again . . . he has been exposed for his "fiddling" the truth . . . .

    This is the same person who was atheist . . . now this same person has had a conversion . . .to God!

    Yet you shamelessly drink it all up!

    – – –

    You? Logical? Do not make me laugh . . .

    Shall we not talk about his pathetic books . . . so how do you account for the "mistakes" in there?

    How?

    And why is it when you mention it to one of his supporters . . . like you . . . . you run off . . . like cowards.

    – –

    I put one shameless coward away the other day . . . do you have the courage?

    Or is it all for long meandering spiels?

  140. aminthemystic says:

    1. He is not a Dr.

    His idiotic response is testament to that . . . he said that is how others refer to him. He, himself does not use this.

    2. What "logical argument" . . . Sina cannot form a logical argument. . . not if he copies and pastes from the internet . . .with shoddy and mistake-ridden research.

    – –

    You people are completely shameless in your lying. Lies get exposed . . . what do you do?

    Carry on . . . and "ignore" the exposition.

    – –

    Possible reason?

    Hate!

    = = =

    Look at one person . . ."chuck"

    He lied and pretended he was knowledgeable in "Philosophy".

    Hint of a challenege – it all fell away . . .

  141. aminthemystic says:

    Pasting such spiels is futile. What do you know about logic?

    – –

    The above is nothing more than nonsensical meandering . . .what you claim to have long ago . . . paste them as you will. . . for the sake of keeping appearances . . .

    But if you want a discussion . . . argument . . . then those will not do.

  142. aminthemystic says:

    I doubt you understand what he said . . .

  143. aminthemystic says:

    "He could be a Quranist. "

    I am not.

  144. aminthemystic says:

    Try reading and understanding what is being said . . . rather than ranting. And then we might get somewhere.

    – –

    "Your revisionism"

    What revisionism? What are you talking about?

    – –

    Either you see Islam as most Muslims see it else . . .whatever you invent in your own invention – it has nothing to do with Muslims.

  145. ihateislam says:

    Amerxp,
    I wholeheartedly endorse your position. It could not have been said in any better way.

  146. ihateislam says:

    Ronny,
    Wife battery is part of muhammadanism, both theoretically and practically. Allah authorizes its employment in the quran. Muhammad put it into practice by violently striking his favorite wife, Aisha. His followers made mince meat of their wives in such a way that Aisha, "the mother of the faithfuls", complained that 'believing women's' conditions were hell on earth.

  147. ihateislam says:

    Chuck,
    That is also a possibility.

  148. Ronny says:

    Beating your wife can't be human in any religion or world for that matter.

  149. cchuckc says:

    @ihateislam
    He could be a Quranist.

  150. ihateislam says:

    "WRONG. ISLAM IS CENTRALLY BASED ON THE QURAN AND THAT BEING THE ABSOLUTE. AND NOT THE SUNNAH…ALL ITS PRACTICES ARE NON ESSENTIAL".
    It is difficult to know who, between you and allah, is correct. Allah says in the quran that Muhammad's life or sunnah was the model for his followers. In his last sermon, Muhammad said that he had left his followers two legacies: the quran and his sunnah. Before Muhammad died, Khalid bin Walid had spent 6 months teaching the people of Najran "the quran and the prophet's sunnah".
    If all the practices of the sunnah "are non essential", why would allah have urged that they be emulated and why did Muhammad say it was one of his legacies?
    Your revisionism is deviously motivated by the desire to create a distance from or obliterate examples which are as utterly odious as Muhammad's sunnah.Without the sunnah nothing is known about Muhammad to be emulated. That will make the orders of allah and Muhammad a nullity.
    One is tempted to conclude that you are an apostate for saying that the practices of the sunnah are non essential.

  151. ihateislam says:

    Muhammad is said to have seen allah and bargained one on one with him/it for the reduction of the daily prayers from 50 to 5. But Aisha said that anyone who claims that Muhammad ever saw allah is a liar. This means that Muhammad was a LIAR.

  152. ihateislam says:

    Ali Sina was born in Iran and later naturalized in Canada. He speaks Farsi and English. Why can't there be a debate in either of the languages if you are that much interested in languages? That you stammer a few half baked words in Arabic does not give you a mastery of that language for the dumb and there is nothing remotely interesting about it.

  153. akshat9 says:

    @Amintheislam,

    You Muslim's cant be impressed by logic. You all are already impressed forever by Quran. 
    A book by mentally sick Psychopath.

  154. narcole1919721 says:

    Oh mr amin inspired me to make correction to alisina.org. hmm how about i name the blog missnarcolesina.blogspot.com? but im quite busy now…might only write once a week…

  155. narcole1919721 says:

    If u win ill post a silly pic 🙂 if u lose i want u to wear lipstick, with  flowers on head, with a toad kissing ur cheek.

  156. narcole1919721 says:

    Mr ali, how about..having arabic debate? before having religion debate *coughs* wanna be no.3?

  157. narcole1919721 says:

    Qurand?

  158. rembrandt_gg says:

    Remember one man's pain is another man's comedy!!

  159. denialisnoproof says:

    your arabic is nonsense language and idiotic language so is your qurand.

  160. Sakat says:

    @aminthemystic
    /When I expose "Chuck" – this is all he has left . . /
    You have become vulnerable confronting that erudite Chuck as usual Mr.Mystic .You are in the habit of self petting ,it is always the weakness of semi-knowledged persons ,you are not exceptions to it . Ok best of luck next time hahaha.

  161. Rembrandt says:

    "•Jesus and Moses greeted Mohammed in jannat and request him to please bargain Allah to reduce prayers from 50 to 5. (I laughed a lot when i heard this 1st time  ) request was funny but funnier was the Allah's acceptance  
    •Muhammad challenged meccan's to produce something similar to quran. (I read Quran 5 times and really it’s tough to produce something as nonsense as Quran)  
    •Allah inspired Sex hungry Muhammad to marry a 6 year old female kid  
    •Satan lives in the nose at night      "

    duh 

  162. Rembrandt says:

    The quran is of this quality:
    http://1000mistakes.com/ http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/
    In addition to all that is in the faithfreedom.org site…

    May be we need to be brainwashed as any muslim imam want us to be to, overlook these errors and celebrate them as poetic/scientific/whatever height of literature…

    What man don't get is the fact the how-to of praying is NOT in the quran but in the sunnah…

  163. Rembrandt says:

    true islam does cause this…

  164. denialisnoproof says:

    amin the pig. screw you

  165. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //My source which I mentioned and have translated . . .I mis-labelled it //
    Ha ha. Not really!!! you were so confused that instead of book A, which you said you were reading and translating, you mention book B. Then you go around talking on it for weeks, in numerous post mentioning book B!!
    No sir, that story is hollow. It is not even worth the pixels shooting out of your computer. Your lie stands exposed.

  166. narcole1919721 says:

    Hmm..i planned to write articles in my blog bt never had chances…i so wanna write recipes and health tips…hmm…to help people to live better….its better than black campaign…brings more positivity to life. hmmm…..should i start again…what name is good…hey whats ur mommas recipe..lets discuss food instead..yumm

  167. narcole1919721 says:

    Lololol u noticed too…they dont know arabic…but talk about arabic stuff in english…man…even murtadin here are indians n persian x'D *coughs*  i dont mind debating with real arab infidel…

  168. aminthemystic says:

    Here is the thing – I have answered this . . .and he is EVEN lying about this . . . I can repeat.

    Accidental property . ..

    "accidents (i.e., of properties that are not essential to the substances in which they occur)"

    or

    "Philosophy (in Aristotelian thought) a property of a thing which is not essential to its nature. "

    or

    "Philosophy . any entity or event contingent upon the existence of something else. "

    There we have it . . .

    THAT is all I am claiming what "Accident" means. . . .

    As I have used this in my article:

    “Any entity or event contingent upon the existence of something else.” [*]
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    – – –

    See!

    Now this exposes his nonsensical lie!

    Yet he continues to lie!

  169. aminthemystic says:

    Pitifully desperate!

  170. aminthemystic says:

    "And you couldn't prove that the point was wrong. And trolling now. Keep on. "

    Ha ha ha ha . . . . and what are you doing?

    – – –

    You lied and you should not have . . . you are shameless in lying . . .YOU do not have nay knowledge in philosophy . . .I have exposed that.

    Attacking me and flinging accusation is simply desperate . . .

  171. aminthemystic says:

    "So you couldn't. How hard is that for you to accept? "

    I have . . .and lying about it . . . constantly will not help. And I have exposed your lying too.

    – – –

    "Poor chap. Couldn't prove a point and now making hollow claims. Go ahead. You stand alone!! "

    Ha ha ha ha . . . you silliness . . .when this philosophy lie was exposed . . . the desperate tit-for-tat attack on my Arabic . . . ha ha ha ha . . .

    – –

    See you will stick to the silly lie . . . yet lying about ONE article is not going to help.

  172. aminthemystic says:

    "But yeah you have yourself agreed to have given wrong sources. That certainly puts your claim of Arabic mastery to jeopardy. Don't even try to escape that. "

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha . . . that is so spectacularly silly . . . it is laughable and this – as I have already said – REALLY exposes you . . .

    My source which I mentioned and have translated . . .I mis-labelled it . .

    exposingsina.wordpress.com

    And even for this YOU rely on MY words . . .

    oh the stupidity of it all . . . .ha ha ha ha ha ha . . .

    YOU still cannot check and say . . . whether I am right or not . . . .

    Ha ha ha ha ha a . . and what is really really funny is that you have failed to see this . . .

    and somehow think this rubbishes my Arabic somehow . . .

    Ha ha ha hah . . . .

    – – –

    "But yeah you have yourself agreed to have given wrong sources. That certainly puts your claim of Arabic mastery to jeopardy. Don't even try to escape that. "

    Ha ha ha ha . . . I am going to laugh at this for a long time . . .and right in your face [one has to point to you – not your literal face! ].

    Ha ha ha ha . . .

    – – –

    I am "well versed" in philosophy . . . er.. . . .no you are not!

  173. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //"Bring that one line from any of your sources that says that Accidental Properties are externally sourced."

    This is simply ANOTHER version of your lying //
    So you couldn't. How hard is that for you to accept?

    //Fame on this board IS all mine . . .as I have Sina in sight and by the proverbial throat . . . you are simply another notch! Another success. //
    Poor chap. Couldn't prove a point and now making hollow claims. Go ahead. You stand alone!!

  174. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //you deliberately lie about a wiki page//
    Which wiki page? Is it saying something that I am not saying?

    //simply pointing to wiki and claiming BOGUS points//
    And you couldn't prove that the point was wrong. And trolling now. Keep on.

  175. aminthemystic says:

    "Bring that one line from any of your sources that says that Accidental Properties are externally sourced. "

    Herein lies . . . his lying . . .

    1. "Accidental Properties are externally sourced." – these are HIS words . . .

    Here is what an external property is as defined . . .

    "accidents (i.e., of properties that are not essential to the substances in which they occur)"

    In other words . . . moonlight is not an essential feature of the moon . . .

    – –

    That is it. . . this is how silly games are played . . .cheap little manipulations . . . . until you stop playing.

  176. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //My "Arabic" scholarship will long continue . . . .keep watching! //
    Poor chap!!

    //See – this is a REPEATED lie . . . I say something else . . .you present it as something else.//
    It is the same truth that you want to avoid. You prove that Accidental Properties are externally sourced and you will expose my lack of knowledge for that is one of the assertions I have made. Until then zip up.

    But yeah you have yourself agreed to have given wrong sources. That certainly puts your claim of Arabic mastery to jeopardy. Don't even try to escape that.

  177. aminthemystic says:

    " For a person who has studied Philosophy in any degree of detail, Accidental Properties are quite well known. "

    Yet you are NOT that person . . . you deliberately lie about a wiki page! We have established this . . . you had trouble getting another source . . .

    simply pointing to wiki and claiming BOGUS points . . .pah!

    – – –

    This all went up in smoke . . .when you claimed to be well versed in "Philosophy"

  178. aminthemystic says:

    This discussion is over . . . I have proven you wrong . . . your silly and nonsensical simple denials are WORTHLESS.

    Fame on this board IS all mine . . .as I have Sina in sight and by the proverbial throat . . . you are simply another notch! Another success.

    – – –

    Like I said . . .quit the lies . . .and the nonsense. . .

    "Bring that one line from any of your sources that says that Accidental Properties are externally sourced."

    This is simply ANOTHER version of your lying . . .

  179. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Here it is! Your claim to fame . . . the lying knowledge of philosophy WHICH you do not possess.//
    Prove that statement wrong and the fame will be all yours. Bring that one line from any of your sources that says that Accidental Properties are externally sourced.

    //You lost ALL credibility with that lie . . . now go and think that over. //
    I didn't lie. Thats your job. And you will keep on arguing around it because thats your modus operandi. The wiki link as I said is good enough. The references are given there itself. You can pick any of them and read. I also referred you to JL Ackril and Aquinas's commentary on the subject, one modern and the other medieval. It doesn't matter what I ask you to read since you will say Oh this is the first link on google, Oh this is on wiki and so forth. For a person who has studied Philosophy in any degree of detail, Accidental Properties are quite well known.

  180. aminthemystic says:

    When I expose "Chuck" – this is all he has left . . .

    "Your scholarship of Arabic has now been proven a lie. "

    – –

    We will see . . . good night's work . . .

    Two old enmities to practice on . . .upwards and onwards in putting a few more nail in Sina!

  181. aminthemystic says:

    Here it is . . .I have exposed you for what you are . . . for that silly lie.

    You clearly do NOT know what you are talking about.

    – –

    "You are merely claiming something you haven't proven. Show me any of the texts that you have quoted where it says that Accidental Properties as understood in Philosophy are externally sourced. Come back once you can show that, till then zip up. Thats the only way you can prove that I don't know anything about Philosophy because this is the sole statement I have made that Accidental Properties needn't be externally sourced. "

    This is just made up rubbish . . . its word and language are YOURS.

    – – –

    "Accidental Properties as understood in Philosophy are externally sourced."

    See – this is a REPEATED lie . . . I say something else . . .you present it as something else. I have let this run on a few times . . .to highlight it.

    – –

    You can sit there and be contrary and lie all night . . .

    But this discussion is over . . .

    = = =

    Why did you lie? That is the interesting question . . . why the lie? And the back peddling . .

    And as for this . . .

    "Your scholarship of Arabic has now been proven a lie. "

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    You having laugh . . . you having a laugh . . .

    My "Arabic" scholarship will long continue . . . .keep watching!

  182. aminthemystic says:

    "They all boil down to the fact that Accidental properties needn't be external to the object."

    Here it is! Your claim to fame . . . the lying knowledge of philosophy WHICH you do not possess.

    See this is the point of your stupidity – the beginning and end of it . . .

    Use this to go over and over and over . . .

    No way.

    – – –

    I have exposed you for that lie . . .and now this is at an end.

    It was futile to begin with.

  183. aminthemystic says:

    This is over . . . pasting large quotes and pretending to answer will get you nowhere.

    Let us review your spectacular lie . . . this alleged knowledge of philosophy?

    – –

    Simple denials are worthless. Reading one wiki page – and deliberately sticking to this one source . . . and trying to make an argument.

    It is silly and ridiculous. . . and can go on until eternity. . .

    Same this all over again.

    No way.

    – – –

    Let us review . . . this was about Sina's claim that Naik made up that Noor is "Reflected Light"

    He didn't. I have shown his source.

    End of.

    – –

    Silly lies that you have knowledge of philosophy . . . and then stick to getting one wiki page wrong . . .over and over?

    No way . . .

    – –

    You lost ALL credibility with that lie . . . now go and think that over.

    Why did you lie?

    Surely you knew it will become apparent . . . that you cannot even move beyond this 1 wiki page.

    = = =

    "They all boil down to the fact that Accidental properties needn't be external to the object."

    Here it is! Your claim to fame . . . the lying knowledge of philosophy WHICH you do not possess.

  184. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    Your scholarship of Arabic has now been proven a lie.

    //Ha ha! – I have – End of. //
    You are merely claiming something you haven't proven. Show me any of the texts that you have quoted where it says that Accidental Properties as understood in Philosophy are externally sourced. Come back once you can show that, till then zip up. Thats the only way you can prove that I don't know anything about Philosophy because this is the sole statement I have made that Accidental Properties needn't be externally sourced.

  185. aminthemystic says:

    "But if you wish to contextualise Muhammad in the context of his times, how can Islam and Muhammad's Sunnah be eternal and for all time? If you want to use this 'contextualisation' argument Islam loses the primacy of its claims to total perfection and eternal absolute ethical supremacy beyond any other religion or ethical system in the modern world. Including, of course, secular liberal democracy and humanism. "

    Wrong. Islam is centrally based on the Quran and that being the absolute. And not Sunnah. . . all its practices are non-essential . . .

  186. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //It could . . .//
    But need not.

    //but what it DOES mean is that moonlight is unessential to the moon! Where as sunlight is essential to the Sun. //
    Yes. Don't repeat.

    //Sure . . .but 1. It could mean that . . . as the clear difference between the 2 indicates . . .and that is EXACTLY how many people have interpreted it.//
    Could doesn't mean must. Some people have interpreted it using the knowledge they thought best to make a particular passage understand. It is a mistake to ascribe that meaning to Quran itself.

    //Of course it is! However that:

    1. Does not make it incorrect.

    2. Naik is NOT the one who simply made this up . . .AS Sina implies . . . if he has checked . . he would have got there //
    1. So thats where it got reduced to. It doesn't make it correct or exact. Anyway Quran didn't use Aradi for Noor. It is an explanation from some Tafsirist. Don't tell me that many have interpretated it thus independently since sucessive Tafsirs are inspired by preceding ones and commonalities aren't hard to find.
    2. About Naik, you may be correct. I am not here to defend Sina's scholarship or vindicate Naik.

    //it gives you NO Merit. Lying like you did . . . .makes you look silly and idiotic. . . //
    //No you are not . . you have no point . . .I have shown that//
    //Yes – that is because you clearly lied . . . and made things up . . . like you are doing now//
    //No dear one . . . ABSOLUTELY NOT . . . .It is clearly you – with the pathetic lie . . . and carrying on//
    More of the same. BS.

    //More made up nonsense . . . the whole POINT Is the contrast . . . and the DEFINITION of the word Noor and its attachment to the Moon. //
    That contrast only ends with the statement you yourself made at the top here: what it DOES mean is that moonlight is unessential to the moon! Where as sunlight is essential to the Sun. You have already agreed that it doesn't mean an external dependency, and I have, that it could.

    //Yes it does! That is the whole point of THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ESSENTIAL AND NON-ESSENTIAL PROPERTIES. . . .

    Your repeated lies are SICKENING! //
    You have repeated a list of references. They all boil down to the fact that Accidental properties needn't be external to the object. You want to deny that?

    //Noor is accidental . . . that is unessential to the moon//
    And we return to first line that Accidental properties needn't be externally sourced.

    //Your petty accusations and snide remarks and little lies do NOT cover up your shortcomings//
    Pot calling.

  187. aminthemystic says:

    It was a spectacular lie . . . . and it blew up in your face . . .

    Go and rest . . . and try to give up the lying urge . . .

    – – –

    I have tasks aplenty in Exposing Sina . . .but keep reading . . .
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

  188. aminthemystic says:

    "You couldn't bring a convincing argument to conclusively link up Accidental in Philosophy with an External source. Neither then nor now."

    Ha ha! – I have – End of. And I have not had to lie about it either. . . pretend knowledge in philosophy – when pressed you failed to demonstrate and changed your story . . . your simple denials are that worthless denials.

    – –

    Once again – resorting to flinging petty accusations of Logical Fallacies.

    You do NOT have a lot of knowledge in philosophy . . . .nor in Arabic or anything.

    This was and is not about "philosophy" . . . even then you have failed spectacularly.
    – –

    " But as I said it doesn't add any merit to the argument."

    Then why claim it . . . ?

    – –

    "However it is now conclusively proven that you aren't a scholar of Arabic. "

    HA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    To cover up the embarrassment . . .comes another lie.

    – –

    I have PROVEN you to be an old fraud . . .beyond doubt . . . .

    Nothing says it as loudly as that last desperate fling . . .

    = =

    You do not have any knowledge of Philosophy . . . you were simply being contrary . . . and failed in it too. . . then resorted to lying . . .

    And are for ever exposed for it . . .

    "However it is now conclusively proven that you aren't a scholar of Arabic. "

    Of course it is!

  189. amerxp says:

    The death taboo that surrounds criticism of Muhammad is augmented by the idea that any criticism of him and his conduct is part of an 'orientalist' and Islamophobic slander. Muslims believe Muhammad is al-insaan al-kamil, the perfect man, beyond reproach, whose life and ways, known as the Sunnah, are guidance for all Muslims to follow and practise. His perfection is immutable, and infinite.

    But if you wish to contextualise Muhammad in the context of his times, how can Islam and Muhammad's Sunnah be eternal and for all time? If you want to use this 'contextualisation' argument Islam loses the primacy of its claims to total perfection and eternal absolute ethical supremacy beyond any other religion or ethical system in the modern world. Including, of course, secular liberal democracy and humanism.

    Critics allege that Aisha was just six years old when she was betrothed to Muhammad, himself in his 50s, and only nine when the marriage was consummated. They base this on a saying attributed to Aisha herself (Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234).

    The truth about Mohammed and Aisha is incidental,it depends entirely on who believes what,the Imam in Britain who was caught by an undercover reporter arranging a ten your olds marriage,"it's okay under Sharia" he said. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia who issued a fatwa saying 10-12 year old girls were ready for marriage or the Sudanese Imam who said the same because" if it was okay for Muhammad" etc. Muslims take this seriously and imitate Muhammad in this. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: "Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. The Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl "a divine blessing," and advised the faithful: "Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house."

    Muslims might want to change or see a different interpretation but one of the most respected authorities in Islam thinks otherwise.I suspect it's almost impossible to defend this in a modern society so it's good, Muslims are tying to make the story of Muhammad more palatable for modern sensibilities but it sounds like they're really trying to convince themselves.

    However, Aisha is not the only matter of concern. After Muhammad killed all the men (including teenage boys) of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe, he took Rayhana as his 'maiden slave' (aka concubine, basically his sex slave) He did this after he had killed all the male members of her family.

    You can have death threats for mentioning this and criticising it. For being horrified that a man considered to be the most perfect example of man who has ever lived, did this. For being horrified at the morality of a man to whom believers are enjoined to follow the Sunnah of. To whom non believers and apostates are informed to never criticise, to observe blasphemy taboos about, upon threat of violence and death.
    Others more circumspect will slander you and call you a bigot, a racist, an orientalist and an Islamophobe for exercising your free conscience and ethical sense and expressing your disdain and revulsion for this, and the idea that such a man should have a death taboo attached to any criticism of this event. And the notion that this represents the highest and most noble man that has ever lived, for whom humanity is destined to submit to – perfect, immutable, beyond criticism, that this is worthy of rejection – this too can be ascribed as being orientalistracismislamophobiabigotry.

    If you can't frighten critics into submission and silence, or physically snuff them out, you can silence and bully them with the language of the modern shame of being bigoted, orientalist, and so on and so forth. That is the progressive way to impose blasphemy taboos. Just like this does free conscience die.

  190. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //As far as I am concerned . . . this is more than over //
    It was over the other day itself. You couldn't bring a convincing argument to conclusively link up Accidental in Philosophy with an External source. Neither then nor now.

    //you lied and made that up . . .when pressed – you changed your story. //
    I never changed any story. It is your habit to hit the opponent instead of the argument. So you keep on harping on it. Argumentum ad hominem. And I have seen you doing that numerous times. As far as I am concerned I know for certain what and how much I know of Philosophy. But as I said it doesn't add any merit to the argument. However it is now conclusively proven that you aren't a scholar of Arabic.

  191. aminthemystic says:

    "That doesn't mean Moon depends on something else for its Noor."

    It could . . .but what it DOES mean is that moonlight is unessential to the moon! Where as sunlight is essential to the Sun.

    – –

    "Or usage of Noor for Moon in Quran will imply that Quran is saying that Moon reflects light from Sun, as Naik, or some Tafsirist wants us to believe."

    Sure . . .but 1. It could mean that . . . as the clear difference between the 2 indicates . . .and that is EXACTLY how many people have interpreted it.

    BASED on what has come before in the dictionaries.

    – –

    " It is an explanation using contemporary knowledge."

    Of course it is! However that:

    1. Does not make it incorrect.

    2. Naik is NOT the one who simply made this up . . .AS Sina implies . . . if he has checked . . he would have got there . . .

    He lacks the ability other than few google searches . . . I have proven that . . . here:
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    = = =

    "See, your tactics is not to see the point. "

    BS . . .and quit this sort of nonsense. . . it gives you NO Merit. Lying like you did . . . .makes you look silly and idiotic. . .

    – – –

    "The point is that Accidental properties don't necessitate an external dependency. You can consult any number of texts for that."

    More made up nonsense . . . the whole POINT Is the contrast . . . and the DEFINITION of the word Noor and its attachment to the Moon.

    – –

    "As far as the usage of Accidental property in Philosophy is concerned, I am correct it shows up and is described by Aristotle."

    No you are not . . you have no point . . .I have shown that – other than pretend knowledge of philosophy. You clearly do not know what you are blithering about.

    – –

    "You asked sources other than wiki, I asked you to go through it. It is not a mandatory read to understand about Accidental properties, the wiki link is sufficient and the examples in there are good enough. "

    Yes – that is because you clearly lied . . . and made things up . . . like you are doing now . . .

    – – –

    "As far as the definition you have quoted here it also doesn't posit anything about any external dependency. No matter how many time you repeat. "

    Yes it does! That is the whole point of THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ESSENTIAL AND NON-ESSENTIAL PROPERTIES. . . .

    Your repeated lies are SICKENING!

    "Accident, as used in philosophy, is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject, without affecting its essence." Wiki

    "Philosophy . any entity or event contingent upon the existence of something else. " Dictionary.com

    " 3 Philosophy (in Aristotelian thought) a property of a thing which is not essential to its nature. "
    Oxford

    "accidents (i.e., of properties that are not essential to the substances in which they occur)"

    Britannica. . .

    No dear one . . . ABSOLUTELY NOT . . . .It is clearly you – with the pathetic lie . . . and carrying on . . .

    They all indicate towards . . . that Aradi means accidental . . .

    Noor is accidental . . . that is unessential to the moon [the body/substance of light]

    THAT IS IT.

    – –

    Your petty accusations and snide remarks and little lies do NOT cover up your shortcomings . . .

  192. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Noor is not essential to the Moon and Dhiyah is essential to the Sun . . . and that is the difference! //
    Absolutely. THAT is the difference. That doesn't mean Moon depends on something else for its Noor. Or usage of Noor for Moon in Quran will imply that Quran is saying that Moon reflects light from Sun, as Naik, or some Tafsirist wants us to believe. It is an explanation using contemporary knowledge.

    //and make an actual point! //
    See, your tactics is not to see the point. The point is that Accidental properties don't necessitate an external dependency. You can consult any number of texts for that. As far as the usage of Accidental property in Philosophy is concerned, I am correct it shows up and is described by Aristotle. So it is a valid reference in understanding the implications. You asked sources other than wiki, I asked you to go through it. It is not a mandatory read to understand about Accidental properties, the wiki link is sufficient and the examples in there are good enough. As far as the definition you have quoted here it also doesn't posit anything about any external dependency. No matter how many time you repeat.

  193. aminthemystic says:

    As far as I am concerned . . . this is more than over . . . especially given the nonsensical lie.

    – – –

    Do NOT try it on again. . . . .

  194. aminthemystic says:

    You do not have knowledge of philosophy . . . you lied and made that up . . .when pressed – you changed your story.

    Now as this is ESSENTIAL in debate . . .when this lie is exposed . .. you clearly have problems. . . .with it.

  195. aminthemystic says:

    "But still doesn't mean dependent or externally sourced. You have to read a lot. "

    Quit the BS. Noor is Accidental property of Moon in contrast Dhiyah is essential property of Sun. . .

    End of really . . . that is the contrast. . . and from this is borne the meaning difference of the word "Noor"

    And it is mos definitely NOT Naik who made it up.

    – –

    "So? If I say that air from the fan is cold it doesn't mean that the fan is cold. "

    More nonsense. . .this has nothing to do with things . . .Is this well versed philosophy coming out? Quit lying . . .

    – –

    "As I said it doesn't add any value. Just as your chest thumping as a scholar in Arabic doesn't. You aren't. "

    I am not what? I am a scholar of Arabic. . . .

    – –

    "As far as I am concerned I know enough of philosophy to know that the wiki article is good enough to support what I am saying."

    Doh! There we have it . . . you are simply making things up . . .you have not made a point . . . I have!

    It is ME who is using the material to make points . . .NOT you.

    Your well versed philosophy was an OBVIOUS lie . . . you are not well versed in philosophy.

    "And there are host of well known books in the reference section, pick one up and read JL Ackrill or Aquinas's commentary for example. But then your job is more to hit me than my argument. "

    Boo hoo hooo. . . You do NOT have any points . . . you are lying outright when you said you are well versed in philosophy.

    You are not.

    Hence why you have descended to sheer nonsense and short posts . . . even then most are filled with my quotes. . . .

    So where is this well versed knowledge . . . . and why has it manifested in the shape of 1 google dearch . . .
    And simply pointing to a long article. Then foolishly and deceptively claiming imaginary points . . . which were not there. . .

    Here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence

    This completely destroys you!

  196. aminthemystic says:

    "The Accidental attributes as understood in Philosophy comes from this work from Aristotle. "

    This is why – you lied about your alleged knowledge of philosophy . . .and this is what you came up with? This is NOT a deep philosophical discussion . . .but about defining a word . . .and that does not go back to categories . . . and what not but to this:

    Accident, as used in philosophy, is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject, without affecting its essence.

    – –

    "You seem to have a problem with long and short articles "

    See – this is why you are good at nonsense!

    – – –

    "But the point is well made."

    No it is not . . . there is no point being made . . . he he he . . .just like your little wee lie . . . no philosophy knowledge here.

    = = =

    "Does it say that Accidental properties are borne outside the object? Essential properties are what are definitely required to define the object. Accidental properties are not required the same way. And thats about it. A ball is a spherical object. The redness of the ball is Accidental. But that doesn't imply that the redness isn't an internal aspect of that ball!! "

    And carry this on . . . and make an actual point!

    I will do it for you . . . given the lack of knowledge you have!

    That . . . Noor is not essential to the Moon and Dhiyah is essential to the Sun . . . and that is the difference!

    It is pointed out in several Tafsir . . . and dictionaries . . .and this is where Sina got his material from . . .

    Ahd he did NOT make it up . . . .

  197. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //That is what Aradi means Accidental property . . . i.e. not essential to its body.//
    But still doesn't mean dependent or externally sourced. You have to read a lot.

    //Doh! And the lights go back to the sun and moon!//
    So? If I say that air from the fan is cold it doesn't mean that the fan is cold.

    //You are not. And it was a silly lie . . . when I pressed . . .you backed down . . . if best you can do is confine to Wiki . . . then obviously//
    As I said it doesn't add any value. Just as your chest thumping as a scholar in Arabic doesn't. You aren't. As far as I am concerned I know enough of philosophy to know that the wiki article is good enough to support what I am saying. And there are host of well known books in the reference section, pick one up and read JL Ackrill or Aquinas's commentary for example. But then your job is more to hit me than my argument.

  198. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Aristotle's categories do not have much to do with anything here. . . in defining the word//
    The Accidental attributes as understood in Philosophy comes from this work from Aristotle.

    //Pointing to long articles and pretending you have made a point //
    You seem to have a problem with long and short articles :-). But the point is well made. Read what you have asked me to read. Does it say that Accidental properties are borne outside the object? Essential properties are what are definitely required to define the object. Accidental properties are not required the same way. And thats about it. A ball is a spherical object. The redness of the ball is Accidental. But that doesn't imply that the redness isn't an internal aspect of that ball!!

  199. aminthemystic says:

    This silliness is not going anywhere. . .

    1. You are not really "well versed" in philosophy . . . and neither have you managed to explain what that means.

    2. You do not know any Arabic.

    3. All this goes back to that Naik did NOT make up that Noor means reflected light . . . if Sina had bothered to check . . . then he would not have fallen flat.

    = =

    To give yourself some merit – you pretended you were "well versed" in philosophy . . . no you are not.

    When pressed – that has crumbled away . . . yet you still want the benefit from this . . . how sad and pathetic.

  200. aminthemystic says:

    "And the word is defined IN PHILOSOPHY. "

    That is in philosophical terminology . . .not simply "in philosophy".

    – – –

    Read that first line again: "an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject"

    And?

    – –

    "This is what I am pointing out time and again. Because you are saying 'Aradi' is externally sourced when taking the meaning Accidental as understood in Philosophy. "

    That is what Aradi means Accidental property . . . i.e. not essential to its body.

    – –

    "It is not talking about the body of moon and Sun but their lights. "

    Doh! And the lights go back to the sun and moon! For crying out loud!

  201. aminthemystic says:

    "So I allowed you the supposition (that I am not well versed in Philosophy). "

    You are not. And it was a silly lie . . . when I pressed . . .you backed down . . . if best you can do is confine to Wiki . . . then obviously . . .

  202. aminthemystic says:

    "Oho!! So you agree that you have lost credibility as a scholar of Arabic since you confessed to have given wrong references?"

    Obviously not . . . and neither have I done so . . . so quit this kind of nonsense . . . mis-labelling does not affect whether I know Arabic or not.

    For example . . . I translated the text . . .and if given can do so again . . . as I have done so repeatedly in these comments section . . .

    And spoken about Arabic grammar and what not . .

    – –

    " As far as I am concerned I know I am well versed in Philosophy, but that doesn't prove or disprove a point."

    Nonsense and a clear lie . . . as this well versed simply means reading one page of wiki!

    – –

  203. aminthemystic says:

    "So are you. You haven't given a single reason to believe that Accidental properties must be externally sourced. And since I understand the subject all too well you can't convince me to the opposite. "

    No you do not understand the subject too well . . . that is all lying . . .as all you have pointed to is 1st thing from a Google search . . . a long mostly irrelevant article.

    As for:

    "You haven't given a single reason to believe that Accidental properties must be externally sourced."

    Actually I have – and outright lying is not going to help you . . . you r nonsense has gone on long enough –

    Here it is:

    "Accident, as used in philosophy, is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject, without affecting its essence."

    There isn't "must be" . . . this is about defining "Zaati" and "Aradi" and these then go to point out the difference between Noor and Dhiyah.

    One is essential to its body and the other is not.

    – –

    "Yes with respect to the intensity in 'meaning '."

    Utter nonsense.

    – –

    "Otherwise the translation would have read The word "Dhiya'a" is Independent and the word "Noor" is Dependent. "

    It often does . . . and that is the contrast between the 2.

  204. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Why make up that are well versed in Philosophy – when you are not?
    Loss of credibility//
    Oho!! So you agree that you have lost credibility as a scholar of Arabic since you confessed to have given wrong references? As far as I am concerned I know I am well versed in Philosophy, but that doesn't prove or disprove a point. What is being shown up as evidence proves or disproves it. So I allowed you the supposition (that I am not well versed in Philosophy).
    //This is not about Philosophy . .. but defining the word//
    And the word is defined IN PHILOSOPHY.

    //I refer you back this Wiki Article//
    Read that first line again: "an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject"

    //This is changing of goal posts . . . we are NOT talking about what might or might not be . . . but what "is".//
    This is what I am pointing out time and again. Because you are saying 'Aradi' is externally sourced when taking the meaning Accidental as understood in Philosophy.

    //Essential and Unessential to the body//
    It is not talking about the body of moon and Sun but their lights.

  205. amerxp says:

    Here's a quote from Abdallah Zekri , President of L'Observatoire de l'islamophobie "The vast majority of Muslims respect the law of 2011, but some, such as 'converts' who know nothing about Islam or the Quran, who want to be more Muslim than the Muslims will want to break the law, burning cars , breaking windows. Doing so, they are very damaging to Muslims."

    Even though male British terror suspects have concealed their identities under the Burka thus far, personally I would still feel uneasy about banning facial veiling in the street. However, one bad incident could harden many peoples opinion on that. So far as requiring facial exposure in schools, shops, banks medical premises etc. Yes, absolutely establishments and employers alike should be able to set that as a rule. In court, no compromise. One rule for all.

    "Those calling for a veil ban in Britain have clearly ignored such depressingly routine cases." What an impertinent assertion. On the contrary, with any such legislation it's entirely expected that routine enforcement cases arise. And whether that's depressing entirely depends on where your sympathies lay.

    And the charge that the legislation ""somehow legitimised physical attacks on them"? Could it be that repeated riots by young Muslims, attacking police cars and police stations and burning and destroying millions of euros worth of property, and the threats of terrorist consequences, from multiple fundamentalist sources might have played a part in "somehow legitimising" attacks on the continuing veil wearers?
    Now what is this nonsense about an offensive myth? Here is something which isn't a myth. Having struggled heroically for centuries to achieve emancipation and equality many western females (and males) are offended at the site of symbols of a grossly patriarchal, misogynistic, regressive segregationist ideology 'recently' evident in society.

    Facial masking is not an Islamic code. Veiling has little to do with religion and everything to do with the politics of culture. And whether we like it or not, accept the fact that culture is alien to Western Europe, and (dangerously) it is centuries out of phase in a backward direction. We no longer execute homosexuals, or apostates. Don't flog or kill adulterers. Don't require four male witnesses to prove rape. We even allow the performance of music.

    And if there are any Muslims out there who are not actively seeking to undermine and overthrow Europe's secular democracies and replace them with Islamic states then either they are not understanding the core instructions of their own scripture, or they are "unpure", Muslims who are compromising with unbelievers, in order to enjoy the benefits of a wealthier more libertarian culture, or they are simply caught between two divergent worlds and in denial about Islamism's patriarchy, expansionist credo and controlling political nature.

    France's ban on the wearing of face-covering headgear in public places is not specific to Muslim face masks, but all face masks for males or females. Like their law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools, it applies to everyone of any religious persuasion.

    Freedom cannot be absolute. Democracy does not and cannot insist on complete freedom (anarchy). France's government (any government) must reconcile competing views and interests in order to find the position most acceptable to the largest number. And particularly to preserve the values shared by the majority of citizens, which form the backbone of their national identity. The overwhelming democratic will of the people of France is that they wish to protect the secular nature of their government, their education system and their nation. And they are going to do so actively and timeously. Understandable and legitimate.

  206. aminthemystic says:

    "Aristotle's Categories "

    Wiki:

    The nine kinds of accidents according to Aristotle are quantity, quality, relation, habitus, time, location, situation (or position), action, and passion ("being acted on"). Together with "substance", these nine kinds of accidents constitute the ten fundamental categories of Aristotle's ontology.[6]

    – –

    Do not pretend that you have made a point – by simply pointing to this. Aristotle's categories do not have much to do with anything here. . . in defining the word.

    – –

    Your link did not open . . . I think you are referring to this. .. the 1st in google search . . !!!!!!
    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/essential-accid

    Pointing to long articles and pretending you have made a point . . . .nope – that does not work either.

    As most of this article is NOT relevant.

    Although . . .again you are wrong . . . Read:

    The modal characterization of an essential property of an object as a property that an object must have fits well with (at least one aspect of) our everyday understanding of the notion of essentiality, which often seems simply to be the notion of necessity. To say that something is essential for something else is typically just to say that the first is necessary for the second. But however well this account accords with (this aspect of) our everyday understanding of essentiality, it has some consequences that may be surprising: this characterization classifies a property such as being such that there are infinitely many primes—or perhaps being such that there are infinitely many primes if (the object in question is) existent—as essential to Socrates (as well as to all other things), since he (like all other things) must have this property, given that it is necessary that there are infinitely many primes; so too, it classifies the property of being the sole member of the unit set {2} as essential to the number 2, given that it is necessary that 2 is the sole member of the unit set {2}.

  207. aminthemystic says:

    Why make up that are well versed in Philosophy – when you are not?

    Loss of credibility . . .

    – – –

    This is not about Philosophy . .. but defining the word. . . and I refer you back this Wiki Article:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(philosophy

    Accident, as used in philosophy, is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject, without affecting its essence.[1] The word "accident" has been employed throughout the history of philosophy with several distinct meanings.

    Aristotle made a distinction between the essential and accidental properties of a thing. For example, a chair can be made of wood or metal but this is accidental relative to its being a chair. It is still a chair regardless of the material from which it is made.[2] To put this in technical terms, an accident is a property which has no necessary connection to the essence of the thing being described.[3][4][5]

  208. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //You simply disagreeing. //
    So are you. You haven't given a single reason to believe that Accidental properties must be externally sourced. And since I understand the subject all too well you can't convince me to the opposite.

    //The two words are contrasted . . . Zaati and Aradi. //
    Yes with respect to the intensity in 'meaning '. As your own translation says: The word "Dhiya'a" is 'Essential' and the word "Noor" is 'Accidental'.
    Otherwise the translation would have read The word "Dhiya'a" is Independent and the word "Noor" is Dependent.

  209. aminthemystic says:

    "Ok. Suppose I am a pauper in philosophy, it doesn't prove your point right. "

    You are NOT well read in philosophy.

    – –

    " Accidental properties don't necessarily are externally sourced."

    This is changing of goal posts . . . we are NOT talking about what might or might not be . . . but what "is".

    – –

    "As far as other references are concerned just pick up Aristotle's Categories and read it through. If that is too much for you just read through: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/essential-accid…. "

    Quit the BS.

    – –

    "Aha!! But you are using this exact way aren't you? And being unessential don't imply reflected or dependent. "

    Essential and Unessential to the body . . . does and can imply dependent on independent. That is one way to contrast the 2 words . . .Zaati and Aradi.

    – –

  210. aminthemystic says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_%28philosop

    "Accident, as used in philosophy, is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject, without affecting its essence.[1] The word "accident" has been employed throughout the history of philosophy with several distinct meanings."

    Ref: Jump up ^ Guthrie, William Keith Chambers (1990). A History of Greek Philosophy. Cambridge University Press. p. 148. ISBN 978-0-521-38760-6.

    – –

    Further more:

    "Aristotle made a distinction between the essential and accidental properties of a thing. For example, a chair can be made of wood or metal but this is accidental relative to its being a chair. It is still a chair regardless of the material from which it is made.[2] To put this in technical terms, an accident is a property which has no necessary connection to the essence of the thing being described.[3][4][5]"

    I have absolutely no problem with this . . .

    And it is easy to see why "Accident [Philosophy]" was chosen as meaning . . .

    As it goes back to the difference between Noor and Dhiyah . . . One is Accidental other Essential to its body . . . and those are Sun and Moon.

    – –

    It is easy to see . . . where Naik and others before him got their meanings from . . . and did not simply pull it out of thin air.

    Meaning of 'Aradi is given from philosophical terminology – it is NOT a discussion about philosophy. . . . but about defining a word.

    = =

    So what disagreement do you have [from this well read source of philosophy] – and it is easy to see WHY someone with no knowledge of Arabic would be limited.

  211. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //You are lying yourself. No you are NOT well versed in Philosophy. . . on the contrary a better article is in the

    If you are so well versed in Philosophy . . .bets you could do was argue over what Wiki says?

    Why didn't you give references from other works . . .in fact you can do that now . . //
    Ok. Suppose I am a pauper in philosophy, it doesn't prove your point right. Neither does it make my point wrong which is that Accidental properties don't necessarily are externally sourced. As far as other references are concerned just pick up Aristotle's Categories and read it through. If that is too much for you just read through: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/essential-accid

    //Also "accidental [philosophy]" is simply one way to translate the word//
    Aha!! But you are using this exact way aren't you? And being unessential don't imply reflected or dependent.

  212. aminthemystic says:

    Make silly points – then end up saying how condescending – and what is a smiley going to do?

    – –

    "In the manner best understood by the person giving the tafsir. (s)he uses her/his contemporary knowledge in explaining something. "

    Yes. However – the source dictionary is pretty clear – on the contrast between the two words. Zaati and Aradi.

    – –

    "Read the wiki article and read the examples quoted there in or the one I gave you in that thread. "

    No – as you are so well read in philosophy – it is expected you will do better . . .

    – –

    "Nonsense. You didn't even seem to have gone through the examples quoted there. Accidental properties needn't be externally sourced or coming from outside. "

    As you are so well versed in philosophy .. . this poor.

    I would put it – another example of your nonsensical and pretense carrying out. . .

    The two words are contrasted . . . Zaati and Aradi.

    – –

    "Which is, as pointed out by you in your article hinges on Accidental properties being externally sourced. Which doesn't follow in how Accidental properties are defined. "

    Boo hoo. . . you simply saying so . . .it is NOT good enough. All you are doing is disagreeing. . .

    If you have anything more to add . . . fine . . . else the futility of this is pretty clear. It is not not going anywhere. . .

    You simply disagreeing.

    – –

    It all goes back to whether Naik was making things up . . .and the audience drinking it all up . . .

    And that is an EMPHATIC no . . .
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    As it is clear where he got the meanings from . . .

  213. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //And on the same token . . . you must be even worse . . . however it was me who corrected . . . so having cheap pot shots . . .nah – you'll flat there son. //
    Aha!! how condescending:-).

    //Wrong. This is why Tafsir are there . . . as they point out explanations//
    In the manner best understood by the person giving the tafsir. (s)he uses her/his contemporary knowledge in explaining something.

    //And you were still incorrect. By using a wiki – and implying the opposite. //
    Read the wiki article and read the examples quoted there in or the one I gave you in that thread.

    //Where? As i correctly remember – the first to ACTUALLY use the wiki article was me//
    Nonsense. You didn't even seem to have gone through the examples quoted there. Accidental properties needn't be externally sourced or coming from outside.

    //the difference is in the explanation.//
    Which is, as pointed out by you in your article hinges on Accidental properties being externally sourced. Which doesn't follow in how Accidental properties are defined.

  214. aminthemystic says:

    Simple . . .there is difference between the word Noor and Dhiyah . . . and that is how Naik – got his meanings . . .

    1. The difference is made clear in several Tafsir. . . . old and modern.

    2. Another source is classical Arabic dictionaries – such as Taj al Aroos – and they too give out this difference in meaning.

    Yet – both words simply mean "Light".

    He OBVIOUSLY did not make up anything. That is where it finally goes to . . .

    – – –

  215. aminthemystic says:

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

  216. aminthemystic says:

    "You referred Wehr's dictionary. It DOESN'T say externally sourced. "

    No – it says "Accidental" as in from the Philosophical terminology. And that is one meaning of the word . . . as it contrasts with . . Zaati

    Essential and Non-Essential. That is the difference between Noor and Dhiyah . . .

    Meandering useless arguments over "Accidental [Philosophy]"? And how is that even relevant?

    – – –

    And what about this claims of knowing Philosophy . . . . what does that mean? What is the extent of being well versed . . .

  217. aminthemystic says:

    "But your confessing that you referenced a wrong book vindicates MY stand that your scholarship is rather poor"

    And on the same token . . . you must be even worse . . . however it was me who corrected . . . so having cheap pot shots . . .nah – you'll flat there son.

    – –

    " I was commenting on what you inferred from words that you picked from it and cross referenced with English meaning from dictionary.com.
    "

    And you were still incorrect. By using a wiki – and implying the opposite.

    – –

    "You stuck to a particular meaning despite being shown examples to the contrary. This is not called perseverance, it is called obstinate indifference. "

    Quit lying. We went round the houses. . . you did not show examples to the contrary . . . made nonsensical points. . .

    As I have pointed out – you were always limited to that . . . as you are NOT able to understand the source material.

    – –

    "You referred Wehr's dictionary. It DOESN'T say externally sourced. "

    It says "accidental" which leads on to the meaning of being external. And I gave examples from other dictionaries too . .

    Also – even HW says non-essential.

    Also "accidental [philosophy]" is simply one way to translate the word . . . then there is the fact that Aradi – has an Arabic definition . . .

    Plus the two words contrast . . . Aradi and Zaati

    – –

    "Don't lie. I did. It may be a short article but people like me are rather well versed in Philosophy, that article is for YOU to understand what an Accidental property in Philosophy means. "

    You are lying yourself. No you are NOT well versed in Philosophy. . . on the contrary a better article is in the

    If you are so well versed in Philosophy . . .bets you could do was argue over what Wiki says?

    Why didn't you give references from other works . . .in fact you can do that now . .

    – –

    "I showed you a whole article on Accidental properties. "

    Where? As i correctly remember – the first to ACTUALLY use the wiki article was me . . . and I was also the one to point to Encyclopedia Britannica.

    – –

    "Naik may or may not have made it up, may be the Tafsirist, Kathir for example, was borrowing his contemporary knowledge in explaining a particular Ayat (thats what I had pointed in that thread too)."

    There is not one Tafsir . . . and what did you point out? Which Tafsir? Don't kid yourself . . . . such "semantics" are worthless. . . . Naik did not make it up . . . there is no "may" about it.

    If Sina had looked it up . . . he would have find that . . .but he didn't. His "hate" got in the way . . . and the inability to go beyond few web searches

    – –

    "It doesn't mean that when Quran is using muneer it is necessarily referring to Moon as a reflector of light. Evidence against it is that if this was a common Quranic reference then Yusuf Ali et al would have surely translated as "moon reflecting light" instead of the making such obvious blunder as "moon giving light". After all they are no less educated in Arabic and Tafsirs. "

    Wrong. This is why Tafsir are there . . . as they point out explanations . . . both words mean "Light" – Noor and Dhiyah . . . the difference is in the explanation. And think about it for a minute . . . countless Tafsir and Classical dictionaries give this difference . . .one can give many references . . .so they were aware of it.

    And we are not talking about the word "Muneer" here . . .

    But Dhiyah and Noor. . . .

  218. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //Doh! That is the WHOLE point . . . . this is how verifications are made . . .this is WHY people give references. //
    You have problem reading what I wrote? I said, I don't have to hit your reference. Them being correctly referred or wrongly referenced is not what I was commenting upon (But your confessing that you referenced a wrong book vindicates MY stand that your scholarship is rather poor). I was commenting on what you inferred from words that you picked from it and cross referenced with English meaning from dictionary.com.

    //How did we? I persevered . . . .there was no reduction . . .it was a folly. As you do not know Arabic . . . there was nowhere else to go. //
    You stuck to a particular meaning despite being shown examples to the contrary. This is not called perseverance, it is called obstinate indifference.

    //the Arabic definition of 'Aradi – would have and does say . . .the difference between two is that Aradi here means "external"//
    You referred Wehr's dictionary. It DOESN'T say externally sourced.

    //No you did not – that is a short Article – the whole discussion was a usual meaningless farce. Accidental – does refer to external property//
    Don't lie. I did. It may be a short article but people like me are rather well versed in Philosophy, that article is for YOU to understand what an Accidental property in Philosophy means.

    //I showed from several dictionaries that – Accidental here does mean external properties. //
    I showed you a whole article on Accidental properties.

    //And not only that. . . . from Tafsir . . .where the whole argument comes from and that it is NOT Naik that made it up//
    Naik may or may not have made it up, may be the Tafsirist, Kathir for example, was borrowing his contemporary knowledge in explaining a particular Ayat (thats what I had pointed in that thread too). It doesn't mean that when Quran is using muneer it is necessarily referring to Moon as a reflector of light. Evidence against it is that if this was a common Quranic reference then Yusuf Ali et al would have surely translated as "moon reflecting light" instead of the making such obvious blunder as "moon giving light". After all they are no less educated in Arabic and Tafsirs.

  219. aminthemystic says:

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    – –

    One chickens off – the other spouts nonsense whilst trying to be "witty". . .

  220. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //I have warned you . . . start with nonsense //
    So what did I start with : "Someone who has a command over what he was talking about". See even you now agree that it is nonsense. Way to go.

  221. aminthemystic says:

    I have warned you . . . start with nonsense . . . then the stock reply. .

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

  222. aminthemystic says:

    "Oink. Changing from Lisan to Taj Al-Aroos? Why do I have to point that out? I am not interested in what you are referring "

    Doh! That is the WHOLE point . . . . this is how verifications are made . . .this is WHY people give references.

    " If you are wrong, you are wrong!! Unlike you I don't have the habit of hitting Strawmans. I did pick up Wehr's book by the way."

    And quit the pathetic flinging names of a logical fallacies for effect . . .

    I have ACTUALLY studied logic . . .and can prove it by talking about the subject. . . so such accusations are not going hold substance . . .

    [[That is not to say that I can err and make mistakes – as can anyone – even the great Bertrand Russell and such like . . . proof is the pudding . . .]]

    The discussion was simply meaningless. . . you cannot have much of a discussion – IF you do not speak the language.

    This is why I do not expect much from likes of Harun Yahya . . . if he was a biologist . . . fine. He isn't or a scientist of any other kind.

    He has a lot to say . . . .

    – –

    "More foolish trash. We had reduced it to "

    How did we? I persevered . . . .there was no reduction . . .it was a folly. As you do not know Arabic . . . there was nowhere else to go. . .

    – –

    "to whether 'accidental' in philosophy means externally sourced or not."

    Meaningless – as this is simply the word chosen from English to mean what the Arabic is saying . . . the Arabic definition of 'Aradi – would have and does say . . .the difference between two is that Aradi here means "external". . .

    BUT – you are not able to read Arabic.

    I even asked at an Arabic forum . . .
    http://forum.wordreference.com/forumdisplay.php?f

    – –

    "I pointed you the article on wiki and gave you example after examples proving that it is not so."

    No you did not – that is a short Article – the whole discussion was a usual meaningless farce. Accidental – does refer to external property . . .

    – –

    It is this word, aradi, in Arabic of which one meaning is 'accidental' as used in Philosophy (Quran by the way isn't a book of Philosophy) and on this particular meaning your whole theory hinges and it is not well grounded. "

    What has quran – being a book of phiolosphy or not got to do with anything?

    I showed from several dictionaries that – Accidental here does mean external properties.

    = = =

    And not only that. . . . from Tafsir . . .where the whole argument comes from and that it is NOT Naik that made it up . . .and that was what Sina was alleging.

  223. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //Someone who has a command over what he was talking about//
    I am not so sure. I have, as you too must have, seen many such Rastapopoulos's claiming scholarship on the internet.

  224. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //You could NOT even tell the that the name of the dictionary I posted was WRONG//
    Oink. Changing from Lisan to Taj Al-Aroos? Why do I have to point that out? I am not interested in what you are referring but what you are saying that the reference is saying. If you are wrong, you are wrong!! Unlike you I don't have the habit of hitting Strawmans. I did pick up Wehr's book by the way.

    //About meaning of a word that was in Arabic?//
    More foolish trash. We had reduced it to whether 'accidental' in philosophy means externally sourced or not. I pointed you the article on wiki and gave you example after examples proving that it is not so. It is this word, aradi, in Arabic of which one meaning is 'accidental' as used in Philosophy (Quran by the way isn't a book of Philosophy) and on this particular meaning your whole theory hinges and it is not well grounded.

  225. aminthemystic says:

    My post is still there . . .
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    It shows Sina's mistake . . .see he does not, like you, know Arabic either . . . hence rather than checking posted the nonsense. . . .

    I have exposed the "mistake". . .where and how Naik got his argument from.

    And . . . this is not something Naik dreamed up either . . . it has a long history . . . with Tafsir

    For example Wahba Zuhaily . . . A Syrian Muslim scholar . . . and many others.

  226. aminthemystic says:

    "What a foolish argument. I was using translations from YOUR site, using references YOU cited (now you have decided). Now its you who decided to use English in you site. So it is fair for me to punch holes in your article in English. "

    Doh! MY translations. . . .MINE!

    Someone who has a command over what he was talking about . . .

    "using references YOU cited"

    How were you using the references?

    You could NOT even tell the that the name of the dictionary I posted was WRONG. . . .eventually I pointed it out . . .

    So what were you arguing about?

    About meaning of a word that was in Arabic?

    – – –

    "So it is fair for me to punch holes in your article in English. "

    If you have no knowledge of physics . . . how would you assess the answer of student. . . .just using the language?

    – – –

    I have warned you . . . post nonsense at me . . .you will get a stock response!

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

  227. aminthemystic says:

    If I am that silly . . . prove it!

    Else . . .

  228. aminthemystic says:

    "There is a big difference between wasting time arguing with idiots and showing cowardice! Showing cowardice is what Muhammad used to do….. I'm sure you already know your prophet, or should I post something verbatim from the Sahih Hadiths?? "

    Ha! So – why have you wasted time . . . why did you bother replying?

    Could have just ignored?

    You did not.

    – –

    You know full well . . . you were exposed in the past . . . now all you have got is petty insults . . .hence why you keep calling me an idiot. . .

    Surely the merit is to SHOW my silliness . . .

    And that is what I have invited you to do . . . .

    Your response?

    Cowardice!

  229. aminthemystic says:

    "You stay on your page and 'expose' Sina, and we will stay here and show the true face of Muhammad! "

    In other words . . . for me NOT to expose your lies and pick on wee Sina!

    Cowardice!

  230. aminthemystic says:

    " If I 'win' a match with a idiot, what title would I get? A Super-idiot??? Sorry I've got better things to do. "

    Like I said . . you will make an excuse and chicken-out. . . so if I am such an "idiot" why is it you are the one with ad-homs?

    Why is it you er . . .lost so spectacularly in the past . . . .?

    I can dig up all the old comments?

    Why is it Sina lost repeatedly . . . .comments all there?

    – – –

    I am openly and clearly willing to talk about real substance . . . Sina's hand work . . .

    You?

    What is it? Lying and insults?

    – – –

    Oh well . . .it YOU decision to chicken out. . .I will simply keep exposing . . .HIM and you.

  231. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Really? It was "rational" trying to respond about a language that you do not understand – with English? //
    What a foolish argument. I was using translations from YOUR site, using references YOU cited (now you have decided). Now its you who decided to use English in you site. So it is fair for me to punch holes in your article in English.

    //But respond? That is beyond you. . . now either join the queue . . .or away you go.//
    More of you pretense. But then you will, won't you?

  232. aminthemystic says:

    So why is it . . . you are so afraid to discuss Sina's many "mistakes" and fiction?
    Why chicken out with . . . .

    "Spend time on your own page! Here you are only exposing your own stupidity. "

    And . . . miss out a chance to show folks – how stupid I am!

  233. aminthemystic says:

    I have already said . . . Sina's "mistakes" and "defeats" are all here. . . .

    YOU have chickened out . . .

    And calling me names? That simply makes YOU look silly.

  234. knowTheEnemy says:

    If I 'win' a match with a idiot, what title would I get? A Super-idiot??? Sorry I've got better things to do.

    You stay on your page and 'expose' Sina, and we will stay here and show the true face of Muhammad! 
    ——-

    ["With your usual cowardice . . ."]

    There is a big difference between wasting time arguing with idiots and showing cowardice! Showing cowardice is what Muhammad used to do….. I'm sure you already know your prophet, or should I post something verbatim from the Sahih Hadiths??

  235. aminthemystic says:

    He he . . . see more silly responses and – not taking up the challenge . . . those were posted here . . . .and they [Is not deleted] are still here . . . .

    Did you have response? Nope.

    – – –

    "Here you are only exposing your own stupidity."

    Boo hoo . . . what stupidity? And why no examples?

    Your flat earth nonsense is still here. . . with the pathetic . .. "not professional" response.

    See – you repeatedly CHICKEN out and post such silly responses . . .

    TELLING once more – once again you have CHICKENED out . . .

    And that will repeatedly happen.

  236. knowTheEnemy says:

    I see… so you are desperate to show "evidence" (your wp page 😉 ). Too bad I didn't give you a chance! Should I say sorry!

    Spend time on your own page! Here you are only exposing your own stupidity.

  237. aminthemystic says:

    Ha!. . . more meaningless meandering ranting!

    Anything of "substance" . . . and look what happens to you . . .

    – –

    So why is there no responses from you . . . take the book for starters . . .

    Have you read his book . . .

    Filled with mistake after mistake?

    – – –

    And doesn't that expose YOU!

    Have you read his articles . . . .lies and mistakes?

    Why don't we get on to them . . . and then you can prove how RIGHT you are . . .

    – –

    Why don't I get response out of you there. . . .

    I mean – you lack the courage to admit WHO you are . . . what is your side and background . . .

    Hindu? Atheist? Sikh . . . Jain? Parsi? Buddhist?

  238. aminthemystic says:

    What no comment about about your "flat earth" nonsense. . . was that spamming too?

    Why so embarrassed about that?

  239. aminthemystic says:

    I mean I have in the past – asked you . . .

    His mistake-ridden and shoddy book . . .so where are your responses?

    See how you ignore and run off?

    Telling isn't it . . .

    – –

    It is telling . . . that we can take this up . . . and I can expose his lying . . . but what are you going to do?

    How are you going to respond . . .

    I am calling you out . . .

    Now are you going to take up the challenge or chicken out?

    With your usual cowardice . . .

  240. aminthemystic says:

    "You think that by posting the above again and again, you will be able to discredit this site in everyone's eyes"

    Boo Hoo . . . what really is telling is that you did not even bother to ask for any evidence. . .

    Sina descended to the level of LYING about me personally . . . I emailed and highlighted that at the time. . .

    I have posted many posts EXPOSING his lies . . .

    And YOU know that too . . .

    For an easy reference:
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    – – –

    I have discredited Sina . . . and will continue to do so. . . .

    Hence – you do not have response. . . .

  241. knowTheEnemy says:

    Your spamming only exposes YOU, not us! People read your shameless denials of the evils of Islam when the horror is clearly staring everyone in the face, and they are fast waking up.And YOU know this. That is why you feel the need to post your nonsense comments here!

  242. knowTheEnemy says:

    [“He he . . . your clear lying about Quran and Flat Earth? That was one lie I exposed . . . and could you respond?”]You think that by posting the above again and again, you will be able to discredit this site in everyone's eyes, but I have bad news for you- there are plenty of people with well-functioning brain out there. They read Ali's articles, compare it with Islamic texts, and compare it all with how Muslims live in Muslim-majority areas, and they are realizing the truth. You are spamming this site in vain! ———–

  243. aminthemystic says:

    Sina has posted many, many, many lies . . . expose them . . . KnowTheEnemy – does not have a single response. . .

    Yet . . . he comes here with his hate and bigotry . . . .to join in. . . with lies of his own.

    – –

    So where are your responses then?

    Where?

    Why so quiet?

    – –

    I have, in the past, exposed a lot of your nonsense. . . I will continue to do so.

  244. aminthemystic says:

    "Fortunately Quran is a big comic book if we don’t look at violent part. We can easily provide logical facts against it and mock it at the same time. Like:

    •Jesus and Moses greeted Mohammed in jannat and request him to please bargain Allah to reduce prayers from 50 to 5. (I laughed a lot when i heard this 1st time ) request was funny but funnier was the Allah's acceptance
    •Muhammad challenged meccan's to produce something similar to quran. (I read Quran 5 times and really it’s tough to produce something as nonsense as Quran)
    •Allah inspired Sex hungry Muhammad to marry a 6 year old female kid
    •Satan lives in the nose at night "

    Whilst you are at it . . . why don't you find these from the Quran – there is perhaps mention of one. . ..

  245. aminthemystic says:

    I have no idea what you are responding to – but pasting long chunks in not going to impress me. . .

    Nonsensical meanderings even less. . . now if you want a sensible conversation . . .fine.

    Paste chunks? Fine.

    Don't aim them at me.

  246. aminthemystic says:

    He he . . . your clear lying about Quran and Flat Earth? That was one lie I exposed . . . and could you respond?

    No.

    – –

    You make up nonsense. . . . and see what happens.

    – – –

    As for that lying article . . . I have put many a Sina's lie to bed . . . and that is another one.

    Is there 1 single response in you?

    Nope.

    – – –

    Why is it you repeatedly fail?

  247. aminthemystic says:

    Really? It was "rational" trying to respond about a language that you do not understand – with English?

    Or was it out right lying?

    – – –

    If it makes you feel better carry on the nonsense. . .

    But respond? That is beyond you. . . now either join the queue . . .or away you go.

  248. akshat9 says:

    Part 2: 

    In brief a child during 0-4 years of age install a 1000’s of such matrices to its subconscious mind at extraordinary fast speed based on reason which is based on his experiences.

    Or exceptions are there?

    Yes exceptions are there. Every matrix is not based on his experiences. There are few matrices coming from other’s experiences. In fact most important matrix is not based on self experiences but based on books like Bible, Quran, Gaeta, dhammapada.

    Yes all religions are like matrices installed to a child’s mind. Those matrices were installed as told by religion, prophets and their books. Humanity has no reply to unknowns of this vast existence so they decided to hide behind religion. They decided to kill the curiosity by imposing a belief on it. And they do it at very early age to ensure no rebel against establish belief.

    If a child was exposed to unknown with his curiosity and then he would have designed matrices based on his own experiences. If he wouldn’t have turned into Buddha then At least his own matrices wouldn’t have done harm to humanity as religion has done.

    Islam is worst of all matrices world has ever witnessed.  To be a Muslim means to follow the same conscious to subconscious cycle. Reason to habit cycle. Just reason here is not based on experiences but supplied by Quran. I am sharing a small conversation which will help you see this process.

    A three year old child said to his father

    Child: Dad why don’t smith come to mosque with us

    Father: he goes to church he is a Christian

    Child: What is Christian?

    Father: Unbeliever, who don’t believe in Allah, you know Allah, almighty, I told you that day.

    Child: Yes who created hell and heaven?

    Dad: Good boy

    Child: why doesn’t Christian come to pray Allah as we do?

    Father: Son they are kafir and Allah will punish them after death they will burn in hell fire after death.

    Child: (sadly) but he is a very good boy dad.

    Dad: Son Allah judging all of us and see who believe and who don’t. Smith and his family don’t so he will burn in hell fire for sure.

    Child: what will happen to us dad, where will we go?

    Father: Son we will go to jannat

    Child: Same beautiful jannat you described that day.

    Father: Exactly my son..

    By the time boy turn 4 years, more than 100 sessions were over by his father and family. You can imagine what kind of matrix is developing inside a innocent child. After 15 years child was wearing skull cap and keeping beard.  A potential brain which could have been nourished with love and kindness for all was filled with hate, fear and violence gradually.  Now Most important reason matrix of his life was ready.he was conditioned now. He will fight himself all his life.  His subconscious matrix will indicate that Gandhi and Teresa will burn in hell fire. His heavy heart will say same what it said for Smith, “no they will not burn”.  When he will see charley Chaplin and lost in his comedy acts then a part of him will ask himself “how can charley deserve hell”. Whenever he will come in close contact of a generous and kind non Muslim, his heart will ask “why not befriend him”.

    Muslim’s Kept on fighting themselves all their life if they are not turned into a dead stone by their religious conditioning

    Their life becomes a constant struggle. If conditioning is little more intense then he will not feel pity for even Gandhi and Teresa. And if extreme conditioning is done in Madarsa and he is given arms then he will do what happening in Kenya, Iraq, Pak, Nigeria, India (almost every place where Muslim exist) killing the innocent.

    Sometime I feel more sympathy then hate for them. What wrong they have done. They also born as an innocent child and all evil started by their parents. Their parents were also victim of their parents. Everyone was innocent till we trace back to Muhammad.

    There are few braves like Ali sina who managed to not only defeat the matrix but became a flag bearer of a movement against Islam. He managed to escape Islam and rebuilt using reason.

    I feel we should trust religion as long as it is satisfying Reason.  After reason, Grand furnace of this World is capable enough to guide our souls till it becomes one with existence.

  249. akshat9 says:

    Hi Aminthemystic,

    Your mechanical resistence forced me to think. I have written something , it turned too long so i poster on freedombulwark also. I am pasting here also in chunk.
    http://akshat.freedombulwark.com/?p=8

    Part 1:
    We see people doing rational and irrational both activities. Rational actions are always based on reason. Reason can react differently to Different scenarios based on the need of hour.  On the other hand root of irrational actions lies in habits. Habit simply means not reacting to scenario or Always follow the same pattern stored in their brain.

    For an example when someone is learning car driving first time, He will be much focused he has to take a very careful action in each activity such as changing gear, releasing clutch, Accelerator, Break. Everything should happen on the perfect timing else car will stop or he can end up hitting a tree.  During learning phase one is much focused.  In fact sometimes we see a learner unable to listen tutor’s instruction as his Mind will be too focused.

    Once he passes through this Phase successfully then after few weeks he will be little less focused. He can listen and talk while driving easily. After few months he can be pretty relaxed and not bothered about the driving actions as those are happening by hand’s and leg’s themselves.  All driving lessons are now transferred to sub conscious mind.

    Now we will see this process from psychology perspective. He learned driving with conscious mind; He taught his brain reason matrix for driving. It was a tough process so it took high focus and efforts. Once reason matrix was built then it was gradually moved to subconscious mind.  Once it is transferred to subconscious mind then he can be relaxed as less focus is required now. It seems that his eyes and hands and legs are autonomous body and just seeking little guidance from brain. While learning it was not true whole brain was occupied.  We can see that, what is Reason in conscious mind later became habit in sub conscious mind. Learning driving was a journey from reason to habit. Conscious to sub-conscious, Focused to relax.

    Your hand releasing a clutch while driving today has a reason rooted in past. Reason is based on your experiences during learning phase.  The time when you were preparing Driving matrix.  That day you realized that not releasing it and releasing in wrong manner will stop the car.

    Having understood we can replicate same use case to all our life activities. All learning’s which are coming through experiences follow the same conscious to subconscious curve.  Our all actions are driven by matrices of their respective domain. And Matrices were prepared based on the reason which was further based on our experiences.

    This same process is repeating all our life right from childhood to older age. Extremely fast in early age and very slow in older age.

    A child subconscious mind is 1000 times more efficient then a adult mind. It can learn at amazingly fast speed. It can memorize thousand words in short times on 1-2 years. It learns everything that comes to its way.  Psychologist says 80% of the human learning’s are over by the age of 4. Learn capabilities remain constant from 5-6 to 30-32 then it start deteriorate.  If a 25 year old young and a 1 year child is introduced to a unknown language then child will be efficient in just 1-2 years and  for young man it will take 4-5 years to become fluent and he can never be as efficient as child will be.

  250. cchuckc says:

    @knowTheEnemy
    //I was wrong! Apparently, educated or not, one has to have a functioning brain to see Islam for what it really is! //
    But no harm in learning it the hard way. This guy can't give rational responses, because he is not rational. Simple.

  251. knowTheEnemy says:

    My only nonsense that you put to bed was my belief that seemingly educated people like yourself, will see Islam for the evil that it is and will help eradicate it for the benefit of humanity. I was wrong! Apparently, educated or not, one has to have a functioning brain to see Islam for what it really is!

    Be assured that your spamming this site is NOT going to save Islam! 'Muslims' with working brains are waking up. Read this article-

    Muslim Scholar Leaves Islam

  252. aminthemystic says:

    I have stock response for your nonsense. . .

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    – – –

    It is there – WHY – I think the person has not read the Quran.

  253. aminthemystic says:

    Yeah right . . .

  254. aminthemystic says:

    Clearly not – When needed I can do "nonsense" with the best of them.

    – – –

    "Note that you haven't said WHY you think @akshat either may not have read that damned book"

    Actually I have . . . And I do not have to spell everything out . . .

    As for your nonsense. . . I have stock phrase:

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

  255. aminthemystic says:

    "Not as good as you are."

    Clearly not. When needed – I can do nonsense really well.

    – –

    "Note that you haven't said WHY you think @akshat either may not have read that damned book or might have comprehended it wrongly in judging it a nonsense."

    I do not have to spell it out. . . it is there . . . given on past experience – you have habit of nonsense. End of.

    However I have adopted a stock phrase for such nonsense. . . .

    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor
    What shall we do with the drunken sailor

    Oh, What shall we do with the drunken sailor?

    – – –

    "Talking about your English? "

    There we go!

    You know exactly what I am talking about.

    – – –

    I have adopted a stock

  256. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic
    //I take you are THAT chuck – with 2c's thrown in. //
    You are right.

    //Nonsensical meandering is what you are good at. //
    Not as good as you are. You only have to read your last comment on this thread to realize that:-). Note that you haven't said WHY you think @akshat either may not have read that damned book or might have comprehended it wrongly in judging it a nonsense. This is exactly what you quoted "Muhammad challenged meccan's to produce something similar to quran. (I read Quran 5 times and really it’s tough to produce something as nonsense as Quran)" on which you said what you said.

    //Especially not knowing a language and carrying on and on and on//
    Talking about your English?

    // . . . as for the mistakes . . . . it was me who found my own! //
    🙂

  257. aminthemystic says:

    Obviously.

    – –

    "You seem to be trying to contend about @akshat not having read Quran instead of commenting on what he has quipped namely that he found it to be nonsense."

    Wrong. Go back and read . . . it is what he said. Hence – it is a safe conclusion to make – he probably has NOT read the book.

    Clues to whether he has read the book are all there.

    – – –

    I take you are THAT chuck – with 2c's thrown in.

    Nonsensical meandering is what you are good at.

    – –

    Especially not knowing a language and carrying on and on and on . . . as for the mistakes . . . . it was me who found my own!

    Keep it view:
    http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

  258. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //did bias get in the way of rationality? //
    It obviously did for you.

    //the "red herring" would have been an incorrect accusation.//
    Not really. You seem to be trying to contend about @akshat not having read Quran instead of commenting on what he has quipped namely that he found it to be nonsense. In other words you are interested in leading @akshat or this discussion (if ever @akshat tries to respond) in the direction of judging his abilities and his having actually read Quran. And this too without actually having any clue about whether he has read it or comprehended it or not.

  259. aminthemystic says:

    It is based on what he has said and hence I am able to determine whether he has read or not read the quran. . . and that is not red herring. It looks like you have trouble reading too. . . did bias get in the way of rationality?

    – –

    Either way though . . . the "red herring" would have been an incorrect accusation.

  260. cchuckc says:

    @aminthemystic,
    //Either you are not capable of comprehending what you read. . . or lying.//
    It is more than likely that he has read it and found it to be nonsense. You are just issuing red herrings without actually knowing whether he has read it or not.

  261. aminthemystic says:

    Ha ha ha ha . . .how easily you people lie, huh! It has never failed to amaze me . . .

    If you do not even know what is and is not in the Quran . . . then . . . .

    "•Muhammad challenged meccan's to produce something similar to quran. (I read Quran 5 times and really it’s tough to produce something as nonsense as Quran) "

    Either you are not capable of comprehending what you read. . . or lying.

    – –

  262. aminthemystic says:

    How the jackals come out to play . . . .

    I though I had put you in the hole for good.

    You still here spinning lies?

    – – –

    The above story is an idiotic lie. Sina has done this repeatedly . . . and been exposed for a few . . . how shamelessly you collude in such easy lies!

    Oh then again – I put more than a few of your nonsense to bed too.

  263. akshat9 says:

    Hi All,

    Narcole is not replying My questions here but she is replying same on a past article"the faithfulness of the skeptic". We all can understand what she is afraid of coming here and comment. Actually that's how a Muslim's behave when foolproof evidence is provided to them. at best they blame wrong translation, wrong interpretation. 

    I am providing last 5 day's conversation with Narcole regarding my questions.

    Me on 29th Sep:

    Dear All, 

    Just to inform you that Ali Sina has posted a new and very interesting article "Beat your Muslim Wife".  Read the article and all please imagine narcole facing same treatment from her husband. Later  We will  all will ask question to nercole about her fate as a muslim's wife.  

    Narcole on 29th Sep:

    Hehehe..im very happy now with my bf. you may comment as you like there. Im just enjoying my life 

    Me on 1st October:

    as you are afraid of coming there so i should post my question here only  
    M really eager to know your new excuses. 

    Dear Stubborn fanatic Narcole,   

    You being A devoted Muslim female I have few questions to you.   

    Q1. How many co-wife you would like to share with your devoted Muslim husband ? (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)   

    Q2. What will be your choice of beating tool ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)   
    a. Leather belt   
    b. Wooden roll (provided he will not break your bones)   
    c. Rubber pipe   
    d. Bathroom slipper   

    Q3. Would you like to reunite with your husband once he utter Talaq thrice ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)   

    Q4. Will you pay the price for reunion as Islam preaches ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam instruct to sleep with other man and then talaq him in order to reunite)   

    Note :- All other please kept on asking here more question's  and don't allow her to change the topic as Muslim's are good in this art 

    Narcole on 2nd October:

    Today not busy..so im being generous again  oh u so interested in my privacy. maybe ur a fan? ♥-♥ 
    A1. since i might be a busy wife so i prefer one more wife for my man. but hes half western so he always refused. he prefers serial monogamy. 
    A2. Same tool like prophet Ayyub's tool  
    A3. Hm, we used to break up and make up. So theres possibility for talaq 3 times. and yes the third time wouldnt be easy, cos if its easy it would be 70 times of talaq. Hm..let me count how many times we broke up for almost 4 years..yep about 70 times. broke up twice every month cos he was too stubborn listening to me to be better moslem, it took 2 years for him to start sholat and jumat, then majlis ta3lim etc. 
    A4. no need to sleep, just aqad. na3uzubillah.  
      
    Thanks for being so interested and curious. @}- 

    Me on 3rd October:

    Dear Stubborn Fanatic Narcole, 

    When you are losing on Islam then you put Islam on backseat and put-forth girl side of u.. to seek some concessions… sorry trick (fan and all) is not applicable here    

    Fanatics are object of fun and tickling, you just talk to them as  you are talking to a 4 yr old child.. A Fanatic’s brainwashed brain will provide childlike replies which will force you to laugh. I am asking  you questions to add some more laughter's in my life.. ur last reply was also full of fun .. thanks for it. And yes its really  
    impressive to see the garbage collection capability of your brainwashed brain..Sholat , jumat, na3uzubillah, ar rehman, ar rahim  

    anyway why afraid of coming on main article"beat your Muslim wife"  .. why hiding here ?? I would like more people to have same laughter's as I am having. Please reply there else i have to do extra work of pasting your replies there. 

    Now I am ensuring my future laughter's. so asking more questions  

    1. Your boyfriend western will not alive for long if he turn true Muslim. so be ready for new wife colleges and yes its not about ur preferences to have one more, Islam provide authority only to men's.he can bring  5-6 or more wife out of ur wish just let him become a true Muslim  

    2. Ayub used  different tool on times based of his anger level.. All the best for adventurous beating…   

    3. come-on don't play taquiyah here, his uttering talaq thrice is enough to subside u forever. 

    4. please describe na3uzubillah as per your garbage collection. 

    Eagerly waiting for ur full of fun replies 

     

  264. Sol Landet says:

    Don't forget Pighammed's ignorance about everyday things.

  265. Sol Landet says:

    Arabic is a language just like another, it's function is to communicate and share informations.
    about the powerful of language, english vocaboulary is richer than arabic vocaboulary, as english is the richest language in the world. so is more powerful than arabic.

  266. Sol Landet says:

    In my language to make fun of muslim, I say 'trollallà' (is like a song to make fun of everybody, but it fits so well with muslims. Also this way ;)&nbsp ;http://oi42.tinypic.com/2mpc1vm.jpg
    The drawing is like in arabic: from right to left.

  267. Sol Landet says:

    My brain works fine even when I have my periods. But maybe is because i'm (proudly) an infidel 😉

  268. Rembrandt_gg says:

    thank you dr sina for a wonderfu advice.

  269. akshat9 says:

    Dear Fot,

    Agreeing with your views that we should kept on bombarding them with logical arguments and facts to plant a seed of doubt in Muslim’s mind. That small seed will gradually develop as a plant and finally become a tree then it will liberate the person from Islam. But those who are using reason during their Seed to Tree journey will take very less time in liberation. If one is not using reason at all then no logic or arguments can help him/her. He will keep the seed of doubt in mind till death and seed will never be able to sprout. It is like planting a seed on a infertile ground. Owners of such infertile brain are known as fanatics. Seed alone will not work with them we have to provide Fertilizer also along with the seed. I think embarrassment could be the best fertilizer. It will force them to think of their religion and its absurdity, That is what our real goal is . Otherwise such people will never be able to defeat there self conditioning done by madarsa, Mosque Family, society. They need a push and I feel mocking their religion, Muhammad and Quran can do this.

    Fortunately Quran is a big comic book if we don’t look at violent part. We can easily provide logical facts against it and mock it at the same time. Like:

    •Jesus and Moses greeted Mohammed in jannat and request him to please bargain Allah to reduce prayers from 50 to 5. (I laughed a lot when i heard this 1st time 🙂 ) request was funny but funnier was the Allah's acceptance 🙂
    •Muhammad challenged meccan's to produce something similar to quran. (I read Quran 5 times and really it’s tough to produce something as nonsense as Quran) 🙂
    •Allah inspired Sex hungry Muhammad to marry a 6 year old female kid 🙂
    •Satan lives in the nose at night  🙂 

    Finally we all should work as different organs of same body. Each will be unique in its function but highest aim will be same for all organs i.e. to keep the body healthy and alive. I feel we both can work different ways yet synchronized, keeping in mind the same higher aim.

  270. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    "Parliamentarians in Iran have passed a bill to protect the rights of children which includes a clause that allows a man to marry his adopted daughter and while she is as young as 13 years.Activists have expressed alarm that the bill, approved by parliament on Sunday, opens the door for the caretaker of a family to marry his or her adopted child if a court rules it is in the interests of the individual child.Iran’s Guardian Council, a body of clerics and jurists which vets all parliamentary bills before the constitution and the Islamic law, has yet to issue its verdict on the controversial legislation.To the dismay of rights campaigners, girls in the Islamic republic can marry as young as 13 provided they have the permission of their father. Boys can marry after the age of 15.In Iran, a girl under the age of 13 can still marry, but needs the permission of a judge. At present, however, marrying stepchildren is forbidden under any circumstances."
    Some experts believe that the new bill is contradictory to Islamic beliefs. But they are wrong. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, married his daughter in-law, his son’s wife. He justified his marriage by saying that his son was his adopted son, not real son. Read Surah 33:37 Wa-ith taqoolu lillathee anAAama Allahu AAalayhi waanAAamta AAalayhi amsik AAalayka zawjaka waittaqi Allaha watukhfee fee nafsika ma Allahu mubdeehi watakhsha alnnasa waAllahu ahaqqu an takhshahu falamma qada zaydun minha wataran zawwajnakaha likay la yakoona AAala almu/mineena harajun fee azwaji adAAiya-ihim itha qadaw minhunna wataran wakana amru Allahi mafAAoolan
    Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.It means you can fuck your adopted son’s life if you want. If you can do that, you can fuck your adopted daughter’s life too. If the prophet can marry adopted son’s wife, it is perfectly alright for Muslims, the followers of Muhammad, to marry their adopted daughter. Muhammad would not have stopped marrying Zainab if she were his adopted daughter.Muhammad married 6-year-old Ayesha. So, Islam even allows men to marry children. The Hadiths are all about Muhammad’s sayings. If you want to be Muslims, you have to believe in the holy Quran and the holy Hadiths. It is as simple as it is. And if you do this, you have to be misogynist, rapist, pedophile, immoral men and spineless, voiceless, submissive, misogynist, masochist women.
    Religion  drag you backwards because it's the synonyms of ignorance ( religion don't allow to utilize your knowledge, experience and Mind but force you to believe it blindly)

  271. Sakat says:

    I was so engaged ,i couldn't read the reply of Ali in the above post to that gentleman ,you were right Mr Ibna khamma, it is splendid in its articulations.Hats up Sina!!! . Dear Narcole do you have any special view here (i don't think so)

  272. kismet says:

    Rubbish ! you are neither in god's mind nor in god's heart……he cares the shit about you.

  273. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Muslims dont try to find the truth and they also stop others to do so. Its time to open your eyes and thrive for the truth, for the just, while not follow a blind person who instruct all of you to keep your palm on your eyes and come with me, this will not give you heaven (jannat ul firdous) but I'm sure you will be in a ditch/pit due to your ignorance.

  274. Sakat says:

    Do you think by default he entered this site.Before begging Ali Sina's guidance he might have read many articles available on this site.Moreover there is a story of similar nature here in this site .Ali Sina has delivered his insight in that article too .Instead ,this person could have solved from the reply given by Ali in that article.There are two avenues to this gentleman's plight ,1. His brother and his family and their rituals are one aspect (they want to show their supremacy of belief against others ,even though they don't know why those rituals are there at first place) this might have enraged that lady to find recourse in her religion to score issue ,2. Today no one want to share the roof apart from husband wife and their siblings ,so this may be a trick from that lady to drove away the brother and his family from their house .He speaks half so,half knowledge is not ultimate end in itself.

  275. knowTheEnemy says:

    Instead of 'coward', he may simply be ignorant about what can be done. That is why it is important to *know the enemy* 🙂 The enemy is not some person or thing, but *ignorance* about that person or thing. Now that he got the advice from Ali Sina, he is [hopefully] no longer ignorant.

    He is will be a 'coward' only if he makes excuses and refuses to act upon Ali's advice!

  276. indonistan says:

    hahaha… It is time to say "Subhanallah" xD

  277. Sakat says:

    Perhaps your way of suggestion may be worthwhile ,but it depends how he assimilate them in order to come out of his present conditions.My above response was to the last part of his post to Ali Sina .He has exposed his cowardliness thoroughly there.It is my firm belief ,those who are coward and expect others to solve their problem ,cannot solve them (unless they make their own efforts to find solution and act upon).

  278. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    3. The habit of sticking with Past: The third cause of Muslim is sick man of this world is they always talk about our beloved prophet did this, he was ideal for all the Muslims, we are the best ummah singled out for mankind: we enjoin what is right (ma’roof), forbid what is wrong (munkar), and believe in Allah.( This is from Surah al-Imran, ayah 110 only you have changed as we as the today's Muslims think), Muhammad's statement, You are the final of seventy nations, you are the best and most honoured among them to Allah (Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and Al-Hakim recorded that Hakim bin Mu`awiyah bin Haydah narrated that his father said that the Messenger of Allah said.) and many more but they don't think about his ignorance, about poverty and how to be a good human being.
    4. Discourage of human being about Humanity, Society and country Development:- Islam teach us we are only for Allah worshiping if any thing is going wrong this is from Allah and this is only he who solve this, we have only offer Namaz and pay Zakat this is the best way, and we have to  fight in the way of Allah as he commandments us in Quran. What is here? Nothing is here this is only for our Test, our reward is in Heaven where we will get everything. What this show? This show this is the mental bankrupting of Muslims who can't think better, but if Muslims are here for worshiping Allah so why you all are busy in watching Movie, also on Internet, some are saying this is Halal but enjoying like Grand Mufti of Jammu-Kashmir (India), who was also listing Music but issued a Fatwa against  Praagaash (girls band). They think Jihad is the way path and it's passport for heaven, where we will get 72 virgin lady. Okay but what will happened with a little boy who die only 1 months old to 3 years old? It's sure he will be in heaven because he have not done any sin. Okay what will he do with virgin Lady who will breast feed him all these 72 virgin Lady? If they will what value these 72 virgins he have? Now they became their mother but here also apply  Surah 58:2 Allatheena yuthahiroona minkum min nisa-ihim ma hunna ommahatihim in ommahatuhum illa alla-ee waladnahum wa-innahum layaqooloona munkaran mina alqawli wazooran wa-inna Allaha laAAafuwwun ghafoorun If any men among you divorce their wives by Zihar (calling them mothers), they cannot be their mothers: None can be their mothers except those who gave them birth. And in fact they use words (both) iniquitous and false: but truly Allah is one that blots out (sins), and forgives (again and again). So will Allah killed his mother for breast feeding?

  279. FoT says:

    Comment to Akshat:

    No I dont think we should give up on fanatics. We should keep bombarding them with logical arguments that proves Islam is wrong. We must understand that the reason why people are fanatics is not because they are stupid but because they are weak persons with a lack of identity and low self esteem – they think Islam will give them this identity and self esteem. 

    Our job is to prove for fanatics (the majority of muslims) that Islamic identity is only going to make them confused and further ruin their self esteem. 

    That is not all.  We must also offer them an alternative to Islam. It is not enough to criticise. For these fanatics there is nothing but Islam. If they become apostates, they will have nothing left to believe in. Their life would be meaningless. Our job is also to prove that there are much better alternatives, which can fill the void that Islam would leave behind.

    This is why I think Dr. Sina is a very smart guy. He not only proves that Islam is corrupt, he also has discussions about God, Karma and Soul. In these discussions, fanatics are introduced to alternative views, which they are forced to read (even unconsciously). The main characteristic of muslims is tat they are ignorant of both their own and of other religions/views . With knowledge of yourself and of your surroundings comes doubt. With these articles, Dr. Sina is planting the seed of doubt inside muslim fanatics. Knowledge is the first, and doubt is the second step towards becoming non-muslim, and Dr. Sina offers both.  

    Thus Dr. Sina's strategy works against both fanatics and the few muslims who dare to question Islam.     

  280. Anand Sagar says:

    We all are in the Mind of God.

  281. ihateislam says:

    Nizam,
    That is not surprising. It is fast track/slide to the stone age in muhammadan territories.

  282. ihateislam says:

    Human Being,
    After your 'conversion', if your wife raises the issue of your brother living with you and praying in his own way, quickly remind her that the quran says that there is "NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION". Everybody is free to choose his/her faith as none can force the other to follow his/her belief.
    I still cannot overcome the 'hangover' effect of Ali Sina's solution to the problem at hand.

  283. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    The government of Pakistan’s Punjab province has banned a science book for Grade VI students of a chain of elite schools for containing material that could provoke “sexual desire”.The text book used by the Lahore Grammar School was banned after authorities received complaints from parents.“We have banned the book after receiving complaints from parents,” provincial education minister Rana Mashhood Ahmad told PTI.The science book had material that could provoke “sexual desire”, which could not be tolerated, he said.“We will not allow anyone to teach our children with material which is against our social values and religious beliefs,” Ahmad said.An inquiry was underway to ascertain why “objectionable” contents were included in the science book, he said.The Punjab government also took cognizance of the same school’s decision to replace Islamic Studies, a compulsory subject, with Religious Studies in Grade VI.“The new subject contains material which may mislead and confuse the minds of children,” Ahmad said.“Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan is quite clear about the provision that no Pakistani citizen should be taught a religion other than his own religion – Islam,” Ahmad said.

  284. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Muslim Sick man of this world:-  Any one can note it, that Muslim is sick man of this world. Why I'm using such type of proverbs for them? The cause are as specified for your kind information
    1. Dynamics of Failure: Islam is not a religion this is Political and Military ideology that cover Itself by the name of Religion. A great number of Islamic People understand it very well and first they try to reform it, but if there is a little worst customs a person can fight but it is full of worst  customs so there is only one way to leave it. And today we can easily understand a person who studied the Quran, Sira and Hadith properly who can't be long with this cult, for Example, Mr. Sina, Ms. Tasleema Nasreen, Ms. Ayesha, Mr. Kasim, Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali & & many more dear brothers and sisters have announce it publicly and silently (due to death penalty they announce it silently) & we can see the irritation/frustration/crossness/irascibility  of true Muslims who think Islam is the best religion. There are also two types of True Muslims first are in Educated Category who is fighting with himself should I have to leave this cult or not but due to fear (Death penalty, and the punishment of Allah that is too much horribly in Quran for who leave this cult or for them also who not follow) and greed ( The reward that is mentioned in the Quran) some of them fight with himself whole life but other side some of them leave it and living a good life, and second type of people are illiterate or not Arabic knowing and logically poor.
    2. Worst Education status:- Education status in Muslims are very poor, they thin we are here for only for the worshiping of Allah and Allah sent us on this earth for testing so we have only read the Quran even understand a or not but it's mandatory to read in Arabic, due to this they depend on Mullah. "On 6 June 2005, Imrana, 28 years old at the time, and the mother of five children, was raped by her 69-year-old father-in-law Ali Mohammad.Soon after she was raped, a local Muslim panchayat (council of elders) asked her to treat her husband Nur Ilahi as her son and declared their marriage null and void. Imrana defied the panchayat's ruling and continued living with her husband.The leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband also issued a fatwa or opinion, which quotes from Quran 4:22: wa la tankihoo ma nakaha aaba-o-kum, “And marry not women whom your fathers married”, and not distinguishing between rape and adultery, said that as a result of her father-in-law's act, she should now be treated as the mother of her husband and she could no longer live with him" But what will anyone say about this Surah 58:2 Allatheena yuthahiroona minkum min nisa-ihim ma hunna ommahatihim in ommahatuhum illa alla-ee waladnahum wa-innahum layaqooloona munkaran mina alqawli wazooran wa-inna Allaha laAAafuwwun ghafoorun
    If any men among you divorce their wives by Zihar (calling them mothers), they cannot be their mothers: None can be their mothers except those who gave them birth. And in fact they use words (both) iniquitous and false: but truly Allah is one that blots out (sins), and forgives (again and again).

  285. vijay says:

    If the husband is in Muslim country then, he may face life threat for being apostate. So when you have to revert to Hindu Faith, you will have to come back to India be a Hindu again. Just a suggestion. 

  286. Akshat says:

    Just now a Idea strike my mind which can help Narcole.. She can drop a mail to Zakir ch-cha and ask him "What all are the tools ch-cha uses to beat his wife and how many wifes he have". Then Narcole might be able to reply my questions :):):)

  287. Akshat says:

     I think she would have lost at World Muslimah as contestant were asked questions from quran and she has no runtime knowledge, thats why she is embarrassed on these questions and passing the buck to periods and busy. She has all the borrowed knowledge.  If you debate Narcole on Islam then you  will see a pattern in her arguments. She echo same views, same logic and even same example's as Zakir naik ch-cha (ch-cha = uncle) you tube videos.         

    In fact most Islamist scholars here are enlightened by same Zakir ch-cha torch.  

    Super Fanatic teaches| Sub Fanatic preaches ||  
                                                                    :):):)

  288. Ibn kammuna says:

    Khalil Jubran said " Do not say God is in my heart. Rather say I am in the heart of God"

    God bless Sina

  289. knowTheEnemy says:

    I am not sure if I agree with your suggestion. Mr. Human should think first and foremost about the well-being of his daughters. Unless there is great hardship, Mr. Human should not divorce his wife because that will take one parent away from the daughters, and depending on what country he currently is in, his wife can end up possessing the daughters. Also, I seriously doubt if she is going to be willing to read articles here, nor is she going to learn anything even if she does read here. She will have to learn the hard way!

    IMO the best thing for Mr. Human to do is to have faith in Ali Sina's expert advice and practice it until he can move his daughters to India or some other safe country AND until his wife realizes that being a Muslim man's wife isn't as awesome as they make it sound. This way not only the Islam problem will be taken care of without breaking apart the relationship, but children will be living with both parents. (You cannot rule out that this outcome may be in his Karma 🙂 )

    Also, simply having a 'modern' education does not wean a person off from Islam. There are lots of people who are fairly well educated yet are firmly loyal to Islam. There are lots of well-educated non-Muslim women who end up with Muslim men, with no idea of the consequences to her and her children. Just check out how many Bollywood actresses marry Muslims. Do they not have fame and money? Are they not 'modern' educated? Answer: Yes they are but modern education is very different from *proper* education!

    In order to give 'proper' education to his daughters, Mr. Human will have to explicitly tell them the dangers of being in Islam, and he will be able to teach these things to them only in a non-Muslim majority country. That is why I strongly suggest that he takes Ali Sina's advice seriously. With proper planning and execution of Ali's advice, I say he is almost guaranteed success. He would need to plan ahead and stay in touch with us for advice and suggestions!

  290. Sakat says:

    Mr Human ,why? you identify yourselves with religion of a particular kind ,You married an woman who follows a different belief.My question to you (because i feel you have married an antique piece like Narcole ) why? you didn't bother (think) while marring that girl who belongs to some other belief that ,she will create problem for you in future .The reason is you love her ( lust of sex). Now you realized your mistakes and,this is what exactly refereed as "Karma" in your kind of belief. Now you have three options i feel so , 1. Divorce her ( if both of you are settled in India and ,you c an claim for the rightful possession of your daughters under Indian matrimonial laws ),2. Drag her to faith freedom org ,provided she is educated (i doubt she is not ), 3.leave her to take her own course of life along with your daughters,don't worry about them ,if they get proper (modern) educations they will certainly come to know this fake religion called Islam and this thug,rapist ,Charlton mad Mohammed by their own findings (conclusions).I insist you (if you are young) to go for second marriage and have your own intelligent kids (those who can think of galaxies and universe and its formations )Don't brood over past ,if you are pessimistic then, you don,t have any mercy here, i bet .

  291. indonistan says:

    I bet narcole is so regret herself on why she didn't become one of the world muslimah contestant as she can wins the event easilly

  292. Akshat says:

    Busy in what…. Jihad ? at least you should seek some time to receive a gift from your beloved and peaceful religion. a. Leather belt
    b. Wooden roll (provided he will not break your bones)
    c. Rubber pipe
    d. Bathroom slipper.
    :):)

    Multiple Options allowed 🙂 🙂

  293. ihateislam says:

    The same man whose life you have or are about to ruin as indicated by Sakat.

  294. narcole1919721 says:

    Which man? sorry im busy

  295. Agracean says:

    Dear Ms Dr Ali Sina, I can't help laughing away as I read this awesome post. I think that many Muslims should learn from these lions. http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/06/21/lions-sav

  296. ihateislam says:

    "-WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. I'M ON MY PERIOD. MY BRAIN NOT FUNCTIONING WELL NOW. I DON'T UNDERSTAND ENGLISH!"
    All that is because Sakat has hit the nail on the head by saying that you are certainly the one who has ruined that man's(Human Being) life. Can you deny it?

  297. Akshat says:

    Dear Stubborn fanatic Narcole, 

    You being A devoted Muslim female I have few questions to you. 

    Q1. How many co-wife you would like to share with your devoted Muslim husband ? (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so) 

    Q2. What will be your choice of beating tool ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so) 
    a. Leather belt 
    b. Wooden roll (provided he will not break your bones) 
    c. Rubber pipe 
    d. Bathroom slipper 

    Q3. Would you like to reunite with your husband once he utter Talaq thrice ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so) 

    Q4. Will you pay the price for reunion as Islam preaches ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam instruct to sleep with other man and then talaq him in order to reunite) 

    Note :- All other please kept on asking here more question's  and don't allow her to change the topic as Muslim's are good in this art     

  298. Akshat says:

    Dear Stubborn fanatic Narcole,

    You being A devoted Muslim female I have few questions to you.

    Q1. How many co-wife you would like to share with your devoted Muslim husband ? (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)

    Q2. What will be your choice of beating tool ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)
    a. Leather belt
    b. Wooden roll (provided he will not break your bones)
    c. Rubber pipe
    d. Bathroom slipper

    Q3. Would you like to reunite with your husband once he utter Talaq thrice ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam allow him to do so)

    Q4. Will you pay the price for reunion as Islam preaches ?  (As your beloved and peaceful religion Islam instruct to sleep with other man and then talaq him in order to reunite)

    Note :- All other please kept on asking here more question's  and don't allow her to change the topic as Muslim's are good in this art :):):):)

  299. Akshat says:

    I have learnt few things here on this forum so i am sharing my experiences.

    Truth can only change the one who has willingness to know the truth. if someone has closed the doors of willingness then no way he/she can reach the truth. If you think Ali's argument will be able to change every fanatic Muslim into a rational being then we are wrong. Only developed souls who has spark of  truth inside will be convinced. fanatics will be unmoved no matter how rational is your argument. They are like a bucket kept beneath water supply from there surface side. No matter how strong is supply it will not fill. Our aim should be to discuss and debate Muslim's who are at least ready to listen and think. 

    But we meet both kind of people  fanatic & rational and our serious efforts and discussions should be for Muslim's who can transform, Who can see the evil  of Islam. 

    What about Fanatics then ? shall we leave them on there will. Yes its the only possible solution as they don't use reason and will be waste to involve in serious discussion with them. I am saying this as I have encountered few hypocrite fanatic's here who are unmoved to any reason and its only a waste of effort and time to try convince them by argument.

    As Ali suggested in past that We should mock them and there beloved Islam (from safe distance), We should mock Islam and Muhammad badly and from every direction. Then only they will be forced to think over it. 

  300. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Dear Human Being,
    Give her a complete chance to express herself about Islam completely about actual Islam, and again ask her about the 10 "Kufr"  first you don't told the number I'm sure she doesn't know and if she, please tell her to explain each other and then talk to her logically. Ask some Questions to her1. La yattakhithi almu/minoona alkafireena awliyaa min dooni almu/mineena waman yafAAal thalika falaysa mina Allahi fee shay-in illa an tattaqoo minhum tuqatan wayuhaththirukumu Allahu nafsahu wa-ila Allahi almaseeru
    Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah. (3:28)Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo la tattakhithoo alkafireena awliyaa min dooni almu/mineena atureedoona an tajAAaloo lillahi AAalaykum sultanan mubeenan
    O ye who believe! Take not for friends unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves (4:144)Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo la tattakhithoo allatheena ittakhathoo deenakum huzuwan walaAAiban mina allatheena ootoo alkitaba min qablikum waalkuffara awliyaa waittaqoo Allaha in kuntum mu/mineena
    O ye who believe! take not for friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport,- whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject Faith; but fear ye Allah, if ye have faith (indeed). (5:57)Why Allah divided all human beings in two category believer & non-believer? Only Muslims are creation of Allah? If her reply is "Yes" ask her again, who created non-believers? If Say "No Allah Does Not Divided in two categories?" then ask to her how you can draw a line between believers and Non-believers? And If say this is the will of Allah then also ask to her, Why he made a great drama to the creation of Azazel and Adam, while he is doing all these things?2:30-34Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."  And He taught Adam the names of all things; then He placed them before the angels, and said: "Tell me the names of these if ye are right." They said: "Glory to Thee, of knowledge We have none, save what Thou Hast taught us: In truth it is Thou Who art perfect in knowledge and wisdom. 
    He said: "O Adam! Tell them their names." When he had told them, Allah said: "Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of heaven and earth, and I know what ye reveal and what ye conceal?" 
    After reading you can understand that how Allah made mockery with angels he did not teach them and ask if you are right, and the answer of angels is of knowledge We have none, save what Thou Hast taught us here they are telling truth and this is the reason of angry Eblees because Allah cheated him. So how can we say Allah is justful this proved he is biased who teach all things to Adams but not teach the angels. And  this is how much stupidity of Allah that he not teach about those things and Ask while he claim I know what will be in future so it was not in his mind that no one is able to reply without teaching. This Proved Allah not like truth speaker.
     

  301. knowTheEnemy says:

    Dear human being,

    Ali Sina has given you great practical advice and I am sure it will turn your life around for the better. However, as ihateislam pointed out, you must take every precaution. Do not let anyone find out that you are only pretending to be Muslim, especially not your wife. Even if she says she no longer likes Islam and is willing to give it up, do NOT reveal the truth to her! That is until you and your daughters are safely moved to a country where it is safe to ditch Islam.

    This means you will have to learn the basic Islamic things by heart, eg Shahada and Namaz, and you will have to go to the Mosque once in a week or so. You may even have to take your daughters there.

    You said your daughters have Indian passport. Move to India if moving somewhere else does not work out soon. India may be poor but at least your daughters will be safe from Islam.

    Good Luck and feel free to ask for more advice from Ali and/or others through the comments section (Password protect access to this website from your computer, and ban her from entering the room when you are on the computer. If she disobeys then you know what to do…lol)

  302. narcole1919721 says:

    Hm? what are you talking about. im on period. my brain not functioning well now. suddenly i dont understand english! 

  303. ihateislam says:

    "-ALLAH HAS USED THE SAME WORD A NUMBER OF TIMES WITH A CONSISTENT MEANING-"
    That consistent meaning has been to 'beat'. There are examples from the lives of Muhammad and his companions to show that the word as used means 'to beat'.. Muhammad struck Aisha violently when he discovered that she was suspicious of him cheating on her. The wives of his companions complained about their husband's violent dispositions towards them and he did not disapprove of what those companions did. Instead it became a revelation that wives can be punished by being beaten. That is allah's consistent use of the word.

  304. Marathon15 says:

    Mr. Human being, "She knows that my love is very big for her." – you are in big trouble. That is all I can say. Your wife is a strong believer of Islam, like many Muslims and religious believers. No one's view on their religion can be changed except for a tiny minority of people. You only have two options, leave your wife and family and take custody of daughters if possible, or be OK with what is going on. Dont worry about two more human beings becoming Muslims. There's a billion Muslims, two more wont make a difference. Stop trying to convince your wife, its not going to happen. Let me also say that you are pretty naive in thinking that if you show your wife the bad verses, she'll be convinced. All religious believers are set in their ways of thinking.

  305. KOham says:

    humanity is not a good, powerful enough entity to implement Islam..

    Allah is not a real God but it is a place to Hide after doing sins…

    Stop reading books that are spoiling your pure views of looking at world…

    remember how you looked at things when you were a kid, and see what you have became today…

    Grow up with Ali…

  306. Ali Sina says:

    Dear Ahmed,
    If you are so embarrassed by this verse that you wish it meant something else, why do you cling to Islam? Isn't it more sane to acknowledge that Muhammad was a false prophet than come up with these silly excuses?

    No darabahunna does not mean multiply them. It means beat them. There is no other way to translate this verse. Even though same words may have different meaning, and this true in all languages, the context of the sentence makes it clear what we mean.

    The word beaver in English can mean,
    -beard; a bearded man (archaic slang)
    -aquatic rodent known for building dams
    -female pubic hair (slang)
    I doubt you can confuse them when used in the sentence. The same applies to the word daraba.

    Assuming you manage to fool us so we believe here Muhammad meant multiply them, or play them as berating drums. How can you fool us about other equally embarrassing teachings of Muhammad?

  307. KOham says:

    ha ha ha !!! Ali, you are such a genius! I could not even think of such a simple and effective way of getting the stupid lady straight! I still wonder HOW CAN HUMAN BEINGS BELIEVE ISLAM??? Don't they have simple common sense? Islam is the biggest psychological disorder mankind ever had…

  308. Ahmed says:

    Let me begin by explaining the English language is not powerful enough when it comes to translating the meanings of the Arabic of the Quran. Nor for that matter, is any other language on earth. So, all we have is translations of meanings according to the best understanding of the translators.

    The operative word in this verse in Arabic is "daraba." While there are literally hundreds of uses for this word varying from "tap" to "walk in stride" to "strike at something" to "set a clear example", the only meaning that can be assigned to something in the Quran must be according to the rules of Quran. And Allah has used the same word a number of times with a consistent meaning.

  309. Sakat says:

    I am certain that ,it is narcole who has ruined that man's family life.

  310. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Dear human Being, 
    7. Why is she believing so much in islam and quran. I showed sura and verses you mentioned, she says that you are amateur and you dont understand. There is a story for it. She says that why you only look bad things, there are good things also.It's her fear that is planted by her parents, Mullah, Quran and pedophile Muhammad that if you will not follow Allah will threw yourself in hell fire, and how is hell fire “They will long to leave the Fire, but never will they leave there from; and theirs will be a lasting torment.” (Quran 5:37)
    “…And they will never leave of the Fire.” (Quran 2:167)
    “Surely, those who disbelieve and did wrong; God will not forgive them, nor will He guide them to any way except the way of Hell, to dwell therein forever.” (Quran 4:168-169)
    “Surely, God has cursed the disbelievers, and has prepared for them a flaming Fire wherein they will abide for ever.” (Quran 33:64)“Soon I will cast him into Hell Fire.  And what will explain to you what is Hellfire?  Nothing does it allow to endure, and nothing does it leave alone!  Darkening and changing the color of man!  Over it are nineteen (angels as keepers of Hell).” (Quran 74:26-30). “And whosoever disobeys God and His Messenger, then surely, for him is the fire of Hell, he shall dwell therein forever.” (Quran 72:23)  
    Can you imagine? Wearing the finest silk clothing and sitting on chairs made of gold and precious stones? Those who disbelieve in the words of Allah, say that this is all a fairy-tale, made up by a would-be prophet. But we know, that Allah is the Truthful and that His Messenger, sallallahu alayhe wasallam, spoke only what was revealed to from the Most Truthful. And even though Allah describes Paradise for us in the Qur'an, He still says, "So no soul knows the delights of the eyes which is hidden for them; a reward for what they did." [32:17]"Verily, the dwellers of Paradise that Day, will be busy in joyful things. They and their wives will be in pleasant shade, reclining on thrones. They will have therein fruits (of all kinds), and all that they will ask for. (It will be said to them): "Salamun" (Peace be on you), a Word from the Lord, Most Merciful." [36:55-58]“The description of Paradise which the Muttaqoon have been promised is that in it are rivers of water, the taste and smell of which are never changed. Rivers of milk the taste of which will remain unchanged. Rivers of wine that will be delicious to those who drink from it and rivers of clear, pure honey. For them will be every kind of fruit and forgiveness form their Lord." [47:15]"And those foremost (In Tawheed and obedience to Allah and His Messenger in this life) will be foremost (in Paradise). They will be those nearest to Allah in the Gardens of Delight. A multitude of those (the foremost) will be from the first generation (who embraced Islam) and a few of those (the foremost) will be from the later (generations). They will be reclining, face to face, on thrones woven with gold and precious stones. They will be served by immortal boys, with cups and jugs, and a glass from the flowing wine, from which they will have neither any headache, nor any intoxication. They will have fruit from which they may choose, and the flesh of fowls that they desire. There will be Houris with wide, lovely eyes (as wives for the pious), like preserved pearls, a reward for deeds that they used to do. They will hear no vain or sinful speech (like backbiting, etc.) but only the saying of: Salam, Salam, (greetings of peace). And those on the Right Hand, who will be those on the Right Hand? They will be among thorn-less lote-trees among Talh (banana trees) with fruits piled one above another, in long-extended shade, by constantly flowing water, and fruit in plenty, whose season is not limited, and their supply will not be cut off. They will be on couches or thrones raised high. Verily, We have created for them (maidens) of equal age, loving (their husbands only). For those on the Right Hand." [56:10-38]And their recompense shall be Paradise, and silken garments, because they were patient. Reclining on raised thrones, they will see there neither the excessive heat of the sun, nor the excessive bitter cold, (as in Paradise there is no sun and no moon). The shade will be close upon them, and bunches of fruit will hang low within their reach. Vessels of silver and cups of crystal will be passed around amongst them, crystal-clear, made of silver. They will determine the measure of them according to their wishes. They will be given a cup (of wine) mixed with Zanjabeel, and a fountain called Salsabeel. Around them will (serve) boys of perpetual youth. If you see them, you would think they are scattered pearls. When you look there (in Paradise) you will see a delight (that can not be imagined), and a Great Dominion. Their garments will be of fine green silk and gold embroidery. They will be adorned with bracelets of silver, and their Lord will give them a pure drink." [76:12-21]Now you can understand it very well why she believe in Islam and Quran So Much this is not believing this is fear and greed that you can understand it Win-Win method by Mu-Hum-Mad.

  311. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Dear human Being,
    3. She is told idolatory is against islam and she does not allow my brother or his wife to pray in our home.Ask to her why Muslims offer Namaz in the direction of Ka'aba, this is also a type of Idolatry like Hindus, Jainis and Mahayan Buddhists (as they  pray in front of the face of the Idol), she will say to you this is instructed by Allah , Ask her again he is everywhere so anyone who does not Idolater can offer Namaz in any direction because he have already told in Quran I'm every where Read Both East and West belong to Allah, so wherever you turn, the Face of Allah is there. Allah is All-Encompassing, All-Knowing. (2: 115) Allah, there is no god but Him, the Living, the Self-Sustaining. He is not subject to drowsiness or sleep. Everything in the heavens and the earth belongs to Him. Who can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them but they cannot grasp any of His knowledge save what He wills. His Footstool encompasses the heavens and the earth and their preservation does not tire Him. He is the Most High, the Magnificent. (2: 255) So Is it a book from Allah? No it is the full of contradiction and prove one Ayath to another Ayath.4. She thinks that if i don’t follow islam, she will go to hell.The Prophet said: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, 'I have never received any good from you." (Volume 1, Book 2, Number 28 :)6.Now she is sending my daughters to learn quran which is sending shivers in my body. Because, i feel the islam is a ticking time bomb and dont know when it will trigger. Feel afraid of thinking my daughters future. Only hope is that i have to work hard to save my daughters future. Hope god will give me strength and allows me to live long enough to guide my sweet daughters in the correct path.Dear Just Stop this and chose a suitable kids magazine, this will develops different skills and abilities, communicate with them as you a child. This is bog if you fall in this you will sink more and more. This is cult and the person understand this when he lost a great in this bog. The teaching of Islam will made your daughter a really Satan, hatred. Ask her about Surah 85:21-22 That say Real Quran is in Loh-e-Mehfooz. This book (Quran that she read) also say about itself that is not correct. correct Quran is in Loh-e-Mehfooz.

  312. ihateislam says:

    Exactly. Muhammadans love and practice taqqiya. Let this woman be the recipient of taqqiya.

  313. FoT says:

    Make them taste their own medicine!

  314. ihateislam says:

    Ali Sina,
    One other thing please, will he be required to recite the shahada before an imam in the mosque or only before his wife? As a true muhammadan he might be expected to attend the mosque and take part in other muhammadan rituals. Will he not be asked to be taught the quran and other muhammadan texts by an imam or shiek who might spot the deceitful conversion?
    I will suggest that on no condition should he let the wife become suspicious of his intentions. Neither should he take the 'conversion' seriously. It is only a means to an end, and that is his total freedom from hell.

  315. ihateislam says:

    Ali Sina,
    Thanks for such a wonderful and thought provoking piece. It is down to earth, practical and, if implemented, will be very effective.
    I will add that as soon as he 'converts' he should immediately ban her from seeing those her new Indonesian friends who are such a bad influence on her. As her husband he has the right to approve of her circle of friends and she cannot see anyone without his permission. Then after the divorce he and the children should relocate from where they are now to another country and continue with his former life. Remaining in the same country is fraught with danger. Being an apostate, the muhammadan 'brothers' will be after his life.
    It is quite a captivating piece.

  316. Akshat says:

    I was reading this article in office , and was unable to stop my laughter's. .It should be read by every women advocating slam. Truthful and effective advice.

  317. 123 says:

    That makes a nice stand up comedy !!!

  318. New says:

    really mind blowing….This suggestions will work for sure..

  319. sap says:

    True teachings wouldn't cause this …<img src="http://tinyurl.com/lymutuj&quot; width="1"><img src="http://tinyurl.com/n5br55c&quot; width="1"><img src="http://tinyurl.com/l6kkmq5&quot; width="1">

  320. Sanjeev says:

    In fact Muslims are so barren of love that they interpret love as weakness and become emboldened in their oppression. The more kindness you show, the more aggressive they become. Muslims are peaceful only when they are in a weaker position. As soon as they feel they are strong and are protected by some laws, they will start their oppression and abuse…….

    So true of a typical Muslim on this Planet. and your suggestions were really Funny but i'm sure they r effective in this case.

Leave a Reply