Maulana Ajmal Qadri vs. Ali Sina

 

Maulana Ajmal Qadri is a senior religious scholar of the Deobandi school and the president of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (The Society of Islamic Scholars). He is regarded as a pir (saint) by his followers and is one of the most influential clerics of Pakistan.

In 1999 Maulana Qadri issued a fatwa saying lawmakers opposed to the Shariat Bill deserve to be killed.

He has also stated: “In our madrassas, we teach the Koranic jihad, This refuses to admit the supremacy of anyone, or any power, but Allah. We believe that the Muslim way is the supreme way, that the Islamic principle is best and that what the rest of the world does is not up to the mark.”

This turned to be a very interesting debate.  Moulana Qadri accuses others of kufr (blasphemy) shirk (polytheis) nifaq (seditiousness) and hasad (jealousy). I proved that actually it is Muslims that are guilty of these sins and Islam is the biggest blasphemy against God.

2007/11/17

Maulana Ajmal Qadri to Ali Sina

<[email protected]>

Mr. ALi
you have earned a great name in the world of shaitan..

I suppose you are right dear Maulana. I am becoming quite famous among Muslims.

you wonder why im saying this?cause i understand what is going on with you, i used to be “something” like you..an agnostic..studied all this anti islam stuff etc..westrn philosphy..but alhamdulillah ALLAH almighty gave me guidance..

And would you care to share that guidance with us? We would be more than glad to hear what you found. Maybe there is something good in Islam that we missed.

i cannot give u any evidence but there are other forces beyond the reach of our understanding and observations,

I have no disagreement with that premise. However, in what ways you think those mysterious forces that are beyond our reach validate the claim of Muhammad? We are not arguing about those mysterious forces, but about Muhammad and his claim. According to my findings, Muhammad was an impostor who lied and fooled the gullible to gain worldly power. He was no different from any other cult leader. My beef is not with God or the mysterious forces. My beef is with Muhammad and his bogus claim.

i dnt know if ALLAH will show you that the way HE showed me, but one thing is SURE SURE SURE that YOU HAVE BECOME A TOOL IN THE HANDS OF EVIL FORCES WHO WERE AFTER YOU SINCE LONG TIME and you have gone so far that there might not be coming back.YOU ARE A VICTIM OF SHAITAN nothing more than that.

This is just a baseless claim. If what Allah showed you are logical, you can share them with us and make us also believers. Since God cannot be an illogical god then his guidance should be also logical otherwise any charlatan can claim to be a messenger of God and fool people. Can you tell us, in a logical way, what is the proof that Muhammad was a prophet of God?

DN BE SO ARROGANT ABOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE,CAUSE YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ISLAM,YOU REALLY LACK KNOWLEDGE OF ISLAM,
IM WARNING YOU OF A TORMENT HERE AND HEREAFTER UNLESS YOU DNT REPENT AND IF ALLAH ACCEPTS,, JUST TO WAIT AND SEE.

WHEN IT WILL COME TO YOU PLS. CONTACT ME

God, if real, cannot be unjust. An unjust god is not God but Satan. A just God will never punish someone for disbelief without giving him all the evidence and proof. I have not seen any proof that Muhammad was a prophet of God and since I am afraid that God may punish me for following Satan I refuse to follow Muhammad. As far as I have seen Muhammad’s deeds and words were very satanic. I don’t want to follow a false prophet and go to hell for that. That is why I left Islam and I am inviting all my Muslim brothers and sisters to be warned, investigate the claim of Muhammad, read the Quran and see for themselves that he was not a true prophet. By believing in a false prophet and doing his evil biddings, like hating and killing the unbelievers, they may go to hell.

Now you say I don’t know anything about Islam. I never claimed to know everything. I am a human and fallible. It is possible that I can be wrong. That is why I am inviting anyone to show my errors and I have promised to not only repent and shut down this site, but also to give the person who can prove me wrong $50,000 in reward for saving my soul and helping me to find the right path. Many have tried, but one after another they failed and proved to be in error.  In every debate I had with Muslim scholars, I was victorious. Now, the fact is that I have no formal training in Islam and my knowledge of Islam and Arabic is not anywhere close to theirs. Nonetheless, I win invariably and they lose all the time. This proves that I am not winning because I am smarter or have more knowledge, but because I understand the truth of Islam while they don’t.  Knowledge does not mean understanding. One can be very knowledgeable, but understand very little. These learned fools are equated to mules loaded with books.

You are most welcome to write your proofs that Islam is a true religion, post them in our forum and let everyone read and learn the truth. What can be better than that? I give you the opportunity to use this site to promote Islam and help, not only the former Muslims, but everyone to know that Islam is a true religion of God.

All the best

Ali Sina

Maulana Ajmal Qadri to Ali Sina

2007/11/17

Part II Second Email

Mulana Ajmal Qadri

Mr. ALI,
first thing i would like to request is to stop using insulting words about prophet muhammad peace and blessing of Allah be upon him..you must have respect and care for the feelings of more than 1 billion people if you respect humanity.

Dear Maulana:

I am not insulting Muhammad. I am laying charges against him. If I say Muhammad was a thief, a mass murderer or a rapist, I am proving my claim using the Hadith, the Sira and the Quran as exhibits.  It is up to you to disprove these charges.

As for respecting beliefs, who said beliefs have to be respected?  Why should anyone respect a religion that says the unbelievers are filthy (najis) crucify them and chop their fingertips because they are the enemies of God and they will be fuel for hell? This is an insult to me, because I am a disbeliever. Why should I respect an insult against myself?

We have to respect people and their rights to believe in anything they choose, but not what they believe. I must respect your right to believe in absurdities, but this does not mean I must respect absurdities.

We hear a lot that we must respect people’s beliefs. That is baloney. We don’t have to respect any belief, not even our own. We must always question beliefs. This is the only way humans can progress. If we respect beliefs, don’t question them and don’t challenge them how are we going to get rid of false beliefs?

Furthermore, do Muslims respect the beliefs of others? Why is it that they insult the Jews, the Christians and kill the Baha’is, the Sikhs, the Ahmadis and the Hindus wherever they are the majority and have the upper hand?  Isn’t the Sura Fatiha that Muslims recite daily an insult to non Muslims? Forget the Muslims; did Muhammad respect the belief of the people of his time? Why did he break into Ka’ba and destroyed that temple? Wasn’t that a sacrilege of the religion of the Arabs? He could start his own mosque elsewhere, why did he have to assault and insult the deities of the people? He set the example for other Muslims to follow and as the result his followers are as vile and intolerant as he was. They constantly fight with each other, call one another heretics and kill one another. Do you know that more Muslims have been killed in the hands of fellow Muslims in sectarian fights than they have been killed in wars in the hands of non-Muslims? This killing is still going on.

When you ask others to respect your faith, please take a closer look at how you respect the faiths of others. Muslims enjoy a lot more freedom and rights in non-Muslim countries than they grant other religions in Islamic countries. You yourself have said lawmakers who oppose the Sharia must be killed. Is this how you respect people’s belief?  You ask for respect when you give none.

and let there be no doubt in your mind that muhammad pbuh is the final and mightiest messenger of Allah,and quran is the (furqan) criteria to judge from right to wrong whatever is the criteria of faith (eaman) presented by quran is given to the umma of last messenger.

Well, I doubt that. That is why I am asking you to prove this claim in a logical way. I won’t believe just because you say so. Where is the proof of those claims? I won’t believe also just because Muhammad says so. I need proof.  Muslims confuse proof with claim and instead of giving any proof they repeat the claim as if by repeating a lie emphatically it becomes true.

i would not go in a logical disscussions with you cause pure logic leads you towards agnostism or atheism, it will always mislead u, unless u dnt belive in “spituality” and let your reason follow your heart.. cause the relation of soul is with heart and soul has its own functions (its own eyes, ears, etc).and quran was revealed on the heart of prophet muhammad pbuh as its mentioned in surah baqarah..therfore Allah addresses “the deaf, dumb” to those whose souls have become dead.

That is a mighty statement. If logic leads to agnosticism or atheism, doesn’t this mean that the belief in God is illogical? Who gave us humans our brain, if not God? Why using our brain would lead to agnosticism or atheism?  As Galileo remarked, if God did not want us to use our brain, why would he give it to us.  If we are not supposed to use logic to find God, how do we know that we are not being misled?

There is no dearth of false prophets who have deceived countless people with their lies and told them don’t use your brain, don’t try to reason, don’t employ logic, just believe. Open your heart and believe in anything we say uncritically and blindly, because this brainless acceptance will lead you to guidance. We know very well that these poor people were not saved, but were misled. That is the risk you take for not using your brain. If God’s message is not logical how can we be sure it is God’s message?

Contrary to what you say, since God is rational, he would never want us to believe in gobbledygook.  He gave us the faculty to distinguish truth from falsehood.  If we are supposed to use our brain and be logical in simple matters of life, why shouldn’t we be logical in finding God?

Don’t you see the ploy? Why do you think Muhammad insisted we should not use our brain?  It’s because he knew that his claim is illogical. He knew that he was a liar. He knew that if people start using their brain they will find the truth and no one would believe in his lies.

It is unthinkable to believe that God wants us to be stupid when it comes to finding guidance. If we are not to use our brain, how do we know which religion is true? There are thousands of beliefs out there. All of them appeal to our heart and warn us against using our brain.  Which one is the right one? Should we follow the one that is more logical or the one that threatens us more?

Only with logic can we find the truth. Truth is logical.  It is falsehood that is illogical. All you need to see that Muhammad was not a true messenger of God is this. If someone tells you, do not use your brain and believe blindly, you should immediately leave him because that person is not a prophet of God. He is an impostor.  Isn’t this enough to see Muhammad was a liar?

Who is deaf, dumb and blind?  The one who uses his brain and finds the truth logically or the one who believes without thinking?  Do you see how easy it is to disprove Islam?

It is not true that with logic you will lose your faith in God. With logic you will lose your faith in Muhammad.  Muhammad had no understanding of God. Whatever he said about God is nonsense.  He envisioned God like a sadist despot, someone like Saddam Hussein, who does what he pleases and abides by no rules; who likes to be adulated; who rewards brainless believers and punishes freethinkers.  That is not the definition of God. A man with such a low intelligence as Muhammad could not understand the greatness of God.  So he described him as a wanton ruler. Muhammad’s understanding of God is stupid. That is why when you use your brain and try to be logical you lose faith in his Allah. Muhammad’s god is illogical. He is not god but a figment of the mind of a very ignorant man.

I found God after I left Islam and I found it with logic. I did not have to abdicate reason in order to find God. Truth cannot be illogical. It is falsehood that is illogical. God is the single principle underlying the creation, but not a despot.

The reason humanity is divided, is because the majority of people believes in illogical gods.  If we stop this insanity and use the greatest gift that God has given us to find him, we will all find the one true God and these divisions among mankind will disappear.

i believe that u are misled by shaitan cause i used to utter the similar things about islam and prophet muhammad pbuh, untill the signs of Allah were shown to me (wich i would not mention in mail).but alhamdulillah Allah proved to me each and everything wat Allah says and HIS messenger says is true.(NO DOUBT).

If the signs of Allah were shown to you, they are not shown to me. I cannot believe in what you believe because I have seen no signs. In the absence of signs all I can do is use my brain and try to be logical. When I do that I see that Muhammad was an impostor. I repeat; my beef is not with God. It is Muhammad that I reject.  I don’t think Muhammad had any connection with God. It is clear that he did not understand God.

Would God want us to believe in him irrationally? That is blasphemy. God is not irrational. It is Satan who is irrational. If Muhammad tells you not to use your brain and believe blindly, that is proof that Muhammad is not from God, but from Satan.

That is what has happened to the poor Muslims. Because they don’t worship God, but Satan, they live in misery and are constantly in war with everyone and each other. Why do you think Muslims are the poorest and the most wretched people on Earth? Why are they constantly fighting with each other and with everyone else? It is because they worship Satan.

You say you cannot talk about the signs of God. What good does that to me? If those signs were real, you could explain them in a logical way.  How do I know that you are not misled?  Tell me about those signs and I will prove that you are being fooled.  Am I supposed to use my own brain or yours? If the signs that you have found satisfy you; good for you!  As long as I have seen no signs I don’t have to believe. It would be foolish to believe without evidence? Why should I believe in Islam and not in one of a myriad other religions that are also irrational?

and islam is so beautiful and peaceful and everything in it is according to nature of human being.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. You find Islam beautiful and I find it ugly. That’s subjective. Let’s not get into esthetics! However, Islam is NOT peaceful. That claim is a joke. Muslims are always engaged in fighting. Muhammad himself launched 78 raids in the last decade of his life. The Quran says “Fighting is prescribed for you’ (Q.2:216) and Allah will punish you with a grievous penalty, if you do not fight in Jihad.  (Q.9:39).

To say Islam is peaceful is ludicrous. When you say Islam is in accordance with human nature, I have to disagree also. If something is in accordance with human nature, it can be understood naturally. Islam is not understood naturally. It must be indoctrinated and sometimes imposed on those who are unwilling to submit to it. This is proof that it is not natural. Falling in love is natural. Curiosity is natural. Seeking happiness and fulfillment are natural.  These are the things we want to do naturally without imposition. When a belief is imposed by force it is not natural.

Earlier you said Islam is not logical. How can something natural be illogical? Also, if it is natural why Muhammad ordered his followers to wage jihad and force Islam on others by the sword? The very concept of Jihad is proof that Islam is against human nature. The very idea of amr bi’l ma`aroof and nahy anil munkar (enjoining what is permitted and forbidding what is prohibited) is proof that Islam is contrary to human nature. If Islam were in accordance to human nature, why there would be a need to impose it on people by force?

And for your information there are still true followers of Prophet muhammad pbuh present in this world (to whom Allah has given special sight to see unseen and auliya of Allah and true followers of prophet muhammad pbuh are given special powers from Allah (similar to given to prophet muhammad) they are the open evidence of true prophet hood of muhammad pbuh.May ALLAH BRING you to one of these, but i fear you have gone so far to earn the anger of ALLAH.

Can any of these true followers of Muhammad prove his claim? If so please ask them to write to me. I eagerly want to hear what they say.

Forget about me. Suppose I am hopeless. You should not think about me, but about millions of people who read this site. Don’t you think they need to know the truth? Please send those Muslims endowed with special powers over and let them establish the truth of Islam once and for all.

Muslims have no special powers. It’s demagogy.  You can impress the gullible with these empty talks, but not a freethinker.

I have convinced countless Muslims that Islam is a lie. This number is bound to grow as more people will read this site. I give you my word that I will publish the rebuttal of your enlightened auliya who can see the unseen. Let them tell us about it. Let them give us the signs. Ask them to come and guide those whom I mislead.

the prophets of bani israel prayed to ALLAH to be among the followers of prophet muhammad pbuh cause they knew what is the status of auliya of prophet pbuh.you have no idea what is the status of this umma.cause you might spent time in wrong hands and your PERCEPTIONS HAVE BECOME UNBALANCED.

This is absurd. Who said the prophets of Israel prayed to be among the followers of Muhammad?  Where is the proof of this preposterous claim? You Muslims are used to make baseless claims and since no one has ever dared to contradict you, because you would not tolerate being contradicted, you kept making up these false claims and now you actually believe in your own lies. Nothing is farther from the truth. No one ever prayed to be the follower of Muhammad because Muhammad is not even a prophet of God. Muhammad is not mentioned in any sacred book of any religion.  Is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible? No he is not.

it would be long discussion that i guess is useless cause i cant give you hidaayat ,

So why did you write? Did you think that I will just believe in any irrational claim you throw at me blindly if you threaten me with hellfire? I need proof, and you have given none. I don’t believe in an irrational god and will not be a blind follower.

if Allah has destined to give you hidaya then it will come if HE has not decided to put you in hellfire.im just warning you shut this up all wat u doing immidiately and repent and goto auliya akraam of ALLAH not to the scholars, your solution is there or else the punishment will come to you sooner or later but defintly..Believe me.. very soon inshallah..

Is that all? First you say that logic makes one disbelieve in the god of Muhammad, because his god is illogical and irrational. Then you say that you have the signs, but you cannot tell them. Then you say you don’t have hedayah (guidance). So far you did not give any proof that Muhammad was a truthful prophet of God. Then you issue threats that if I don’t believe in your irrational god and his bogus prophet, I will be sent to hell. Are you trying to frighten a child? We are rational people dear Maulana. All you have to do to prove Islam is true is to present logical arguments. Threats are for fools. Smart people cannot be scared into submission.  God has given us brain to use in order to not fall prey to charlatans and impostors. Anyone can issue threats. I want logical proofs. You have none.

Don’t be afraid of thinking dear Maulana. Use your brain. God wants you to use your intelligence.  With logic you can find the real God. Don’t let impostors and conmen mislead you. Don’t fall prey to their lies. God will never punish people for using their brain. By following Muhammad you are following Satan. Whatever this man did and said were satanic. Don’t waste your life following a liar.

You cannot prove Islam is true. But I have proven that it is a lie. Please read my articles. You will find the truth there. I use the Quran and hadith to back up my claims. I will also send you a digitized copy of my book, if you ask for it. The proof that Muhammad was lying is overwhelming. You will not be rewarded for following the prophet of Satan. It’s time to wake up. Millions of Muslims are waking up. Don’t be the last.

Maulana Ajmal Qadri to  Ali Sina

2007/11/18

Part III Third Email

WELL how do you prove GOD with logic? it all starts from fear of one who created us and once fear of him comes in the earth dates where EAMN comes, in your case u don’t have fear of ALLAH, can you prove soul? i challenge and i will give 100,000USD to one who purify himself according to way prophet pbuh prescribed and yet claim this is not true faith. please let all readers of your site to follow true teachings  of MUHAMMAD peace be upon him and purify yourselves from following desieses as defined by muhammad peace be upon him.

SHIRK(associating partner with GOD)
KUFR (to disbeliefe)
NIFAQ (hipocracy)
TAKABBUR (arrogance)
HASAD( JEALOUSY,ENVY)
AJAB (being BOOSFULL)
and one hadith is enuf to complete all human rights as prophet pbuh said  ( chose the same thing for your brother what you like for yourself).if you only follow this one hadith its enuf to practice all human rights. and if anyone after practicing this and being purified from above mentioned desieses and still claim that teachings of Muhammad pbuh are wrong i will pay 100,000USD. inshallah..
and those who love to be purified and enjoy life here and hereafter pls. contact at my email. [email protected]

Dear Maulana Qadri:

To understand God you have to change your entire paradigm. The god of Muhammad cannot be proven, because he is a false god. However, it is easy to prove the real God.  To do that you must see things from a complete different perspective. As long as you think of God as a sovereign ruler, or a king, you will not be able to prove his existence and therefore you believe without proof. Here is the pitfall. Once you believe in something without proof, you become prone to believe in any fantasy.  Since you can’t prove that the object of your belief is real you can fall prey to charlatans who will mislead you with their lies and convince you to believe in their bogus gods. Truth is only one but falsehood can be many. That is why we have so many faiths and religions. Why people are so divided?  It is because they don’t care about the truth. They believe in things that are irrational and illogical and erroneously believe that God cannot be proven. That is a fallacy. God can be proven, but you must be prepared to see things from a different perspective.

For most religions, particularly the Semite ones, God is a being. He is a supreme being, separate from his creation and yes, God is a “he”. This notion of God cannot be proven. In fact it can be shown that it is not true. Generally, when people reject God and say they are atheists, it is this god that they reject. However, many great minds believe in God and they are very religious. Albeit their God and religiosity is very different from what religious people understand.  I have explained this in an article titled “What is God?”

You gave us a laundry list of several “diseases of the soul” such as shirk, kufr, nifaq, takabbur, hasad, etc. and suggested that Islam can cure these diseases. This is not true at all. If we pay attention we can see that Muslims are the ones who suffer from these diseases. Let me go over them one by one.

Shirk:

Shirk means associating partners to God. Muslims claim God has no partners, but in reality they associate Muhammad to God. The Quran is full of injunctions telling the believers to love Allah and his messenger, obey Allah and his messenger, loot and bring a fifth of the spoils for Allah and his messenger, etc.  Muhammad even claimed that in the Day of Judgment he will sit next to Allah interceding on behalf of the believers. In other words he will act as a counselor to Allah advising the almighty, how to do his job, whom to punish and whom to reward.

Can a person believe in God and not in Muhammad? According to Muhammad such person is still a kafir. Therefore, it is clear that despite Muhammad’s claim he actually elevated himself to the rank of the partner of God to such an extent that the belief in God without the belief in his partner is not accepted.

Muslims can criticize Allah, as the Pakistani poet Iqbal did, but no one can criticize Muhammad. Doesn’t this show that Muhammad is above Allah?

Kufr:

Kufr is not just disbelief. It means blaspheming God. It means attributing false characteristics to God. There are many qualities that Muhammad attributed to God that are false and blasphemous. Take a look at the 99 names of Allah.  Among them you find Al-Mutakabbir (The Proud One), Al-Jabbar (The Despot),  Al-Qahhar (The Subduer), Al-Khafid (The Abaser) Al-Mudhell (The Humiliator), Al-Mumit (The Death Giver) Al-Muntaqim (The Avenger), Ad-Darr (the Creator of the Harmful). According to the Quran Allah is khairul Makirin (the Best Deceiver). These are not divine qualities. The Bible says that Satan is the Proud One, the Deceiver, the Giver of Death, the Humiliator and the Abaser.  Muhammad has attributed satanic qualities to Allah. How can God be a deceiver?  Either Muhammad’s god was Satan or he has blasphemed God. As the result, Muslims, by virtue of believing in Muhammad and perpetuating these blasphemies are kafir. Islam is nothing but kufr.

One name of Allah according to Muhammad is Al-Warith (the Inheritor). If God is the owner of everything, how can he inherit thing that he owns already?  It is very clear that Muhammad’s god is not God and Islam is a big kufr.

Nifaq:

Nifaq means sedition and discord caused thorough deceit and mischievousness. That is what Muhammad did and Muslims do. Muhammad deceived young men and women and separated them from their parents. He caused sedition among the people and told his follower to sever their ties with their friends and relatives if they don’t believe. In Medina he caused sedition among the Arabs and the Jews who were the original inhabitants of that land and eventually massacred the Jews or banished them. There is nifaq and discord wherever two Muslims reside.  They can’t live with each other and they can’t live with others. The seed of this nifaq was sown by no other than Muhammad himself. He said that his umma will be split in 72 sects and all but one group will go to hell. He never made it clear which sect is the right one. As you yourself stated, Islam does not have any logical explanation and Muhammad never explained anything. Therefore, Muslims interpret Islam in different ways and each group considers others as heretics, fuel for hell and deserving of death.

Takabbur:

Takabbur means pride and vain glory. Yes of course takabbur is a vice and a disease of the character. But lo and behold that according to Muhammad Allah is also mutekabbir (filled with takabbur).  Why Muhammad attributed this vice to God? It is because his god was a figment of his imagination and a creation of his own psychopathic mind.  Muhammad was a narcissist and Allah is the projection of his sick mind.  As the result the god of Muhammad reflects his personality disorders. He is a deceiver; full of pride, humiliator, abaser and a despot. These are all traits of a narcissist.  Muhammad projected his own attributes on his imaginary god.

It does not take much to see that Islam is false and Muhammad was an impostor. The reason Muslims are unable to see this is because they have stopped using their brain and as you have confessed, they have abandoned logic.  When you renounce logic, you can fall prey to any lie. If any Muslim decides to think for one minute, he will see that Islam is false. More and more Muslims are using their brain and they are leaving Islam. At this rate, Islam will become history in one generation.

Hasad:

Hasad is jealousy. Let us be honest dear Maulana. Who are more hasood (jealous) people? Is it the non-Muslims or is it the Muslims? I have been in both sides and I can tell you with certainty that the non-Muslims have no jealousy towards Muslims. As a matter of fact they see nothing worthy in Muslims to be envious of. What possibly Muslims have that could cause jealousy?  Are Muslims more advanced, scientifically, technologically, culturally, socially, politically, economically or even psychologically?  Muslims are the lowest of the low. What do they have that others don’t, that may cause envy?

Muslims are so backward in their thinking that one is tempted to classify them as a less evolved sub species of human race.  The only sentiment they may arouse among non Muslims is pity. It’s time to pull our heads out of the sands of denial and face the truth.  Muslims are the most wretched people on the face of the earth. It is they who are envious of others. It is they who constantly compare themselves with others and brag about their illusory past glories. What glories? As long as they looted the wealth of other nations they lived a dishonorable luxurious life. Once the loot ended, they regressed into poverty from which they cannot recover. The wealth generated through oil has nothing to do with Islam and Muslims. Again, it is the non-Muslims who have found a use for that black stuff.  Muslims are a lazy lot who produce nothing. Instead of relying on work they rely on “providence” and waste their time praying to a false god. While the non-Muslims have come out of the Dark Ages and every day they are conquering new frontiers in all fields of knowledge, Muslims are stuck in the seventh century barbarity with no hope to ever catch up. All they do is read the Quran and fool themselves into believing that it has foretold many of the scientific discoveries made by the Kafirs. How pathetic!

I am not sure what do you mean by Ajab (being boosful). I know what ajab (strange) means, but it does not mean boastful and I don’t understand the word boosful. If you mean boastfulness, this is the same as vain glory and we discussed it already. All you have to do to see Muslims are a boastful arrogant lot is look how they behave. If a picture is worth a thousand words, these pictures are worth a few thousand words.

You say that Muhammad said: “choose the same thing for your brother that you like for yourself”. Assuming Muhammad said such thing, he was not the first to say it. This is called the Golden Rule and a variety of that is said by people of all cultures and times. Confucius said “Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself.” Jesus said, “And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” Luke 6:31.

However, what Muhammad said is not the same. According to Muhammad only Muslims are brothers. In that brotherhood, the non-Muslims are not counted. Muhammad said: “O ye who believe! take not for awlia your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.”(Q. 9:23) In another place he put the following words in the mouth of his imaginary deity and said: “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are harsh against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other.”(Q. 48:29) This is a far cry from the Golden Rule. The brotherhood of Muslims is only among Muslims. As far as the non-Muslims are concerned Muhammad said, “Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers” (Q. 9:14)  Since Muslims regard Muslims of differ-ent sects heretics, they even kill one another. So this brotherhood in Islam is very limited. Shiites are not brothers of Sunnis and vice versa. There are hundreds of sects in Islam and each hate the others.

Even hyenas are compassionate to their own pack. There is no glory is being good to our own people. The glory is in being fair to all mankind. What Muhammad preached is called fascism. Being united with each other and harsh against the outsiders is the philosophy of fascism. Islam is a religion of hate. It divides mankind between “us” and “them,” the believers and the non-believers and incites discord and war. Islam is not a religion of God. It is an instrument of Satan to divide mankind and destroy the human race. Muslims are not worshiping God. They are worshiping Satan.

Truth is out. Good people who up until now thought that by following Islam they are following the religion of God are seeing the truth. They are waking up and realizing that they have been lied to. They are leaving Islam in droves. This is just the beginning.  Soon you’ll see a mass exodus from Islam all over the world.  Truth is spreading fast. You can no longer hide it. The days of Islam are numbered. “The truth has come and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing).”

you are sick and all those you are misleading are garbage and we dnt need them, and mark my words ALLAH is swift in taking account, and its very soon coming to you , and you will even have no ability to repent… remember my name, me email, and i pray to ALLAH at least to give ability to inform me your reward .

Okay, so I am sick and all those I am misleading are garbage.  But why don’t you explain the beauty of Islam to us so we can be guided?  So far we exchanged three messages and you said nothing to prove that Islam is a true religion. You simply threatened that if we don’t believe we’ll go to hell and called us garbage.  You even pray that the news of our “reward” reach you so you can rejoice hearing what your jihadi brothers have done to me. I am afraid these are not convincing arguments. We need proof. Anyone can say stupid things and threaten those who don’t believe in his illogical arguments.  This is called argumentum ad baculum and it is a logical fallacy. Anyone can insult his opponents when he fails to produce logical arguments. Why any sane person should believe in such fallacies? Threats and insults are fallacies. Is the creator of the universe a crazy sadist?  How can a real god send a religion with no proof and then punish people for not believing?  This is sadism. Is Allah insane?

No my dear Maulana. You are mistaken. God is not as stupid and crazy as Muhammad made him look and you believe.  First of all God is logical. If Muhammad’s god is not logical it is because he is not God.  Secondly, God would never want us to believe in absurdities. This is a blasphemy. By claiming that God is illogical and wants us to believe in him blindly, you are saying a kufr.  You portray God as an insane sadist.  Are you sure he will forgive you for that?  I hope he does.

Please come to your senses.  God is not stupid.  He is not irrational and illogical. How can you even think of such thing?  Muhammad lied.  This man was evil.  He fooled ignorant people, incited them to raid, loot and bring wealth and young women for him.  Everything this man did was satanic. You are worshiping none but Satan.  How can God be illogical?  How can God be  deceiver, arrogant and proud,  despot, abaser, humiliator, death giver, avenger and a the creator of harms?  These are satanic attributes. You worship Satan. It’s time to wake up.  Truth is manifest like the sun.  For how long do you want to fool yourself and others?

I proved that the teachings of Muhammad are evil. I won the $100, 000 dollars that you offered.  As the rightful owner of that money, I appoint you as my trustee to spend it for the well-being of the people who donated that money to you.  Teach them the truth.  Please translate my book in Urdu (It is now translated). Print it and distribute it at cost or for free. Let people be enlightened and learn the truth because this is the greatest gift you can give them.  Only truth will set them free.

I am giving away this truth for free. Please spend my money to spread it among the people in your country. I want them to be free from this web of lies. I want to see them prosper and live as equals, with all the nations of the world in harmony and peace. I want the Pakistani youths see the light and not volunteer to blow up themselves and other innocent people for a lie. Please spend my money to spread this truth and set your people free from lies, deceptions and the misery that Islam has brought for them.

I remain sincerely yours

Ali Sina

You may also like...

No Responses

  1. Amin Riadh says:

    Previous answer…

    Didn’t I say I will not be messing about with you. And I will not entertain your deliberate misunderstandings…

    Now, I am glad you have learned that wrapping yourself in words too large in order to impress doesn’t work. Neither does going down the good old route of flinging petty insults about.

    Now let us work on another aspect… this tendency to be dishonest…

    “1.”Nur” you say has two meanings,the original definition of “accidental/contingent” used during Muhammad’s era and the one which evolved over time meaning “light” with no further assumptions,(ie. emit or reflect is not implied in the definition).”

    I never said anything of the kind. This is completely from you… so is it that:

    1. You are a bit slow in understanding?

    2. Or that you are dishonest?

    Decide which and do reply back. You see this is not what I have said at all… so how come you have arrived at this particular conclusion?

    – –

    Failure to reply will end up with me calling you thoroughly dishonest and a liar. So I will hold off until you have had a chance of explaining the above.

  2. Dodol says:

    So, Mr. Ali, what is your religion or what is the perfect religion you means?

  3. Amin Riadh says:

    Didn’t I say I will not be messing about with you. And I will not entertain your deliberate misunderstandings…

    Now, I am glad you have learned that wrapping yourself in words too large in order to impress doesn’t work. Neither does going down the good old route of flinging petty insults about.

    Now let us work on another aspect… this tendency to be dishonest…

    “1.”Nur” you say has two meanings,the original definition of “accidental/contingent” used during Muhammad’s era and the one which evolved over time meaning “light” with no further assumptions,(ie. emit or reflect is not implied in the definition).”

    I never said anything of the kind. This is completely from you… so is it that:

    1. You are a bit slow in understanding?

    2. Or that you are dishonest?

    Decide which and do reply back. You see this is not what I have said at all… so how come you have arrived at this particular conclusion?

    – –

    Failure to reply will end up with me calling you thoroughly dishonest and a liar. So I will hold off until you have had a chance of explaining the above.

  4. Phoenix says:

    This is my final exposition on this topic,so let’s recap:

    1.”Nur” you say has two meanings,the original definition of “accidental/contingent” used during Muhammad’s era and the one which evolved over time meaning “light” with no further assumptions,(ie. emit or reflect is not implied in the definition).

    2.If the first definition of Nur was used during Muhammad’s time then it applies to all contexts where light (source of illumination) is mentioned.So logically it follows that the Quran was correct,moonlight is dependent on the sun,but then there’s the contradiction of Allah conceding that his light (metaphor for knowledge,wisdom,truth,etc.) is also dependent on an external source.Clearly this poses serious problems for muslims.

    2.However,accepting the latter definition of Nur being “just light” does not pose any such problems for muslims,except that they must now concede the Quran makes no mention of the moon reflecting light and Zakir Naik is a charlatan for entertaining these silly notions.

    3.You then tried desperately to bypass the equivocation fallacy and etymology fallacy by claiming the two meanings of Nur must be used in its proper context.But your excuse is merely another deception because the mention of light in these quranic verses always denote a source of illumination,whether sun,moon or lamp is used.

    4.You also gave an example of mouses containing two meanings,a rodent and a device for a computer.The context of my story would indicate which mouse I’m referring to.Likewise,in the quran the context for Nur always refers to an object which illuminates.Never for anything else.So your charges of taking things out of context is a false charge.

  5. cchuckc says:

    Oh.. you are at it again with ‘nur’. Let me repeat, an accidental property can very much belong to the object, for example the fact that the ball is made of rubber is just an accidental property for it being a ball.

  6. Amin Riadh says:

    This is getting silly. You do not know what you are talking about – raise a nonsensical objective and I will simply ignore and move on.

    Look through your comment… you have the habit of making easy baseless accusations and then not referring to them at all.

    Sweetling – we are no messing about. And I am not wasting time on objections that are not there.

    I have explained the matters to you and it is the end. I will oblige this last time by completely going through your reply…

    Raise an objection that either has already been answered or is simply objection for the sake of objecting then it will get ignored.

    – –

    “Here you’ve contradicted yourself.Before you said Nur means REFLECTED light and now it means just means light with no further assumptions.”

    This is called game playing… seeing contradictions where no contradictions exists. As I said… I will not entertain such objections again.

    When you say the word “Light” then it means “Light” and there are no more assumptions as to its origin. That is what I said in relation not to Noor but to the word “Light”. Hence there are no contradictions there.

    – –

    “In english we can use verbs such as reflected and emit to distinguish between the sun and moon’s light.How does the Quran distinguish between the two?”

    Irrelevant question. Has nothing to do with the topic underhand.

    – –

    [[“How come” he uses a fallacy is not my concern.Exposing Naik’s sophistry is more of my concern.]]

    Absolute nonsense. In this instance Naik is not being fallacious or using any sophistry.

    And your concerns are not same as mine.

    You were lying and making it up… a baseless claim is a lie. Hence you are a liar for making baseless claims.

    – –

    \All Naik did was look it up in older sources [works of exegesis and dictionaries] so how is Naik the one committing the fallacy? //

    [[Naik employs a semantic shift by appealing to the etymology of the word Nur.]]

    Incorrect. The older exegesis and the dictionary SPECIFICALLY mentions this – yes with the verse and the contrast of Sun and Moon and their respective lights.

    I have already pointed this out. I will not let you repeat this nonsense again. it is NOT Naik inventing and applying meanings… but he is merely quoting people before him.

    Once more proceed in baseless claims and it is you lying.

    – –

    [[Just because Nur may or may not have its origin in the word accidental does not mean both definitions are tautologies,yet Naik treats them that way.He uses them interchangeably.]]

    Once more incorrect. And this ALL relates back to the sources he uses… and nothing on this point is from him.

    And you seem desperately keen to avoid the sources in order to accuse him of fallacy. Hence repeating the same lies as Sina…

    Like I said. I have dealt with this and explained it.

    I am not going to let you carry on UNLESS you bring something new to object to.

    – –

    [[Damn this Amin guy is smart.Of course a definition must be consistent in its application or else it loses its meaning.Only fools beg to differ.]]

    Swearing at me will not work. Or such nonsense… but I am very smart. Not just smart…

    – –

    [[You can’t use a word which means “just light with no further assumptions” in one way then in another passage redefine that word “just light” to mean borrowed light.It’s a fallacy you fool.]]

    Call me fool or any other name… and I swear at you dirty whoring mother. We are not playing petty insulting game or rowing…

    There is no such “fallacy”. Word usage is in context… and I have already thoroughly explained this.

    Given your sudden keenness to try and and name calling me shows your descend towards irrationality.

    Sweetheart it is not going to happen.

    I refer you back to my mouse sentences… 2 sentences same word… but different shades of meaning apply. One can instantly recognize which is which.

    “I clicked on an icon with the mouse”

    “I took my mouse to the vet”

    It is safe to say a 10 year old will be able to tell which ‘mouse’ is in each context.

    Hence given context… meaning of words changes. I have shown that with one simple example and I can repeat that over and over… with English/Arabic.

    However the point is illustrated with merely one example.

    Now, you are not going to sit there and start getting ever more abusive. It is not going to happen.

    – –

    [[Nice try but I checked the transliteration of surah 10:5 – the word diyaan is used denote the sun’s light and nuraan for the moon’s light.The word nur is not used for both.Please,I’d really love to see how you bs your way out of this one.]]

    Lol! You are thoroughly dishonest and as are your objections…

    You didn’t bother to read my article OR in utter dishonesty ignored it to have a petty row! Now feel free to feel a right “ignorant” whilst I expose you and your dishonesty..

    Read this:

    {النُّور، بالضمّ: الضَّوْءُ أيَّاً كَانَ، أَو شُعاعُه وسُطوعُه، كَذَا فِي المُحكَم، وَقَالَ الزَّمَخْشَرِيّ: الضياءُ أشدّ من النُّور، قَالَ تَعَالَى: جَعَلَ الشمسَ ضِياءً والقمرَ نُوراً} وَقيل: الضِّياءُ ذاتِيٌّ،! والنُّورُ عَرَضِيٌّ، كَمَا حقَّقه

    The word “Dhiya’a” is of more intense meaning than the word “Noor”. As the Almighty said: He made the sun “Dhiya’a” and the moon “noor”. And it is said: The word “Dhiya’a” is ‘Essential’ and the word “Noor” is ‘Accidental’.

    thoroughly, thoroughly dishonest!

    Did you ignore all what I write in hope to accuse me of fallacies, contradictions and bs? Did you really think that was going to work?

    So why is it that I have to expose your nonsense by copying and pasting from the original article?

    It is not your English that is at fault… after 1 warning… I am glad that stopped the pretence of using BIG words whose meanings your were not so familiar with.

    Why not move to my blog and read the actual article? So you won’t embarrass yourself?

    – –

    [[Of course not,Allah is not literally a property of light,yet he uses an example of something which is contingent to describe himself,contradicting his claim of being Self-Sufficient. ]]

    This nonsense means nothing… once again, unsurprisingly – the almighty is not contradicting anything. Mere example of how to understand something of God is given. This is a completely separate verse and it has no relevance in any way to the verse 10:5 other than the fact that the word Light [Nur] is mentioned.

    And that objection is simply incorrect and I have completely explained that.

    = = = + = = =

    Now make another comment that shows your irrational mentality and we will simply have an outright row. I can swear too! Until Sina will put an end to it.

    Might I suggest… links above go and read and digest the original article.

    As I have stated several times… given how you have the habit of skipping over what I say in order to try and finding fallacies that we are not messing about here.

    I am not wasting so much time. Paste such a comment as above again… and I will deal with you differently.

  7. Phoenix says:

    Incorrect. Simple word “light” means just that “light” and there is no presupposition. This light could simply be any type of light. Further context is required. Else… “Noor” simply means light. There are no further assumption.//

    Here you’ve contradicted yourself.Before you said Nur means REFLECTED light and now it means just means light with no further assumptions.In english we can use verbs such as reflected and emit to distinguish between the sun and moon’s light.How does the Quran distinguish between the two?
    ==
    So how come this “fallacy of equivocation” was used by writer of Taj al Uroos? And his older sources? So where does this fallacy come into play? It doesn’t.//

    “How come” he uses a fallacy is not my concern.Exposing Naik’s sophistry is more of my concern.

    \All Naik did was look it up in older sources [works of exegesis and dictionaries] so how is Naik the one committing the fallacy? //
    Naik employs a semantic shift by appealing to the etymology of the word Nur.Just because Nur may or may not have its origin in the word accidental does not mean both definitions are tautologies,yet Naik treats them that way.He uses them interchangeably.
    ===
    Nonsense. Just because there are other instances of the word Noor then it doesn’t mean that every time EVERY single meaning of the word Noor is applicable.
    For example this word also means that “brighten”. This doesn’t mean this meaning will fit into every instance and context of the word.//

    Damn this Amin guy is smart.Of course a definition must be consistent in its application or else it loses its meaning.Only fools beg to differ.
    ===
    Quran 24:35
    Here is the word Light then its definition and context is being defined. What does this have to do with:
    “It is He who made the sun a shining light and the moon a derived light…”//

    You can’t use a word which means “just light with no further assumptions” in one way then in another passage redefine that word “just light” to mean borrowed light.It’s a fallacy you fool.

    ===
    Quran 10:5
    Here a different shade of meaning applies. Here the meaning of light is to completely different context. Here the Sun light and Moon light is being contrasted. //

    Nice try but I checked the transliteration of surah 10:5 – the word diyaan is used denote the sun’s light and nuraan for the moon’s light.The word nur is not used for both.Please,I’d really love to see how you bs your way out of this one.
    ====
    In Muslim theology the Almighty is NOT understood be a property of light… and this is merely a metaphorical example.//

    Of course not,Allah is not literally a property of light,yet he uses an example of something which is contingent to describe himself,contradicting his claim of being Self-Sufficient.

  8. Amin Riadh says:

    Trying to use words that are big and difficult… and whose meanings you are not sure of isn’t actually clever. It is in fact stupid. And it hinders communication. So try quitting this pretence, son.

    Wrapping yourself is “words” will not give any more oomph to your poor arguments.

    – –

    [[Your contention regard the word “Nur” is that it contains more than one meaning.According to you and your source Nur can mean “light” (the typical understanding of illumination) and “accidental” (Any entity or event contingent upon the existence of something else).]]

    – –

    [[The first definition presupposes the light is generated by itself,as opposed to being reflected light.The second definition expresses an external influence.]]

    Incorrect. Simple word “light” means just that “light” and there is no presupposition. This light could simply be any type of light. Further context is required. Else… “Noor” simply means light. There are no further assumption.

    – –

    [[To test whether the fallacy of equivocation is being used by Zakir Naik et al. – all one has to do is to substitute the definition they insist upon for all uses.]]

    Incorrect again. And this repetition of the above nonsense which I have already dealt with. Considering this is all you had and you couldn’t add anything else then the only thing for you to do was repeat your old nonsense.

    So how come this “fallacy of equivocation” was used by writer of Taj al Uroos? And his older sources? So where does this fallacy come into play? It doesn’t.

    All Naik did was look it up in older sources [works of exegesis and dictionaries] so how is Naik the one committing the fallacy?

    Now ignore these questions, my boy, and I will put the boot into you…

    – –

    [[The definition should be consistent with the overall theme and context.]]

    Nonsense. Just because there are other instances of the word Noor then it doesn’t mean that every time EVERY single meaning of the word Noor is applicable.

    For example this word also means that “brighten”. This doesn’t mean this meaning will fit into every instance and context of the word.

    – –

    [[However,like I pointed out regarding surah 24:35 (God is the *Light* of the heavens and the earth. ..”) does not hold when the definition of accidental/contingent is applied.The definition which Naik propounds,presupposes there exists an external influence controlling the light and Allah merely reflects it.]]

    Try reading:

    “Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The example of His light is like a niche within which is a lamp, the lamp is within glass, the glass as if it were a pearly [white] star lit from [the oil of] a blessed olive tree, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil would almost glow even if untouched by fire. Light upon light. Allah guides to His light whom He wills. And Allah presents examples for the people, and Allah is Knowing of all things.”

    Quran 24:35

    Here is the word Light then its definition and context is being defined. What does this have to do with:

    “It is He who made the sun a shining light and the moon a derived light…”

    Quran 10:5

    Here a different shade of meaning applies. Here the meaning of light is to completely different context. Here the Sun light and Moon light is being contrasted.

    Go back to my mouse sentences… it is utter stupidity to say that:

    [
    “I clicked on the icon with the mouse.”

    “I took the mouse to the vet.”
    ]

    Simply one meaning of the word Mouse should apply to both.

    – –

    And there is further thing:

    Consider this meaning of the word: Light.

    “the natural agent that stimulates sight and makes things visible.”

    This is the primary and literal meaning of the word light.

    Then:

    “an expression in someone’s eyes indicating a particular emotion or mood.”

    This is secondary and metaphorical meaning of the word light.

    In Muslim theology the Almighty is NOT understood be a property of light… and this is merely a metaphorical example.

    – –

    “Unless,there exists another meaning of Nur which you failed to mention,then we can test that theory too.”

    And why should I go about mentioning every other meanings of the word? For what reason will I do that?

    You might not be familiar with a “dictionary”. Look it up.

  9. Phoenix says:

    I’d like to correct a typo:

    “The second definition expresses an external influence.” This should read as:The second definition expresses “dependence on” an external influence.

  10. Phoenix says:

    If I have failed to make myself clear I will make up for it now.
    Your contention regard the word “Nur” is that it contains more than one meaning.According to you and your source Nur can mean “light” (the typical understanding of illumination) and “accidental” (Any entity or event contingent upon the existence of something else).The first definition presupposes the light is generated by itself,as opposed to being reflected light.The second definition expresses an external influence.
    To test whether the fallacy of equivocation is being used by Zakir Naik et al. – all one has to do is to substitute the definition they insist upon for all uses.The definition should be consistent with the overall theme and context.However,like I pointed out regarding surah 24:35 (God is the *Light* of the heavens and the earth. ..”) does not hold when the definition of accidental/contingent is applied.The definition which Naik propounds,presupposes there exists an external influence controlling the light and Allah merely reflects it.
    Unless,there exists another meaning of Nur which you failed to mention,then we can test that theory too.

  11. Amin Riadh says:

    So it is the end of line for you and your nonsense… and there was not much in you after all! I am disappointed. I thought there might be someone who would give me a going over on this. No one yet!

    – –

    Let us have a see what you have said:

    “Ah,the “multiple meaning” evasive tactic.”

    Now… how is that a tactic? Multiple meanings of words is a feature of as many languages as I have come across… in fact it is rare for an English word to be of singular meaning. So how is that a tactic of anything?

    The word ‘Mouse’… and following are 2 sentences… and see how quickly you will grab the different shades of meanings:

    I clicked on the icon with the mouse.

    I took the mouse to the vet.

    One word – 2 meanings – which were easily understood by you. So what are you confused about?

    – –

    “The supposed clear book (Quran) contains ambiguous and vague words”

    Yes. It contains plenty of ambiguous words – however this is not one such word. The word means “light”. There is no ambiguity about it.

    Yet the book is clear… and it is hardly “vague” or “unambiguous” when meanings are known.

    – –

    “that may be interpreted ad libitum to suit the proclivities of its adherents.”

    Yes. Within reason that is perfectly possible… as long as the context and lexicon allows. There 100% nothing wrong about that at all… my two sentences from earlier:

    “I clicked on the icon with the mouse.”

    “I took the mouse to the vet.”

    Now… there is no confusion that which mouse is meant. However consider this sentence:

    “I took the mouse to my friend”

    Here it could mean either ‘Mouse the animal’ or ‘Mouse the computer device’. Further context is required to establish the meaning. So meanings are not really left in limbo or dangling.

    Go back to the verse… the word Noor meaning light is perfect fit. However it is within the depth of meaning of the word that Noor to mean “reflected light” is possible. And you have nicely missed the point of my article:

    “Dr. Naik insists that the Quran makes it clear that the light of the Moon is borrowed light and to prove that, he claims ‘nur’ means reflection. This is not a fallacy but a blatant lie.”

    Er… no it was not a blatant lie. Naik got the meaning from somewhere… that is he didn’t invent it and lied about it. This exposed Sina’s ignorance and hate-mongering nature.

    – –

    “One can only assume the author(s) either erred in their communication or it’s a deliberate calculated technique of deception – or perhaps both.”

    Yes. But on your part. Those non-Muslims who are militant haters of Islam and Muslims tend to make things up. And you had nothing much to go on other than this complete nonsense.

    You know perfectly well neither is there any error or any deception… on a simple verse… why should there be? But it is your devious nature… lest we forget your lying above? … that has let you down.

    – –

    Now hopefully I have shown you the door… get out.

  12. Pheonix says:

    Ah,the “multiple meaning” evasive tactic.The supposed clear book (Quran) contains ambiguous and vague words that may be interpreted ad libitum to suit the proclivities of its adherents.One can only assume the author(s) either erred in their communication or it’s a deliberate calculated technique of deception – or perhaps both.

  13. Amin Riadh says:

    “Submitting numerous links is a form of gish galloping,when all I asked for was a single refutation on an excerpt,just to make it simple.”

    Nope. No you didn’t. Else where? Where did you ask for any such single refutation and what of? Do post that bit… and make it clear even now.

    Further more it is not several… but a single link… which I had to post several to expose your lying. Which I did.

    See as it is a simple blog layout… single blog link was sufficient… but you chose to lie about it… and then in order to expose this lie:

    “I visited your blog and I noticed you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.”

    So in order to “reveal” you as liar… I posted individual links to show where rebuttal of Sina laid.

    See… if you hadn’t lied…

    But then you made a further lie:

    “I’m not intersted in reading a blizzard of links which I could just as easily counter with a blizzard of links”

    But this one was easy to see through… wasn’t it? So where is that “blizzard”? It doesn’t exist.

    Savvy?

    = =

    [[Since you’re reluctant,]]

    Yes…

    – –

    [[I’ll take a look at your article “Light” ]]

    Atta boy! So why didn’t you do that in the first place and made such a song and dance about it? First you refused to see these articles at all!

    Then when links given, you didn’t like “links”

    Then you wanted to paste it here?

    My sweet heart… whose “reluctance” is it?

    Were you working up to things? Is that why you were all so reluctant?

    Is that what these simple lies were all about?

    All that time waste and game playing?

    Oh dear… yet this refutation of your is coming straight from the site which allegedly had no such articles?

    My sweet-pea… how is that possible!?

    Such miraculous change of heart!

    – –

    [[According to yo,the term Nur means “reflected light” in its original 7th century interpretation.Now,to test this theory is really simple.I’ll use some examples where the word Nur appears in the Quran,we should be able to substitute it with your definition and the ayat must retain its intended meaning and context.If the Quranic verse becomes unintelligible as a result then it’s clear your definition is irrational and false.But before I proceed,I’d just like to point out that I copy pasted the arabic script word of dhiyaa’a from your source onto Google translate and it comes up as “subjective”.It appears there’s a discrepancy because subjective and essential or autonomous are entirely different meanings.But that’s for you to clear up.
    But moving on to test your theory:
    9:32 Fain would they extinguish God’s light [reflected]with their mouths, but God will not allow but that His light[reflected light] should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).
    -How does one extinguish reflected light?
    -How can reflected light or that light which is contingent upon the source be perfect? It is equating itself with the source thus making the source redundant.

    24:35 God is the Light[reflected light]of the heavens and the earth. ..”
    If Allah’s light is contingent,then who are what is the source or where did Allah borrow it from?Unless Allah is the moon god or literally the moon then it makes perfect sense.

    The above examples expose serious flaws in your redefinitions.]]

    Hardly… now that you know where my article is… you can go back to it! First you say:

    “According to yo,the term Nur means “reflected light” in its original 7th century interpretation”

    Well that is wrong for a start… it is according to my source “Taj Al-Aroos”.

    One meaning of the word “Noor” when compared with the word “Dhiyah” is one is “light of extraneous source” and the other is “light of intrinsic” source.

    So why would you go substituting this meaning in all the other instances of the word? Why would that make sense?

    Is that what your dilly dallying was all about?

    There are many instances of the word “Daraba” in the Quran. And there are many meaning for the this one word… now that is like taking one particular meaning and pasting them wherever this word occurred. Which would render its meaning as useless.

    = = =

    Let us read again what my article was about:

    “Dr. Naik insists that the Quran makes it clear that the light of the Moon is borrowed light and to prove that, he claims ‘nur’ means reflection. This is not a fallacy but a blatant lie.”

    So Sina is putting up that Naik made the meanings out of thin air…. hence “blatant lie”.

    However as I showed he didn’t. His sources was works of other exegesis’s and dictionaries.

    – –

    Just because Sine knew the word Noor means Light. It didn’t occur to the old dear that this word could have multiple meanings.

    But if he had done some research!

  14. Phoenix says:

    No you couldn’t. As my links are my original work… and if you are going to counter their argument then I am dead interested in that “blizzard” you are promising. Of course, we both know you do not have any “blizzard” to counter with.//

    Submitting numerous links is a form of gish galloping,when all I asked for was a single refutation on an excerpt,just to make it simple.Since you’re reluctant,I’ll take a look at your article “Light” which is intended to expose Ali Sina’s misunderstanding of the term “Nur” ,thus invalidating his alleged refutation.
    According to yo,the term Nur means “reflected light” in its original 7th century interpretation.Now,to test this theory is really simple.I’ll use some examples where the word Nur appears in the Quran,we should be able to substitute it with your definition and the ayat must retain its intended meaning and context.If the Quranic verse becomes unintelligible as a result then it’s clear your definition is irrational and false.But before I proceed,I’d just like to point out that I copy pasted the arabic script word of dhiyaa’a from your source onto Google translate and it comes up as “subjective”.It appears there’s a discrepancy because subjective and essential or autonomous are entirely different meanings.But that’s for you to clear up.
    But moving on to test your theory:
    9:32 Fain would they extinguish God’s light [reflected]with their mouths, but God will not allow but that His light[reflected light] should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).
    -How does one extinguish reflected light?
    -How can reflected light or that light which is contingent upon the source be perfect? It is equating itself with the source thus making the source redundant.

    24:35 God is the Light[reflected light]of the heavens and the earth. ..”
    If Allah’s light is contingent,then who are what is the source or where did Allah borrow it from?Unless Allah is the moon god or literally the moon then it makes perfect sense.

    The above examples expose serious flaws in your redefinitions.

  15. Amin Riadh says:

    “I’m not intersted in reading a blizzard of links which I could just as easily counter with a blizzard of links.”

    No you couldn’t. As my links are my original work… and if you are going to counter their argument then I am dead interested in that “blizzard” you are promising. Of course, we both know you do not have any “blizzard” to counter with.

    – –

    “The burden of proof has been met by Ali Sina”

    Where? When? About what? What are you on about? Do you even know what BoP is?

    Oh and I am glad you didn’t bother using the “Dr”. Which is entirely false.

    – –

    “the onus is on you to illustrate the errors in his reasoning,a position you seem very eager to assume.Paste your rebuttal here and we can all examine them together.”

    Oh Sweetling… when I have given the links… I have no need.

    – –

    And I am outright calling you a liar… why? I asked you prove your accusations against me. You have failed.

  16. Phoenix says:

    The accustaion that I’m “making things up” is not a counter argument, it’s a dodge.What is required is specifics.

    I’m not intersted in reading a blizzard of links which I could just as easily counter with a blizzard of links.
    The burden of proof has been met by Ali Sina,the onus is on you to illustrate the errors in his reasoning,a position you seem very eager to assume.Paste your rebuttal here and we can all examine them together.

  17. Ali Sina says:

    Comments with links will be retained for moderation. This is necessary to stop spamming

  18. Amin Riadh says:

    “Your presumption that I’m ignorant is really cute but misplaced.”

    Where? You do know what making things up is called? But… you are ignorant. Of many things. Hence this was a useless and pretty stupid sentence to come up with.

    – –

    ” I noticed you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.”

    … where is such accusation? Do tell… else making things up is called…?

    – –

    “Here’s a simple task for you to do:”

    Lol! No sunshine. Go whistle for it… and I am going to expose your “fiction” right here:

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/10/06/samiri/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/light/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/quality-of-research-i/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/quality-of-research-ii-a/

    Let us see:

    “you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.”

    “Ad hominems are not substitutes for good reasoning.”

    Now, my dear… go an find these alleged ad hominems and er… accusations.

    Fail and I will call you the “L” word – which the spam filter seems not to like! For now I will hold my tongue….

  19. Amin Riadh says:

    It will do you no good to moderate my comments only.

  20. Amin Riadh says:

    “Your presumption that I’m ignorant is really cute but misplaced.”

    Where? Making things up is called lying. But… you are ignorant. Of many things. Hence this was a useless and pretty stupid sentence to come up with

    – –

    ” I noticed you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.”

    This is called lying too… where is such accusation? Do tell… else making things up is called lying.

    – –

    “Here’s a simple task for you to do:”

    Lol! No sunshine. Go whistle for it… and I am going to expose your lies right here:

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/10/06/samiri/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/light/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/quality-of-research-i/

    https://exposingsina.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/quality-of-research-ii-a/

    Now these expose you as a complete liar? Why? These are direct exposition of Sina’s thoughts and mistakes. So what lies did you come up with?

    Let us see:

    “you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.”

    “Ad hominems are not substitutes for good reasoning.”

    – –

    Now, my dear… go an find these alleged ad hominems and er… accusations.

    Fail and I will call you a liar. For now I will hold my tongue.

  21. Phoenix says:

    Your presumption that I’m ignorant is really cute but misplaced.Nevertheless,I visited your blog and I noticed you have the habit of arguing by accusation instead of rational rebuttal.
    Here’s a simple task for you to do:Copy/paste an excerpt from this article or from Sina’s challenge then refute it with counter evidence.Ad hominems are not substitutes for good reasoning.

  22. Amin Riadh says:

    Given that there is nothing there counter argue with… hence it isn’t really a debate with anyone.

    “let’s see a deduction in support of Islam.”

    And try not pretend to be literary and use word whose meanings you don’t seem to know. Islam is a massive topic… and I am here ultimately to counter argue Sina.

    – –

    Furthermore… http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

    I will be picking up where I left off.

    – –

    In relation to this alleged debate. It is another of dear Sina’s forgeries. I have exposed a few in my time.

    – –

    Given how the old dear likes a debate… I am always available… see he doesn’t debate those he will lose too.

    – –

    Now enjoy whoever you are… but get in my way boy… and I will enjoy “having” you.

  23. Amin Riadh says:

    Right? So Qadri writes like an American teen? It wasn’t Qadri or his email. You gave me the email once and it wasn’t his – it was a free service.

    I reckon you invented the name… unless you can show me it was this emailer who claimed it.

    – –

    We have been through it and you have never been able to put up a sensible reply.

  24. Phoenix says:

    Hey Amin Riadh,glad to see you’re back.Perhaps you’ve been gone too long and forgot about the rules of debate.It’s not sufficient to merely charge your opponent with “hatred” as a refutation.What is required is a point by point analysis to demonstrate the errors.
    Feel free to try again and since you claim to be rational,let’s see a deduction in support of Islam.

  25. Ali Sina says:

    Are you embarrassed? Yes it was Qadri. He said he was and his email also was from Gadri. Furthermore, he is welcome to come back and improve his performance.

  26. Amin Riadh says:

    I love such comments… where non Muslims pretend to be “rational” and all scientific. Yet, you are more or less off your trolley. “Hatred” is an impediment of rationality…

    Isn’t it interesting that even Sina knows this debate was NOT “Maulana Ajmal Qadri” but some kid.

  27. JPSundharam says:

    Over months of following Islam apologists getting hammered in debates (including yours), I have realized that there either devout Muslims (simply just Muslims) and Rational Muslims.  A Muslim is one only because he suspends his rationality and his ability to think when it comes to matters Islam.  It probably has a lot of bearing on following teaching in Islam:

    >> And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers’ way. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell – what an evil destination.  [Quran 4:115]
    >> I heard the Prophet say, ‘Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.’ [Bukhari: Vol 2 Book 24 Num 555]

    Whenever I’ve had discussions with Muslims on any Islamic topic, I find they freeze once this is presented to them.

  28. greygandalf says:

    I see that Islam has progressed not at all in 1400 years. Congratulations! At least some people are keen to cling desperately to ancient traditions. Your false prophet Mohammed, the terrorist, would be proud.

  29. greygandalf says:

    It gets rather tiresome in the end. Nothing intelligent said, just a string of abuses. Who are you to say we are evil? Only because your false prophet said so, and you blindly believe him. As for justice, the Satanic cult that you believe in, knows of no such thing – just threats, violence and brutality .

  30. greygandalf says:

    The poison is inherent in Islam. They are greedy rascals, they lust for money, and blood, just as Mohammed did.

  31. chrisheath says:

    cactass – on your butt

  32. chrisheath says:

    Here we see, yet again, the astounding depths to which Muslims are prepared to sink.

  33. chrisheath says:

    Muslims are required to be slaves to do Allah's dirty work.
    If Allah was all powerful, and is Muslims' God, why did he bother to create non-Muslims?
    He could have said ' Right, I've made a million Muslims, I am happy now.'
    But He obviously wasn't happy.
    Did He say to Himself ' Shit, that was a big mistake, I'd better put it right by making a million non-Muslims'.
    He could easily have said' I am not really happy, but I'll have to make do with a million Muslims.' Boom, no non-Muslims.
    Or did He say ' Ok, these Muslims are a lazy lot, I better give them something to do. That's right, I don't want non-Muslims on earth. I'll get the Muslims to get rid of them for me, while I attend to my virgins .'

  34. chrisheath says:

    Here we see, yet again, the astounding depths to which Muslims are prepared to sink.

    No attempt at mature discussion.

    Just lies, more lies, and false accusations.

    Hell was specially created for the Muslims to live in.

    The Imams know it, and are pretending about Paradise.

    They have fooled you, now and forever!

    They laugh as you stick your arse in the air to pray!

    'We have fooled them again!' Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.

  35. chrisheath says:

    Muslims believe that if there are enough of them, they are right. They don't seem to realise that if a billion people believe a false lie, it does not make it more right – it makes them more wrong.

  36. chrisheath says:

    And that is about the level of your brain aminass. Not even an attempt at a mature discussion. May God have mercy on your misbegotten soul.

  37. chrisheath says:

    I'm sure ANYONE could come up with better 'arguments' . But that is the problem of belief. There is no logic only insistent repetition of rubbish.
    I have noticed that Imams, Mullahs, and Muslims going on, all have a high pitched, fast voice, as if they are desperate to stop anyone from interrupting them, and calling them a liar. In fact, talking as they do is a psychological pointer to the fact that they are lying, or at least don't fully believe what they are saying.
    And of course, that is true, as they are speaking to a non-Muslim, they are not sure whether they should lie, as directed in the Koran, or tell the truth. Telling the truth is so difficult for them, so they resort to inane stupidity, and expect us all to start believing them. No thanks, dickhead.

  38. hindusml says:

    And this ASS "cactus on ur throat" is in front of a crowd saying this cos his mama said mohammed was a messenger of god and mama is always right so don't ask for logic.

  39. hindusml says:

    Ali most of these mullas are opportunists and i really don't think this quadri fool had the stature to debate at a forum like this. Beware of such idiots – This fool had nothing productive to say other than make threats in the name of his Allah. You know these Paki Tribals are great manipulators – He will definately go back and on top of his voice claim amoung his fellow tribals ridiculous things about the debate he lost here. These people are still living 1400 years back in Pakistan and Afganistan.Lets not just have any stupid come here to gain publicity.

  40. chrisheath says:

    Well, the Great One had his chance, He Is Truly Merciful….maybe, it was Mo the prophet who faltered badly in his service? Who knows, how these mythical things happen….. ? I see whats going on in my world – Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa.. there is a common theme……bring on the BURHKA AVENGER, educate , educate ,educate, and end the cycle of ignorant manipulation…..

  41. chrisheath says:

    If their God (Allah) is so great, will he strike me dead if I say the wrong ….. aaahhhhggggghhhhhhh…….he has struck me dumb……

  42. randall says:

    mohammad made himself a partner to allah, but shortly before his death, he! wasn't sure if he was going to heaven. is that not a bit odd.

  43. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    My pleasure. We are in this together.

  44. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //1400 YEARS AGO ISLAM ALLOW WOMEN RIGHTS://
    Which rights? Aha the famous women are half of men in inheritance or the right the husband has to talaq his wife? The verse you have quoted Q 2:228 is a mighty smack on the rights of women in Islam.

    The very fact that Khadija, the first wife of Muhammad was a successful business women with a big inheritance is a mighty proof that even before Islam came women had rights in Arabia. And Khadija was a Christian in those days!!
    And how are the rest of the verses anything to do with women rights? And who put the Arabian women behind veils? And despite such great laws not a single women Caliph!!

    Talking about women's right, here is a list which shows where women stand top 10 and bottom 10: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_rights#2011_st

    Why not a single muslim countries in top 10? Why so many of them in the bottom 10?

    //#since 1923……………………..OH! POOR ………..WESTERN………….DEMOOOOOOOOOOO…….. ………..WHERE R THEIR …….BEFORE THE 1925………………….DON'T LIE ACTUALLY IT WAS 1925 @ CANADA//
    Demsci is clearly wrong. Women had right to vote even before that. In the ancient Mahajanapads in India for example. Also women were allowed to keep their own wealth in the Roman Empire. read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Elder#Repea
    Anybody abreast with ancient Roman and Greek history know what kind of freedom women had.
    Jews even think of Deborah, a women, as prophetess: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah
    In fact she has a whole chapter dedicated to her (Judges Chapter 5) .
    And I can go on and on. The point is in terms of women rights Islam brought nothing and its laws and the behavior of its invaders helped deteriorate the conditions of their own women and the women of the countries they attacked (for example India).

  45. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM
    Thanks for the hadith reference. Misyar is valid for all muslims and at least Shia's consider Mutah valid. Both are forms of sexual exploitation for money

  46. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    You wrote on the great library at Alexandria. The fact that even your post says that it survived till the muhammadan conquest of Egypt is enough to tell you that it was destroyed by the muhammadans, those enemies of good things and progress. That dastardly act was perpetrated by the muhammadan commander on the direct order of Umar, that ape-like creature.

  47. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    I am not interested in your bogus passages. Assessment has to be based on what is prevalent in muhammadan culture as it affects the right of women.
    In Saudi Arabia, the citadel of muhammadanism, how long ago since women were given the right to vote?
    How many women ministers or legislators are there in Saudi Arabia?
    In muhammadanism, a woman has the same status as a black dog, which is satan and a donkey.
    In muhammadanism, two women witnesses are equivalent to one man.
    In muhammadanism, a woman in the house is bad omen.
    In muhamadan Pakistan a poor little girl was shot in the head for desiring to get education.
    In Afghanistan, under mullah Omar, it was a crime for women to think of going to school.
    Above all, Muhammad had declared that any society ruled by a woman cannot prosper. The meaning of this is that women should not be allowed in leadership roles. But how very stupid of him and all those who think that way.

  48. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, This idiocy has been thrashed innumerable times. Yet you keep on repeating it. It is self evident that you are jobless.

  49. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Trust Shabby to exhibit the typical muhammadan mentality of denying everything which assaults common sense.
    Shabby, here is the authority that makes sura 4:24 the Verse of Mutah:
    Muslim 008:3243 "ABDULLAH (B. MAS'UD) REPORTED: WE WERE ON AN EXPEDITION WITH ALLAH'S MESSENGER (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM) AND WE HAD NO WOMEN WITH US. WE SAID: SHOULD WE NOT HAVE OURSELVES CASTRATED? HE (THE HOLY PROPHET) FORBADE US TO DO SO HE THEN GRANTED US PERMISSION THAT WE SHOULD CONTRACT TEMPORARY MARRIAGE FOR A STIPULATED PERIOD GIVING HER A GARMENT, AND ABDULLAH THEN RECITED THIS VERSE:'THOSE WHO BELIEVE DO NOT MAKE UNLAWFUL THE THINGS WHICH ALLAH HAS MADE LAWFUL FOR YOU, AND DO NOT TRANSGRESS. ALLAH DOES NOT LIKE TRANSGRESSORS" (AL-QUR'AN, V: 87).
    It has to be noted that the reciting of the verse was done in the presence of Muhammad who did not admonish or contradict Abdullah. In Muhammadan tradition that was an unqualified approval. Secondly, allah regarded the refusal to contract mutah as transgression.
    There is left in nobody's mind that prostitution, euphemistically called 'mutah', has the blessing of allah and is part of the muhammadan's life style. As you pointed out Chuck, the shiias practice it without reservation and so do the rest of them. After all, they all read the same quran.

  50. shabeer says:

    #since 1923……………………..OH! POOR ………..WESTERN………….DEMOOOOOOOOOOO…….. ………..WHERE R THEIR …….BEFORE THE 1925………………….DON'T LIE ACTUALLY IT WAS 1925 @ CANADA……………….

    1400 YEARS AGO ISLAM ALLOW WOMEN RIGHTS:
    "…I will not suffer the work of any worker from among you to be lost whether male or female, the one of you being from the other." Surah Al-Imran:195
    “From what is left by parents and those
    nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women,
    whether the property be small or large – a determinate share.” (Qur'an
    4:7)
    2:228. And divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods, and it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allâh has created in their wombs, if they believe in Allâh and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses, etc.) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect, etc.) to what is reasonable, but men have a degree (of responsibility) over them. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

    "O you who believe, it is not lawful for you to take women as heritage against their will. Nor should you straiten them…." Surah Al-Nisa:19
    "And among God's signs is this: He created for you mates from amongst yourselves (males as mates for females and vice versa) that you might find tranquillity and peace in them. And he has put love and kindness among you. Herein surely are signs for those who reflect. (The Noble Quran, 30:21)"

    Men can not harm their wives: "…Do not retain them (i.e., your wives) to harm them…(The Noble Quran, 2:231)"

    "If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, God is well-acquainted with all that ye do. (The Noble Quran, 4:128)"
    “O mankind! Fear your Guardian Lord, Who created you from
    a single Person, created, out of it, his mate, and from them twain
    scattered (like seeds) countless men and women; fear Allah, through
    Whom ye demanded your mutual (rights), and be heedful of the wombs
    (that bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.” (H.Q. 4:1)

    woman is the guardian of her husband's & children
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 89 :: Hadith 252
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 726
    rights of mother
    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 43 :: Hadith 662
    marriege with girl permission
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2076,77,88,91,95
    mother permission required for marry their daughter
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2090
    Women permission required for marriage
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 98 ,100,101
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 85 :: Hadith 79
    Women permission required for marriage: parents forced to do it prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 99
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 85 :: Hadith 78
    inheritiance women rights[daughter /sister]
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2084
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 726,33
    inheritiance women rights[daughter /sister/son daughter]
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 728 , 34s
    inheritiance women rights[mother, daughter /wife]
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 731
    Dawud :: Book 18 : Hadith 2881 , 2900,2901
    divorced mother right the childREN:
    Dawud :: Book 12 : Hadith 2269
    Women rights of Inheritance:
    Dawud :: Book 18 : Hadith 2885 ,89,2900,01

  51. chuck says:

    @shabeer,
    //#Newspapers in Saudi #wiki link invaluable evidence ,the last chance of escaping from the truth """ABROGATION """" //
    You realize that abrogation is your problem not ours. You have produced wiki links and so have I. If yours are to be taken seriously mine too have to be. The wiki page gives references, care to scroll down and check for yourself.

    //#Q 4:24 is known as Verse of Mutah//
    Ask any Shia scholar and he will agree.

  52. Demsci says:

    The links I talk about here are:

    Classical Roots of the Scientific Revolution http://metalab.unc.edu/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhib….

    Highlights in the History of Algebra: http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~sxw8045/history.htm

    The links you gave from the Vatican and the Louisiana-edu did mention Islamic contribution in development of good things in passing, but mention other influences to that too, and the Islamic influence they mentioned was not such as if it was better and bigger than the other influences,

    if indeed it was not as if Islamic influence was shown even less important than the other influences.

    That is what I meant.

  53. shabeer says:

    #definite proof that "God" was the author of the Quran………………..

    What are the evidences in favour of the Qur'an being a divine
    Sripture?
    Given below is a list of some of the evidences in support of the
    divine nature of the Qur'an:
    1. It , itself, declares that it is a divine Scripture
    2. It shall remain unchanged upto the Last Day.
    3. The path of right conduct that it prescribes is faultless.
    4. It is practicable.
    5. The history that it teaches is faultless and honest.
    6. Its literature is incomparable.
    7. The prophecies made in it can be seen to have come true.
    8. The references in it to the varied phenomena of nature, as
    representing the signs of God, are free of controversies.
    9. There is no reference, whatsoever, of an unscientific nature in it.
    10. It is free of all contradictions.
    11. None has been able to take up the challenge it poses when it calls
    forth all, and any, to produce an equivalent of at least one of its
    chapters.
    12. The person who was appointed with it in the world was himself of
    a truthful and selfless nature.

    WHO R THE historic Quran-researchers-experts??????????/

    The Qur'an is the last scripture that has been revealed to mankind
    by the Lord Creator and Protector. It was through the Last Messenger,
    Muhammad (e), that the world first heard of it. It certainly is the
    divine scripture that is to be accepted by all, upto the very last man.
    The Qur'an also describes itself as Kitab (book), Dhikr
    (guidance), Burhaan (evidence), Shifa (cure), Kayyim (that which is
    pure), Muhaymin (that which preserves the previous scriptures) and
    the like. Through these attributes the reader of the Qur'an is exposed
    to the clear picture of the morality enshrined within.
    scriptures is to unite mankind. Look at what the Holy Qur'an has to
    say: ‘Mankind was one single nation. And Allah sent Messengers
    with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book
    in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed.’
    (2:213)
    It becomes evident from this that religious scriptures were
    revealed in order that a divine ruling, of a final nature, may be made in
    the matters in which mankind differed. Thus, the Qur'an declares that
    it, too, was revealed so that mankind may be freed of the dissensions
    that were rife amongst themselves. ‘And We sent down the Book
    to thee so that That thou shouldst make clear to them those
    things in which they differ, and that it should be a guide and a
    mercy to those who believe.’ (16:64)
    In order that the fate of the people of the book, who had boasted
    of their own high status, by which they were ultimately led to
    dissension and anarchy, not fall upon its believers, the Qur'an exhorts
    them to stick fast to the last of the scriptures as well as to its practical
    manifestation as enshrined in the life and conduct of the Prophet.
    “And hold fast, All together, by the Rope which Allah (stretches
    out for you), and be not divided among yourselves.” (3:103) The
    commentators are unanimous in their opinion that the ‘rope of Allah’
    mentioned here indicates the Qur'an.
    The theme of the Qur’an is the salvation of man. As the only
    terrestrial being capable of independent action, man is to follow certain
    laws for his very survival and progress. All things in the universe
    follow the divine laws of their own accord. Indeed, they do not possess
    the option of straying from this set course. In fact, the systemic
    functioning of the human body itself compulsorily follows the divine
    laws. However, man has been granted freedom of action in certain
    limited domains. Even in these spheres he can attain salvation if, and
    only if, he obeys the divine commandments.
    The Qur'an contains within itself the words of the Lord Creator.
    Mankind is the subject of its exhortation and address. It is not the
    discursive style of the other ordinary books which the Qur'an adopts.
    The style the Qur'an does adopt is not merely the assertive style of
    scientific books or the discursive style of the history books or the
    narrative style of the books of literature. However, the Qur'an does
    accept all of these styles. The Qur'an does not assert the required
    point by elaborating on the branches and sub-branches of a selected
    central topic. The Qur'an’s has not been a method in which the subject
    is first determined on the basis of which is then divided the various
    chapters and sub-titles. It is in a very haphazard manner that a varied
    assortment of subjects are dealt within its pages.
    “(This is) the revelation of the Book in which there is no
    doubt, from the Lord of the Worlds.” (32:2).
    “Verily this is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds”
    (26:192).
    “(It is a Revelation) sent down by (Him), the Exalted in
    Might, Most Merciful” (36:5). http://authorityofquran.blogspot.in/ http://authorityofquran2.blogspot.in/ http://authorityofquran3.blogspot.in/

  54. shabeer says:

    #, some were not even about a prominent role of Islam in particular……………WHERE IS IT? PLZ GIVE ME THE LINK………………..#Some seemed Islamic propaganda………..THAT NOT LEGAL COMMENT FOR IT,SUPPOSE THEY SAYS ANY LIE/INVALID COMMENT ,PLZ PROVE HERE WITH RIGHT EVIDENCE,WHY THE PEOPLE NOT DOING LIKE THAT?

    #Al Buleihi said exactly…………..WHO WAS THAT AL BULEIHI???????????/ THOUSAND OF HISTORIAN FROM WEST /EAST ADMITTED,PROVED THE ISLAM THE BEGINNERS OF THE MODERN CIVILIZATION,PAST LONG YEARS…………A LAYER ONLY CAN HIDE THE TRUTH FROM THE PEOPLE…………..OR SOME JEW GIVE HIM TO DAILY WAGE FOR HIS ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES………………..

    ISLAM IDEAL TO ALL SOCIETY:
    It was a society which was steeped in the darkness of blind superstitions; which was enslaved to the addiction to wine and
    intoxicants; which showed not the least hesitation in the spilling of
    blood over senseless conflicts to assert tribal superiority; which was
    nowhere in the matter of knowledge and learning; which was ignorant
    in the field of health care; which remained backward in the field of
    agriculture; which lacked cohesiveness as a political and military bloc.
    This was the state of Arabia before the revelation of the Qur'an.
    When we look upon the Arabia after the revelation of the Qur'an,
    however, it is the picture of the standard bearers of a civilization that
    challenged, in its greatness, all the other civilizations of the day, which
    we witness. Indeed, they had attained such prominence as to stand
    higher that the Greeks who were the masters of the day in the fields
    of science and arts. Alexandria was soon replaced by Baghdad as the
    greatest centre of learning and culture. Furthermore, they now caused
    to tremble even the empires of Rome and Persia both of which had
    enjoyed the legacy of political leadership that were centuries old. The
    Arabs, who engaged in unjustifiable tribal warfare and the wanton
    spilling of blood, had now emerged as the flag bearers of unity and
    cohesiveness. Not having known what morality and immorality were,
    they now became the chief propagators of a moral code. The Holy
    Qur'an had truly succeeded in remoulding Arabian society into one
    which would prove to be a model for the whole world; and that too
    within the span of only 23 years.
    The Qur'an has, thus, been a book that enabled an entire race,
    which had been nowhere in the fields of culture and civilization, to
    attain the very pinnacle of human development within the short span
    of twenty- three years. In fact, there has not been another book that
    equals it in so transforming a whole race. The fact becomes abundantly
    clear here that there has not been any other writing like the Qur'an
    which has proved to be as practicable in guiding humanity to the path
    of righteousness.
    In reality, none of the critics of the Qur'an has been able to
    prove the non-practicability of any of the laws enshrined in it, in an
    impartial and truthful manner.

  55. shabeer says:

    #Newspapers in Saudi #wiki link invaluable evidence ,the last chance of escaping from the truth """ABROGATION """"

    #Q 4:24 is known as Verse of Mutah…………..

    24. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allâh ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allâh is Ever All­Knowing, All­Wise.

    WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR MUTAH HERE?

  56. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    This is utter rubbish. Hellfire is waiting for you because you have lied that your allah did not abrogate any verse when, in fact, it did. Abrogation is a unique feature of muhammadanism.

  57. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci,
    Good job. A muhammadan will deny anything including his own name. Somebody abrogated his name from 'Abu Qassim" to 'Muhammad'. That is what Shabby is doing. He lives on denials.
    In further proof of abrogation, which you have handled creditably, there are other verses and writings as well.Sura 2:106 "-IF WE ABROGATE ANY VERSE OR CAUSE IT TO BE FORGOTTEN, WE WILL REPLACE IT BY A BETTER ONE OR ONE SIMILAR-".
    At Suyuti 3:59 "ABROGATION MEANS THE REMOVAL AS IT IS MENTIONED IN CHAPTER HAJJ 52, AND IT MEANS ALTERATION".
    Suyuti in Asbab al-Nuzul page 19 "–IBN ABBAS HIMSELF SAID, 'SOMETIMES THE REVELATION USED TO DESCEND ON THE PROPHET DURING THE NIGHT AND THEN HE FORGOT IT DURING THE DAYTIME, GOD SENT DOWN VERSE 2:106".
    Sura 16:101 "WHEN WE CHANGE ONE VERSE FOR ANOTHER -ALLAH KNOWS BEST WHAT HE REVEALS-THEY SAY—"
    A being that keeps changing its mind belatedly to suit situations it never envisaged is not 'all knowing". Such a creature cannot be God for HE knows all and cannot be so fickle minded. The muhammadan god is mentally deficient and cannot think properly. It has to wait until told what to do or the circumstance arises. It is never proactive.

  58. Demsci says:

    Right Chuck, and about oil, the Arab oil-countries and Iran and Russia are also in essence big "takers". It costs 10 $ (I have heard 5 $ too) for them to extract a barrel of oil from the ground, if you will.

    But since 2003 oil-prices have skyrocketed, to 147 $, fallen down, but recovered, and now the price of oil is 100 to 110 $ per barrel. Imagine the prophit they make! Very bad for Western economies and deficits.

    Thankfully this high price works as an incentive to find alternatives for oil, so that it will lose it's monopoly as fuel for cars, ships & planes in due course.

    I hope oil will be replaced in such quantities that the price will drop substantially again, or at least so that Western and Indian democracies, and poor African countries have no need to use oil (because even if a country has and uses it's own oil, then still OPEC and Russia can keep the price of oil, which is worldwide the same, very high).

    I was particularly shocked when I heard that the price of oil, is 20 to 30 $ per barrel higher because of risks, dangers and especially wars.

    So in stimulating war in Syria Iran, Russia, but also Saudi Arabia, Qatar, of course have expenses, but more prophits, because the war increases the worldprice of oil! Due the risk- and fearfactor, which THEY enhance!

  59. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    Muhammadan's greatest charity is terrorism in all its ramifications. How much of that rotten meat was sent to Syria? If the Saudi authorities are serious about helping their needy brethren, why don't they send live animals or processed ones which are not discarded after it has been exposed to unhygienic conditions? There are millions of Saudis living in abject poverty. Don't they need meat?
    The 'chemical & biological bombs & missiles' sent to Iraq and Afghanistan have increased the number of children, especially the female ones, who are now enrolled in schools. That will bring about greater enlightenment which the mullahs are afraid of. Those ' missiles and bombs' are building more schools, hospitals,roads and creating better economic opportunities etc, all leading to a higher standard of living. Such do not go down well with the mullahs who want progress only for themselves and their families. To them extending benefits to the less privileged means a challenge to the status quo and it is unacceptable to them. That is why they are sponsoring terrorism using religion which is a very handy tool.
    Being specific about Iraq, in 2002 the population was 24 million. By 2011 it stood at 32.96 million. That is an increase of 37.3%. How does a population increase when millions have been killed? The answer to that is only found in muhammadan mathematics.
    In 2008, a survey was conducted on the number of Iraqi homes with certain durable goods. The result was: color tv 95.25; electric cooker 93.5%; fridge 88.9%; cars 25.3%; washing machine 43%; personal computer7.4%.
    In January, 2010, there were 1.3 landlines telephones compared to a pre-war figure of 833,000, there were 19. 5 million mobiles phones when there was none in 2002. There were 1.6 million internet subscribers against pre-war level of only 4,600. Car ownership doubled between 2003 and 2004. Public sector employment doubled in 2005 providing 43 % of all jobs.
    Under Saddam Hussein, 1 million Iraqis fled into exile.This was more than the number of persons displaced during the war which spiked when muhammadans were at each other. After the bombing of the Samarra mosque 1.5 million fled to other parts of Iraq. The most bloody month in Iraq before the pull out was March 2003, when muhammadan terrorists massacred 3,977 Iraqis. In recent times that figure has been surpassed. All these were or have been caused by muhammadans.
    By the widest of margins, the greatest enemies of the Iraqis are the privileged muhammadans who do not want anything good for the Iraqi people. First, it was Saddam Hussein. Now the terrorists have taken over at the behest of those who are resisting a change of the status quo.

  60. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //100 times answered the topics jaziya repeating again & again is the symbols of weakness & cowards//
    Thanks God you realized that repeating again and again is a symbol of weakness. Because thats what you do repeat your weak arguments and then sprinkle liberal dawa-ic material around.

  61. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //THE Q'N IS REMAINING WHY WESTERN DEMOCRATIC R MORE CRIME COMPARE TO ISLAM ?//
    You ask a 100 times, the answer is same: 1. Under strictly Islamic law some acts considered and reported as crime in other countries aren't considered crime, for example sexual exploitation pf your domestic servant . 2. Many muslim countries don't participate in these surveys. 3. In many muslim countries and some other conservative countries like India crime remains unreported because crimes like rape are considered stigma.

  62. chuck says:

    @Demsci,
    Very well said.

  63. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //MY QUESTION TO CHUCK WHY EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY NEAREST TO ARABS LIKE Greek and the Romans R THE MOST ADVANCED IN COMPARE TO WESTERN ?//
    Advanced in what? Which period? And anyway what has that to do with Arabs? Fact is, that the Romans and the Greeks WERE advanced civilization a thousand years BEFORE Islam. The question should actually be reversed, why the Arabs were not advanced when they were so close to the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, Sumerians and Persians?

    And if you are talking about today then Greece is a poor country suffering economic downturn with no major contribution in any important field in last 1000 years. Now this makes me think whether the advent of Islam and the proximity to Arab has to do anything with that.

    Rest of what you say has no bearing with the topic being discussed. You tried to show that Western and Indian democratic societies have only started being around since last 75 years. Off course you couldn't counter the argument.

    As far as Islamic contribution to science and mathematics is concerned I never deny that. However you should notice that most of these scholars are from Persia/Babylonia who were already much advanced than the Arabs when Islam came around. Chances are these great people would have been even greater had there been no Islam.

  64. Demsci says:

    //."IS PEOPLE RULING /CREATING RULE FOR THEM IS VALID /CONSISTENT ?"//

    The key point is that humans get to change laws that do not work well, have more detrimental than beneficial results. And humans augment their laws constantly. So the human laws get better all the time in response to practice, changing world.

    But the so-called DIVINE (Islamic) laws cannot be changed one bit until judgement day! Only their interpretation can change, but not much.

  65. Demsci says:

    Shabeer wrote:
    /,CONSIDER A GROUP OF JAILERS [ES PUNISH WITH RAPE] WE CONDUCTING A VOTING WHETHER THE RAPE IS ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED//

    Are your "jailers" MEN? Then maybe such a travesty voting can take place in a patriarchal Islamic society. And the motion could be carried there, but of course in more fine words than "rape".

    But in Democratic societies, since # 1923, women also the vote. And hardly any women will vote in favor of "rape", no matter how fine it is presented

  66. chuck says:

    @Shabeer
    //# In your Islam pedophilia isn't a //
    How is that related with the hadith you quoted which is about child born of adultery?

    //WE MUSLIM BELIEVE/AGREED THAT THE CHILD ADULTERY WORST THING ………………..
    I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MEANING OF THE " WORST" IN CHUCK FOOLISH LAND?//
    Read my comment above. Child of adultery and pedophilia are not related.

    //# temporary Nikaah//
    Misyar is not prohibited. It is perfectly legal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misyar#Legality_of_m
    And even with Mutah there is confusion. Q 4:24 is known as Verse of Mutah and it HAS NOT BEEN ABROGATED within Quran. But if you say that the above hadith abrogates Quran then you will have a second problem. I will explain the problem if you agree that a hadith can abrogate the Quran.

    //SOMEONE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES ,NOT ACCOUNT WITH MUSLIM SOCIETY ,IF U FEEL I AM POOR /I CAN'T DEBATE WITH ISLAM WITH PROPER EVIDENCE /TRUSFUL MANNERS ,I GIVE A ADVICE ,PLZ LOCK U'R BEDROOM DOOR & LOOK THE MIRROR & CRY LOUDLY AS MUCH U CAN…………………………………………..hhhhaaaaaaaaaaa……………………Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii//
    Misyar or Mutha isn't illegal. Newspapers in Saudi Arabia are often full of ads for Misyar proposals. I don't feel you are monetarily poor, but being a true muslim you are intellectually poor off. My sympathies are with you.

  67. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //AT LEAST SAUDI SEND SOME MEAT TO THEM FOR POOR//
    Poor Muslims to be correct. Rest all that you say is not related with the topic being discussed here. The point was that despite all the noise you were making Islamic benevolence and Islamic Economic paradigms fact remain that the Muslim countries are far bigger takers than givers. Even rich muslim countries don't spent much in humanitarian aids especially to non-muslim countries.

  68. Demsci says:

    Shabeer wrote:
    //"The God Qur’an present is not one whose
    entity is spread over in all His creations. If that be so He has to
    have limitations partially. But He is beyond all nature ie., etc."//

    "This pertains to the idea that God-given laws are superior to mere man-made laws."

    Reaction 1: Ali Sina many times asked Muslims to provide definite proof that "God" was the author of the Quran. There are many reasons why not only we, but especially historic Quran-researchers-experts reject this. This means that Islamic texts may well be just as manmade as the (other) laws made by mankind. And only PRESENTED and MISTAKEN as GOD-GIVEN.

    Reaction 2: Isn't it inconceivable that " God" never intervened after Mohammed? in the course of Mohammed's prophethood from # 609 until 632 there was some change/ abrogation/ replacement of verses in the Quran, and of course constant augmenting, due to evolution of Islam and reaction and questions/ dilemma's to it from the world, from practice.

    Why did that change/ replacement, and indeed all augmentation (have to) stop at Mohammed's death? Because ever since 632 even Muslims admit that from then on the Tafsirs, the explanations of the all-too-incomplete&unclear set of Islamic texts, was work of humans, no Muslim after Mohammed claimed that he heard instructions from God or Gabriel to tell mankind.

    What this means is that the core Islamic texts cannot be changed, only interpretations of them be changed. Augmentation of core principles/ values/ laws of core Islamic texts is very problematic. and both interpretation and augmentation is very hard to make all Muslims to adhere to. So clearly there are worldwide diverse variations of interpretation of Issues that Islam addresses and gives instructions about.

    And Muslims can be as one about their texts, especially Quran, but they have lost the ability to speak authoritatively about how THE QURAN, THE ISLAM is to be interpreted.
    On the many issues it gives instructions about.

    And then of course there are also so many issues the core texts do not even raise. So about them there are to be expected many differences of opinion among Muslims as well.

    Muslims just CANNOT speak as ONE community.

  69. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //Who is eligible to receive Zakat? //
    Zakat, by definition, is only meant to benefit muslims and enhance Islam.

    //MR.CHUCK NOT SEEN THE FIRST THREE ELIGIBLE PEOPLE ,& OTHERS//
    I have explained all the categories, you are not reading. Go back and re-read. Only your point 4 is meant for non-muslims and that is, as stated, meant to attract/lure/bribe people in accepting Islam. Do not try to reinvent Islam for me.

  70. Demsci says:

    I clicked on all links. some did not open, some were not even about a prominent role of Islam in particular. Some seemed Islamic propaganda.

    One said that Europeans before the 1100's regarded Muslims as infidels and inferior, and therefore disdained to learn from them and so remained backward. Al Buleihi said exactly the same about modern-muslim-majority; they regard Westerners as infidels and inferior and disdain to learn from them and so remain backward.

    But most important, the contents being true or not, they will all about the distant past. One link distinctly regarded the Golden Age of Islam ENDED 1258 AD. Due the gruesome sack of Bagdad by the Mongols in that year.

    Now look, I prefer Democratic liberal societies over Totalitarian Islamic ones. For this I trust on recent past and present facts. If you prefer Totalitarian Islamic society, then for propaganda you have to go to facts of distant past. Which is better? to emulate a society from the distant past or to emulate the most successful, prosporous, free, happy societies that came to excellence in many ways in recent past and which are in the present leading the beneficial statistics of the UN?

    You know; about prosperity, GDP, Happiness, Freedom, high literacy and high education, longevity, all sorts of positive statistics. The Totalitarian Islamic countries are in general lagging far behind the Democratic Liberal Societies the positive statistics (why don't YOU SHOW THEM?) . Turkey is one of the best performing Islamic countries today, if we do not count oil-rich countries, but precisely Turkey is organised as a secular liberal society!

  71. shabeer says:

    100 times answered the topics jaziya repeating again & again is the symbols of weakness & cowards………..

  72. shabeer says:

    All the creatures in this world are Allah’s creations. Creator
    and creations are not the same. Creation is entirely distinct from
    the Creator. It is like a painter and his painting. Painter is not the
    painting. Painting is not the painter. From any perspective they
    are different. Qur’an uses the words `doonillahi (besides Allah)
    and `gairullahi’ (other than Allah) whenever creation are mentioned.
    It is clear from these words that creations are absolutely
    different from God. All creations including man are different from
    the essence of Allah according to the Qur’anic teachings.
    Any jurisprudence that does not relate good and evil to the
    life of Prophet is bound to fail. Nationalism, casteism or language
    cannot deal with universal good. Neither can rationalism. The
    European rationalism does not see anything wrong in extra marital
    relationship and homosexuality (Barbara Smoker: Humanism
    P. 82-84). Even Mr. Idamaruku who is supposed to be the most
    progressive thinker in India is not in a position to approve this.
    His son in law the European traveller, Yoran Scarner writes “They
    (Idamaruku and his Wife) did not allow Geeta to come out with
    me until marriage was legally registered. Indian society does not
    allow premarital relationship. Even the most progressive Indian
    cannot tolerate dating which is quite common in western countries’’
    (Yoran Scaner: Thousand faces of India P. 29). If rationalism
    is to distinguish between good and evil, the good in England
    will become evil in India.
    As far as Islam is concerned the words and deeds of the
    prophet always remain as guidelines. We just need look into it to
    ascertain what is good in anything. If we wish to distinguish between
    good and evil without the help of divine revelations we
    will be forced to change their definition from time to time. This is
    what happened with regard to the concepts of Ahimsa and rationalism.
    A clear and definited understanding of good and evil help us
    to stand for good and to free ourselves from evil. This is what
    happened in the history of Islam. The fact that Muslims wish to
    get reward for their deeds in the world hereafter also makes them
    sincere and ready for service and then showmanship or exhibi-tionism is practically eliminated.
    As we have already learnt man who is the only living being
    capable of making use of nature needs divine guidance. Utilization
    of nature without divine guidance will only lead to the destruction
    of mankind. Only someone superior to human stature
    can tell him how to lead a human life. He knows that except the
    Creator nothing among the creations is superior to himself. We
    should then get guidance from the Creator. Islam teaches that all
    the prophets were sent to achieve this goal ie to tell him how to
    live like a man. All the prophets had come to the world for the
    purpose of setting good examples for mankind by living a life on
    the basis of divine instructions. `Risalath’, the technical term represents
    this idea. The medium of contact between God and man
    and between sky and earth is Risalath.
    Islam does not teach that prophets were gods and that they
    had any divinity in them. The concept of prophethood in Islam
    goes against the Hindu theology of incarnation avatar according
    to which God comes down to the earth and becomes a model of
    what man should be. The argument that God comes down with all
    the trivialities of man runs counter to the purity of Almighty God.
    It is quite meaningless to suppose that God takes the form of man
    and shows him how he should live. God is all powerful. He does
    not need food or sexual pleasures. Even if He comes down He
    can exist without food and human needs. It is not God who should
    be a model to man. A representative from man should show the
    practical manner in which man should live in accordance with
    divine guidance.
    Prophets were ordinary men in the sense that they had hunger
    and thirst, sleep and rest, happiness and sorrow, wives and
    children. But when hungry they were not the ones to lay their
    hands on things belonging to others. They did not go for prostitution
    to satisfy sexual needs. They did not revel in joy, nor did they
    seek refuge in drug and liquor when sad. They did no injustice to
    anyone for the sake of their wives. They did not earn wealth
    through crime to bring up their offspring. They were men. Perfect
    men
    Prophets fulfilled their mission in different societies. With
    the development of the intellectual capabilities of man slight
    changes were effected in the sphere of law. But basically what all
    the prophets said was the same thing. Worship only the Almighty
    who created and maintains the universe and obey the prophets
    send by him. Society was growing. All the prophets without any
    exception through their exhortation, were predicting the advent
    of a great prophet who would be model for all the human beings.
    Mankind was waiting for the great personality who was destined
    to be model for the entire human race.

  73. shabeer says:

    Man has a lot of limitations, basically he acquires knowledge
    through senses. The human brain processes informations collected
    through the five senses. It is a well known fact that human sense
    have a lot of limitations.
    Human eye can see light only within a range of wave lengths
    from 380 to 780 millimicrons. The ultraviolet rays, X-rays, infrared
    rays and cosmic rays which are emitted at wavelengths above
    or below this range are not visible for human eyes. Human ear
    can listen to sound waves within a frequency range of 20 Hz. to
    20,000 Hz. Sound waves beyond these limits are not audible to
    human ear. So also is the case with taste, smell etc. So it turns out
    that, since human senses have limitations the brain also must have
    limitations. That means we can think only about this materialistic
    world. Human brain is incapable of thinking beyond the materialistic
    world and creating images and performing calculations outside
    its limits.
    It was already pointed out that Allah is beyond matter and
    hence limitations of materials are not applicable in His case. Human
    brain is incapable of arriving at conclusions and deductions
    on his own about God. Because it is all beyond limits of his senses.
    Human brain which is with in space-time limits can not visualize.
    the Supreme being beyond space-time limits. The Qur’an verse
    given below indicates this:-
    “No vision can grasp Him
    But His grasp is over all vision
    He is above all comprehension
    Yet is acquainted with all things’’ (Al-Ana’s: 103)
    The Creator has arranged every thing that is required in this
    world for survival of a new born baby. When it cries that throat
    doesn’t get dried up; its body temperature is kept under control;
    the water content of the body is automatically regulated; oxygen
    is breathed in and carbon dioxide is breathed out-and so many
    such intricate and complicated body functions are designed and
    regulated by our Creator. The mother herself carries the perfectly
    balanced diet for the offspring. There is nothing to beat breastmilk.
    It contains all nutrients and antibodies and antibodies required
    for body growth and building up immunity against diseases.
    The preposition that the Creator and the creations are one and
    the same is another side of the same coin. islam reaffirms that this
    theory is absurd and baseless. The essence of Allah is distinct
    from His creations. The God Qur’an present is not one whose
    entity is spread over in all His creations. If that be so He has to
    have limitations partially. But He is beyond all nature ie., His
    essence is distinct from nature. But His knowledge and power
    contain and include all things. From the feeblest movement in an
    atom to the gigantic explosions of stars are within His power and
    control. He is beyond time and space limitations. He is beyond
    matter and its limitations. His power stretches to all macro and
    micro world.
    “To Him belongs the dominion of the heaven and the earth
    It is He who gives Life and Death and
    He has power over all thingsHe is the first and the last
    The evident and hidden
    And He has full knowledge of all things’’ (Al Hadid: 2,3)

  74. shabeer says:

    REGULAR COMMENT FROM[MY POST] FROM NON ISLAMIC PEOPLE :

    1) WESTERN MUSLIM DID THE CRIME:
    2) MUSLIM NEVER COUNT THEIR CRIMES & NOT GIVEN TRUSTFUL REPORT:
    3) MUSLIM HIDE THE CRIME
    4) MUSLIM KILLED THEM ,THEN NOT COUNT IT AS A CRIME……………….

    WHAT THE REQUIREMENT OF THESES NON SENSE COMMENTS MY DEAR BROTH/SIS………….WHERE R U GOING TO ESCAPE?

    EVEN THE COUNTRY GOVT OFFICIAL AGREED THE REPORT THEN WHAT THE REQUIREMENT OF U'R FALSE CLAIM……………………………

    FOR EX) UN Rape Statistics:

    RANK
    1 United States of America93883
    2 Australia 18237
    3 United Kingdom 13272
    4 France 10408
    5 Germany8766
    6 Russian Federation8185
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics http://www.yellodyno.com/pdf/Rape_Statistics.pdf

    NON ISLAMIC COUNTRIES ARE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF CRIME COMPARE TO ISLAMIC COUNTRIES THE FOLLWING LINK GIVES U MORE DETAILS REPORT:
    http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countriehttp://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/images/Graph03.JPG http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/images/graph05.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by

    ABOUT 99% OF SITE STATICS SAYS WESTERN [DEMOCRATIC ]& NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES R LEADING CRIME ,HERE SINNA & SOME PEOPLE CRITICIZING ISLAM WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE ,IF THEY HAVE AT LEAST LITTLE BIT TRUST/MORALITY ABOUT THE PEOPLE GOOD FUTURE & BETTER LIFE PLZ ADVICE THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE :

    THE Q'N IS REMAINING WHY WESTERN DEMOCRATIC R MORE CRIME COMPARE TO ISLAM ? EVEN THEY R WELL EDUCATED,ADVANCED……………………THE PROBLEM IS THEY MISSING THEIR CREATOR NATURE OF LIFE ,THEY CREATING HUMAN LAW ,DEMOCRACY [A MAJORITY OPENION SHULD BE GOOD ] ONE QUESTION ,CONSIDER A GROUP OF JAILERS [ES PUNISH WITH RAPE] WE CONDUCTING A VOTING WHETHER THE RAPE IS ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED ,SURLY " RAPE ALLOWED WON OVER NOT ALLOWED " THAT ONE OF THE WEAKNESS OF DEMOCRACY ………..IS PEOPLE RULING /CREATING RULE FOR THEM IS VALID /CONSISTENT ?

  75. shabeer says:

    MY QUESTION TO CHUCK WHY EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY NEAREST TO ARABS LIKE Greek and the Romans R THE MOST ADVANCED IN COMPARE TO WESTERN ?

    WHY ENGLAND? WHY GERMAN? WHY FRANCE ? SUPERIOR …………CAN U EVER THINKING ABOUT IT?

    Roman society, their culture and history, evolved over 1300 years from the legendary founding of Rome in 753 BCE to the, almost equally mythical, ending of the Roman Empire in the West in 476 CE. If we add the history of the Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire, we must add another thousand years to 1453 CE when the Ottoman Turks finally captured Byzantium. If the Holy Roman Catholic Church is viewed as a successor institution to the Roman Empire, then Rome lives still. How is one to summarize the legacy of Rome.

    The Romans were a practical people. They excelled in the arts of government, military organization, public administration, law, engineering, and architecture. They were pragmatic and not particularly theoretical or philosophical. The Romans borrowed their art, philosophy, and literature from the Greeks and the Hellenistic world of the Eastern Mediterranean. They borrowed, copied, and adopted. Without the Romans, Greek and Hellenistic culture would, most likely, have been lost to the West and, perhaps, to the world. It was the Roman empire that preserved ancient and classical culture for the medieval and modern ages. http://faculty.ucc.edu/egh-damerow/romans.htm
    Throughout the Middle Ages, formal attempts to understand the physical world were developed, chiefly in the arts and medical faculties of the medieval universities. This natural philosophy, as it was known, derived almost entirely from the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Most of the brilliant legacy of ancient Greek thought had been lost to Western Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century. When this legacy began to be recovered from Byzantine and Islamic sources where it had to some extent been preserved, it was the works of Aristotle that had the most immediate impact and began to dominate Western philosophical thought.

    Library of Alexandria

    The Royal Library of Alexandria, or Ancient Library of Alexandria, in Alexandria, Egypt, was one of the largest and most significant libraries of the ancient world.[1] It flourished under the patronage of the Ptolemaic dynasty and functioned as a major center of scholarship from its construction in the 3rd century BC until the Roman conquest of Egypt in 30 BC. The library was conceived and opened either during the reign of Ptolemy I Soter (323–283 BC) or during the reign of his son Ptolemy II (283–246 BC).[2]
    The Library is famous for having been burned, resulting in the loss of many books. After the main library was destroyed, ancient scholars used a "daughter library" in a temple known as the Serapeum (located in another part of the city). During Plutarch's (AD 46–120) visit to Alexandria in 48 BC, he wrote that Julius Caesar had accidentally burned the library down when he set fire to his own ships.[3] However, Florus and Lucan note that the flames Caesar set only burned the fleet and some "houses near the sea"; ancient sources do not mention the Library. Furthermore, years after Caesar's campaign in Alexandria, the Greek geographer Strabo worked in the Alexandrian Library and described its two buildings as "perfectly intact."
    The exact date of the Library's burning is not known. In fact, sources identify four possible occasions for the partial or complete destruction of the Library of Alexandria: Julius Caesar's fire in the Alexandrian War, in 48 BC; the attack of Aurelian in AD 270 – 275; the decree of Coptic Pope Theophilus in AD 391; and the Muslim conquest in AD 642 or thereafter.
    Intended both as a commemoration and an emulation of the original, the Bibliotheca Alexandrina was inaugurated in 2002 near the site of the old library.
    Caesar's conquest in 48 BC [edit]
    See also: Siege of Alexandria (47 BC)
    The ancient accounts by Plutarch,[20] Aulus Gellius,[21] Ammianus Marcellinus, and Orosius agree that Caesar accidentally burned the library down during his visit to Alexandria in 48 BC.
    Plutarch's Parallel Lives, written at the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd century AD, describes the Siege of Alexandria in which Caesar was forced to burn his own ships:
    when the enemy endeavored to cut off his communication by sea, he was forced to divert that danger by setting fire to his own ships, which, after burning the docks, thence spread on and destroyed the great library.
    —Plutarch, Life of Caesar[20] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandri

    ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHICAL INFLUENCE UPON
    EUROPE: 900-1200 http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_contributionhttp://www.templemount.org/islamiad.html http://www.historyguide.org/ancient/lecture18b.hthttp://www.islamawareness.net/Maths/science_and_mhttp://www.islamawareness.net/Maths/science2.html http://www.islamawareness.net/Maths/science3.html http://www.islamawareness.net/Maths/science4.html http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/History_of_Islamic_Chttp://www.albany.edu/jmmh/vol1no1/teach-islamic…. http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac20.htm#li

  76. Demsci says:

    Hello Shabeer, your lie is about that you state "NON of the translators claim verse 60:8 is abrogated " and that you go on to say that ONLY the "zombies from answering Muslim" say this.

    But these "zombies" could/ would never concoct this on their own, they always rely on SOME Muslim text or SOME Muslim authority, be it in the past or in the present, on TV for example. YOUR statement was too general, there must have been translaters, interpreters who concluded from Al-Jalalayn's remark:

    "this was [revealed] before the command to struggle against them."

    That this is meant as abrogation of verse 60:8. And why ELSE would he have written it? What purpose does it have if it doesn't mean at least a partial abrogation?

    With this "struggle" He was probably referring to Sura 9:5, the verse of the sword. And here is what Ibn Kathir says about the verse of the sword:

    According to Ibn Kathir Surah 9:5 abrogated every peace treaty that had been made with the idolaters:

    This is the Ayah of the Sword …

    <But if they repent and perform the Salah, and give Zakah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.>

    Abu Bakr As-Siddiq used this and other honorable Ayat as proof for fighting those who refrained from paying the Zakah. These Ayat allowed fighting people unless, and until, they embrace Islam and implement its rulings and obligations… In the two Sahihs, it is recorded that Ibn ‘Umar said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    <I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish the prayer and pay Zakah.>

    This honorable Ayah (9:5) was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, "It abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolator, EVERY TREATY, AND EVERY TERM." Al-‘Awfi said that Ibn ‘Abbas commented: "No idolator had any more treaty or promise ever since Sura Bara’ah was revealed. The four months, in addition to, all peace treaties conducted before Bara’ah was revealed and announced had ended by the tenth of the month of Rabi’ Al-Akhir." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 4 (Surat Al-A’raf to the end of Surah Yunus), by Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, First Edition: May 2000, pp. 375, 377; cf. online edition; bold italic and capital emphasis ours)"

  77. shabeer says:

    # it were the Western societies……………….SO THERE IS NO MIRACLE IN CRIME STATICS……………#The sick man of Europe………….WHAT CAN I SAYS SOME EUROPEAN HAD JEALOUSY WITH TURKEY & ISLAMIC CALIPHS & SADLY FAILED WAR[CRUSADE] WITH SALAHUDEEN..NO CHANCE CONQUERED THE ASIAN & AFRICAN COUNTRIES………….SO THEY [SOME FOOLISH COWARDS ] LIKE THAT……………..

    #Al Buleihi admits that the Islamic world in large part is backward…………………..PLZ STOP ZOMBIE OPINION,TO DAY WORLD AGREED THE TRUTH WAS ISLAM & MUSLIM BEGGING 300 BRANCHES OF SCIENCE ……………..PLZ CLICK ALL THE LINK STUDY SOME OF THE ISLAMIC CONTRIBUTION TO MANKIND & HUMAN CIVILISATION………….. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
    Golden Age of Islam http://regentsprep.org/Regents/global/themes/gold
    How Islam Influenced Science http://www.ais.org/~bsb/Herald/Previous/95/scienc
    Classical Roots of the Scientific Revolution http://metalab.unc.edu/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhib

    The Origins of Algebra http://vmoc.museophile.org/algebra/section3_1.htm

    List of Arabic Mathematicians http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/mathhist/arab.ht

    Highlights in the History of Algebra http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~sxw8045/history.htm

    Arab contributions to mathematics and the introduction of the Zero http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/980422/

    Geometry

    Symmetric Patterns at the Alhambra http://weasel.cnrs.humboldt.edu/~spain/alh/index….

    Dome of the Rock http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Dome_of_t

    Islam and Islamic History in Arabia – Mosque http://www.islam.org/Mosque/ihame/Sec12.htm

    Islam, Knowledge, and Science http://cwis.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introduction/woi_kno

    History of Geometry http://members.aol.com/bbyars1/contents.html

    Astronomy

    Greek Astronomy http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhib

    Islamic Astronomy http://physics.unr.edu/grad/welser/astro/arab.htm

    Islam, Knowledge, and Science http://cwis.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introduction/woi_kno

    Muslim, Scientists, Mathematicians and Astronomers http://www.cyberistan.org/

    Medicine

    Arabic (or Islamic) Influence on the Historical Development of Medicine http://www.levity.com/alchemy/islam19.html

    Arab Roots of European Medicine http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/index.htm

    Islam, Knowledge, and Science – Medical Sciences http://cwis.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introduction/woi_kno

    Islam and Islamic History in Arabia and The Middle East http://www.islam.org/Mosque/ihame/Ref4.htm

    Medicine in Medieval Islam http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/islamic_medical

  78. shabeer says:

    # In your Islam pedophilia isn't a crime……………………….

    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3952
    Narrated AbuHurayrah:
    The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The child of adultery is ''''''''''worst''''''''''' of the three.

    WE MUSLIM BELIEVE/AGREED THAT THE CHILD ADULTERY WORST THING ………………..
    I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MEANING OF THE " WORST" IN CHUCK FOOLISH LAND?

    PLZ ADVICE THE PEDOPHILE COUNTRY[I MENTIONED ABOVE ] PEOPLE OR U'R SELF AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE……………" DON'T EXPORT THE OIL & SAND TO SAUDI ARABIA "

    # temporary Nikaah……………….
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2068
    Narrated Saburah ibn Ma'bad al-Juhani:

    The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) prohibited temporary marriage with women.
    Muslim :: Book 8 : Hadith 3260
    Rabi' b. Sabra reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) forbade on the Day of Victory to contract temporary marriage with women. This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Rabi' b. Sabra that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) forbade to contracf temporary marriage with women at the time of Victory, and that his father had contracted the marriage for two red cloaks.

    Muslim :: Book 8 : Hadith 3259
    Rabi' b. Sabra reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) prohibited the contracting of temporary marriage.

    SOMEONE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES ,NOT ACCOUNT WITH MUSLIM SOCIETY ,IF U FEEL I AM POOR /I CAN'T DEBATE WITH ISLAM WITH PROPER EVIDENCE /TRUSFUL MANNERS ,I GIVE A ADVICE ,PLZ LOCK U'R BEDROOM DOOR & LOOK THE MIRROR & CRY LOUDLY AS MUCH U CAN…………………………………………..hhhhaaaaaaaaaaa……………………Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii………………..Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

  79. shabeer says:

    DUM SAYS:
    #####And your big lie is this:
    "NON OF THE TRANSLATOR CLAIM THE VERSES 60:8 ABROGATED IN 1400 OF ISLAMIC HISTORY, IT DID BY SOME ZOMBIES FROM ANSWERING MUSLIM.

    OK IT BIG LIE THEN PROVE TAKE THE CHALLENGE & PROVE IT HERE WHO THE AUTHORIZED TRANSLATOR SAYS THE VERSE R ABROGATED,PLZ BRING THE EVIDENCE & PROVE IT HERE WRIGHT NOW ……………ALL MUSLIM AGREED THE MOST VALID TRANSLATOR [IBN KATHEER ] EXPLANATION I GIVE U FOR EXAMPLE ,HE OR ANY AGREED SCHOLARS EVER SAY VERSES R ABROGATED ,ITS THE " BIG FAT LIE " CREATION OF ANSWERING MUSLIM & SOME BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIE'S ,WHO R THEY? MUSLIM NEVER GIVE ANYONE TO CATEGORIES THE VERSE ,ABROGATED `OR NOT ,ACCORDING TO SOME FOOLISH NON BELIEVER,THEY NEVER COME TO TRUSTFUL DEBATE WITH MUSLIM, THEY SAY ALL THE PEACEFUL VERSES ABROGATED…………..WHO R THEY ? EVEN PROPHET MUHAMMED[S] HAS NOT THE AUTHORITY OF CATEGORIES VERSES ,LAYERS ……………….HELL FIRE WAITING FOR U………………..DEBATE MUSLIM WITH RIGHTEOUS EVIDENCE…………………..

  80. shabeer says:

    AT LEAST SAUDI SEND SOME MEAT TO THEM FOR POOR ,WHAT U'R PEOPLE SEND TO IRAQ& AFGHAN ,ONLY CHEMICAL& BIOLOGICAL BOMB & MISSILES ,EVEN CNN AGREED ,THEY KILL 1.5 MILLION IRAQI CIVILIAN,BY MASS BOMBING

    he Iraqis did not have nor used any Nuclear Weapons against the US and its Allies. I am not in anyway defending Saddam Hussein and his barbaric regime. But why did the Civilized United States decide to attack the innocent IRAQI CIVILIANS with Nuclear Weapons??!!

    The following pictures were extracted from http://www.wakefieldcam.freeserve.co.uk/extremede…. This site was sent to me by Noaman Ali; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him. You can also visit http://www.islamicparty.com/commonsense/iraq30.ht…. The link is about showing statistical numbers about the hard times that the Iraqis had gone through for the past 10 years of Sanctions, and it was sent to me by Shakoor Ahmed; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

    "In an act of stark cruelty, the US dominated Sanctions Committee refuses to permit Iraq to import the clean-up equipment that they desperately need to decontaminate their country of the Depleted Uranium ammunition that the US fired at them. Approximately 315 tons of DU dust was left by the use of this ammunition.The Sanctions Committee also refuses to allow the mass importation of anti-cancer treatments, which contain trace amounts of radio-isotopes, on the grounds that these constitute '…nuclear materials..' (Ross B. Mirkarimi)"
    The following article was taken from http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/09/18/vic.ter…. At the end of the article, CNN tells us that "Iraq blames the United States for the deaths of 1.5 million Iraqis as a result of U.N. economic sanctions imposed after the Gulf War."

  81. shabeer says:

    Who is eligible to receive Zakat?

    1)People who are in complete poverty and have nothing.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    2)People who have some wealth, but not enough to meet their basic needs.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    3)The people who collect Zakat to distribute to the poor and needy. [MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    MR.CHUCK NOT SEEN THE FIRST THREE ELIGIBLE PEOPLE ,& OTHERS…………….REPLAY ONLY FOR 4 TH ELIGIBLE PEOPLE,THE CONDITION IS VERY CLEAR (who are sympathetic towards Islam or wish to enter to Islam, and are needy),HE DON'T LIKE TO VISIT THE MOSQUE ,SIMPLY ARGUING WITH NO EVIDENCE ,NO LOGIC……………………WHAT WE SAYS TO HIM?

    4)People who are sympathetic towards Islam or wish to enter to Islam, and are needy.[ONLY NON MUSLIM]

    5)Zakat may be used to free a person from slavery.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    6)Zakat can be given to those who are in debt and unable to pay off their debt.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    7)The people who work in God’s way and strive to give Dawah.

    8)Travellers and/or wayfarers who are needy.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

  82. Demsci says:

    Shabeer, I believe in Democratic liberal societies also because they are the happiest countries.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/th

    They are Australia, Canada, USA, UK, Iceland, Danmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Holland.

  83. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //Malik :: Book 21 : Hadith 21.3.10
    Do not kill women or children or an aged, weak person,Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees.Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty//
    Sorry but this is not recorded in Shahi Bukhari or Shahi Muslim so chances are that this is a daif(weak) hadith. This has been countered by a person no less than Imam Shafi (http://currenttrends.org/docLib/20061226_NoncombatantsFinal.pdf):
    Elsewhere in the same book, ShÁfi‘ states that all infidel men without exception must convert to
    Islam or be killed; all men of the protected religions (ahl al-kitÁb) must pay jizya or be
    killed. He emphasizes that this rule applies to monks as well and denies the authenticity
    of the tradition attributed to AbÙ Bakr, which he himself had accepted on another
    occasion. Alternatively, he explains that even if the tradition from AbÙ Bakr is
    authentic, this does not mean that monks may not be killed. AbÙ Bakr’s intention,
    according to ShÁfi‘, was that monasteries be left aside temporarily in order to
    concentrate on more important military targets first.

  84. Demsci says:

    And; wouldn't it have been better if Allah had forbidden Muslims to be UNKIND to those who did them no harm?

  85. Demsci says:

    I meant:

    if He had forbidden to be KIND to those who did them no harm, ON ACCOUT of religion?!

  86. Demsci says:

    //"Tafsir al-Jalalayn 60:8

    Quran: 60:8

    God does not forbid you in regard to those who did not wage war against you, from among the disbelievers, on account of religion and did not expel you from your homes, that you should treat them kindly (an tabarrūhum is an inclusive substitution for alladhīna, ‘those who’) and deal with them justly: this was [revealed] before the command to struggle against them. Assuredly God loves the just. "//

    On closer inspection; Isn't this verse a waste of space in a DIVINE book? It certainly is nothing better than what most other religions teach and most ordinary humans do by themselves anyway.

    Imagine; Allah tells Muslims that He does not forbid them to be kind!!! to who? To those who did them no harm!!! So why would He even consider to forbid this completely normal kindness?

    On account of religion presumably. But wouldn't it have been cultlike if He had forbidden to be unkind to those who did them no harm, ON ACCOUNT of religion?!

    This kindness-behavior should be natural, logical, self-evident en this instruction seems highly superfluous for a God to instruct humans in a HOLY ETERNAL book IMO.

  87. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //PLZ STUDY THE LINK COMPLETELY //
    Read the link completely. Didn't find any evidence of any help being given to non-muslim countries.

    //“As-Sadaqaat (here it means Zakaah) are only for the Fuqaraa’ (poor), and Al‑Masaakeen (the poor) and those employed to collect (the funds); and to attract the hearts of those who have been inclined (towards Islam); and to free the captives; and for those in debt; and for Allaah’s Cause (i.e. for Mujaahidoon — those fighting in a holy battle), and for the wayfarer (a traveller who is cut off from everything); a duty imposed by Allaah. And Allaah is All-Knower, All-Wise”

    [al-Tawbah 9:60] //
    Hunh. The poor, the needy, the traveler, the collector and the debt-ridden referred here are all Muslim people. Do you have any evidence that it covers non-muslims? And the verse points further who other benefactors are : The Jihadist and the war captives or those in bondage. The first is definitely a muslim and the second is a muslim captured in war and then the zakat can be used to pay the ransom to free that person or to free the muslim slave from slavery (The Riqab). The most telling part is this: "and to attract the hearts of those who have been inclined (towards Islam)". In other words luring, bribing another person into the religion (Thats why it is not qualified with words like poor or needy).
    Muslims do have difficulty concealing this part so they use some trickery of words like Yusuf ALi says "For those whose hearts Have been (recently) reconciled", Pickthall says: "and those whose hearts are to be reconciled". Note the difference. Tafsir Ibn Kathis explains it thus: "(To draw their hearts closer.) Some people are given because some of his peers might embrace Islam" Explaining further Ibn Kathir shows this hadith as example:
    Imam Ahmad recorded that Safwan bin Umayyah said,
    "The Messenger of Allah gave me (from the spoils of) Hunayn while he was the most hateful person to me. He kept giving me until he became the most beloved person to me.''

  88. Demsci says:

    "NON OF THE TRANSLATOR CLAIM THE VERSES 60:8 ABROGATED IN 1400 OF ISLAMIC HISTORY ,IT DID BY SOME ZOMBIES FROM ANSWERING MUSLIM,WITH NO EVIDENCE ,
    Ibn Kathir COMMENTARY ABOUT 60:8,9 "

    Herein lies your problem, if not your arrogance or DECEIT, Shabeer.

    There are 1 unchangeable set of Quran-Hadiths-Sira, but on many issues there are DIVERSE variations in interpretation of that unchangeable set.

    You cannot speak for all Islam and for all Muslims. Because there is no unquestionable group in Islam that ordains YOUR interpretation as only valid and lawful, then enforces this interpretation on Muslims, on pain of removal out of Islam, when they fail to adhere to THIS INTERPRETATION.

    And still, while you must know that, you tell the outside world, what Islam is and is not, ordains, forbids or allows etc. AS IF that were the only valid and lawful interpretation on the issues you explain.

    But among the Muslims, as is often shown by MEMRI-TV, other, seemingly more qualified Muslims than you, pass off their contradicting interpretation of your issues AS IF THAT is the only valid and lawful interpretation on these issues.

    And your big lie is this:
    "NON OF THE TRANSLATOR CLAIM THE VERSES 60:8 ABROGATED IN 1400 OF ISLAMIC HISTORY, IT DID BY SOME ZOMBIES FROM ANSWERING MUSLIM.

    While also a lot of Muslims have come to the same conclusion as the "zombies". Indeed the "zombies" learned their conclusion from Muslims somewhere.

    Muslims who thus contradicted you, but with the same insistence that theirs was the only valid, lawful interpretation of a particular issue in Quran-Hadiths-Sira.

  89. Demsci says:

    About your statistics; As Chuck points out, with you we will be going in circles perpetually, or at least for a long time about this issue.

    MANY times it has been pointed out to you that the researchers of those statistics point out that this is not only about OCCURRENCES and therefore this does not inform that the same crimes do not OCCUR less in states with lower numbers like the Islamic states.

    These statistics are also about the government or police allowing the numbers to become public.

    And also these statistics are about how much the victims of crimes do trust the police enough to report/ come forward.

    So it is entirely possible that many Islamic governments severely UNDER-REPORT honestly, accurately, or do consider some crimes not crimes at all

    And it is also entirely possible that crime-victims refrain from reporting to the police of Islamic countries, because the laws and practices of these countries are such that the victims will even be persecuted and punished or at least much discouraged when they do report.

    And I have a statistical report for you and those who are indoctrinated by the likes of you with these statistics of you in return:
    http://www.unwomen.org/publications/study-on-ways

    This first widespread governmental study on sexual harassment in Egypt has revealed that an astounding 99.3 per cent of women and girls surveyed report having been subjected to one form or another of harassment.

    What do you think of that?!!!!!

  90. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //#Western & Indian Democratic societies……………..WHEN?…………….1400 YEARS AGO?…..//
    This may come as a news to a dimwit like you, but what we call the Western civilization has its roots in the Greek and the Romans who predate Islam by at least 1000 years. The Indian were at it about 3000 years before Islam came and started tormenting the poor souls.

    As far as the crime statistics are concerned, check these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Trafficking_in

    You are from Kerala it seems, you must be familiar with this kind of news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/07/india

  91. Demsci says:

    Shabeer: " DEMOCRACY " U STILL BELIEVE IT? !!!!!!!!!!!!!THE WORD CAPITALIST INVENTION FOR MOCKING THE PUBLIC POOR PEOPLE ,MY Q'N WHERE IS U'R DEMOCRATIC UTOPIA?
    ACTUALLY CAPTILIST RULED THE DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY ,BILLIONAIRES RULED THE DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY ,MAKING LAW FOR THEM,THEY R GOING TO MULTI BILLIONAIRES ,POOR GOING TO UTTER POORNESS ,THAT THE RESULT OF DEMOCRACY, "

    Yes, I still believe it. And I believe that in the last 200 years alone it were the Western societies, who not only democratized, but immensely grew in prosperity for the average citizen and in technological progress. Due to their freedom and attitude of change and their flourishing entrepreneurship and their respect for it.

    And if it had been up to the world of Islamic totalitarianism mankind would have progressed hardly anything at all in those 200 years. For instance in that period the Ottoman empire, the embodiment of the Kalifate, the ideal Islamic state, steadily deteriorated in power and prestige. Journalists called it "The sick man of Europe" around 1900. If the West had not prevented it, the Russians would have beaten the Ottomans and taken back Constantinopel in that period.

    And for some time now on MEMRI TV there is available this wonderful interview with Ibrahim Al Buleihi, a very high placed, wise, experienced and brave Saudi.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG0CeResVB4

    Al Buleihi admits that the Islamic world in large part is backward, because of it's attitude. The attitude that it has something great to TEACH to all others, including the West, while it is more like it has so much to LEARN from the West. Not because Westerners are genetically better, but because they cultivate a culture of change. Not of "unchangeability" and tradition, on which Muslims pride themselves.

    Al Buleihi points towards Japan, which EMULATED the West and because of that itself became so prosperous and powerful and free. Japan openly admits that too. And he wishes the Muslim world would emulate the West too.

    But you Shabeer, prefer Muslims to NOT LEARN about new good ideas, while at the same ungratefully prophiting from them,

    you still think you have something valuable to TEACH the world, namely this 1400 year old, obsolete, hostile-to-change & progress Islam!!! And you still desire to force mankind under it's failed obsolete political ideology.

  92. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    back in circles? Do I again have to show you links I had shown before. In your Islam pedophilia isn't a crime, your own prophet did it, how can you even consider sex with minors as crimes. No wonder you don't have any figures from Islamic countries.This one link is enough: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

    Civilized countries recognize even a minor offence as crime while Islamic countries authorize such crimes. The Sheikhs would travel to India and Bangadesh to get a temporary Nikaah to young girls done for some handful of money. Isn't that prostitution?

  93. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //HOW CAN U COMPARE A WHITE DOVE WITH WILD ANIMAL//
    Nothing can be compared with the Wild Animal that you say islam is. Sorry I was in wrong.

  94. shabeer says:

    #Western & Indian Democratic societies……………..WHEN?…………….1400 YEARS AGO?………….WITHIN 50 OR 75 Y'RS AGO THEY R TALKING ABOUT THE PEACE,HUMAN RIGHTS ,ETC………………….AFTER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ISLAM,AFTER THE ISLAMIC CALIPHS THE WORD PROGRESSED/DEVELOPED WITH THE SHINE OF ISLAM ,ALL THE PART OF ECONOMIC,HUMAN RIGHTS,GOVT PLANNING,POLICE,JUDICIARY,COURT,ETC ALL THE INVENTION ISLAM,DURING THE 15,16 TH CENTENARY EUROPEAN [ HISTORIAN NAMED THEM " BASTED BARBARIAN "] LIVING NO CIVILIZATION ,THEY LIVING FOR ONLY WAR & SEX. EVEN DURING THE 18 TH CENTURY THEY NEVER BELIEVE WOMEN HAS SAUL OR NOT…………ISLAM LEARN THEM HUMANITY & CIVILIZATION……………………………….

    " DEMOCRACY " U STILL BELIEVE IT? !!!!!!!!!!!!!THE WORD CAPITALIST INVENTION FOR MOCKING THE PUBLIC POOR PEOPLE ,MY Q'N WHERE IS U'R DEMOCRATIC UTOPIA?
    ACTUALLY CAPTILIST RULED THE DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY ,BILLIONAIRES RULED THE DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY ,MAKING LAW FOR THEM,THEY R GOING TO MULTI BILLIONAIRES ,POOR GOING TO UTTER POORNESS ,THAT THE RESULT OF DEMOCRACY,

    Total crimes (most recent) by country

    RANK COUNTRIES AMOUNT

    #1 United States:11,877,218
    # 2 United Kingdom:6,523,706
    # 3 Germany:6,507,394
    #4 France:3,771,850
    #5 Russia:2,952,370
    #6 Japan:2,853,739
    #7 South Africa:2,683,849
    #8 Canada:2,516,918
    #9 Italy:2,231,550
    #10 India:1,764,630
    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-cri
    Child sex tourism :

    Thailand : 40% of prostitutes are child in Thailand
    Northern Italy: 40% of prostitution affects minors.
    Cambodia: 1/3 of prostitutes are child
    India : 1.2 million child prostitutes
    Brazil: 1.2 million child prostitutes
    United States: Between 244,000 to 325,000 child prostitutes.
    China: It is estimated that there are between 200,000 and 500,000 child prostitutes.
    Mexico:16,000 children in Mexico were involved in prostitution
    Sri Lanka, there are nearly 40,000 child prostitutes
    In the Philippines, there are 60,000 to 100,000 prostituted children
    In Nepal approximately 30% of them were found to be children.
    in Vietnam, and 20,000 of these are children.
    in Ukraine, research has shown that between 30 and 40 percent of prostitutes are between 11 and 18 years
    in Russia approximately 20 to 25 percent of Moscow's sex workers are minors.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sex_tourism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_of_chilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse

    THAT THE RESULT DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY……………………..

  95. shabeer says:

    WHAT THE REQUIREMENT OF THIS FOOLISHNESS IN FRONT OF PUBLIC PEOPLE?

    afsir al-Jalalayn 60:8

    Quran: 60:8

    God does not forbid you in regard to those who did not wage war against you, from among the disbelievers, on account of religion and did not expel you from your homes, that you should treat them kindly (an tabarrūhum is an inclusive substitution for alladhīna, ‘those who’) and deal with them justly: this was [revealed] before the command to struggle against them. Assuredly God loves the just.
    http://www.thequrancollection.com/index.html?tafs

    NON OF THE TRANSLATOR CLAIM THE VERSES 60:8 ABROGATED IN 1400 OF ISLAMIC HISTORY ,IT DID BY SOME ZOMBIES FROM ANSWERING MUSLIM,WITH NO EVIDENCE ,
    Ibn Kathir COMMENTARY ABOUT 60:8,9

    8)Here a doubt may arise in the minds. It is all right to treat the disbelievers, who are not hostile, kindly, but should only they be treated unjustly? And should the disbelievers, who arc hostile, be treated unjustly? The answer is that in this context, the word justice, in fact, has been used in a special sense. It means: Justice demands that you should not be hostile to those who are not hostile to you, for it is not justice to treat the enemy and the nonenemy alike. You have every right to adopt a stern attitude towards those who persecuted you for embracing Islam and compelled you to leave your homes and pursued you even after your expulsion. But as for those who were not partners in persecuting you, you should treat them well and should fulfill the right they have on you because of blood and other relationships.

    9)The instructions to sever relations with the disbelievers given in the preceding verses, could cause the people the misunderstanding that this was because of their being the disbelievers. Therefore, in these verses it has been made clear that its real cause is not their disbelief but their hostility to Islam and their tyrannical treatment of the followers of Islam. The Muslims, therefore, should distinguish between the hostile disbeliever and the nonhostile disbeliever, and should treat those disbelievers well who have never treated them with evil. Its best explanation is the incident that took place between Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, and her disbelieving mother. A wife of Abu Bakr’s was Qutaylah bint Abdul Uzza, who was a disbeliever and had remained behind in Makkah after the migration. Asma had been born of her. After the peace treaty of Hudaibiyah when the traffic opened between Makkah and Madinah, she came to Al-Madinah to see her daughter and also brought some gifts. Asma herself has related that she went to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and asked: Should I see my mother. And can I treat her as a daughter should treat her mother. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: Yes, treat her as your mother. (Musnad Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim). Asma’s son, Abdullah bin Zubair, has given further details of this incident. He says that Asma in the beginning had refused to see her mother. Then, when she received Allah and His Messenger’s permission she met her. (Musnad Ahmad, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim). This by itself leads to the conclusion that a Muslim’s serving his unbelieving parents and his helping his unbelieving brothers and sisters and relatives is permissible when they are not hostile to Islam. Likewise, one can also spend his charities on the indigent among the dhimmis. (Al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Quran; Ruh al-Maani).
    http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=6

  96. Slave of Prophet says:

    @Shabeer
    You are best creation of Allah of today era. I think you are above even Zakir Naik. You have guts to challange the non-believers in front of their house. Even Zakir Naik have no dare to come here to refute Shaitan Ali Sina. Ali Sina is incarnation of Shaitan who came to destory the religion of Allah. But he does not know 1 believer is equal to 100 non-believers. In the world 20% population are of believers. One day 20% people would be heavy on 80% non-believers as pakistani which is 16% of India's population is heavy on 125 crore of Indians. Hails to the believers.

  97. shabeer says:

    #Quran brings nothing that wasn't already present in other Abrahamic and Indo-Eastern religious systems…PERSONAL OPINION REJECTED !!!!!!!! QURAN & other Abrahamic and Indo-Eastern religious systems R NOT SAME , ISLAM THE TRUE RELIGION OF GOD STANDING +INFINITY,MOST SUPERIOR,MANNERS,MORAL RELIGION …………………… Abrahamic and Indo-Eastern religious systems STANDING NEGATIVE INFINITY ,WITH KILLING CHILDREN/WOMEN & TONS OF CONTRADICTION…………………………..HOW CAN U COMPARE A WHITE DOVE WITH WILD ANIMAL ……………………IS IT LOGIC?

  98. shabeer says:

    PLZ STUDY THE LINK COMPLETELY NON MUSLIM CHARITY TOO INCLUDE THERE FOR EG )http://www.islamic-relief.com/indepth/downloads/Islamic_Relief_Faith.pdf

    #Fortunately I don't have a mosque near by and living rather peacefully……………………..

    THAT NOT MY PROBLEM ,U EVER SEEN THE PEACEFUL & KIND MANNERS PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD A,U LEARNED THE ISLAM FROM SOME ANTI ISLAMIC SITE,THAT NOT MY PROBLEM,PLZ VISIT ANY MOSQUE IF U CAN , A YEARLY ZAKATH COLLECTION & DISTRIBUTION IS ENOUGH FOR ISLAM THE GREATEST RELIGION ON EARTH CONSIDER THE POOR

    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 498
    Narrated 'Adi bin Hatim heard the Prophet saying:

    "Save yourself from Hell-fire even by giving half a date-fruit in charity."

    “As-Sadaqaat (here it means Zakaah) are only for the Fuqaraa’ (poor), and Al‑Masaakeen (the poor) and those employed to collect (the funds); and to attract the hearts of those who have been inclined (towards Islam); and to free the captives; and for those in debt; and for Allaah’s Cause (i.e. for Mujaahidoon — those fighting in a holy battle), and for the wayfarer (a traveller who is cut off from everything); a duty imposed by Allaah. And Allaah is All-Knower, All-Wise”

    [al-Tawbah 9:60]

    Who is eligible to receive Zakat?

    Allah has stated in the Holy Quran (chapter 9, verse 60) that there are eight categories of people who have the right to receive Zakat:
    People who are in complete poverty and have nothing.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]
    People who have some wealth, but not enough to meet their basic needs.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]
    The people who collect Zakat to distribute to the poor and needy.
    People who are sympathetic towards Islam or wish to enter to Islam, and are needy.[ONLY NON MUSLIM]
    Zakat may be used to free a person from slavery.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]
    Zakat can be given to those who are in debt and unable to pay off their debt.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]
    The people who work in God’s way and strive to give Dawah.
    Travellers and/or wayfarers who are needy.[MUSLIM/NON MUSLIM INCLUDE]

    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 46 :: Hadith 694
    Narrated Abu Dhar:

    I asked the Prophet, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and to fight for His Cause." I then asked, "What is the best kind of manumission (of slaves)?" He replied, "The manumission of the most expensive slave and the most beloved by his master." I said, "If I cannot afford to do that?" He said, "Help the weak or do good for a person who cannot work for himself." I said, "If I cannot do that?" He said, "Refrain from harming others for this will be regarded as a charitable deed for your own good."
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 701
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "I am ruined!" The Prophet said to him, "What is the matter?" He said, "I have done a sexual relation with my wife (while fasting) in Ramadan." The Prophet said to him?" "Can you afford to manumit a slave?" He said, "No." The Prophet said, "Can you fast for two successive months?" He said, "No." The Prophet said, "Can you feed sixty poor persons?" He said, "No." Then an Ansari man came with an Irq (a big basket full of dates). The Prophet said (to the man), "Take this (basket) and give it in charity." That man said, "To poorer people than we, O Allah's Apostle? By Him Who has sent you with the Truth! There is no house in between the two mountains (of the city of Medina) poorer than we." So the Prophet said (to him), "Go and feed it to your family."

    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 486
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Allah's Apostle said, "Whoever is made wealthy by Allah and does not pay the Zakat of his wealth, then on the Day of Resurrection his wealth will be made like a bald-headed poisonous male snake with two black spots over the eyes. The snake will encircle his neck and bite his cheeks and say, 'I am your wealth, I am your treasure.' " Then the Prophet recited the holy verses:– 'Let not those who withhold . . .' (to the end of the verse). (3.180).
    PLZ STUDY 24&25 THE CHAPTER FROM BUKARI
    Obligatory Charity Tax (Zakat)& Obligatory Charity Tax After Ramadaan (Zakat ul Fitr)

  99. Evergreen says:

    @Osama,
    The kuffar will not use this primitive weapon. They use drone ( which was invented by Israel ) to shoot rockets to blow u n yr gangs into pieces. And u will not know what has hit u. R.I.P.

  100. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //THAT I SAY U AGREED THE OTHER TRUTH,NO ERRORS OTHERS//
    No. That means exactly what I said: 1. I showed you the correct interpretation of your first example and 2. I didn't deem it correct to comment on the other examples. Nothing more nothing less.
    But I also said that based on your own interpretation of these examples do we see any actual laws implemented in any Christian/Jew majority country? No we don't. I also said that if your interpretation is correct I will find it OK to say that Joshua was a war-monger and Elisha was a foul mouth who would curse in the name of Lord. And I dared you to say the same about Muhammad. Off-course you didn't take up the dare :-).

    //THERE IS NO.000000000001% SIMILARITY BETWEEN ISLAM& OTHERS//
    Thanks for agreeing. Read my comment back. I also said exactly the same thing. There is absolutely no similarity between the banal Islam and other religions.

  101. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //1 Corinthians 11:14
    13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
    14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has>>>>> LONG HAIR, it is a disgrace to him<<<<<<<<<<,
    SO FROM JESUS,12 APOSTLES ,90% CHRISTIAN R LONG HAIR THEY R NOT REAL CHRISTIAN……… //
    Numbers 6: 5 : All the days of his vow of separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in which he separateth himself unto Jehovah, he shall be holy; he shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long.

    When the Nazarites here are being asked to keep long hairs, how can Corinthians 11:14 be asking you to do the reverse? So a look back on the original Greek reveals something different. The Greek word translated here as "long hair" is kom-ha-o which literally mean "to wear long tresses". Since the immediate next verse (15) refers to the same word for women as their ornament (glory) and serves the purpose of covering!! So what this means is that the text is actually asking men not to adorn their head with ornamental dressings which are 'womanly'. I hope it is clear now.

  102. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    You are quite right about Shabby being correct on muhammadan history.
    Ayatollah Khomeini did say something which amount to giving approval for bestiality. There are some muhammadan scholars who hold the view that a man can have sex with his own daughter who was given birth to out of wedlock. Allah has permitted so many evil deeds including trafficking.
    Sura 2:275 "-GOD HAS PERMITTED TRAFFICKING, AND FORBIDDEN USURY". That is why slavery and human trafficking will never be abolished by muhammadans.
    Thanks for coming to my assistance by interpreting Shabby's 'works'.

  103. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM,
    What Shabeer means by pointing out the verses from Exodus etc and then yelling : "IF WE PRACTICALISE THE ABOVE VERSE WITHIN ONE MONTH THE POPULATION OF CHRISTANITY BECOME """""""""""""''ZZZZZZZZZZZEEEEEEERRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"""""""""""""""
    Is that the Christians keep on indulging in all these crimes and therefore ought to have been killed if these laws were followed. So what he means is that a Christian man sleeps with his daughter-in-law, curses his/her parents, have sex with animals AS A MATTER OF COURSE and hence ought to be killed.

    As usual with Shabeer he then throws in some 'logic' that actually comes back and bites him:-). Here in this example he claims that either Christ or Paul or God (he is not sure, but I guess he means whoever devised these Laws) must be a fool because following this the Christians ought to have been killed. So he means to say that his Allah/Muhammad wouldn't have devised such foolish laws and would have permitted having sex with daughters-in-law, sex with animals, kidnapping others, attacking and cursing parents etc. Knowing Islamic history, I know he is CORRECT for once 🙂

  104. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM,
    //With so many of his links going against him, it would seem that Shabby does not even bother to read them before referring to them.//
    No, I am certain he does. And he even knows. Yes but he doesn't bother to UNDERSTAND. His modus operandi is to throw as much mud around as possible hoping that some would stuck. He can then play the trumpet of victory.

  105. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //Q. 60:8//
    Here is the circumstances under which this verse was 'revealed'.
    Shahi Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 9:
    Narrated Asma' bint Abu Bakr:

    My mother came to me, hoping (for my favor) during the lifetime of the Prophet asked the Prophet, "May I treat her kindly?" He replied, "Yes." Ibn 'Uyaina said, "Then Allah revealed: 'Allah forbids you not with regards to those who fought not against you because of religion, and drove you not out from your homes, that you should show them kindness and deal justly with them.'…….(60.8)

    How does that counter 5:32?

    //Prohibit killing with unjust//
    /Killing innocent people prohibited//
    However the definition of 'unjust' and 'innocence' is Islamic here. So if you are a polytheist then off-course you are not innocent and killing you is not unjustified. If you are a Christian or Jew and therefore certainly don't believe that Muhammad then you are not innocent, and you have to pay the Jizya in complete humiliation. Off-course it is not 'unjust'.

  106. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci'
    It certainly was a waste of Cameron's breath. It seems that these foolish Western leaders will stop at nothing to shield muhammadanism from taking responsibility for its crimes against humanity.

  107. Demsci says:

    Chuck,

    You already showed what the 4th link said.

    Sorry I repeated that unnecessarily. Too zealous I suppose. But it is not as if Shabeer himself has not ever repeated HIS messages.

  108. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    With so many of his links going against him, it would seem that Shabby does not even bother to read them before referring to them. And that ties in with the muhammadan modus operandi of making so much noise which he passes off as evidence.

  109. Demsci says:

    2nd link says:

    OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT

    "The Saudi Project for Utilization of Hajj Meat, which is managed by the Islamic Development Bank, is performing a pioneering role. It aims at achieving the following objectives:

    1- Utilization of the meat of Hajj Meat animals by distributing it among the poor in Makkah and exporting excess quantities to the Muslim poor around the world in realization of Muslim solidarity."

  110. Demsci says:

    3rd link says:

    "Saudi Hajj meat arrives in Sudan
    February 27, 2012

    A ship laden with 5,000 heads of sacrificial meat arrived in Port Sudan today, as part of the Saudi project to distribute Hajj meat to needy countries. The program is being administered by the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) mission in Sudan. An additional shipment of meat is set to arrive on Wednesday and will be distributed in Khartoum state. The IDB plans to distribute 200,000 heads of sacrificial meat to beneficiaries in twenty-four African and Asian countries this year."

  111. Demsci says:

    Link one gives a touching story but here are the destinations of the Hajj-meat it presents:

    "This year Islamic Relief has delivered hadi meat to Iraq, Lebanon, and Chad and will also be distributing to two more African countries, as well as Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

  112. Demsci says:

    Like the woolwich killer, Michael Adebolajo, clearly a Muslim, said: "Remove your government". Apparently he felt that that government " was at war with Islam" and "unjustly killing Muslims". A few hours later that government's leader, Cameron, said: "Islam had nothing to do with this attack. Islam has made great contributions to our nation." Was this in your opinion a waste of his breath?!

  113. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    I have already told you that the quranic Jesus when he returns will abolish the jizyah tax because that action will seal the confirmation that the quran is evil. It contains and advocates evil. That is why it also talks about its provisions being subject to abrogation.

  114. Demsci says:

    OK, Shabeer, but my point is that George Bush, Barack Obama, David Cameron all also have maintained that Islam is great religion. Great and powerful leaders.

    But still most Muslims are hostile to them and show zero appreciation or even acknowledgement. Saying instead that those leaders are leading their countries" in a war with Islam".

    So many Muslims are in essence telling the world that it makes no difference if you praise Islam or not. Because as soon as you do something majority of Muslims do not like they will not appreciate or acknowledge your denials of warring against Islam and you complimenting Islam.

    Maybe that is why anti-Islamists like Ali Sina, Robert Spencer et al do not bother to
    deny they fight whole Islam or to
    praise "mainstream Islam" or to
    "only fight the extremist Muslims".

    Because the overwhelming majority of Muslims would not ackowledge or appreciate it one bit any way.

  115. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    It is absolutely true that there is no similarity between Muhammadanism and the other religions for it is only muhammadanism that institutionalizes evil such as murder and the seduction of other people's wives. Sometimes you unintentionally tell the truth. This is called the ' Freudian slip'.

  116. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //@chuck…………link required //
    The links YOU yourself provided. I looked into the first link: http://www.answering-christianity.com/no_killing_

  117. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    Lets dissect your 'evidences'. As I have noted in a previous post of yours, your evidences expose your own positions rather poorly.
    Link1, Link2, Link3 – essentially same, about Hadi meat being delivered to other muslim countries. How does this amount to 'relief' or economic aid in general? How is this 'aid' benefiting any other poor 'non-muslim' country?
    Link 4 – Here is a text from the wiki link provided that emphasizes my point : "It was established with the key goal of alleviating poverty amongst Muslim communities around the world, with particular focus on Pakistan. "
    CUI BONO?
    Link 5 – Zakat is meant for 'Muslim' poor. Need I say more. One look at the 'Where we work' tab and you find countries with distinctly big muslim population.

    //plz visit u'r nearest mosque ,collect the yearly zakath /sadaka report//
    Fortunately I don't have a mosque near by and living rather peacefully:-)

  118. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci,
    Muhammad did not prohibit the killing of women and children because he was altruistic. Killing them would have deprived him of the sex salves/concubines who, because they were not married, cost him nothing and the children who were chattels in the slave markets and homes. To appreciate this, one has to take cognizance that Aisha alone manumitted 40 slaves in one single day. You can then imagine how many slaves were in Muhammad's household which had up to 60 wives and concubines.

  119. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    One cannot give what he does not have. Allah has no sense, so what is it to give?

  120. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Please use your expert communication skills and help me out. I don't understand an iota of what Shabby is saying in the post above. He seems to say that God had commanded that Paul be stoned and when that was not done it meant the violation of God's order. Frankly speaking, I do not understand him.

  121. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci,
    The injunction not to cut down fruit trees was breached by the master liar himself.During the attack on one of the communities and I think Taif also, Muhammad ordered that the trees be cut down and they were. He even silted up a well so that the people had no source of water. But which one is more valuable, human lives or trees? A muhammadan is authorized to preserve trees but cut down human lives. What a misplacement of priorities!

  122. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Osama,
    That does not surprise anyone so it is no news. Muhammadanism was founded on blood and is maintained on blood. There is no way that it can depart from spilling blood.

    ,

  123. Mike says:

    My Dear Shabeer please know this Islam is fighting a loosing battle on the Internet and free speech is exposing Islam finally after centuries of blood spillled of those who dared to speak. These are great times we live in.
    Mohammed murdered his critics a poet mother with small children Asma' bint Marwan stabbed her to death by his gangsters for critisizing him. The Internet is not Islam friendly.
    No spiritual leader such as Jesus or Buddha ever massacred anyone for speaking out or expressing themselves.
    Understand this and contemplate on these thoughts.
    Islam wont survive much longer with this onslaught of free speech and freedom of expression.
    Dear brother you have a heart, feelings and emotions and have become fanatical defending Islam from childhood possibly indoctrinated with it and thought to hate, destroy and wage war against the filthy infidel and kuffar.
    Look at all the chaos in Islamic world muslims blowing up and killing non muslims infidel kuffar,
    muslims killing muslims, how long can this last dear brother until we all kill each other off and destroy our happiness and peace over this madness.
    Dear brother I hope and wish you all the best to use this free Internet and freedom of speech to research find and to free yourself and your mind from this dark evil bottomless devil pit of Islam that you have imprisoned yourself in and set your spirit free. Please open your mind and your heart and seek the truth.

  124. Demsci says:

    Shabeer, I read all the other verses you presented and they are OK, nice. In accordance with existing Western laws and opinions, too, I add.

    One thing I noticed; that the Prophet said " they (women, children), are of them (pagan warriors)" when he was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their woman and children (to avoidable killing), . Even Osama Abdallah of AnsweringChristianity admitted that the prophet meant here that regretfully the night attack must take place in order to secure victory for the Prophet's army.

    Only logical, but if you do not blame your prophet for such values and norms, then why do you blame Americans when they face similar dilemma's and make similar choices as Mohammed himself did?

  125. Demsci says:

    Shabeer, the other verses you mentioned, were of course admirable and good. Perhaps "do not cut down fruit-bearing trees" is a command or law that the Western & Indian Democratic societies do not have, although it is an admirable notion.

    But the Western & Indian Democratic societies also do have laws prohibiting killing all humans, stealing and destroying places, or cruel and senseless behavior towards animals (Holland even has a political party exclusively for animal rights; the Animals-party).

    And you proving to us that Islam has similar benign laws and injunctions as the West, still does not address the challenge that David Wood issued about Quran verse 5;32, which I presented to you. So these verses are NOT enough answer to my comments.

    Admirable laws and injunctions elsewhere in Quran-Hadith-Sira do not alter the meaning of other contradicting verses in them. Both can be valid for other Muslims. And I mean that your quoted verses very probably do not change the minds of Muslims who interpret Quran 5;32 in the same way that David Wood contends that it means.

  126. Demsci says:

    Shabeer wrote:
    “God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you
    not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing
    kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just.”
    (H.Q. 60:8)
    “God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you
    for (your) faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support
    (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship
    and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumst
    ances), that do wrong.” (H.Q. 60:9)

    But search4truth said under a link of answering christianity, provided by Shabeer himself:

    60:* was abrogated by the later ayats of subjugation OR murder! Look:

    * تفسير Tafsir al-Jalalayn 60:8
    this was [revealed] before the command to struggle against them. Assuredly God loves the just.

    And all Osama Abdallah could say in response was stubbornly deny that Jalalayn meant that 60:8 was abrogated and replaced by the command to struggle against them.

    But indeed; That command was given in the verse of the sword in the Quran. And 60:8-verse and verse of the sword do contradict each other, don't they? And Jalalayn IS speaking of a COMMAND, while 60.8 is only talking about: "Gods forbids you not to deal kindly with them (unbelievers)."

    If Jalalayn did not mean abrogation, then the Quran contradicts itself (which is probably why Jalalayn commented in the first place)

    or then Quran and Tafsir at the very least are ambiguous, vaque, unclear, incomplete, very prone to misunderstanding and misuse by those Muslims, who want to circumvent verse 60.8.

    So this imperfection of Quran and tafsir could have profound bad consequences when Muslims do not interpret them on this verse as benign as Shabeer and the writers of his copy-paste-articles.

    And that imperfection is perpetuated by the command that not a single iota of the Quran may be altered, until the end of times.

  127. shabeer says:

    WHAT CAN I SAYS ABOUT THE MAN WHO LOOSE ALL THE COMMON SENSE & POWER OF KNOWLEDGE………………..ALLHA PLZ GIVE HIM SOME LITTLE BIT SENSE OF KNOWLEDGE………..

  128. shabeer says:

    # I showed you your error in the first example………………THAT I SAY U AGREED THE OTHER TRUTH,NO ERRORS OTHERS ……….

    #Similar to Sharia in Muslim countries……………….& same about Muhamad? [READ ABOVE HADEETH]…………….NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO,THERE IS NO.000000000001% SIMILARITY BETWEEN ISLAM& OTHERS…………………….

  129. shabeer says:

    1 Corinthians 11:14
    13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
    14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has>>>>> LONG HAIR, it is a disgrace to him<<<<<<<<<<,
    SO FROM JESUS,12 APOSTLES ,90% CHRISTIAN R LONG HAIR THEY R NOT REAL CHRISTIAN………
    Exodus 21:15
    15 Anyone who attacks his father or his mother must be put to death.

    Exodus 21:16
    16 Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.

    Exodus 21:17
    17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.

    Exodus 22:19
    19 Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death.

    Exodus 31:14
    14 'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people.

    Exodus 31:15
    15 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death.

    Leviticus 20:12
    12 'If a man sleeps with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their own heads.
    IF WE PRACTICALISE THE ABOVE VERSE WITHIN ONE MONTH THE POPULATION OF CHRISTANITY BECOME """""""""""""''ZZZZZZZZZZZEEEEEEERRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO""""""""""""""

    WHO R THE FOOL CHRIASTIAN,PAUL OR GOD OR ALL OF THEM………………………….???????/

  130. shabeer says:

    @[email protected]
    And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. Then Allah sendeth whom He will astray, and guideth whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise."(14:4)
    "Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. Lo! We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces. Calamitous the drink and ill the resting-place!"(18:29)
    who misguide the people?

    God hardens the heart of people and blinds them so that they will not harken and do mistakes.
    "The LORD said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your power; but I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go."(Exodus 4:21)

    "But I will harden Pharaoh's heart that I may multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt."(Exodus 7:3)

    "But the Lord hardened Pharoah's heart, and he would not let them go."(Exodus 10:27)

    "Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh; yet the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not let the sons of Israel go out of his land."(Exodus 11:10)

    What happened to Pharoah in the end? He got drowned by Moses' miracle. Shall we then conclude that God's hardening of Pharoah's heart led to his demise? Is God responsible for what happened to Pharoah? Shall we blame God?

    "Yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear."(Deuteronomy 29:4)

    who [email protected] the god?

    "Jesus answered them, ?Watch out that no one misleads you. For many will come in my name, saying, "I am the Christ," and they will mislead many … Then if anyone says to you, "Look, here is the Christ!" or "There he is!" do not believe him. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. Remember, I have told you ahead of time.'" Matthew 24:4-5, 23-25
    1 Corinthians 7:1

    "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry
    1 John 4:1
    Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
    Jeremiah 4:10

    Then I said, "Ah, Sovereign LORD, how completely you have deceived (nasha) this people and Jerusalem by saying, 'You will have peace,' when the sword is at our throats."
    1 Kings 22:20-22
    " 'By what means?' the LORD asked.
    " 'I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,' he said.
    " 'You will succeed in enticing him,' said the LORD. 'Go and do it.'
    Ezekiel 14:9-11

    9 " 'And if the prophet is enticed to utter a prophecy, I the LORD have enticed that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand against him and destroy him from among my people Israel.
    EVEN GOD HATE THE CHRISTIAN ……………….

    PAUL SAY GOD SELFISH IDIOT :
    "For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"

    Here are the countless English translations of this verse. Literally, almost 100% of all of the English translations agree:

    Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version)
    25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

    1 Corinthians 1:25 (New American Standard Bible)
    25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

    1 Corinthians 1:25 (Amplified Bible)
    25[This is] because the foolish thing [that has its source in] God is wiser than men, and the weak thing [that springs] from God is stronger than men.

    POOR GOD SAY:
    Leviticus 22:32
    Do not profane my holy name.
    Leviticus 24:16
    anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. …………..
    "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca, ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 5:22)"

    DID CHRISTIAN STONED THE PAUL?
    NO……………SO CHRISTIAN REJECT THE GOD COMMAND, AGREED THE PAUL STATEMENT " GOD A BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIES"

  131. shabeer says:

    @chuck…………link required

    @i hate…………….#"jesus" returns he will abolish this same tax. Why?………….

    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 43 :: Hadith 656
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you as a just ruler, he will break the cross, kill the pigs, and abolish the Jizya tax. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it (as charitable gifts).<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

    @demsci:
    two verses enough for u'r comments:
    “God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you
    not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing
    kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just.”
    (H.Q. 60:8)
    “God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you
    for (your) faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support
    (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship
    and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumst
    ances), that do wrong.” (H.Q. 60:9)
    Malik :: Book 21 : Hadith 21.3.10
    Do not kill women or children or an aged, weak person,Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees.Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty,
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 89 :: Hadith 320
    Not to join anything in worship along with Allah, (2) Not to steal, (3) Not to commit illegal sexual intercourse, (4) Not to kill your children, (5) Not to accuse an innocent person (to spread such an accusation among people), (6) Not to be disobedient (when ordered) to do good deeds.
    Prohibit killing with unjust:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 92 :: Hadith 423
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 37
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 17
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 2,3,6,9
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 82 :: Hadith 840
    Bloodshed completely prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 4,7 ,8
    Killing innocent people prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 93 :: Hadith 611,23
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 12
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 10 , 21s
    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 43 :: Hadith 637
    Dawud :: Book 35 : Hadith 4257 , 59

  132. Osama says:

    I will personally behead all these kuffar and watch my shining sharp sword drip with his dog blood.

  133. Michael says:

    There is fear among the fanatic Hindutiva ranks of masses of Hindus converting to Christianity they fear Christians that's why missionaries are persecuted harrased beaten and nuns raped and missionaries and Christians burnt and killed in India and everywhere. They fear the gospel taking over India is a democracy but there is no freedom to spread the gospel. They fear the word the word of God has a strange kind of power over everyone. Why not fight words with words philosophy with philosopy logic with logic but no violence is used by the hindutva fanatics.

    Can you stop God TV evangelical satellite TV from preaching to them in India or Saudi Arabia i think not can you stop the internet i think not.

    The Roman Europeans first banned Christianity mocked and persecuted executed the Christians burnt them at stakes fed to the lions in the Collesum google it and you'll know and in the end Christianity spread throughout in Rome and Europe.
    Christianity grows the fastest in places where it is persecuted our faith was built upon the blood and suffering of martyrs. All this is predicted in the Bible.

    Matthew 24:14This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations in the last days.

    2 Peter 3:3 And as you knew this first, that in the end of days, scoffers would come who scoff JUST LIKE YOU DO NOW In the last days people who follow their own desires will appear. Deceitful scoffers These disrespectful people will ridicule our faith.

    (Mat 5:11-12)Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great [is] your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
    Matt 24:9 And ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. -And then many will be offended,

    1 Peter 2:20-24 To this you were called, because Christ suffered When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly."

    1 Peter 3:14-15
    "But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you are blessed. “And do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled

    1 Peter 4:12-13
    "Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you; but rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ’s sufferings, that when His glory is revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy."

    1 John 3:13
    "Do not marvel, my brethren, if the world hates you."
    Revelation 2:10-11
    “Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer

    Christianity grows the fastest in places where it is persecuted all these things are written in the Bible this is just a fulfillment of prophecy these things are supposed to happen it was predicted in the end times.
    The Roman and Europeans couldnt stop us with their persecutions tortures and executions so what's gonna stop us then. Remember all this was predicted it's supposed to happen the thing that you do now is supposed to happen it's nothing new.

  134. Demsci says:

    I meant:
    Shabeer wrote:
    "In islam it is strict forbidden to kill women , children and/or innocents. The only way that they can be killed is as " an unintentional consequence of fighting against the enemy combatants."

  135. Demsci says:

    Shabeer wrote:
    "In islam it is strict forbidden to kill women , children and/or innocents. The only way that they can be killed is as

    It is important for clarity that this is only one interpretation of relevant texts for this conclusion. And that there almost certainly are Muslims that interpret the relevant verses more violent.

    But no Muslim authority in power enforces this above interpretation on all Muslims, by saying that only when they accept this interpretation of those verses will allow a Muslim to call him/ herself a mainstream Muslim. Otherwise let them be known as "stray Muslims" or so.

    But Barack Obama did order, in 5 years of office, 300 drone-strikes, and almost 3000 Muslims were killed, among them a proportion of women, children and innocents.

    But of course he too calls that " an unintentional consequence of fighting against the enemy combatants."

    He can claim that not using drones only leaves him with the alternatives of not doing anything about murderous, marauding Talibans or fighting them in the way Bashar Assad fights the rebels in Syria. But are there any Muslims, Pakistani's en Indians that notice the difference in fighting between America's way and Syria's way?! Why not?

  136. Demsci says:

    Hello I-Hate-Islam,

    I think you correctly emphasize that Muslims may not and never try to disagree with anything in the Quran-Hadith-Sira. But these texts are so ooooooold, and so multi-interpretable. If some kind of Muslim high authority with power could ordain benign interpretations of Islam's holy texts, such as Quran 5;32, perhaps we should not care that they really twisted it's meaning.

    Instead we should hold this Muslim authority to that benign interpretation, demanding from it that that is the official interpretation of that verse by mainstream Islam. And to belong to mainstream Islam Muslims have to abide by that decision of interpretation. Otherwise they should be considered "stray" Muslims, apostates even. And so on with other texts.

  137. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @All Muslim
    Islam, Allah, prophet hood, Quran were political agenda of Muhammad. If not why do worshiping God in non-Arabic languages treated as Kufr /unislamic?

  138. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Shabeer
    Can you bring anything which is inhuman, immoral and unscientific supported by Ali Sina? Ali Sina views are based on all these aspects. Why do you Muslims believe that believer in Golden Rule and science enemy of Islam?Has this been taught by your Muhammad?

  139. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci,
    The quran says that no muhammadan has a right to disagree with a matter that allah and its apostle have taken a decision on. According to those two, the vilest thing in the sight of allah is the unbeliever. That is a clear instruction that the muhammadan has no business loving what allah and its prophet hate. Can these characters show where allah and its apostle changed their mind on this? If allah and its prophet have not done so, no muhannadan can contradict them for that will be apostasy.
    It is plain dishonesty when the likes of Obama and others deliberately falsify the clear provisions of the quran to foster their personal agenda.

  140. Demsci says:

    I agree with Chuck about the first link and I checked the other ones too.

    I would like to make this point: Shabeer wrote about Quran 5;32. I responded with a rebuttal of wrong conclusions from that verse by David Wood.

    Shabeer then did not provide a "reply" that in any way refuted what David Wood had said about Quran 5;32; I didn't see anything about that verse under these links.

    Instead Shabeer gave links to the readers here in which there was a debate with search 4 truth (not David Wood) and in which there were rebuttals to something else David Wood had written, about the 4 reasons why people follow Islam. But with nothing in it about quran 5;32.

    It looks to me like Shabeer is trying to attack the messenger instead of trying to debate his particular message. That's a logical fallacy. And a diversion too. And it shows his apparent inability to effectively argue against David Wood's point about Quran 5;32.

    And here is another critical response to conclusions from Quran 5;32 by Muslims and their Western helpers:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/essa

    In public Muslims and their helpers, like Obama, Keith Ellison, when quoting this verse, deliberately leave out the qualifier:
    "for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth," which avoids this:
    "the omitted parts of 5:32, when included, change the meaning dramatically, actually permitting killing of non-Muslims in a wide variety of circumstances."

  141. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby
    Noise making is the muhammadan's second nature. Muhammadans relish advertisement. Fasting is supposed to be a very private affair. But before the ramadan begins the muhammadans will embark on so much advertise and turn it into a 40 day carnival. In my country that is when the prices of food stuff hit the roof. During the hajj every news item focuses on the expensive hobby.
    If muhammadan countries have made significant contributions to disaster relief efforts the atmosphere would have been polluted with their self glorification.

  142. chuck says:

    @Shabeer, the loud mouth
    //DUDE WE DON'T REQUIRED SOMEONE OPINION OR ADVERTISEMENT & PUBLICITY FOR CHARITY THE WESTERN PEOPLE GIVE 100$ CHARITY FOR IT ADVERTISEMENT SPEND 1000$,IT NOT ISLAMIC,MORAL ,IDEAL,OUR CHARITY PART OF OUR BELIEF WE GIVE THE POOR FOR ALLHA SAKE …….ISLAM PROMOTING MORAL WAY OF CHARITY//
    Thats all? When asked for a proper proof you have none. Because despite all your tall claims Muslim countries aren't forthcoming with much of donations. As far as Zakat is concerned it is only meant for muslim poor, not for common human being. On the other hand the muslim countries don't hesitate to take alms from other countries.

  143. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Elisha was not half as foul mouthed as Muhammad. There is hardly a page in the quran where he did not heap curses on people even though all such curses were ineffective. He even used to patronize cursing contests called 'muhabilla'. On his death bed he still cursed the Christians and Jews for burying their dead in their places of worship. But as soon as he ended those curses and was pronounced dead, he was buried in the mosque in Medina. Those who have gone there say it is larger than the one in Mecca. What a grand hypocrisy.

  144. Evergreen says:

    Saif,
    What about the people who are deceived to beat their wives, to do honor killings, to do never-ending suicide bombings, to engage in endless sectarian violence ( Sunni vs Shiite ), etc, etc. Are they brain-dead just like you.?

  145. shabeer says:

    Islamic countries donate when natural calamities hit non-muslim countries (even muslim countries for that matter) ……………….DUDE WE DON'T REQUIRED SOMEONE OPINION OR ADVERTISEMENT & PUBLICITY FOR CHARITY THE WESTERN PEOPLE GIVE 100$ CHARITY FOR IT ADVERTISEMENT SPEND 1000$,IT NOT ISLAMIC,MORAL ,IDEAL,OUR CHARITY PART OF OUR BELIEF WE GIVE THE POOR FOR ALLHA SAKE …….ISLAM PROMOTING MORAL WAY OF CHARITY :

    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 504
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet (p.b.u.h) said, "Seven people will be shaded by Allah under His shade on the day when there will be no shade except His. They are: ……………..
    (6) a person who practices charity so secretly that his left hand does not know what his right hand has given (i.e. nobody knows how much he has given in charity).

    PLZ READ FROM THE FOLLOWING VERSES 2:43, 2:110, 2:177, 2:262-264, 2:271-274, 2:277, 3:92, 3:134, 4:39, 5:12, 5:55, 9:5, 9:18, 9:60, 9:71, 9:121, 21:73, 22:41, 22:78, 24:37, 27:3, 30:38-39, 31:4, 36:47, 41:7, 47:36-38, 51:19, 52:40, 57:7, 57:10-12, 63:10, 64:16-17, 73:20, 76:8, 92:18, 98:5, 107:7
    Muslim :: Book 5 : Hadith 2230
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 496
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 540
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 502
    Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 51 :: Hadith 26
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24 :: Hadith 505
    ETC
    PLZ READ HADEETH :
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 24
    Obligatory Charity Tax (Zakat)
    Obligatory Charity Tax After Ramadaan (Zakat ul Fitr)
    Bukhari :: Book 2 :: Volume 25
    Muslim :: Book 5
    The Book of Zakat (Kitab Al-Zakat)
    Zakat (Kitab Al-Zakat)
    Dawud :: Book 9 :
    Malik :: Book 17
    Zakat

  146. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Thanks. It is up to Shabby and the other rag heads to explain the difference between their prophet and a monster from the innermost part of hell.

  147. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    It is so and Muhammad aka allah was the chief borrower taking from every creed to concoct his 'revelation'.

  148. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    The quran imposes the jigzy tax on non muhammadans who are to pay it in total humiliation. It then goes on to say that when "jesus" returns he will abolish this same tax. Why? Because it is evil. The fact that the quran has recommended something which is evil means also that it is evil, for evil begets evil.A compassionate God will not ask to be done something which he knows is bad and whose destruction He will order later.
    No matter the quantity of white wash used in painting muhammadanism, it willl forever remain as black as charcoal.

  149. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM,
    Not only was the old woman killed brutally, her daughter was exchanged as ransom to free some muslims!! If you read the hadith carefully you will find that the narrator was gifted that poor girl and he had every desire to sexually devour her, all in the presence of Abu Bakr. But alas, he couldn't do it as Muhamad found a neat plan to trade her as slave to the Meccans and free some his own men. In a single hadith you find brutality, intention to rape, and slave trading. Subhanallah!!

    This is the event of Battle as mentioned in Shahi Muslim:
    Book 019, Number 4345:
    It has been narrated on the authority of Salama (b. al-Akwa') who said: We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. He had been appointed by the Messenger oi Allah (may peace be upon him). When we were onlv at an hour's distance from the water of the enemy, Abu Bakr ordered us to attack. We made a halt during the last part of the night tor rest and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children. I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So I brought them, driving them along. Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day. the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ag;tin met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah. I have not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent her to the people of Mecca, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been kept as prisoners at Mecca.

  150. shabeer says:

    #Numerous verses of violence have been quoted from the accursed quran and the hadiths……………………PROVE HERE WRIGHT NOW ………………IF U H'V GUTSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

    #play games and bore us .HIDEN TRUTH BORED SOMEONE ……….NATURALS ……………

    #QUMNI,[email protected]@VI,MOUDUDI,[email protected],XXX,[email protected]@N.YYYYYYYY,BOKO HARAM.ZZZZZZZZZZZZ,SADAM,CCCCCCCCCCCCC,,GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG…………..BOOOOOOOOOOOOO………..SHIT …….PLZ STOP IT…………STOP IT…………………

    MORAL WAR
    Sura 9:5: http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    Sura 9:29: http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    FIGHT ORDER ONLY PEOPLE FIGHT WITH MUSLIM,TERRORIST COME TO MUSLIM LAND WITH THE INTENTION OF KILLING MUSLIM,HATE OF MUSLIM,LOOTING OILS & NATURAL RESOURCES & GOLD & DI MOUND…………
    190. And fight in the Way of Allâh>>>>>>>>> those who fight you<<<<<<, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. [This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihâd, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)].

    Muslim :: Book 19 : Hadith 4314
    It is narrated by Abu Nadr that he learnt from a letter sent by a man from the Aslam tribe, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and whose name was 'Abdullah b. Abu Aufa, to 'Umar b. 'Ubaidullah when the latter marched upon Haruriyya (Khawarij) informing him that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) in one of those days when lie was confronting the enemy waited until the sun had declined. Then he stood up (to address the people) and said: O ye men, >>>>>do not wish for an encounter with the enemy<<<<<<<. Pray to Allah to grant you security; (but) when you (have to) encounter them >>>>>exercise patience<<<<<, and you should know that Paradise is under the shadows of the swords[DURING THE " MORAL WAR ",A MAN MUST BEING COURAGEOUS,IF HE DIED ,PARADISE OFFERED FOR THEM ] . Then the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood up (again) and said: O Allah. Revealer of the Book, Disperser of the clouds, Defeater of the hordes, put our enemy to rout and help us against them.

    Muslim :: Book 20 : Hadith 4695
    It has been reported on the authority of Sahl b. Aba Umama b. Sahl b. Hunaif who learned the tradition from his father who (in turn) learned it from his grandfather-that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who sought martyrdom with sincerity will be ranked by Allah among the martyrs even if he died on his bed. In his version of the tradition Abd Tahir did not mention the words:" with sincerity".
    INNOCENT PEOPLE[NONMUSLIM] FIGHTING PROHIBITED:
    “God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you
    not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing
    kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just.”
    (H.Q. 60:8)
    “God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you
    for (your) faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support
    (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship
    and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumst
    ances), that do wrong.” (H.Q. 60:9)

  151. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    When evil allah's foot soldiers blow up schools as they did in Beslan, or hospitals or spectators as in Boston, do they discriminate between men, women and children? When Saddam Hussein used chemical and biological weapons on the Kurds, was there a difference to him of the sexes or age? When he diverted the waters of the Euphrates and starved the Marsh Arabs, did it occur to him that there were women and children in that population?
    Muhammad sent his henchman Yazid, to Bani Fazarah which was ruled by a woman. In keeping with his cowardly attacks, the raid was in the night when the people had taken a well deserved rest after a hard day's work. The community was plundered, men killed, women enslaved and the queen was tied to two camels which were then driven in opposite directions till the woman was torn in halves. On getting the report, Muhammad was pleased with the action taken by Yazid. Yet, that wicked devil related to women on three grounds:as a son, as a husband and as a father. In his demented state he could allow that to be done to a woman.

  152. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //so u agreed the rest of them Christianity promoting child/women/animal //
    Well I said nothing about the other references. I showed you your error in the first example you cited. I also showed you the circumstances of these events and proved that the culprits were youths and not kids(check again the Hebrew text, you fool). The fact they were 42 or more is pretty suggestive, they could have been a band of youths gone ashtray (why else so many of them will come together).

    I would also like to know if there is a single Jew or Christian Law (Similar to Sharia in Muslim countries) that calls for killing up children if a bald Jew/Christian is ridiculed. This is just a report of an incident as the rest are. Based on them I have no objection if you call Joshua a war-monger or Elijah a foul mouthed person, but will you take up this as an example and say the same about Muhamad? I dare you.

  153. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    Thanks for the links. Went through the first one, this guy Osama Abdallah is a clown for sure and this guy 'Search 4 Truth' exposes him rather brilliantly. Kudos to you again!!!

  154. shabeer says:

    first : so u agreed the rest of them Christianity promoting child/women/animal killing……………THEY DID DURING THE II WW & [email protected],[email protected]@[email protected],VITNAM,IRAQ&AFGAN…………………..

    SECOND :
    23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

    New International Version (NIV)
    23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.

    24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

    King James Version (KJV) http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Kin

    NOBLE VERSES FOR PROHIBITING WOMEN/CHILDREN :

    Saheeh Bukhari

    Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.

    Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.
    Saheeh Muslim

    Book 019, Hadith Number 4320

    Chapter : Prohibition of killing women and children in war

    It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children
    In islam it is strict forbidden to kill women , children and/or innocents. The only way that they can be killed is as an unintentional consequence of fighting against the enemy combatants.

    Saheeh Bukhari
    Volumn 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 256.
    Narated By As-Sab bin Jaththama : The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."
    Ibn `Abbas says: The Messenger of Allah, when dispatching his troops, would tell them, " ..Do not behave treacherously, nor misappropriate war-booty, nor mutilate [those whom you kill], nor kill children, nor the people in cloisters." [Narrated by Ahmad, Tirmidhi (who graded it hasan sahih ]).

    Another contains, "…Do not kill a woman, nor a child, nor an old, aged man’ [Narrated by Baghawi, through his isnad [Sharh al-Sunnah, 11/11]. He said, "This is an authentic hadith, narrated by Muslim.]

    It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children. [Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4320]
    You are neither hard-hearted nor of fierce character, nor one who shouts in the markets. You do not return evil for evil, but excuse and forgive." [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 362]
    Narrated Anas ibn Malik: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Go in Allah's name, trusting in Allah, and adhering to the religion of Allah's Apostle. Do not kill a decrepit old man, o a young infant, or a child, or a woman; do not be dishonest about booty, but collect your spoils, do right and act well, for Allah loves those who do well. (Sunan Abu Dawud , Book 14, Number 2608)
    Another contains, "…Do not kill a woman, nor a child, nor an old, aged man…" [Narrated by Baghawi, through his isnad [Sharh al-Sunnah, 11/11]]
    Another contains, "Do not kill a child, nor a woman, nor an old man, nor obliterate a stream, nor cut a tree…" [ Narrated by Bayhaqi,vide I`la al-Sunan, 12/31 ]
    'Avoid the seven ruinous [sins] … associating partners with Allah, sorcery, unrightfully taking life which Allah has prohibited , consuming riba, consuming the property of an orphan, fleeing on the day of marching [in battle], and accusing a chaste, oblivious believing woman of adultery (Narrated by Bukhari, Muslim, Nasa'i, Abu Dawud)

  155. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    Without Muhamad and his Sunnat Islam is absolutely nothing. Quran brings nothing that wasn't already present in other Abrahamic and Indo-Eastern religious systems.

  156. shabeer says:

    About Oneness of God/Allah

    Monotheism is the essence of Islam. To understand the purity and uniqueness of Islam, one must first study its concept of monotheism.

    First, Muslims recognize that God alone is Divine, and that no entity nor being shares any of His powers or rights. "God created all things and He is the agent upon which all things depend." [39:62].

    Second, and this is what distinguishes Islam from other faiths. Muslims must not violate the oneness of God in their worship and devotion. There is no praying to, nor through an intermediary, whether it be a prophet, priest, saint or idol. The Prophet made it clear to Muslims that there can only be one object of their worship-God/Allah. There can be no believing in horoscopes, and no fearing "unlucky" numbers. One should only pray to God, put all hope in God, love Him before all else, and only fear the wrath of God. "Do not worship besides God that which cannot help nor harm you." [21:66].

    Third, Islamic monotheism also includes recognizing the perfect names and attributes of God, which He gave himself in the Qur'an. He is Ar-Rahman, the All-Merciful, He created beings in need of that mercy, namely, humans. He is Al-Adl, The Just, and therefore rewards and punishes according to what each person has earned. One cannot compare His love, mercy, wrath, sight, or any other characteristic to that of anyone or anything else. All of the attributes of humankind are created; the attributes of God are not created, but have always existed and are eternal.

    One of the earliest revelations to Prophet Muhammad reads: "Say: He is Allah, the One, Allah, the Self-Sufficient Master upon Whom all depend, He begets not, nor is He begotten, and there is none who is comparable unto Him." [112: 1-4].

    Another beautiful verse, known as 'The Verse of the Kursi/Footstool,' shows more of His attributes: "Allah! None has the right to be worshipped except He, the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists. Neither slumber nor sleep overtake Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His permission? He knows what happens to them (His creatures) in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter. And they will never compass anything of His knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursi/footstool extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. And He is the Most High, the Most Great." [2:255].
    Man is in a never ending search for the cause behind all
    that exist in this Universe-right from the sub automic
    particles to the gigantic stars and unfathomable depths
    of galaxies and things beyond the bowl of night. But every time a
    cause is found it so emerges out that there still remains a cause
    behind that cause. This search goes on and on. But it does have an
    end-when man reaches a `cause’ which does not have to have a
    cause, a superior being without cause-ie., a causless cause. That
    causeless cause is the end of man’s inquiry. In other words man’s
    search for a cause ceases at this point. We do not find in this
    universe any materialistic phenomenon without a cause. So it turns
    out that the causeless superior being must be outside this Universe
    and beyond material existence. Islam calls this primary
    causeless cause behind all small and big, micro and macro phenomena
    in the universe Allah!
    But Islam does not teach that `Allah’-this causeless cause is
    some conventional form of force or simple ordinary energy. The
    real essence of God is beyond man’s comprehension and description.
    Man knows the essence of that Divine being only through
    His own divine revelations. However, the materialistic objects in this universe reveal and testify His ominiscience and omni pote
    nce. The Holy Qur’an exhorts man to realise this fact through
    reason-unbiased and rational free thinking
    “Do they not look at the camels
    How they are made?
    And at the sky,
    How it is raised high?
    And at the mountains,
    How they are fixed firm?
    And at the Earth.
    How it is spread out?’’ (Al Ghashiyah: 17-20)
    The Qur’an commands man to realize the Great Power
    behind the wonderful design of the universe by discerning the
    surrounding nature. During the middle ages the Church’s strictures
    prohibited reason as it would lead to atheism. Islam does
    not subscribe to this view. Qur’anic verses teach man to make
    best use of his eyes, ears and brain to see, hear and think.
    There is not even a single verse in Qur’an which restricts man
    from following reasons. As a matter of fact there is no other book
    which invokes human intelligence in such an inspiring manner.
    The Quranic verses urging man to think and learn from nature
    and realize the invincibility of the Supreme Being, are thoughtprovoking
    to a lay man as well as a scientist.

  157. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sword of evil,
    To prove the power of your allah, I will like to see my computer, laptop and iPad blow up in my face. But I can assure you that such a thing will never happen because the idol allah, which Muhammad adopted as his god, has no power to do anything on its own. That is why you kill for him.
    In further proof of Muhammad's falsehood, Bukhari says in one verse that once there was an eclipse and Muhammad jumped up frightened that it was judgement day. Why did an all-knowing god not tell its messenger before the fact that an eclipse is an astronomical phenomenon, which occurs when the moon gets between the sun and the earth, instead of allowing him to get scared? If Muhammad was a true prophet, which claim all of you stupidly believe, why was he afraid of judgment day? As a true prophet he should have been happy that such a day had come for him to receive all the reward he told people allah had kept for him and its followers.
    Really, nothing is more pathetic than a muhammadan because his brain is so dead that he cannot think.

  158. denialisnoproof says:

    Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
    Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64

    you go and lick vagina in the kaba and get your bachchabaz brother . mohammad was a bastard who slept with a 9 year old girl when the old runt was aged 53

  159. denialisnoproof says:

    Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
    Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64

    look at this saif you will come to know what a kunt your mohammad was.

  160. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sword of evil,
    I am in the least worried about what the quran says because nothing in it is factual apart from its incitement to violence.

  161. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    You choose to call yourself 'saif' which means 'sword'. It is either the sword of Muhammad or the sword of muhammadanism. Which ever one applies, you are still the sword of evil. From now on I will no longer call you 'Sieve' but the sword of evil.
    So, sword of evil, you are denying that Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was only 9 years old. It is then clear that you are either ignorant of the literature of your muhammadanism or you are an unrepentant liar. In various hadiths Aisha herself said that her marriage to the "prophet" was consummated when she was 9 years old while still playing with her dolls and in the swing. How many adult women play with dolls and in the swing? On her first day in Muhammad's bed for sex, her mother had washed her face and led her off to the residence of the pedophile prophet. When these events were recorded they were to show Muhammad's virility which would serve as a precedent to all muhammadans. It has been so from Umar, who married the 5 year old sister of Aisha, to the present. Such acts are contemptible to every decent human being.
    You say Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene in the mouth when His disciples were not looking and also had sex with her. How did you know that since the disciples, who were the only witnesses, did not see it and neither the quran nor the hadiths contain it? Even if Jesus had done that, Mary was a full adult. How will that justify Muhammad raping a 9 year old in the name of marriage?

  162. Saif says:

    you are pagan hindu idolator to speak bad against the prophet you well know what happens to you pagans given it is in the Quran so you read it
    your hindu gods and buddha are the rapist, looter, pedophilia and mass-murderers and now i know you hindus are also teaching the hindu small girls and boys to worship the stone penis and you also pray to it

  163. Saif says:

    you are a she devil why are you saying like that you are demonized yourself why are you spreading lie that prophet had sex with 9 year girls.
    you know Jesus have sex with Mary Megdaline and also used to kiss her on the mouth when disciples were not looking

  164. Saif says:

    you kuffar infidel why are you saying bad like this things everytime to the prophet and Allah like bloody thug, pedophile ,road robber are you mad get yourself your brain checked or your tongue will be cut off in hellfire or your computer or laptop will blow up in your face

  165. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    That is precisely the point. But Shabby will quote the same passage again someday because he has no response to salient questions. His diversion gives him the cover to duck under.

  166. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //2 Kings 2:23-24//
    This is statement of an event. It is not saying that the Lord on hearing Elisha's curse send forth two bears. He may or may not have that is your deduction. Second and more important we are talking about a group of at least 42 youths (The Hebrew neurim qetannim doesn't mean young children but more appropriately young men/youths). Now when we have a group of at least 42 young men mocking Elisha when his master Elijah has just died few days back, don't you think that the mauling wasn't unjust? What more, Jews or Christians don't use this to suggest that any child mocking a bald person must be put to death.

  167. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    Suppose Ali Sina has 50,000 USD in reserve which he is keeping just in case you defeat him some day. But he has no more than that so he needs funding to maintain this site's server. So no 1, he has USD 50,000 to give away and no 2, he still needs help to maintain the servers.

  168. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    //Islam religion for fighting against poverty & economic protection//
    Read the article what or where was the 'Islamic economic system'? As far as charity is concerned the could you tell me how much money do Islamic countries donate when natural calamities hit non-muslim countries (even muslim countries for that matter) ?

    Also consider this: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm don't you think in terms of how it operates and the mechanism it defines it is far better than the Islamic way (which is, at best , vague).

    Look at this list (sort by aid received decreasing): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by… the muslim countries top the charts!!!

    On the contrary look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governments_

  169. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    The fight by muhammadanism against poverty and the economic protection it offers are so successful that muhammadan countries are among the poorest in the world. They must be reading and practicing their economics backwards.

  170. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    I had cause to say sometime ago that you are dumb, blind and deaf. No matter how many times your baseless assertions have been addressed you will always keep on repeating them. What you posted here has received more than adequate attention. It is clear you are here to play games and bore us with your endless repetitions. Numerous verses of violence have been quoted from the accursed quran and the hadiths. In order not to give you the satisfaction that you have done anything important, I will give quotations from the two evil compilations and also from contemporary muhammadan 'scholars' and leaders. To serve time I choose to paraphrase in certain cases.
    Ayatollah Khomeini :"-THOSE WHO KNOW NOTHING OF ISLAM PRETEND THAT ISLAM COUNSELS AGAINST WAR. THOSE(WHO SAY THIS) ARE WITLESS-".
    This describes you for saying that muhammadanism is peaceful'
    Ali Gom'a, Grand Mufti of Egypt:'-MUSLIMS MUST KILL NON BELIEVERS WHEREVER THEY ARE UNLESS THEY CONVERT TO ISLAM". He went on to compare non muslims to apes and pigs. This was reported in Al Ahram, Cairo, April 7, 2006.
    Yousef Al Qaradhawi, Spiritual Leader of the Muslim Brotherhood:"NO PEACE CAN BE MADE BETWEEN US (MUSLIMS) AND THE NON-BELIEVERS. THIS IS WHAT OUR HOLY BOOK SAYS. THIS IS WHAT ALLAH SAYS". This was on Al Jazeerah TV, January 9, 2009.
    Does he have a different 'holy book' and allah from you?
    Sura 9:29 WAGE WAR AGAINST NON MUSLIMS TILL THEY ARE TOTALLY SUBDUED AND PAY THE JIZYAH TAX IN TOTAL HUMILIATION.
    Tabari 9:69 "KILLING NON MUSLIMS IS A SMALL THING TO US".
    Muslim 20:4695 : Muhammad said 'ONE WHO DIED BUT DID NOT FIGHT IN THE WAY OF ALLAH NOR DID HE EXPRESS ANY DESIRE FOR JIHAD DIED THE DEATH OF A HYPOCRITE"
    Remember that a hypocrite will roast in hellfire according to muhammadanism.
    Muslim 019:4314:"-PARADISE IS UNDER THE SHADE OF THE SWORD".
    Sura 9:5 KILL NON MUSLIMS AFTER THE SACRED MONTH WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM.
    Osama bin Laden:"AND THIS FIERCE HOSTILITY –CEASES ONLY IF THE INFIDEL SUBMITS TO THE AUTHORITY OF ISLAM–BUT IF THE HATE AT ANY TIME EXTINGUISHES FROM THE HEART, THIS IS GREAT APOSTASY-".
    You are an apostate for saying that muhammadanism does not counsel violence and death for the non muhammadan. But of course you are lying through your muhammadan teeth.
    Tabari 9:61 and sura 9:109 give account of how the mosque at Dhu Awan was destroyed and some of the worshipers burnt to death on the orders of Muhammad who branded them " unjust people".
    The people who are quoted above based their statements on the provisions of the quran which govern every aspect of the muhammadan's life. To prove that they were echoing the teachings of muhammadanism, nobody or authority cautioned or denounced them. In effect, they spoke for muhammadanism and all muhammadans.
    Of all the things Muhammad saw in the Bible, it was the violence which captivated him. He refused to see all the compassionate verses and only polished the former and incorporated them as 'revelations' in the quran.
    To show the emptiness of your submission, you have not quoted one Jewish or Christian leader who has invoked those verses to justify acts of violence in the last 2000 years. Whereas muhammadans anchor every act of violence perpetrated by them on the evil quran and sunnah of the devil incarnate.

  171. Demsci says:

    Shabeer wrote:
    "On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

    But David Wood rebutted Quran 5;32 in the video below:
    http://counterjihadreport.com/2013/04/20/david-wo

    He said that verse 5;32 was ordained for the children of Israel, not the Muslims!!! which it says in the very first sentence. Anyway it is a copy or derivative from a text from the Talmud.

    And even when Muslims feel they must abide by this instruction, they can easily find a way out or around it. Because they can always claim that the victims of their killing weren't innocent and that they were " Creating mischief in the land".

    Very vaque language, very well usable for Muslims to excusing, exonerate themselves after killing by accusing the victim of mischief.

    David Wood goes on to show that in the very next verse, Quran 5;33, the MUSLIMS get instructions from Allah to kill or oppress infidels, when these do not submit.

    Now I would be happy if Muslims interpreted quran 5;32-5.33 in a way that makes them fine citizens, and not take it literally,

    but when I compare the Quranic "legislation" to Modern Democratic Legislation it strikes me that the Quran may not be altered one iota

    and therefore is very prone to misunderstanding and usable for excuses for murder.

    Now, if that would be the case in Democratic laws, then lawyers, judges and then parliament will see to it that the legal texts are much improved, clarified, augmented and then declared law to which citizens must abide.

    The improvibility of Democratic laws thus gives people living under them a great advantage over Muslims, living under unchangeable and thereby a so vaque, ambiguous, multi-interpretable, incomplete, obsolete lawbook as the quran. Which must be considered by Muslims as the highest law, yet cannot be improved at all, until judgment day, not with Allah stipulating that Muhammad was and will be the last prophet he sent to mankind until the end.

  172. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    Forget every other thing first define as per you who is god? ,whether Allah is god? ,than why? he is not powerful enough to crush his opponent of his own ,all the time he needs Mohammed and his Henchman to protect his authenticties whenever he is challenged..

  173. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    Don't worry we will nuke all the Muslims on the earth and ,reduce them into pony element for eternal peace for all on this earth.

  174. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    Evidence has been given copiously showing that muhammadanism and science are mutually exclusive. Dr Sina and many others have done so times without number. Yet you pretend not to see.
    As for muhammadanism being inhuman, you don't need more evidence than the news coming out of Pakistan every 60 minutes.Within that period, you will have at least a dozen different pieces of evidence and by day's end there will be enough of such evidence to last you a life time. But being that you are a muhammadan, you will never admit to seeing any evidence. A muhammadan ceases to be one the minute he parts company with lies.

  175. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    None of them because I replied to your post telling you that the prize money is still very much available and if any muhamadan scholar is worth that name he/she should run the gauntlet and grab it. The challenge has not been taken up.Every muhammadan 'scholar' is scared stiff of Dr. Ali Sina.
    You made some noise the other time about the Americans having killed "millions" in Iraq. Well, for your information, the war started in March 2003. In 2002 the Iraqi population was 24 million. In 2007 it stood at 27.5 million and that was the peak of muhammadan terrorism. According to the World Bank, Iraq had a population of 32.96 million in 2011. This shows a growth rate of 37.3%. over the 2002 figure. It is only in muhammadan mathematics that a population shows an increase when its people are being killed in their millions. Many countries which did not experience war did not show such a remarkable growth rate. There is proof beyond the shadow of a doubt that muhammadans live on lies just as their false prophet did. They can never depart from them since lies suit their purpose.

  176. shabeer says:

    Islam religion for fighting against poverty & economic protection ,today the west thinking about Islamic banking & adopting economic theory…………plz read from the link,about ideal Islamic economic system: http://fightpoverty.tumblr.com/

  177. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    Further more you are not knowing how life is useless without any higher education ,you bloody roughs live on our jakat and enjoying life without any burden and responsibility. Our hard earned money is being spent on you useless scums on earth .Jesus is right choice for me and not bloody thug, pedophile ,road robber this Mad Mohammed . His preaching are restricted only to "penny and pussy", so disgusting. Just see the vocabulary of your kind here, you don't know even the basics of universal language that is English and you want to compit Dr Sina ,even intelligent like me think twice confronting Dr .Sina.

  178. shabeer says:

    ISLAM:
    "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

    "On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

    "Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; – and any that does this (not only) meets punishment. (But) the Penalty on the Day Of Judgement will be doubled To him, and he will dwell Therein in ignominy. (The Noble Quran, 25:68-69)"

    "But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

    "If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. (The Noble Quran, 5:28)"

    "God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. (The Noble Quran, 60:8)"

    "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers. (The Noble Quran 2:193)"
    Malik :: Book 21 : Hadith 21.3.10
    Do not kill women or children or an aged, weak person,Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees.Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty,
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 89 :: Hadith 320
    Not to join anything in worship along with Allah, (2) Not to steal, (3) Not to commit illegal sexual intercourse, (4) Not to kill your children, (5) Not to accuse an innocent person (to spread such an accusation among people), (6) Not to be disobedient (when ordered) to do good deeds.
    Prohibit killing with unjust:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 92 :: Hadith 423
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 37
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 17
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 2,3,6,9
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 82 :: Hadith 840
    Bloodshed completely prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 4,7 ,8
    Killing innocent people prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 93 :: Hadith 611,23
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 12
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 83 :: Hadith 10 , 21s
    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 43 :: Hadith 637
    Dawud :: Book 35 : Hadith 4257 , 59
    prohibit women killing:
    Bukhari 4.52.256
    [killing girl prohibit]
    women killing prohibited:
    Malik :: Book 21 : Hadith 21.3.9
    Dawud :: Book 41 : Hadith 5128,28
    prohibited killing when people who pray.
    Dawud :: Book 41 : Hadith 4910
    forbid killing animal
    Dawud :: Book 41 : Hadith 5247, 49
    cut tree prohibit:
    Dawud :: Book 41 : Hadith 5220
    children captive killing prohibited:
    Dawud :: Book 38 : Hadith 4390
    mischief through the land prohibited:
    Dawud :: Book 38 : Hadith 4357 ,59
    Do not steal from the booty, and do not act treacherously. Do not mutilate and do not kill children.
    Malik :: Book 21 : Hadith 21.3.11
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 81 :: Hadith 793

  179. shabeer says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM

    KILLING CHILDREN/WOMEN/ANIMAL:CHRISTIANITY:
    2 Kings 2:23-24
    ……….. When he turned around and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. (NRSV)
    2 Chronicles 25:12

    The sons of Judah also captured 10,000 alive and brought them to the top of the cliff and threw them down from the top of the cliff, so that they were all dashed to pieces.(NASB)
    Joshua 8:24-26

    ……. So the entire population of Ai, including men and women, was wiped out that day—12,000 in all. For Joshua kept holding out his spear until everyone who had lived in Ai was completely destroyed. (NLT)
    Deuteronomy 2:32-34

    And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed every inhabited city, with the women and the little ones; we left none remaining. (ASV)
    Deuteronomy 3:3-6

    the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these were cities fortified with high walls, gates and bars, besides a great many unwalled towns. We utterly destroyed them, as we did to Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women and children of every city. (NASB)
    1 Samuel 15:3,8

    Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' " … He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword.(NIV)
    Hosea 13:16

    Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open. (NRSV)
    Isaiah 13:18
    They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.
    Ezekiel 9:5-7

    "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children.
    Psalms 137:9
    he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.
    Leviticus 26:29

    You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters.

    Deuteronomy 28:53

    Because of the suffering that your enemy will inflict on you during the siege, you will eat the fruit of the womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the LORD your God has given you.

  180. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    He is not coming to your call , It is not Azan, calling people to salute this thug Mohammed and helpless Allah (to implement his wish he need Mohammed's help through his follower huh!!!) .Dr. Sina is a creative genius and you are a murky element ,to be least considered if any ( you must be proud if he refers your name or answer your post personally),in his grand design of peeling Islam 's fallacy and blowing away this ugly Islam from human society and psyche.

  181. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    You are loosing a war against Dr Ali before being even fought .Don't boost yourself see you tube how the son of Hamas leader striping our beloved (rough Mohammed) prophet ;his altar ego Allah and the Criminal jurisprudence Quaran (holy book for jail birds to commit more crime). From here onwards we displaced Muslim will take charge of infidels to , bring down Islam ok my dear.

  182. shabeer says:

    BROTH SD JUST SAYS TO HIM COME TO HERE & GIVE/PROVE THE VALUABLE EVIDENCE FROM QURAN ISLAM BEING UNSCIENTIFIC & INHUMAN ………………………..

    " ONLY ONE EVIDENCE IS ENOUGH "

  183. shabeer says:

    @Salman Syed……………..&I-HATE-ISLAM……………NO COMMENTS FOR MY LAST POST ,SO U 2 AGREED HE WAS

    1) LAYER [TO MUSLIM,:HE HAS NOT ACTUALLY 50,000$ ] OR

    2) CHEATER [ TO NON MUSLIM:HE HAS 50,000$,CHEATING THEM TO SAY HE HAS NOT AT LEAST 6000$ TO RUN HIS SITE ]

    WHAT THE TRUE? 1 OR 2

  184. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @shabeer
    Refutation matters if it is based on human values, science and morality. Islam has nothing to refute Ali Sina. What inhuman, unscientific, immoral Ali Sina advocated? Ali Sina is enemy of Islam but not the enemy of humanity, science and morality. Muslim consider Ali Sina enemy because Islam and humanity not compatible.

  185. Demsci says:

    OK, an impressive list of articles severely critical to the Democratic American side. But … all published and allowed within it's own sphere. Of power, influence.

    Now … can you or anyone, also show a similar list with articles similarly critical, only AGAINST the Islamic totalitarian side, but published inside THEIR sphere?

  186. Demsci says:

    OK, there are approx. 1.6 billion Muslims, and they identify themselves as Muslim, probably 99 % were born into Islam. But about rather a lot of Muslims other Muslims say: They have zero or rather little knowledge and understanding of Islam. And about Muslims who commit murder or rape, saying they do it in the name of Islam, or Jihad other Muslims say: They are NOT Muslim, we condemn their action.

    But why can't Muslims then not be thrown out of Islam? After repeated warnings to study Islam better or to study some kind of correct version of Islam? Which is endorsed by some kind of authoritative leadership in Islam?

    If it is too easy for people to say that they are Muslims AND at the same time to hardly study and know what it is about and to commit heinous crimes while saying that they are doing it in the name of Islam or inspired by Islam, then

    other Muslims lose credibility, and much confusion about Islam among Muslims and fellow humans is sown.

    So, Muslims admit to the world that there are those who call themselves Muslims, who are willfully or stupidly ignorant about Islam and/ or who are doing crimes while invoking Islam's teachings as reason and inspiration for those crimes.

    But, not only is it impossible for Muslims to throw out of Islam these above-mentioned self-confessed Muslims, but according to many Islamic clerics and a high proportion of Muslims, according to surveys, it is forbidden to Muslims to get OUT of Islam, so regardless of they say and do or fail to say and do, they are obligated to stay IN Islam all their lives!

    When Muslims say that there are certain conditions to be considered a Muslim, and be IN Islam, we can say; yes, but when are Muslims EVER thrown OUT of Islam when not fulfilling those conditions?!

  187. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    Can you solve this riddle to the satisfaction of Basir Mummmti? He needs an answer as to why he was kicked out of the birth place of muhammadanism to become a displaced person without being able to extend his nationality.

  188. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    Muhammadans are the ones who have made the lives of Iraqis look like insects. In fact, to a muhammadan every life is less valuable than that of an insect. Allah said that the unbeliever is the filthiest thing before it. Any body to the muhammadan can be an unbeliever including a muhammadan who wears his head tie in a different way. Muhammad's head lice had more value to allah than a human being whom it brands a kafir. According to allah's command, a pest can be spared but never the life of an unbeliever. In Iraq the shiites in Sadar city are unbelievers to the minority sunnis and the shiite feeling towards the sunni is mutual. They kill each other to fulfill allah's command. Allah kills by proxy through its foot soldiers or mujaheddin.

  189. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    A Chinese market toy gives joy to the children who own them and does not harm anyone. The greatness of muhammadanism is in the magnitude of destruction it causes and lives taken per passing minute. You only have to look at Syria to appreciate the greatness of muhammadanism.

  190. Salman Syed says:

    If Islam is the religion of God why we where kicked out of Saudi ,the place where Islam originated ,my cousin went to U.S he was naturalized citizen their and earning more than me .I spend 30 years of my life in Saudi and today i am displaced from staying in the land of Islam by the followers themselves ,let alone extending any nationality. Islam has become cause for the poverty of my family and me.

  191. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    I really wish they are such people as you have said because it will mean that they used their God given brains to do the right thing by rejecting evil. Your allah suffers from incurable madness.

  192. Basir Mummutti. says:

    If Islam is the religion of God why we where kicked out of saudhi ,the origin of Islam ,my cousin went to U.S he was naturalized citizen their and earning more than me .I spend 30 years of my life in Saudi and today i am displaced from staying in land of Islam by the followers,let alone extending nationality.

  193. shabeer says:

    ISLAM THE RELIGION GOD,& THE ' MUSLIM ' IS THE NAME FOR ONLY PEOPLE WHO FOLLOWING UNDER THE RULE OF QURANIC LAW & HADEETH ,THERE R SOME PEOPLE IN ISLAMIC LAND WITH MUSLIM NAME & BORN WITH MUSLIM PARENTS WITH ZERO ISLAMIC KNOWLEDGE,THEY R NOT MUSLIM,WE TOO CONDEMNED THEIR ACTION………………………….

  194. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    You are the one to advice your best of the best to tale up Dr. Sina in debate which the entire world will be opportune to participate. That way no debater will not have to hide behind endless quotation of irrelevant or even non existent passages which the likes of Zakir Naik specialize in. The audience will have the time to cross check the facts and expose the liar. This is what "muhammadan scholars" are afraid of.
    The prize money is still there for anyone who is willing to run the gauntlet.
    TELL YOUR CO-LIARS TO AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THIS OPPORTUNITY.

  195. shabeer says:

    ISLAM THE RELIGION OF GOD ,IS NOT LIKE A CHINESE MARKET TOY'S AVAILABLE FOR ALL PEOPLE ……………..HIDYA IS HANDS OF MY CREATOR ,HE GIVE IT RIGHTEOUS PEOPLE……………MY LAST POST INCLUDING COMMON PEOPLE GENERAL RESPONSE ABOUT ISLAM,THEY AGREED ISLAM IS GREAT RELIGION………………….

  196. Salman Syed says:

    @shabeer
    Don't go deep into Dr Sina's , day today schedule he is far intelligent ,unlike your illiterate Mohammed folked by illiterate people to drink his urine.People do not accept Sina here for the sake of acceptance ,and the followers are not any ordinary people ,they are intelligent if not to his caliber,but far more intelligent than this Mad Mohammed and his illiterate followers like you .Now you people want Sina to come out of his cage ,you must have solid proof ,discarding Ali Sina's claim that your prophet is not road robber,pedophile etc thing ..I too tried with an intention of earning 50,000 dolor but failed .Now i am die hard fan of Dr Ali.

  197. shabeer says:

    JUST REGULAR INVALID PERSONAL OPINION…………………….. REMEMBER THAT THIS WAS THE RESON FOR KILLED 567,000 children & MILLIONS OF INNOCENT CIVILIAN ……………………………..WHAT CAN I SAY ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO LOOSE ALL SENSE OF MORALITY…………………………….

    SADAM KILLED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE BUSH[S/J] KILLED REAMING MILLIONS ……………..

    MY Q'N IS ,IS IRAQI PEOPLE LIKE RATS/INSECT, FOR KILLING …………………..

  198. shabeer says:

    # Dr Sina threw a [WEAK/MOCKING/ILLOGICAL/challenge]………..HIS CHALLENGE WAS " FAKE EMAIL DEBATE " WE MUSLIM REFUTE BY EMAIL ,IF THEY DECIDED WE R WON THEY GIVE US %50,000 …………………………….WHAT A BOOOOOOOOSHIT WAS IT? IF HE HAS A 100% CONFIDENCE WITH HIS /WHY HE KEPT THIS TYPE CHEAP ,SHAMELESS WAY OF CRITICISM……COMMON PLZ COME TO THE GROUND & DEBATE AT LEAST A "MADRASSA BOY " WITH TRUTH EVIDENCE /………………………………[email protected] HATE -PLZ ADVICE HIM BEHAVE BEING MORAL :

    best example for his cheating :
    one day he says :
    Ali Sina Writes:

    Thank you for your generous donation. We already reached and surpassed the funds required for leasing a super fast server in just a few days. Your support is a nod of approval to our work and it shows how much you care for this site to stay alive and grow. If the donations reach $6,000 dollars, we can afford to keep the present server also and host other Islamocritic sites for free. Otherwise we just concentrate on our own site. http://www.faithfreedom.org/Announcement/70401.ht

    REMEMBER WAS POOR MAN ,HIS HAND WAS EMPTY ,NO AT LEAST $6000 ……………

    DAY TWO :
    ALI SINNA SAYS;
    If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay

    $50,000 U.S. dollars http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge.htm
    THERE R 2 POSSIBILITY WITH IT
    EITHER HE WAS CHEATER OR LAYER

  199. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharna, this goes to show that you are too dumb to understand the enemy or devil's mentality. It's no wonder that the Bible says that Satan masquerade himself as an angel of light to deceive people like you. Yes, although Krishna, Buddha or Kabir didn't penetrate a 9 years old girl like what that evil Muhammad did, this doesn't mean that they were not demonized ie. A fortune teller make a living by telling his customers their fortune or fate with the help of demons which he perceives is doing a good deed. This demonized man is not a pedophile neither is he a murderer like that monster Hitler. But the fact is that he is demonized! Do you get the point, Mr Sanatan Dharna?

  200. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Thanks for the post. In addition, it is the same America which is leading in the reconstruction effort in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2010 Western aid to Afghanistan was $11,446.8 million while Iraq got $1698.9 million. Out of the first 10 recipient countries, 8 are muhammadan. With all the noise made about American support for Israel, the Jewish state ranked third after Afghanistan and Pakistan and only edges out Iraq. Is it not amazing that a country which seeks the destruction of others is doing everything it can to build up those same countries? There is something to be said about the large heart of the West. This is proof that the war was never aimed at any muhammadan but at those who did evil in the name of islam. With the wild reaction of muhammadans the line between islam and evil is blurred.
    The West is not involved in Syria even though support is being voiced for the opposition. Yet that same opposition is crying for material support from the same West. At the same time Russia and Iran are arming Assad to the teeth to continue killing his people. No muhammadan nor the likes of Sheila Musaji is condemning Russia and Iran. Musaji has not gone to Russia to write her articles.
    Like you said Chuck, if war mongering is bad, let the muhammadans first condemn Muhammad for all the misery he unleashed on those communities who lived in peace and never wronged him.Let them condemn his successors for killing 80 million Indians. Muslims talk about the 'golden age of islam' without acknowledging that it was achieved on the blood of millions of innocent lives. I am using the phrase very cautiously knowing quite well that islam has never achieved anything good and whatever progress was made at that time came from the subjugated people with muhammadans only wielding the whip or sword as the case was.

  201. Sanatan Dharna says:

    @Agracean
    Mohammad was demonized because he was rapist, looter, pedophilia, mass-murderers also. Krishna, Jesus, Buddha, Kabir were not engaged in sex with 6 or 9 years old girl.These legendary never said if anybody do not give them respect kill him/her. If Hitler was good to his companion and friends that does not mean he was not demonized. Buddha, Jesus, Kabir preaching were based on over all humanity.

  202. Demsci says:

    With your responses you confirm 99 % of what I wrote. George Bush, Barack Obama, David Cameron, Boris Johnson and many Western/ Indian journalists keep telling mankind that "Islam is a religion of peace and that Islam has nothing to do with the terrorist activities that shock us", even that the woolwich-killing was a " betrayal of Islam".

    But if Muslims indeed think and react like Shabeer, then they "spit in the faces" of Bush, Obama, Cameron and completely contradict and ignore them, showing ZERO appreciation for their kind, protective words about Islam. Muslims completely deny with contempt what Daniel Pipes says, namely that "Islamism is the problem and moderate Islam is the solution".

    In doing so, the Muslims in huge numbers, like Shabeer, PROVE RIGHT, CONFIRM and SUPPORT Ali Sina, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and many other writers and commenters

    when they say: there is NO distinction between good, peaceful Islam and bad Islamism, it is Islam itself, whole, that is the enemy of all democracies, the totalitarian enemy-ideology, like Nazism and Communism also were.

    DON'T YOU SEE?

  203. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM,
    Again a good response. However I have a slightly different take on this one:
    1. It was a political war not a religious Jihadist attack. Very unlike the Gazhwas by Muhammad.
    2. As the above links indicate it was the press in West that reported many of the war attrocities by both sides. Can you show me a single muslim report condemning the raids by Muhammad?
    3. Bush never claimed himself to be a Messiah or the Mercy of the world.
    4. Even a decade before the timings of these reports, Iraq was in an economic downward spiral because of the Iran Iraq war of the 80s. It had accrued a bill of 80 B USD some reports suggest. Iran off-course was/is also an Islamic country.
    5. The economic sanctions are rooted into the Gulf crisis when Iraq invaded Kuwait, which off-course was also an Islamic country and had funded that 80 billion I mentioned above. So much for Muslim Brotherhood. First a muslim country aided the war between two muslim countries and was then itself attacked by the same country that it aided 🙂
    6. The Gulf War itself was majorly funded by Saudi Arabia. It footed a bill of 36 Billion USD against a total of USD 60 Billion.
    7. The economic sanctions were ratified by UN not by US.
    8. People in the war zone and especially in the losing side suffer. We have seen that again and again in history. However sensible people condemn all kinds of war and rightly so. I have come across many Americans who are utterly disgusted with the way the war with Iraq came about. However I don't see a single muslim who is remorseful of the naked dance of death comitted by Muhammad!!

  204. chuck says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM,
    Really good one. Spot on.

  205. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck,
    Excellent question.

  206. chuck says:

    @Shabeer,
    And how many of these great scholars converted, sorry, reverted to Islam despite having known the truth?

  207. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, If Sheila Musaji really means that they are hated, she would have left the comfort of the west by now.
    Still, answer the questions posed on Muhammad.

  208. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, after the first Gulf War sanctions were placed on the Saddam Hussein murderous muhammadan regime. But Iraq was allowed to sell oil and use the precedes for such essentials as food and medicine. Instead of spending the money on those essentials, Saddam Hussein embarked on the building of palaces. There were at least 15 of such imposing structures in the Baghdad area alone. His children went on the rampage. Alcohol, which muhammadans say they forbid, was imported in all forms. As a demonstration of total lack of feeling for the populace, mock deaths of infants were staged almost on a daily basis with empty coffins carried about. To show the falsehood in your post, all the articles you have quoted on Iraq date back to 1999. After the ousting of Saddam Hussein there have been no more 'death marches' in Iraq.
    On Afghanistan, before the war about 3 million lived in refugee camps mostly in Iran. Almost all have returned home making the movement one of the greatest home comings in human history. To those returnees, the attack has turned out to be a blessing. Like Iraq, civilians killed in Afghanistan are the victims of muhammadan terrorists.

  209. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    Sieve had listed Pres. Bush and Obama among the Western leaders who claim that muhammadanism is a religion of peace. Is it conceivable that the same people would use "nuclear weapons" on the Iraqis? There was no such thing. Muhammadans are adept at fabricating lies which they sell to the gullible. What about the Muhammad Adura affair? The world saw muhammadanism for what it actually is but refused to condemn the hoax. From every available record, the overwhelming majority of Iraqi civilians killed died at the hands of fellow muhammadans. Why are the Kurds happy to receive the Americans? The Christian population of Iraq has been decimated by the heinous muhammadfans who are following in the footsteps of their founder.
    The Americans vacated Iraq about two years ago. If there was any contermination and the need for any clean up equipment, the Iraqi govt would have procured one by now assuming that the Americans had prevented them from doing so.
    Ever since the war ended, several countries, with the Chinese and French at the lead, have flocked into Iraq for business. Would they have exposed their nationals to the risk of nuclear radiation?
    No day goes by without the muhammadans blowing up dozens of people in Iraq? Are the perpetrators Americans?
    In any case, your post is diversionary. You have refused to answer the questions asked about Muhammad. STOP INDULGING IN FRIVOLITIES AND ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.

  210. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby,
    It is not everyone who sees $cience in the quran to get petro-dollars. The people you mentioned do not want or miss any muhammadan award. Dr Sina threw a challenge to the best muhammadan to refute what he says about Muhammad and his movement. Till date that challenge has not been taken up. You may fan yourself over the likes of John Esposito who directs a $20 million muhammadan foundation. With that amount he can see Muhammad as having risen from the grave. That is a good example of someone who is intellectually fraudulent.

  211. Sakat says:

    My simple question you answer, why ? a ,Nigerian staying in a peaceful and intelligent country killed a white real native (who is real English) soldier protector of his country , by beheading him (Surprisingly attacking him without warning/challenging him for fight and than cutting his head after shooting him ) chanting "Allah o Akbar" .

  212. shabeer says:

    Mahatma Gandhi
    I wanted to know the best of the life of one who holds today an undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind… I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the second volume (of the Prophet’s biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of that great life.

    Alphonse de LaMartaine
    If greatness of purpose, smallness of means, and astonishing results are the three criteria of a human genius, who could dare compare any great man in history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws, and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislations, empires, peoples, dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and the souls.

    Michael Hart
    My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the secular and religious level.
    …It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity. .
    ..It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.

    Rodwell
    Mohammad’s career is a wonderful instance of the force and life that resides in him who possesses an intense faith in God and in the unseen world. He will always be regarded as one of those who have had that influence over the faith, morals and whole earthly life of their fellow men, which none but a really great man ever did, or can exercise; and whose efforts to propagate a great verity will prosper.

    W. Montgomery Watt
    His readiness to undergo persecution for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as a leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement – all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems that it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad…
    Thus, not merely must we credit Muhammad with essential honesty and integrity of purpose, if we are to understand him at all; if we are to correct the errors we have inherited from the past, we must not forget the conclusive proof is a much stricter requirement than a show of plausibility, and in a matter such as this only to be attained with difficulty.

    D. G. Hogarth in ‘Arabia’
    Serious or trivial, his daily behaviour has instituted a canon which millions observe this day with conscious memory. No one regarded by any section of the human race as Perfect Man has ever been imitated so minutely.The conduct of the founder of Christianity has not governed the ordinary life of his followers. Moreover, no founder of a religion has left on so solitary an eminence as the Muslim apostle.

    Washington Irving
    He was sober and abstemious in his diet and a rigorous observer of fasts. He indulged in no magnificence of apparel, the ostentation of a petty mind; neither was his simplicity in dress affected but a result of real disregard for distinction from so trivial a source.
    In his private dealings he was just. He treated friends and strangers, the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, with equity, and was beloved by the common people for the affability with which he received them, and listened to their complaints.
    His military triumphs awakened no pride nor vain glory, as they would have done had they been effected for selfish purposes. In the time of his greatest power he maintained the same simplicity of manners and appearance as in the days of his adversity. So far from affecting a regal state, he was displeased if, on entering a room, any unusual testimonials of respect were shown to him. If he aimed at a universal dominion, it was the dominion of faith; as to the temporal rule which grew up in his hands, as he used it without ostentation, so he took no step to perpetuate it in his family.

    James Michener
    No other religion in history spread so rapidly as Islam. The West has widely believed that this surge of religion was made possible by the sword. But no modern scholar accepts this idea, and the Qur’an is explicit in the support of the freedom of conscience.

  213. shabeer says:

    THE INTELLIGENT SCHOLARS SAYS ABOUT ISLAM:
    Napoleon Bonaparte
    I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Quran which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness.

    Sir George Bernard Shaw
    I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him – the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity.
    I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.

    H.G. Wells
    The Islamic teachings have left great traditions for equitable and gentle dealings and behaviour, and inspire people with nobility and tolerance. These are human teachings of the highest order and at the same time practicable. These teachings brought into existence a society in which hard-heartedness and collective oppression and injustice were the least as compared with all other societies preceding it… Islam is replete with gentleness, courtesy, and fraternity.

    Phillip Hitti
    During all the first part of the Middle Ages, no other people made as important a contribution to human progress as did the Arabs, if we take this term to mean all those whose mother-tongue was Arabic, and not merely those living in the Arabian peninsula. For centuries, Arabic was the language of learning, culture and intellectual progress for the whole of the civilized world with the exception of the Far East. From the 9th to the 12th century there were more philosophical, medical, historical, religious, astronomical and geographical works written in Arabic than in any other human tongue.

    R. Bosworth Smith
    He was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without Pope’s pretensions, Caesar without the legions of Caesar: without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue; if ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by the right divine, it was Mohammed, for he had all the power without its instruments and without its supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life.

    Sarojini Naidu
    It was the first religion that preached and practised democracy; for, in the mosque, when the call for prayer is sounded and worshippers are gathered together, the democracy of Islam is embodied five times a day when the peasant and king kneel side by side and proclaim: ‘God Alone is Great’

    Dr. William Draper
    Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born in Mecca, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race… To be the religious head of many empires, to guide the daily life of one-third of the human race, may perhaps justify the title of a Messenger of God.

    Thomas Carlyle
    The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only.
    A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so.

    A. S. Tritton
    The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur’an in the other is quite false.

    De Lacy O’Leary
    History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.

    Gibbon
    The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab.

    Edward Gibbon and Simon Oakley
    The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force.

    Edward Montet
    Islam is a religion that is essentially rationalistic in the widest sense of this term considered etymologically and historically… the teachings of the Prophet, the Qur’an has invariably kept its place as the fundamental starting point, and the dogma of unity of God has always been proclaimed therein with a grandeur a majesty, an invariable purity and with a note of sure conviction, which it is hard to find surpassed outside the pale of Islam… A creed so precise, so stripped of all theological complexities and consequently so accessible to the ordinary understanding might be expected to possess and does indeed possess a marvellous power of winning its way into the consciences of men.

  214. shabeer says:

    Does the most recent military scandal reflect a deeper problem?, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    Evangelical Christian missionaries embedded with American combat troops in Afghanistan, Mikey Weinstein http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    Pamela Geller’s praise for the desecration of dead bodies is not “funny” , Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    How common are casualty photos like ones gathered by Stryker “kill team?”, Adam Ashton http://blog.thenewstribune.com/military/2011/03/2

    ISAF Data: Night Raids Killed Over 1,500 Afghan Civilians, Gareth Porter http://original.antiwar.com/porter/2011/11/02/isa

    The Kill Team, Mark Boal http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-kil

    The “Kill Team” Photographs, Seymour M. Hersh http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/20

    “Kill Team” War Crimes in Afghanistan, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2010) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_cas

    Loner, Loser, Killer, Olivier Roy http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/24/opinion/loner-l

    Massacres are the Inevitable Result of Foreign Occupatio, Seumas Milne http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/03/14-1

    MRFF Demands Marine Corps Investigate Use of Nazi SS Flag by Marines in Afghanistan http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    New video emerges of US troops cheering wildly as innocent Afghan civilians are blown up, Andrew Gregory http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/03/

    US admits lethal blunders: Village is wiped out as 2,000lb of Allied explosives miss Taliban target http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/terro

    U.S. Afghan atrocities reflect poorly on all, Tony Norman http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11088/1135456-153….

    US air strike wiped out Afghan wedding party, inquiry finds http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/11/afgha

    U.S. Army Apologizes Over Graphic Afghan Photos http://www.rferl.org/content/us_army_apology_grap

    U.S. report: Marines Killed 40 Unarmed Civilians http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1

    U.S. Soldier pleads guilty to killing jailed Taliban commander http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_18142186#ixzz1p

    U.S. soldiers’ ‘kill team’ killed Afghanis, used body parts in poker games: report, Corky Siemaszko http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2011/03/28/

    Video on “kill teams” by John Whitehead, Rutherford Institute http://www.rutherford.org/OnTarget/2011/03-30-201

    Whether or not a ‘kill squad’ is to blame, civilian deaths often go unreported, Julius Cavendish http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators

    Why Do They Hate Us?, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

  215. shabeer says:

    http://www.mideastfacts.com/index_iraq.html this site was created by a christian arab and his name is Sam. You can find many articles on the Israeli participation in the holocaust of Iraqi civilians.

    The main site is http://www.mideastfacts.com/

    You can find quotes such as:

    "More than one million Iraqis have died- 567,000 of them children -as a direct consequence of economic sanctions… As many as 12% of the children surveyed in Baghdad are wasted, 28% stunted and 29% underweight." –UN FAO, December 1995.

    "Surely the extermination of Jews in gas chambers is not comparable to the slow death inflicted in Iraqi children by deprivation. But from another angle the latter is even more despicable. The genocide against Jews was perpetrated in the greatest secret and without the blessing of the "civilized world". The crimes against Iraqi civilians are committed in full day-light, with the blessing of the ruling "civilized nations" and with the tacit support of the educated classes in these nations. Those who keep silent and are legally able to speak up, are morally accomplices to this crime." — Elias Davidsson, Musician and a Palestinian Jew, 4/16/1999 posted in the open forum of http://www.arabamerican.com

    "The U.S. has perverted the U.N. weapons process by using it as a tool to justify military actions, falsely so. … The U.S. was using the inspection process as a trigger for war." — Scott Ritter, former head of the U.N. arms inspection team in Iraq, on the NBC Today show, December 17, 1998.

    "More than 4,500 children under the age of 5 are dying each month from hunger and disease." -UNICEF, October 1996.

    Leslie Stahl: "We have heard that a half million children have died (as a result of sanctions against Iraq). I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it." — A CBS Sixty Minutes interview between Leslie Stahl and U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, on 12 May 1996.

    "U.S. war planners considered Iraqi electrical plants to be high priority targets…. Destruction of electricity, nonetheless, proved devastating for the civilian population… the civilian life-support systems of air conditioning, refrigeration, and water purification were destroyed. Collateral damage had a new definition. … Almost a third of all cruise missiles fired were aimed at electrical power." — From The Washington Post in a page titled: Bomb Now, Die Later.

    "They know we own their country. We own their airspace… We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there is a lot of oil out there we need." –Air force Brigadier General William Looney, head of the US Central Command's Airborne Expeditionary Force, which directs operations keeping Iraqi planes from flying south of the 32nd parallel. (Taken from an article by Kathy Kelly in the Spring 2000 Arab-American University Graduates, AAUG, Monitor).

    "the greatest purveyor of violence on earth is my own country." –Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    "This week, we also learned from legitimate UN sources in Iraq that the recent, wag the camel, `precision' bombing of defenseless Iraq destroyed at least thirteen schools, an important food storehouse, and the municipal water system of Baghdad's Karrada suburb, leaving 300,000 people without clean drinking water. During the 1991 Gulf War, US bombing wrecked Baghdad's water and sewage systems, creating a grave health crisis for millions of Iraqi civilians." –Eric Margolis in his column It's Time to Put Away the Big Stick 01/11/1999.

    "It is becoming increasingly clear, that George Bush, operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into the aggressive power that the United States ultimately had to destroy." — Ted Koppel, NightLine, ABC News 06/09/1992. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2113410/Uhttp://antiwar.com/blog/2012/12/04/us-military-sahttp://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art
    Afghanistan Shootings Suspect, Not Likely To Face Death Penalty http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/21/robert-b

    Atrocities Against Civilians in Afghanistan: A Troubling Timetable http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2010/05/04/atroci

    Australian soldiers in Afghanistan post racist comments on Facebook http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1507031/Smith-

    Do Bible Verses on Rifle Scopes Represent Christianity?, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/art

    DOD rails Rolling Stone for publishing pictures, Fred Childers http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=14338461

  216. shabeer says:

    #America only fights terrorist????????????????????????????????????????????????
    PLZ TAKE SOME LICENCE TO SPREAD LIE:
    The use of the "Deplete Uranium Bombs" against the Iraqi civilians in Southern Iraq during the Gulf War:

    Note: Please don't forget to read the "Other related web sites" section at the end of this article. It has tragic statistic numbers that you need to be aware of.

    The following pictures reveal the truth about the barbaric attacks that were done by the United States of America's Armed forces against the Iraqi civilians in Southern Iraq. The United States used what is called "Uranium Bombs" against the unarmed Iraqi Civilians. The Deplete Uranium Bombs are exactly small Atomic Bombs!!.

    Rebuttal to those who claim that Deplete Uranium is not equal to small Atomic bombs.

    The Iraqis did not have nor used any Nuclear Weapons against the US and its Allies. I am not in anyway defending Saddam Hussein and his barbaric regime. But why did the Civilized United States decide to attack the innocent IRAQI CIVILIANS with Nuclear Weapons??!!

    The following pictures were extracted from http://www.wakefieldcam.freeserve.co.uk/extremede…. This site was sent to me by Noaman Ali; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him. You can also visit http://www.islamicparty.com/commonsense/iraq30.ht…. The link is about showing statistical numbers about the hard times that the Iraqis had gone through for the past 10 years of Sanctions, and it was sent to me by Shakoor Ahmed; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

    "In an act of stark cruelty, the US dominated Sanctions Committee refuses to permit Iraq to import the clean-up equipment that they desperately need to decontaminate their country of the Depleted Uranium ammunition that the US fired at them. Approximately 315 tons of DU dust was left by the use of this ammunition.The Sanctions Committee also refuses to allow the mass importation of anti-cancer treatments, which contain trace amounts of radio-isotopes, on the grounds that these constitute '…nuclear materials..' (Ross B. Mirkarimi)"

    And why is the Civilized United States until today (10 years after the war) is preventing Iraq from importing the "clean-up equipment" to clean its region from the Nuclear Radiation that is causing thousands of Iraqi kids to be born with its infection as shown below??!!
    FOR PICTURE EVIDENCE: http://www.answering-christianity.com/iraqi_tortu

  217. shabeer says:

    WHO R THE PEOPLE Ali Sina, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and many???????????/
    WORLD AGREED SCHOLAR ?? NOOOOOOOOOOOO…………………………..THEY GOT ANY AUTHORIZED AWARD OR SOMETHING FROM THE PUBLIC MEDIA……………….?NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO……………THEY CONDUCT ANY DEBATE WITH MUSLIM & WON OVER THEM? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO……………………………..

    PLZ READ THE FOLLOWING LINK & READY TO LAUGH
    http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatrihttp://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatrihttp://muslim-responses.com/Ali_Sinas_Mental_Stathttp://spencerwatch.com/

  218. Agracean says:

    Mr Saif, you're just another cursed braindead zombie.

  219. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    I predicted what your response would be. But it has done nothing to address the issues raised. Answer the questions asked and leave the Jews and Zionists alone. They have borne the brunt of muhammadan brutality over the years. Deceit is part and parcel of muhammadanism.Do not try to shift it to innocent people. None of us is anyone's payroll. What we do is voluntary to inform people about the poison which is called 'islam'.

  220. Saif says:

    all you cursed kuffar infidels are just employees puppets of the Jew Zionist and Christians and Hindus on their payroll is your job to do all this propaganda. So that why you do this with so much energy and like doing this to spoil everyones name and image and do slander Islam things you do this deception to fool everyone. It allowed in your religions to deceive people like this. But the worst of all this is the jewish
    zionist they are the center of all this and started this things to destroy the peace of the world.

  221. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Agracean,
    Based on his previous answers, he will start by calling you an 'infidel who will burn in hellfire'. That is what muhammadans always do when they are caught 'pants down'.
    While answering your question, if he ever will, I will like him to explain Bukhari 4:2:83 "–THE PROPHET SAID:'FIVE ARE REGARDED AS MARTYRS: THOSE WHO DIE AS A RESULT OF PLAGUE, ABDOMINAL DISEASE, DROWNING OR A FALLING BUILDING ETC AND THE MARTYRS IN ALLAH'S CAUSE'".
    By this, it means that a muhammadan who dies from a plague as a result of his poor hygiene or refusal to avail himself of medical treatment becomes a martyr with a passport to the muhammadan paradise to have 72 virgins and uncountable non virgins. Equally, a muhammadan who dies for not receiving medication or surgery for abdominal disease ends up in the muhammadan paradise with all the pecks it offers.
    Is there any greater absurdity?

  222. Agracean says:

    Let's wait for Mr Saif's reply. I think that he has a much humorous answerthan yours. 🙂

  223. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Agracean,
    According to muhammadan teaching, there will be endless sex orgies in the muhammadan paradise. There, men will have eternal erection while women "will have the most appetizing vaginas" whose virginity will never be broken no matter how many times they indulge in sexual intercourse. After every such act, the vagina will revert to its virgin state. Muhammad said that men will engage in sex "dahman, dahman". What they have not taught is whether allah will be a participant or just an observer. One is, however, tempted to believe that if allah allows it, then it too will participate. After all, muhammadanism teaches that the mother of the 'book' (quran) is with allah. If there is a mother and presumably a father, it necessarily follows that they will be active participants as well.
    There are verses in the quran which promise numerous virgins( black eye houris with voluptuous breasts) and non virgins to the martyrs as their reward for dying in the course pf allah. The promise is not restricted to heterosexual relationships. It caters for gay men as well. Thus, there is mention of ghilman who are described as eternal youth with bodies like pearls wearing brocades of unspeakable beauty.
    In pre-muhammadan Arabia, ghilmen were exquisitely handsome young men who were either slaves or eunuchs in the service of noblemen to satisfy the sexual desires of their masters and also look after their masters' harems.
    Yes, there will be sex in muhammadan paradise and every orientation will be provided for. But how much time they will have to worship allah is a big question. It seems that allah does not mind.
    What you know as hell is what the muhammadan calls paradise. Muhammad is already there. He said he saw women as the majority of the inhabitants. You can figure out what happens there.

  224. Agracean says:

    Mr Saif, let me ask you, 'can you have sex in your Allah's paradise?' How about helll? Can you have sex in hell too?

  225. chuck says:

    @Saif,
    //do not insult Allah or his prophet //
    The problem is if we talk about humane objectives it will automatically sound an insult to Allah and his prophet. By the way how to you know Allah's gender? It could be an eunuch too!!

  226. chuck says:

    @Saif,
    //Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people. //
    The comfort of death. For example the 3000 people dead after 911 attacks.

    //It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion a spirit of tolerance//
    93% of opiates are produced in Afghanistan alone, a muslim country. Honesty indeed. And then we have Iran that is harvesting nuclear weapon just so as to bomb Israel out of World Map, a country with which it doesn't even share borders or have any territorial dispute. Compassion?

    //Islam brings hope and comfort to millions of people.//
    What hope? Most Muslims are mired in war, illiteracy, poverty etc. Even in the Western countries the immigrant muslims are at the lower end of the economic pyramid.

    //do not you watch news everyday on TV and see everyone talking about Islam//
    Yes we do and we realize that many of the terrorist activities are funded by the Muslim clergy, much of the mafia and many of the drug traffickers hail from Muslim background.

  227. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Demsci,
    The muhammadans take every attack on their terrorists as an attack on their 'religion' because there is no distinction between 'a true' muhammadan and a terrorist. The religion promotes hate and terror. Every muhammadan has sympathy for the terrorists and only profess indignation for public consumption by the gullible western media, politicians, academicians and Holly Wood rag heads who have never been 100 kilometers from the scene of a muhammadan terrorist attack. They fail to realize that a bomb does not know who thinks of muhammadanism as evil or the one conceives it as a 'religion of peace'.

  228. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    "Powerful leaders" may say what they want about muhammadanism all in the name of modesty and liberalism, the fact, however, remains that you have not answered why allah degraded its messenger, its most valuable creature by allowing him to face the agony of the pains of death like an evil doer, according to sura 6:93. You have by your silence agreed that Muhammad was an evil doer.
    Some of those who will burn in hellfire are already there. They include the false prophet Muhammad and those who allowed themselves to be deceived by him. Others will join them later. You will be one of them, except you retrace your steps.

  229. Saif says:

    do not insult Allah or his prophet or you will be punished in hellfire

  230. Agracean says:

    Hi Alex, I think that you have many hurts and unforgiveness in your heart. I apologise to you on behalf of those Christians who have hurt you with their words or actions. Please note that Christians are sinners too and none of us is perfect except Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour. Look up to Jesus and you'll not be disappointed but if you cast your look at men, you'll be disappointed.

  231. Demsci says:

    And IMO, if you Muslims, in general, and overwhelming majority, keep rejecting and vilifying Bush, Obama, Cameron and Daniel Pipes, and politicians, writers, journalists who have the opinion with distinction of good Islam and bad Islamism, as much as Ali Sina, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller et al, then you in essence prove Ali Sina, Spencer and Geller right; that there is no meaningful distinction and that Islam is ALL BAD.

  232. Demsci says:

    Think about it, Saif. Barack Obama sent, in 5 years in office 300 drones, mostly in Afpak and Yemen, towards ""Islamist, terrorist targets" and killed almost 3000 Muslims through them, not to mention OSAMA Bin Laden. And Bush and Cameron also fought and fight in this way. But according to them America only fights terrorists, not Islam. But you Muslims in huge numbers and very often vilify these leaders for their policy and war!

    So how can you use THEM and what they say about Islam as good publicity for Islam?

    If you Muslims yourself almost NEVER say in Public: The Western leaders do not fight Islam, but only terrorism, so the Western leaders, they are OK and we support them! WHY NOT?

  233. Demsci says:

    That's right, Saif, great powerful leaders like Bush, Obama and Cameron do say that Islam is a religion of peace etc. But they AND many others, most notably Daniel Pipes, famous Islam-critic, also say, that they believe there is a distinction between "Islam" and "Islamism". And they all say: Islam is good, but Islamism is very, very bad and our enemy!

    But Ali Sina, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and many or most Western and Indian Islam-experts and commenters do NOT make this above distinction of Islam (good) and Islamism (bad) and they are against the whole of Islam, and see Islam as the enemy-ideology, as you must have noticed.

    But you Muslims almost never and nowhere support these mentioned powerful leaders and Daniel Pipes who do make the above distinction,

    one bit better than Ali Sina, and Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, and commenters here, who do not make this distinction. So there seems to be no use whatsoever in complimenting Islam and seeing only Islamism as the bad enemy of the West and India.

  234. Alex says:

    your language speaks volumes about your self you seem to be obsessed with devils and demons etc it's unnatural to think this way.
    you know Christians have this self righteous and superior nature that they are the above the rest are superhuman and better than the rest it reminds me of the Nazis.
    regarding hypocrites yes i know most Christians have a superiority complex and are true hypocrites i am not a preacher so i dont preach to large congregations or to people or go on the internet insulting other people's faith so i dont qualify as a hypocrite.
    i would suggest rather than displaying do research on your Christian faith the history etc i have done research too try to read the gnostic gospels the nag hammadi gospels and you'll have a different view of Christianity if you dont have the ebooks search on the net or i'll mail them to you. Open your mind learn to think and stop been spoon fed by your pastors and preachers and learn to live and let live in peace.

  235. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharna, let me ask you a question then, in order to answer your above question. How do you know that Allah's last prophet was not demonized? Will a demonized soul care for the orphans?

  236. Agracean says:

    Mr Saif, what religion of peace are you talking about here? For goodness saje, please switched on your TV everyday and watched all the horrible news about the havoc your radical devilish cult members have wrought in the name of your devil allah. The worst part of the news is to watch all the villains shout 'Allahu arkbar' at the end of the atrocities! Please tell me, what kind of 'peace' your religion is preaching to the world? I think that your religion of peace should be rephrased as the religion of unforgiveness, hate, bitterness, unrest and beheading. These terms perfectly matched the descriptions of your religion of 'peace'.

  237. Agracean says:

    Dear Alex, I don't deny the fact that I'm a hypocrite because I admit the fact that I'm an imperfect human being and I'm a sinner and I'm weak in certain areas of my life. Yes, you may classify me as a hypocrite but let me ask you frankly, can you ever deny the fact that you are a hypocrite, or at least for once being hypocritical in your lifetime?

  238. Saif says:

    you infidel devil who are you to say you are far worse than any creatures on earth and you are controlled by the devil to talk against Islam the religion of peace. Your gods are devils in disguise and wolfs in sheeps clothings.

  239. Sanatan Dharna says:

    @Agracean
    How do you know Jesus/Krishna/Ali Sina/Socrates are/were not demonized. Will a demonized soul will preach in the world as this Saint Kabirdas enlightened the human being
    Kabirdas
    1 Translation
    If You are Big so what? Just like a date tree
    No shade for travelers, fruit is hard to reach

    Meaning

    Being bid, important, poweful, wealthy is of no consequnce – Kabir likens this to a date tree that does not give shade to the traveller and its fruit is out reach.
    2 When you came in to this world , Everyone laughed while you cried
    Don't do such work, That they laugh when you are gone
    Meaning

    Do good work.
    3 Like the Oil is inside the Seed, Just as the Fire is Inside the Flint Stone

    Your God is Inside You, If you have the Power to Wake Up, then Wake Up

    Meaning
    God is within, like the oil in the seed – wake up if you have the power to
    4 Watching the grinding stones, the Light Kabir Cries
    Inside the Two Stones, no one survives
    Meaning:

    Kabir sees the grinding stones as the duality that we live in. Heaven and earth, Good and Bad, Male and Female, High and Low – all around is duality. This play of opposites, this Chalti Chakki (moving mill) gets everyone, no one is save from in it's powerful grip.

    Whoever enters this duality is crushed. No one survives. Kabir cries because rarely, if ever, does one see the oneness, the divinity, behind the duality.
    5 The Ocean is on Fire, The Smoke is not Visible
    He Knows Who Has Been there and been Burnt

    Meaning
    Experience teaches, the one who has felt the fire knows it – when you know, you know.
    6 Translation
    Kabir, save the wealth that remains in this Moment
    Departing with a bag of material wealth, no one has yet been seen.
    Meaning
    Enjoy the present moment. Accumulating wealth for tomorrow is a waste because tomorrow you will die. This is a certainty. No one has been seen that managed to take his material wealth with him.
    Hope yet lives, the world dies, people die and die again
    Perish yet hoarding wealth, spend and freedom attain

    7 Meaning

    Hope is that people will wake up, drop their attachments and hoardings and be free from the clutches of illusion.

  240. Agracean says:

    Mr Slave of Prophet, stop gloating! You are far worse than any creatures on earth because you have pledged allegiance with the devil and the will of the devil you want to do! Your Islamic biases, prayers and belief are far worst than meditation itself! Your allah is not my loving Creator God but the devil in disguise! Please wake up from your wet dream!

  241. Saif says:

    so now i say to you important things you infidels who are against Islam there is all the evidence in the media and with great powerful leaders.
    -if it were so unlike like your lies which is wrong but even in media they say only good things about Islam and defend and protect Islam and only bad things about the infidels how they are insulting Islam and they are doing all islamophobia things which is bad.
    -even great powerful leaders like Bush Obama and Cameron say Islam is a religion of peace and
    Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people.
    It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion a spirit of tolerance
    Islam brings hope and comfort to millions of people.
    Islam has charity, mercy, and peace justice and the peace on earth.
    The future does not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." -Barack Hussein Obama
    do not you watch news everyday on TV and see everyone talking about Islam and then remember to notice that there is something seriously wrong in your heads and you must rethink everything and stop behaving like infidels???

  242. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, thank you for sharing a bit of your personal information with me, of which I'm really touched. You reminded me of a heartless man named Mr Jonathan Harrel, whom I once loved dearly and the thought of him bring tears to my eyes. Yes, I know fairly well that this awesome site is specifically designed by my dear Ms Dr Ali Sina to destroy hate and restore peace on earth and that's the reason why I love the founder of this site so much. I'm not wasting my energy nor time here sharing the truth with every strangers but redeeming the time because the time is evil. Last but not least, please don't be angry with my good intentions here. Jesus loves you and I love you too. 😉

  243. Alex says:

    Agracean Christians like you like to go to church, socialize, party, meet, talk, chit chat, have get togethers, dinners, parties fellowships, Sunday school, Bible Study, sing songs, pray, praise and worship that's religion for you guys and you've made a business out of it you collect so much money doing all of this stuff and enjoy doing it too i know.
    Your pastors don't practice what they preach i know a pastor who preached from the pulpit equality and against favoritism only to see him hanging out with only the rich businessmen after service and ignoring everyone else after service he was practicing what he was preaching against, he was a damn hypocrite. A man who cheated and abandoned his wife and son enjoys other women also preaches the gospel with religious fervor. There are many hypocrites among you i know.
    I was raised Christian i know all this i have witnessed all of this with my own eyes.
    Christians dont practice what they preach they are good at preaching they are proud high headed like to insult degrade other faiths and have this superiority complex. Get over it sister the world has moved on. You know whenever i witness such happenings it makes me sick to the stomach i am glad to have moved on. I once was was a fanatic like you were but i am glad to have discovered other philosophies like Buddhism which is also peaceful. Christ was against organized religion himself you know and you are trapped into this organized form defending what you see as "the truth". This is sick madness. So go and enjoy your parties and get togethers meet talk and socialize in church with all of your rich friends ENJOY LIFE but dont insult another mans faith just because they are different than you are.
    Alex

  244. Slave of Prophet says:

    Haa haaaaaaaaaaa non-believers fighting with each-others. Very soon Islam will be in every house. Dear Agracean all these practice of non-believers are un-Islamic. Meditation/Concentration are not Islamic practice. I am happy you are not following non-believers theology. Buddha was a kufr. He doubted in the existence of Allah "the creator".

  245. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Before leaving from this thread ,i want to fulfill your wish .I am a software techie,located in Darjeeling (Northern India ) near Himalayan valley ,doing cloud computing for Microsoft ,from my home.Stop underestimating others.This site is specifically designed to know the profession of Mohammed and Allah and not about ordinary people like me and you. Erudite Mr I HATE ISLAM advised SANATAN DHARMA and you both not to waste your energy fighting for your religion,instead to concentrate on our common enemy Islam ,however you did not heed to his advice.If you continue these kinds of blunder again and again ,how your hero's dream of eradication of Islam from the planet earth will be fulfilled ,think again,may your savior bless you bye.

  246. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I think that you are drunk. Stop drinking Jack Daniel and be sober. I bet that you are not a professional at all because you are ashamed to disclose your profession. Well, since you like to practice meditation so much, I won't stop you from dreaming and getting high on it. Wish you all the best in that drunken state. Cheers.

  247. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    I am not a monk so that i can wish to attain Nirvana ,however any person who is pure and having dogged determination can certainly attain this state of mind.I do not doubt about Buddha,s preaching in respect of Nirvana.I have tasted a piece of cake it is too good ,however i don't have patience or time to eat full cake ,because of my materialistic responsibilities.As far showing proof of your belief ,you have failed miserably like your Muslim brethren here.They say hell and heaven and, you say sin and spirit man.Infect both of you are the birds of same feather.Once upon i said there is no difference between that Mr Slave of Prophet and Slave of Savior(your good self) and i stick to it.I said you need not take trouble to dig my professionalism,this is not important issue here.You prove your belief practically (so far you have failed) or vacate so simple.

  248. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I'm not asking you for the full details of your professionalism but just the field of your specialty only and yet, you can't answer me at all. This is really strange! Are you really a professional liar? Am I teaching others to swim while sitting comfortably on the shore? What are you muttering huh? Is it true that you are drunk when you muttered that statement? I think that your idol. Buddha, will like your idea of drinking a bottle of Jack Daniel while practicing meditation at the same time. This is a much faster way of attaining nirvana than sitting down under that Bodhi trees for donkey years. Have you tried Jack Daniel with coke? This awesome concoction taste so much better than drinking that bitter Jack Daniel by itself and it will help you attain nirvana in a much sweeter way. Cheers. xD

  249. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve, Shabby and Slave mentality,
    Let us examine what muhammadan literature further says about its prophet.
    Sura 6:93 :"IF YOU COULDST ONLY SEE WHEN THE EVIL DOERS ARE IN THE AGONIES OF DEATH-"
    Sura 50: 16-19 "-WE INDEED CREATED MAN–WE ARE NEARER TO HIM THAN THE JUGULAR VEIN(AORTA)–AND DEATH'S AGONY COMES IN TRUTH-''.
    Tabari 1:189 says that during his illness Muhammad would pray to allah to save him from the pains of the agonies of death but that did not happen.
    Put it this way: evil people go through the agonies of the pains of death; Muhammad went through the agonies of the pains of death; therefore, Muhammad was an evil man.
    The verdict is passed by Muhammad himself since he authored the quran which gave rise to the other writings.

  250. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    You should be aware this is a public domain. You need not wonder in which field i am working as professional.You mustn't tut others how to swim while seating comfortably on the shore. I don't bother about any sin or God ,i have life to spend as according to my wish ,i was not here before my birth and i will not be here after my death.So in between i want to enjoy life to its fullest extent .Some time i am on the rock enjoying Jack denial and some time doing meditation in an hermits hut and i am happy with it .Keep your savior ,spirit man,sin etc, things for your future generation OK.

  251. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, like what I said in my earlier comment that it is very unfair of you to bully a kind, beautiful and intelligent Christian lady like me, by asking me to prove that I've really attained the true enlightenment while you have no balls to ask all the sage/rishi in India especially Buddha, to prove all their claims to you. Why don't you act like a gentleman with balls and ask them first for the proof before asking me for it? I believe that your pants will drop when you realized that they were merely pulling your legs. :p

  252. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, what do you mean by great sage? Who knows that this great sage that you adore is demonized and you are ignorant of it.

  253. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I'm really surprised that you are a professional. I wonder what field you specialize in? Care to share with me a bit of your personal information? Of course, a short time of meditation is as good as a short nap which will rejuvenate your body. But what I meant is when a person meditate until beyond control. That's the danger of it.

  254. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    For your kind information i am a professional and ,i personally know how meditation help increase efficiency in my work.You are thinking meditation is bad ,i am practicing it so i am practical to its benefits.

  255. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Aim of meditation to reach the state of as Great sage "Kabirdas" says

    Kabir says – this state is very difficult to achieve. When your body becomes still, your mind is still, speech still, even surati (soul’s seeing faculty) and nirati (soul’s hearing faculty) are also still (then you know).

    State of jaap is subject to death, ajapa(ceaseless remembrance without tongue) and anahad (regions of unstuck melody) are also subject to destruction, but the attention or soul which is absorbed in the (true) shabd or sound, will not be a prey of Kaal(Death).

  256. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    You need to prove this. How you got enlightenment? Follower will work on your method to confirm your claim & what enlightenment you have got? Can you share with with me.

  257. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, for goodness sake, please stop deceiving yourself for one moment and be honest. How on earth can you deny the existence of sin? Even Buddha admit that sin exist and he named it 'karma'! Mr practical Sakat, if you continue to think and believe that meditation is really good for you, then please go ahead and sit down under that Bodhi tree and meditate till the day you die and rot and became fertilizer for that lucky tree. Isn't it too wonderful for you to meditate your life away ?No work, no stress, no money, no need to eat or drink, no need to pee and poop, no wife and children, no responsibilities at all. It's no wonder that meditation is such a popular trend among lazy bums.

  258. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    Obviously, you have no response to the facts brought out to show that Muhammad was evil and what he brought about is destroying humanity like no other pestilence. Instead of blaming the internet, you should rather thank it for providing the avenue for you to open your eyes and know the truth.
    When the treaty of Hubeidayya was being negotiated, Abu Bakr the gullible, told Umar, who was disgusted with the terms, that allah would not degrade Muhammad because he was its apostle.. But allah degraded Muhammad by allowing him to die excruciatingly of poisoning. That should tell you that Muhammad was a liar. I know that you are a Muhammadan, who can do unimaginable things, but it is doubtful that you would stand by and watch your most loved one being harmed when you have the wherewithal to prevent such harm. Allah stood-by non nonchalantly as its messenger was poisoned and did nothing to help him out of his suffering.
    That shows that the man lied. If there was allah, then it did not love or regard Muhammad as its prophet contrary to what he professed. Your 'religion' is, therefore, nothing but total deceit.
    Had it not been for the internet, you would never have been made privy to all the information now available to you and others.
    Yes, the Holy Bible says that one will reap what he sows and that was exactly what happened to Muhammad. He lived by the sword and also died by the 'sword'. SAVE YOURSELF BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.

  259. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    There is nothing called sin exist,meditation can cure any kind of deadly sin ,meditation makes man efficient.See the people of Japan ,China,Taiwan etc ,they are not beggars, of course those who are mad after god are certainly had become beggars,if not materially at least on emotional level.For your kind information many MNC,s and Top educational institution's around the world are following these meditation courses regularly to their employees for increasing their work efficiency .That the great teacher S.N.Goenka himself an industrialist .Only boogeyman man preach sin ,heaven-hell,after life perdition etc,fools and day dreamers adopt it and later on take refuge in mental asylum.

  260. Saif says:

    is very wrong that these cursed infidels are for misusing the internet for anti Islamic things they are going against the very heart of humanity All these infidel devils are hiding behind the internet only to do these evil things one day they will have to be caught and brought to justice in end justice will prevail the justice will come down upon them like a ton of bricks or a sunami. These infidels cannot claim innoccent in the end then infidels know very well it is written in their bible you reap as u sow

  261. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, Buddha can only offer you temporal bliss but no final solution to our sin problems at all. Can you imagine a nation no need to work and all her citizens practice meditation and seek alms for life? Meditation can't save you but only the Savior of your soul can. His name is Jesus Christ. Yes, it's really sad to know that many atrocities were commited by Christians too. But, let's not forget that they are sinners too, like you and me and besides that, we don't know the full details.

  262. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, everybody here knows that my beloved Ms Dr Ali Sina is an Iranian and the founder of this awesome website. He has never claimed to be a sage but an Atheist. So, the evidence here is that you are confused and misinformed.

  263. Sakat says:

    @Agracean

    "I just want to thank you very much for the course and everything you are doing for that and for us. So, thank you very much :-). I’m very happy and glad that I could participated the course! I have participated the course already twice before, but it is for the first time I finished it. I feel that it is vital for me to continue with meditation etc. First two attempts were not probably serious enough. Now I feel that there is no other way. I was forced to participate the course for the third time because, even if I have everything (great family, friends, good job and enough money) I don’t feel happy (it is much more better now :-)). So, that is my short story. I like vipassana meditation and especially metta, mudita etc. meditations. I am very happy that these meditations are part of our training also. Thank you very much again Andrew and I wish you all the best!" – J, Czech Republic

    "Many thanks for your work with the Vipassana Fellowship. I've enjoyed and greatly benefited from the course. It can be difficult to know where or how to begin this kind of practice and the availability of such a vipassana course online was just what I needed. Thanks again." – A, USA

    "I was a member of your September 2008 course. Sorry for the late feedback. I should say, I am i"Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this course. Before, I was trying to develop insight without a proper base and this course gave me a necessary patience to develop concentration using the samatha techniques." – J, UK

    September 2008 course:

    in the process of gaining wisdom and knowledge from the course. Surprisingly, during the course, I had found it hard to realise the treasure that was hidden inside the course. As the days keep progressing, and as I keep contemplating about the dhamma teachings, subtle changes in my personality keep happening. One thing for sure, this is something that is going to stay with me for my whole life. Please keep up the wonderful work that you have been doing by conducting such courses." – R, India

    "Thank you very much for the course – I got a lot out of it and found it really did effect my perception of life and deepen a spiritual connection and a desire to progress further." – R, UK

    "Just wanted to say thank you very much for your support during this wonderful Vipassana course. I think your vision to take a 2500 year old spiritual tradition and then teach it an authentic yet high tech. way, true to the tradition, is an outstanding achievement. I would (and do) recommend people, who are genuinely interested in establishing themselves in a Buddhist practice, to look at this Vipassana Fellowship Course. I have personally found the course to greatly assist me in the integration of the Dhamma into my life. It gives me a daily focus that shows up as equanimity, joy and purpose. " – W, Australia

    "I just wanted to say you for putting on the Vipassana Fellowship course. I was excited to find an on line option that would let me explore meditation and this course certainly exceeded my expectations. … I very much liked the daily readings … I've always wanted to develop my ability to be more compassionate but as your basic geeky engineer it's not in my nature, although, I know I do better than a lot of people. So I thank you for helping me to focus on compassion and loving kindness as it fits with my aspirations. … Thank you very much for the guidance you provided to myself & the others through this course. You have much to be proud of. If you ever set up a retreat in Canada or the Northern US I'd appreciate knowing as I think I might be able to muster enough courage to attend." – L, Canada

    "I have been on a journey for the last three and a half years. Some steps has been the logical effects of prior events, others like this class have been pure leaps of faith. I want to again thank you for making this leap more meaningful then I could have every hoped!" – P, USA

    These above people are not Buddhist and now it is left to your judgment who is imperfect ,Buddha who shows you a practical path,which many people are getting benefited or the savior who only expect belief no proof of his tall claims his followers are killing children in school and in malls,fathers engaged sexual misconducts with nuns and small kids in their respective church's.

  264. Sakat says:

    Keep aside your ego and don't argue for the sake of argument . I told you i have seen a boy of 14 year old reaching state of Nirvana.If any monk is not reaching the state of Nirvana,because he keeps in his mind of reaching the state of mind and thus lost whole process and deprived of state.However i am providing here under some comments from people who have undergone Vipassanan coursese from many part of the world .:

    "Thank you very much for the Vipassana course! … I kept up, learned, and benefited in what feels like a major way." – M, USA

    "Impermanence! I do not like endings. Thank you so much for offering this meditation course to the world. I was so happy to find it." – S, Canada

    "Hi, I have just completed the course. It was fantastic, life altering. Feel very sad that it is finished. I have now established a daily meditation practice and will try to find a group in Sydney to further my dhamma practice. Thank you, it really has been a remarkable experience. I will join the Parisa and stay in touch with this organization. I have NO complaints only gratitude. Thank you." – K, Australia

    "As we near the end of the course I just want to say 'thank you' for your work on it and share some of my thinking and experience at thsi point. Ive found the different aproaches to meditation interesting and useful and have appreciated your focus on practicalities. The frequently asked questions have helped to avoid my inundating you with questions, as many people have clearly walked the path before asking them! … I am happy that it is a practical philosophy for living an ethical life, I like the emphasis on acting skillfully, feel that individual responsibility for ones actions (rather than relying on redemption) makes sense … Thank you for a very accessible path! – J, UK

    January 2009 course:

    "A year ago, I read a book on vipassana meditation which inspired me to take January 2009 course. I am Christian and come from Pakistan. I am a teacher in a high school and couldn't afford to do this course but I was accepted in the course under free Buddhist Homelands Scheme. I would like to state that the impact of the course has been phenomenal. It has changed my entire life. I AM really blessed. Brother Andrew, thank your very much indeed." – N, Pakistan.

    "I live in the western part of Texas, 3-4 hours from any Sangha, and deeply appreciated your course, with the different types of meditation, and the depth of information on the elements of Buddhism. I will definitely remain connected to your program, and hopefully will have the joy of meeting you some day. Your kindness and clarity opened many doors and windows in a shuttered life, and gave further impetus to pursue the path revealed by the Enlightened One. I will commit one day at a time, one breath at a time, and with the help of your light reach some degree of insight. At times I feel suspended between the demons of lust and greed, but meditation does bring hope that these arrows may someday turn to flowers. Thanks again for a wonderful and enlightening course." -J, USA

    continued……..

  265. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Ali Sina is not Indian. He is Iranian. I am not afraid to say Ali Sina is sage to today era. He is enlightened and making us also enlightened. If Ali Sina claims something he put evidence you can check and reconfirm his claims.

  266. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, be honest and stop telling lies. Please go to every monastery in India and ask all those high ranking monks or nuns if they know of any human being besides Buddha who has attained nirvana. Like what I said much earlier, Budhha is a good teacher but he is an imperfect human being afterall and he could be wrong in his thinking and teachings. By the way, how can the blind lead the blind to eternity? Only God or a perfect, sinless human being has the final solution to our sin problem and obviously, Buddha is disqualified to do so as he is a sinner like you and me too.

  267. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    It is wrong to say none of Buddha's follower had never reached the state of Nirvana. Many of his follower have reached this during Buddha’s own period, ex,Sariputra, Mogalan etc ,and later on Nagarjuna ,Bodhisattva (Who took Buddhism to China). Our body is formed of several million cells .In frequency they decay and replaced by new cells this you will come to know when you attend vipassana meditation course as taught by Buddha . Buddha was the first person to realize this phenomena and he exclaimed “oh whatever I see in this visible world is not real ,every matter changes each and every second, though a stone look like stable, but all the time in it the movement of atoms take place, so nothing is permanent in this apparent world”. The second phenomena he came to know in deep meditation that there is direct relation between mind and body ,so if I bring bad thoughts in me the formation of cells on my body is different for example ,if I get angry my body become solid (converting from subtlety to gross )and become painful. This is true I myself experiencing this everyday .Now the third phenomena he found which took him to concentrate on a single cell (just imagine out of millions of millions cells from gross to subtle, from subtle to subtlest and from subtlest to the single cell it took him 7 years) .And on a full moon day of summer he was able to split that ultimate single cell and he found nothing “shoony” (0) and that is called “Nirvana”. Reaching state of Nirvana is not easy .Buddha say’s anybody can reach the state of Nirvana it depends on his effort or he must be a meditator since many of his earlier life (that is called the law of Karma). I have seen a boy of 14 years old reaching that state of Nirvanan,once while attending meditation course. One has to undertake meditation under the supervision of expert teacher and in a conducive atmosphere .I suggest you to undergo a 10 day vipassana course .My teacher (not Buddha) say’s after doing these course a Jew become true Jew, a catholic become true catholic ,a Hindu become true Hindu. So don’t worry if you undergo these 10 day course your faith /belief to your creator get diluted no, it will become strong in many fold .Btw I love Jesus equally .Buddha and Jesus are my two eyes. Google here below,if you are interested to undergo meditation course, there are hundreds of center throughout the world
    "Vipassana International Acadamy"Offering courses in Vipassana Meditation as taught by S.N. Goenkain the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin Course Schedule

  268. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, what confirmation on practical level are you expecting? You've got to be practical for once and know that so far, in human history, we know that only Buddha himself claimed to attain nirvana and none of his followers, no matter how hard they tried to follow his good examples, has ever attained it! So, in this case, how can you be practical?

  269. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    I was expecting you to reply to Chuck's post. But since you have failed, refused or neglected to do so, it leads to the inevitable conclusion that you have accepted what the erudite gentleman said. In addition to what he posted, I want to give you a few instances of people who were killed because Muhammadans considered them to be apostates. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan provides a very fertile ground. Remember Ms Benazia Bhutto, the former Prime Minister of that God forsaken country? She was killed because, as a woman, she should not have entered politics. This ties with your 'prophet's' order that a society ruled by a woman cannot be prosperous therefore women should not be allowed to rule. The Governor of the state of Punjab was shot dead for speaking against the killing of the minorities minster. The minister himself had earlier met a similar fate for advocating the abolition of the blasphemy law. Their assassins have the status of celebrities today and no prosecutor is comfortable handling any of the cases. The judge who was initially assigned the case of the killer of the Governor of Punjab fled to Saudi Arabia or there about.
    Very recently another female politician was killed because she 'violated' the primitive sharia law which consigns the role of women to the purdah only.
    Were all these ' criminal infidels' or victims of a oppresive system which is cruel and super rigidly evil?
    Apart from the minorities minister, all the other victims were muhammadans. If this gruesome end met them, do you have any doubt about the fate of those you call 'infidels'?

  270. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    When some one ready and willing to show me his preaching in practical , i followed him and found it genuine on practical level.Where as you want me to follow the preachings of your master,i didn't say i am not follow you, but i want confirmation on practical level.As per me, absolute truth is only one and rest is apparent truth ,our sense can grasp these apparent truth intellectually ,so your example above is not suitable to understand unknown absolute truth.I am wise as usual,but you failed to understand the elaboration i did in the above post , of your example from the prism of spirituality.I am sorry it is not my fault.

  271. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, you can laugh at your own stupidity for as long as you live, but please be wise and know that being too practical is no good because that means that you have little or no faith in anyone at all. An excellent example to prove my point was stated in my above comments. It would be good if yo have faith in me when I tell you the truth that I'm a lady. But I knew that you are a practical man and you would not believe me until you check my private parts. Don't you think that you ought to have faith in life?

  272. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    I laugh at your awful argument . One say, follow me i will show you private part to confirm my statement and, another say , believe me there is a private part.When asked proof ,he has no proof but only insist, to believe his statement .And my friend believe the later though he has not shown the existence of private part, where as ,when the former say i am ready to show you the existence of private part and the way to see it,she discard him.I don't understand what logic you are following.Practical thinker is weirdo as per you,what about blind believer,weird.

  273. Agracean says:

    Hi Alex, have you ever seen a dog returns to its vomit? Don't you find it totally disgusting to witness a dog licking all its vomit up? I'm really surprised that you who have once attained enlightenment became stupid again and prefers to remain in that state stupidity and at the same time, enjoying the pleasures of it while forsaking your eternal blessings. I'm not here to destroy other faiths as per your stupid remarks but to share the truth here, so that many people will know the truth and the truth will set them free. I pray that you will be wise and know that Jesus loves you and He is waiting patiently for you to come back to His embrace again. God bless.

  274. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, I laugh as I read your above comment. There are so many 'rishi/sage' in India who claimed that they are the enlightened ones and yet, they don't have to do anything at all to prove themselves but yet, you required me to prove my claim. Isn't this very unfair to me?

  275. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Amir Khureshi, please note that I'm a kind, beautiful and intelligent Christian lady and not a man. I'm glad that you're clear minded, unlike some confused minds here. Cheers.;)

  276. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I respect your wish to wean my ego and not to continue our debate here anymore. However, please do let me offer you one more golden advice and that is, no matter how practical you can be, you can't possibly check everyone's private parts to determine if they are telling the truth or not. Sometimes in life, you ought to have faith in others, especially if they are telling you the absolute truth.

  277. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Just claim are not enough to be sage . If a scientist claims he is scientist. He need to prove his invention or discovery before others. He will present his theory how he invented or discovered the particular thing and other people will also work on theory to reconfirm the claim of scientist. Same concept of sages.In the sage concept everyone has the divinity within them. People just need to realize it. And once we do meditation and release the Atman inside us through Yoga, and release everyone has the Atman in them, we reach enlightenment and connect directly to the higher state of consciousness, God. And that connection to the higher state of consciousness, God, is called Moksha.

    God example, Buddha was Rishi. He taught his followers how to reach enlightenment the way he did. It’s call Vipassana meditation. Krishna taught his followers how to achieve what he has achieved, Yoga/meditation.

  278. Sakat says:

    @Agracean ·
    You are feeding your ego.I asked you to prove your "belief ",but instead you have resorted to pseudo argument .All Semitic religion are based on belief,they insist people to believe their belief.Where as the eastern philosophy based on practical proof.Buddha said don't believe me blindly.I have shown you a path , you have to travel the journey of your own to realize that ultimate reality/truth. Prescription won't cure the decease ,but the consumption of medicine prescribed in that prescription will cure the decease. There is no merit in continuing our debate, i hope, we should conclude it here.Thank U.

  279. Sakat says:

    @Amir Khureshi
    Thanks,nice presentation.

  280. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Nothing sensible is ever allowed in muhammadainsm except the filth that comes from the quran. After all in muhammadanism, there is no room for independent thinking.Whatever poison must be swallowed whole. Thank God that this site exists because some people have used their brains to bring others out of the darkness of muhammadanism.

  281. Saif says:

    I just have one statement to say and nothing else that this all is blasphemy on this website and everything that is written. It wouldnt be permitted at all anywhere because it's against everything.

  282. Alex says:

    Agracean Christians like you like to go to church, socialize, party, meet, talk, have get togethers, dinners, parties fellowships, Sunday school, Bible Study, sing songs, pray, praise and worship etc etc well that's your way of worship.
    Going to church has become a social affair you know.
    I know all this because i was raised Christian i went to church observed all this. I know how proud Christians are. I study Buddhist philosophy now i lead a much better peaceful meaningful life now.
    Well there are others too you know like Buddhists who find peace in their lives by reading their Philosophy practicing it. Not everyone is supposed to be worshiping, partying and hanging out like you do. So please stop trying to destroy other faiths just because they dont have your habits and mannerisms and way of life.

  283. Alex says:

    Christians like you like to go to church, socialize, party, meet, talk, have get togethers, dinners, parties fellowships, Sunday school, Bible Study, sing songs, pray, praise and worship etc etc well that's your way of worship.
    Going to church has become a social affair you know.
    I know all this because i was raised Christian i went to church observed all this. I know how proud Christians are. I study Buddhist philosophy now i lead a much better peaceful meaningful life now.
    Well there are others too you know like Buddhists who find peace in their lives by reading their Philosophy practicing it. Not everyone is supposed to be worshiping, partying and hanging out like you do. So please stop trying to destroy other faiths just because they dont have your habits and mannerisms and way of life.

  284. chuck says:

    @Saif
    //no one is killed everyone is free//
    And this is your islamic propaganda. You think the Shahi Bukhari was also created out of the Western propaganda?
    Shahi Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260:
    Narrated Ikrima:
    Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I
    would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.'
    No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

  285. Dharma says:

    wrong

  286. Saif says:

    all this is western propaganda about killing no one is killed everyone is free also they killed the American Sheik Alawki with predator drone missile because he left America citizenship behind ok so the westerns are evil killers first who do commit crimes against all muslims and others.

  287. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    One of such crimes is to become an apostate. Where is the freedom of speech and free debate you talked about? No crime is greater in this world than muhammadanism because, among other things, it denies people their God given right to choose what they want for themselves.

  288. chuck says:

    @Saif,
    //That is lie because only evil infidels who do crime are killed.//
    Which exactly proves my point. Because as per Islam, leaving Islam implies you become infidel. In fact leaving Islam itself is considered a crime.

  289. Amir Khureshi says:

    @Saif
    Those who are fit to become dust been (Islam) property will choose the dust been like my friend addressee here.Intelligent and educated like me cough it out .Those who remained in Islam are animals they don't have any prominence in mainstream humanity and in this 21st century intelligent world.

  290. Saif says:

    That is lie because only evil infidels who do crime are killed.

  291. chuck says:

    @Saif,
    // becomes he can never leave because he dont want to leave Islam because he is happy and in peace//
    Because if he leaves Islam then he becomes liable to be killed under Sharia laws.

  292. Saif says:

    Thats why Islam is increasing everyday and once someone becomes he can never leave because he dont want to leave Islam because he is happy and in peace.

  293. Amir Khureshi says:

    I-HATE-ISLAM
    THANKS

  294. Amir Khureshi says:

    @Agracean ·
    Please forgive me sir ,i am confused at understanding your thread,it is not response to your post.Once again i beg pardon for irritation on my part.

  295. Amir Khureshi says:

    @Agracean
    This is too much on your part ,if you expect me to believe things which cannot be practically proved. And suppose , i believe this,don't you think this will be an injustice with other person (believers of Allah and Mohammed) . Why i have to believe your creator god and not the creator Allah. Both of your assertion based on belief ,both you claim, your respective belief is right one.What wrong is there if i ask proof for believing any one of your claim.

  296. Agracean says:

    Weirdo not wires.

  297. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I think that you are too practical a man and you have absolutely no idea of what faith is all about. Let me put it in this way. Since you are such a practical man, you won't believe me even if I tell you that I'm a lady unless I show you my private parts. Don't you think that you're such a wires?

  298. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Amir Khureshi,
    Please continue to educate Sieve till he leaves the path of perdition which is the ultimate destination of all muhammadans.

  299. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve,
    Bad news for you. Iam not a westerner. I am an African. Specifically, I am a Nigerian and we are among the greatest producers of oil today in the world. Unfortunately, there is not much to show for all that accrued revenue because, since our independence in 1960, the muhammadans have been at the helm of affairs for the greater part of that period. There was nothing but squander mania on a prodigal scale.So I cannot be jealous of you for you have nothing in terms of natural resources which I don't have.
    Nobody in the west is jealous of your 'wealth' either. Without the technology of the west all that oil would have remained buried in the ground and would have been of no use to you. There are many countries and territories which have developed without sitting on vast reserves of oil. Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and many others are living proof. Let your oil not pollute your brain and make you feel more important than you really are.
    Talking about envy and lust, those apply more to you, muhammadans, than the westerners. The traffic is unidirectional. More of you are fleeing your satan possessed homelands for better homes in the west. Every single day sees plane loads of muhannadans being emptied at western airports. The asylum seekers are from muhammadan countries and will risk everything to settle in the west.There is no corresponding flow in the opposite direction.
    If having oil signifies the blessing of allah, then God has blessed Israel mightily because her reserve of oil is said to be as huge as that of Saudi Arabia. When that oil goes into production, the muhammadans will force themselves to voluntarily shut up. With a far less but productive population, the per capita income and GDP of Israel will be out of this world.
    Muhamadan history has it that your prophet was a robber, murderer, rapist, pedophile and totally evil. How would you love or respect a man who kills your father, enslaves you and your brothers and then rapes your mother and sisters repeatedly as of right? If, in your conviction, such a person deserves to be called a 'prophet', then you can worship Muhammad for that was his life style. Based on his antecedents, no sane human being can call Muhammad anything but a retarded semi ape which could not complete its evolutionary cycle.

  300. Amir Khureshi says:

    @Saif
    First straighten your language, that is essential for effective communication,we Muslims are uneducated lot ,see none is able to refute Dr Sina's allegation about Islam and Mohammed .All these day's i prayed so called Allah to help the believer in defeating Dr Sina , but no help came forward.One day i really started giving full attention to Sina's allegation ,even for a moment i was dreaming the prize money . However when i went deep caressing Quaran,sunna,hadiths,sira,
    to my shock i found they corroborates with the allegations of Dr Sina.The last nail was hit on that day to the coffin of my belief,now i am free bird without any burden of false Allah and thug Mohammed upon my shoulder.For your kind information Muslims are not rich only Arab's are and they don't share their wealth with you ,unlike infidels.Their sale of oil depend on infidels demand .To extract oil they need the technology of kaffir's not Allah or Mullah.And for you the job reserved is to wash the ass of rich Arabs . Don't try to jump in the sky ,heed my advice leave this cult for your better future .

  301. Saif says:

    You all westerner are jelous man of Islam and all Muslims because of Allah he give us oil and riches and lots of money and you cannot contain yourselves and are burning with jelousy envy lust and anger at your fate so that why you come to Muslim country to steal everything. It is you who are the rascal and robbers who have been robbing from ancient time.

  302. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Amir Khureshi,
    I congratulate you on letting your eyes be opened. Please join this enlightenment program and feel free to ask any question on an issue that bothers you.

  303. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve
    It is very traditional of muhammadans to blame everything on Jews and Christians. Then they attribute each disagreement to greed. This attitude shows an alarming state of insecurity brought about by lack of self confidence. Dr Sina is neither a Jew nor a Christian. In several of his articles he has criticized both religions. The rascal and robber was the man you hail as prophet today. He brought the poison that has polluted the world. Why do you think he died such a miserable death after suffering for three years? If, indeed, he was a prophet, why did God not reveal to him that his food was poisoned and why did God not heal him after?
    You have allowed yourself to be brianwashed by those who know the truth but because of losing their means of economic power and prestige in society choose to live in falsehood. The sooner you realize this and save yourself the better it will be for you. Dr Sina is doing a great humanitarian job. MAY GOD BLESS HIM.

  304. Saif says:

    It is the evil Jewish Zionist and the Christians that are paying and bribing you all to do this you are all just greedy rascals robbers and lust for money to do this poisonus stuff

  305. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve
    It is your so-called " expert muslims scholars" who are afraid of facing Dr Sina "for a honest to honest peaceful debate". Zaki Naik is a good example. The internet is neutral enough for everybody. So they should have nothing to fear. Let each debater make his point on the internet and the audience will have the opportunity of cross-checking facts adduced to know who the intellectual is and who deserves to be branded the pseudo-intellectual. They are so many people who want the matter to be settled finally but the stumbling block to this has always been and will always be the muhammadans. Written records are the best ways of preserving history and such a debate will be of historical proportions.
    Like all muhammadans you indulge in deceit. There is no freedom of speech in any muhammadan country. If there were, what would each of those countries be doing with blasphemy laws which are invoked even when no situation warrants it? No promise given by a muhammdan goes beyond the air that brings it out of the throat. No guarantee of ones safety given by a muhammadan merits consideration.

  306. Amir Khureshi says:

    Dear Dr Ali Sina Sir,
    Since last 2years i am reading your article here in this site ,Sir,first of all i salute you for opening my eyes about my religion and this rascal Nabhi. Since child hood we are taught to keep this man Mohammed on high pedestal.All these years i was proud to be a Muslim ,and even i used to think infidels are not knowing about real spirituality and Allah (the single god) ,hence we are superior to them .But now i have realized that Islam is not a religion and this thug,road robber,pedophile ,murderer can't be called human, let alone a prophet.My request to my fellow Muslim brothers and sisters is, not to follow this cult Islam and this criminal Mohammed .Don't waste your time doing this dirty prayer exercise use that time for hard work which can bring good returns .If that is not possible spend good time in a gimme. Sina Siras as you said this book is good to read in a commode, i have kept good number of copies in my commode not for reading but for ……………..guess, otherwise they are burden for me.I salute you once again for the opening my eye's, now i am free bird ,i wish you all the success in your endeavor.

  307. Saif says:

    Ali Sina then i challenge you to remove and destroy this website if you cannot face Expert Muslims Scholar for a honest to honest peaceful live debate in a Muslim country on live television with a live audience and lights and cameras to record everything and settle it finally. Islam always have free speech and free debates of expression. Why then Ali Sina are you hiding behind the internet like poisonus snake, is the internet so much more important and comfortable???

  308. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sieve
    What stops your expert 'mullahs and madrassa leaders' from engaging Dr Ali Sina on the internet? It attracts no cost to them. The reason they will not do that is simply the fear of being exposed as those perpetrating fraud. What better evidence is there than the fact that instead of subscribing to intellectual debates, your mullahs and madrassa leaders will invoke the ever present omnibus blasphemy law which covers a wide range of issues and use that as a cover for murder? You are the ones who are afraid to face the world.Muhammad did it with the deputation from Najran when he failed to acquit himself in a debate. The community would be surrounded and given a dawa some months after the debate. Muhammadan tricks are rather childish, always hiding behind violence to cover its deficiency.

  309. Saif says:

    You cursed infidel Ali Sina if you are so great and wise as you claim why dont you just simply answer this important question.
    WHY O WHY don't you physically come to an Muslim country like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen or Pakistan (your stay will be free of cost no charges) Where all of your words can be clearly heard and have a face to face live debate with all the expert mullahs and madrassa leaders on the stage with lights cameras recording equipment and a large audience.
    ARE YOU SO AFRAID U CHICKEN COWARD to come???

  310. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    I said i am practical ,even your loving creator decides to force it down his whims upon my throat ,i will not allow it to happen unless he proves his existence practically. I don't want to die a stupid death of "blind belief ",rather a brave death of confronting truth.Sorry you knocked a wrong door.

  311. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, never compare me with that braindead zombie. My job here is to share the truth with you and man, you have the choice to believe and accept it or not and nobody, not even my loving Creator God can force it down your throat. So, please continue to practice meditation till the day you die in your stupidity.

  312. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    I am not saying anything from out blue,my statements are based on fact/practicality.Unlike your myopic vision based on belief ,Buddhas teachings are based on practical experience.If he say,s , upon establishing oneself in meditation regularly one will encounter certain experiences, (it depends on the progress of the student) he mean it.If the student don't experience those symptoms ,the fault lies in that aspirant and not with the teacher.My own experience i am telling you ,i am doing meditation since last so many years , as i am progressing on each step i am experiencing the symptoms exactly described by the master when he was alive some 2700 years back.If you believe a third person will come to your rescue forget it . You have to become your light to dispel the darkness in your journey of life.This profound truth based on experience was narrated by this great man many century back,however some Charlton appeared in the history later on and deviated humans from reality to false hood. Some time i feel there is no difference between that Mr Slave of prophet and you ,both of you insist others to believe your belief without any practical follow up.

  313. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, if I tell you frankly that I'm a sage who has reached enlightenment. Will you believe me?

  314. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, like what I've said in my above comment. Don't ever practice meditation for fun because you are unaware of the danger of it. Not only meditation itself but also yoga. These two activities are really dangerous and many people are demon possessed as a result of their foolishness.

  315. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Reason may be he has not go through requires stages before reaching to stage of meditation.
    Before reaching to stage of concentrating an aspirant has to follow all these in stages in his/her life.

    1.1.MORAL OBSERVANCES which consists of five commandments:
    1.Nonviolence ~ Let all cease to bear malice to any living being and all animals with no exception to any, let him always love all.
    2.(Truthfulness ~ Practice of truth, discriminating between right and wrong. It consists of acquiring the knowledge of the nature, properties and characteristics of all things from earth to God, in assiduously obeying God’s commandments and worshiping Him, in never going against His Will and in making nature subservient to oneself.
    3.Honesty ~ Let no one ever commit theft, and let all be honest in his dealings.
    4.Self-control ~ Let all practices self-control, never be lustful.
    5.Humility ~ Let all be humble, never vain.
    PHYSICAL DISCIPLINE
    Back to contents
    2.PHYSICAL DISCIPLINE ~ which consists of another five commandments:
    1.Purification ~ Renounce all passions and vicious desires, externally by the free use of water etc.
    2.Contentment ~ Work hard righteously but neither rejoice in the resulting profit nor be sorrowful in case of loss. Renounce sloth and be always cheerful and active.
    3.Austerity ~ Keep the mind unruffled whether in happiness or misery, and do righteous deeds.
    4.Self-Study ~ Study the books of true knowledge, and teach them as well, and associate with good and pious men, and contemplate on and mentally recite Om (God) which is the highest name of the Supreme Spirit.
    5.Devotion ~ Let all resign their souls to the Will of God.
    These ten commandments are important not only in Yoga but also in life, providing for the support of life itself. Without them there can be no progress whether individually or socially, for character is built out of them. Whether one believes in God or not the observance of morals is essential, because without them nobody, even a scientist or a scholar, or a genius, can be called a true human being. Without observing morals there can be no control of the mind. And, as the aim of yoga is mind-control, morals must be observed.
    Many aspirants have fallen by the wayside because they did not pay sufficient attention to morality. Moral precepts play an important part in concentrating the rays of the mind. For instance, when a person is established in the practice of nonviolence, not even under provocation will he become angry. Scriptural studies help one in establishing concentration and gradually purify one’s mind.
    "There is no turpitude in drinking alcohol, eating meat, committing adultery, etc. for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstinence brings great reward." Manu
    EXERCISE
    Back to contents
    3.EXERCISE (Yoga Postures)~ is a system of making all parts of the body strong, healthy and supple. Even those not practicing the mystical aspects of yoga may do exercise to improve health. Exercise regulate breathing, ensure proper digestion of food and increase longevity. Exercise strengthen the nervous system, having a salutary effect on the brain centers and spinal cord. Exercise relaxes the five systems that make up the physical body:-
    1.The physical system which consists of all the tissues and fluids of the body from bone to skin.
    2.The vital systems
    3.The mento-motor system which comprises the principle of volition, the principle of individuality, and the five principles of action – articulation, grasp, locomotion, reproduction and excretion.
    4.The mento-sensory system which comprises the principle of judgment, the principle of memory, and the five principles of sensation – sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch.
    5.The Spirituo-emotional which is love, cheerfulness, happiness (little or much).
    The elementary matter is the medium through which the soul entertains these feelings. It is only when the physical body is in perfect health that the mind can concentrate.

  316. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    What unscientific / illogical/ irrational I had said? Please bring in my notice I will my stances if any. I repeat again
    We have is the SAGES(RISHI) vs the PROPHET concept. First we must define what they are.

    Rishi/SAGE: Is someone who has reached enlightenment by practicing meditation/Yoga and connects directly with God. A person who not only got some message, but personally experienced God, the highest state of consciousness. During that time, God does not talk to the Rishi/SAGE, nor does God give that person words or letters or anything like that. Instead the Rishi/SAGE literally experiences God on senses and feelings and views and intellectual stimulation to the max. After that experience the person now becomes a Rishi/SAGE.

    After the experience the SAGE generally finds other SAGES that have also had the enlightenment experience or experienced the highest state of consciousness, God. Than as a group they exchange notes and produce written material based on a common set of shared experiences.

    Key here is anyone can become a Rishi. It is reproducible. It is not limited to any one person. That is the beauty of God. God offers this to everyone with the simple tools/techniques called Yoga/Meditation. No one has authority to experience or hear some so called message from God for themselves only. God is the great equalizer, meaning anyone can equally experience that great God, highest state of consciousness.

    Prophet: One a specific person that is supposedly chosen by god for a specific time can only be a prophet. They hear that message by their god and they spread that message to everyone else. It can not replica-table, people must just take that person’s word and that is it. No exchanging of notes or experience because it is not able to be done again. It called history centrism. Basically god is prejudice and does not make that so called word available to everyone.

  317. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, you know not the danger of meditation. I have a friend who practice meditation. He read many books on meditation and he became very deeply involved into it, so much so that he can lock himself up in the room and do meditation for days. He has reached the stage of experiencing his spirit detached from his body and that's the danger of it. He became demon possessed after such experiences and the demons instructed him to plan his own death. At the brink of death, a miracle suddenly happened and that's how he know that Jesus is real.

  318. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, are you another braindead zombie here? :p

  319. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, do you know where in the world is my dear Ms Dr Ali Sina? I really miss him very much because he is the one who always remind me and everyone here of the Golden Rule and we all know that Jesus Christ is the Author of the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule must be the fundamental principle in every multi cultural society and nation, in order to achieve happiness and world peace. It is very sad and disheartening to watch the recent UK news about the murder of a soldier in London by two black radical muslims. These two monsters beheaded that innocent white young man in broad daylight in the street and after that, they have the cheek to shout, 'Allahu Arkbar'! What kind of religion is this and what kind of allah is this and what kind of prophet is this that cannot tolerate any of their followers to think and question the contents of that quran that lead to so many insanities, bloodsheds, unforgiveness, hatred and bitterness in the world?

  320. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @saket/agracean
    The concept of God in the Vedic way in looking at getting information about God is very different from the Abrahamic view of the world.

    What we have is the Rishis/SAGES vs the prophet concept. First we must define what they are.

    Rishi/SAGE: Is someone who has reached enlightenment by practicing meditation/Yoga and connects directly with God. A person who not only got some message, but personally experienced God, the highest state of consciousness. During that time, God does not talk to the Rishi/SAGE, nor does God give that person words or letters or anything like that. Instead the Rishi/SAGE literally experiences God on senses and feelings and views and intellectual stimulation to the max. After that experience the person now becomes a Rishi/SAGE.

    After the experience the SAGE generally finds other SAGES that have also had the enlightenment experience or experienced the highest state of consciousness, God. Than as a group they exchange notes and produce written material based on a common set of shared experiences.

    Key here is anyone can become a Rishi. It is reproducible. It is not limited to any one person. That is the beauty of God. God offers this to everyone with the simple tools/techniques called Yoga/Meditation. No one has authority to experience or hear some so called message from God for themselves only. God is the great equalizer, meaning anyone can equally experience that great God, highest state of consciousness.

    Prophet: One a specific person that is supposedly chosen by god for a specific time can only be a prophet. They hear that message by their god and they spread that message to everyone else. It can not replica-table, people must just take that person’s word and that is it. No exchanging of notes or experience because it is not able to be done again. It called history centrism. Basically god is prejudice and does not make that so called word available to everyone.

    I hope that helps you out. http://agniveer.com/god-vedas-hinduism/

  321. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, it's naïve of you to say that 'To know the invisible existence we have to become invisible,(that is going beyond time space and causation)that is possible only when we shut our sense organs firmly and to do that only tool is Meditation.' The fact that you are a spirit man is good enough to prove your invisible existence. Meditation is safe only when you meditate on the teachings of Jesus because there is power in Jesus' mighty name.

  322. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @agracean Cont from above
    DEEP-BREATHING

    4.DEEP-BREATHING ~ The vital forces, which are the media through which the soul acquires all kinds of knowledge, carries on all the mental processes, and performs all its actions, are:-
    1.The expiratory force – breathing out.
    2.Inspiratory force – breathing in.
    3.The solar-sympathetic forcewhich is situated in the center parts of the body.
    4.The Gloss-pharyngeal force that draws the food in to the stomach, which gives the body strength and energy.
    5.The Motor-muscular force which is cause of motion.
    It is a special method of breath-control by which the life-force is brought under control and made regular. This is achieved by controlling the incoming and outgoing breaths.
    It is not the normal way we breathe but something else. It is the subtle life-force behind the breathing function. Breath is only a gross manifestation of the subtle energy we call breathing. In fact, all functions of the body have air as their life-force. For instance, breathing, flickering of the eyelids, the heartbeat and circulation, and digestion, all have as their life force. Breathing is a conscious life-force in all living beings and is derived from air, sunlight, water, vegetation and minerals of the earth. It works together with the soul in all animals.
    The correct practice of Deep-Breathing controls the governing powers of the body which are the nose, mouth, eyes and ears; in the lower abdominal region, waste material are expelled via the kidneys and intestines; the region around the navel promotes the proper digestion of food and its seat is within the heart and in the veins and arteries which propel the proper circulation of the blood; the blood is the vitalizing force in the nerve centers and in the brain and it is this force that is responsible for the reincarnation of the soul by serving as a guiding vehicle. It stills and steadies the restless mind thus making concentration and meditation easier to achieve.
    DETACHMENT
    DETACHMENT ~ This is the ability to withdraw the senses or internal organs form the centers of objects to which they are attached. The natural inclination of the senses towards the objects of enjoyment leads the mind astray. When children in a classroom hear some loud noise outside they immediately look through the window and do not pay attention to their studies. But if their minds were engaged in their studies no noise or distraction would have the power to lead them astray. So the ability to withdraw the senses from the objects of attachment is detachment. Just as a tortoise withdraws all its limbs in the face of danger, so must an aspirant completely withdraw his senses from their objects.
    When you have become the master of your mind, the mind is controlled, and simultaneously all senses are under control also. When heaven is spoken of, it is meant to be a place, whether it is in some location in the sky or here on earth, of perpetual happiness. Therefore, isn’t it natural to assume one has to qualify for it? Those who chose to become doctors have to do so in theory and practice. They have to conquer all errors and weaknesses. They know that one mistake can be very fatal. As a matter of fact, they must be qualified before their practice. Like wise it is reasonable to assume that one has to enjoy perpetual happiness before going to heaven. That means one has to conquer all unhappiness and discomforts in life here on earth before departure. Some of those discomforts are hunger, sleep, heat and cold, sex, anger and inanition.
    CONCENTRATION

    5.CONCENTRATION ~ When the mind is withdrawn from outside objects and is totally fixed on an idea or a center it is said to be concentrated. In concentration all the rays of the mind are collected and fixed on a center or idea. No artist, sculptor, musician, sportsman, or student can hope to succeed if his mind is not engaged in the task on hand. So in yoga also, concentration is most essential.

    Next stages are
    communion and supreme conciousness

  323. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    It is clear from you that you have not any knowledge what is meditation. Meditation is a part of Astang Yoga. Before reaching to stage of concentrating an aspirant has to follow all these in stages in his/her life.

    1.1.MORAL OBSERVANCES which consists of five commandments:
    1.Nonviolence ~ Let all cease to bear malice to any living being and all animals with no exception to any, let him always love all.
    2.(Truthfulness ~ Practice of truth, discriminating between right and wrong. It consists of acquiring the knowledge of the nature, properties and characteristics of all things from earth to God, in assiduously obeying God’s commandments and worshiping Him, in never going against His Will and in making nature subservient to oneself.
    3.Honesty ~ Let no one ever commit theft, and let all be honest in his dealings.
    4.Self-control ~ Let all practices self-control, never be lustful.
    5.Humility ~ Let all be humble, never vain.
    PHYSICAL DISCIPLINE
    Back to contents
    2.PHYSICAL DISCIPLINE ~ which consists of another five commandments:
    1.Purification ~ Renounce all passions and vicious desires, externally by the free use of water etc.
    2.Contentment ~ Work hard righteously but neither rejoice in the resulting profit nor be sorrowful in case of loss. Renounce sloth and be always cheerful and active.
    3.Austerity ~ Keep the mind unruffled whether in happiness or misery, and do righteous deeds.
    4.Self-Study ~ Study the books of true knowledge, and teach them as well, and associate with good and pious men, and contemplate on and mentally recite Om (God) which is the highest name of the Supreme Spirit.
    5.Devotion ~ Let all resign their souls to the Will of God.
    These ten commandments are important not only in Yoga but also in life, providing for the support of life itself. Without them there can be no progress whether individually or socially, for character is built out of them. Whether one believes in God or not the observance of morals is essential, because without them nobody, even a scientist or a scholar, or a genius, can be called a true human being. Without observing morals there can be no control of the mind. And, as the aim of yoga is mind-control, morals must be observed.
    Many aspirants have fallen by the wayside because they did not pay sufficient attention to morality. Moral precepts play an important part in concentrating the rays of the mind. For instance, when a person is established in the practice of nonviolence, not even under provocation will he become angry. Scriptural studies help one in establishing concentration and gradually purify one’s mind.
    "There is no turpitude in drinking alcohol, eating meat, committing adultery, etc. for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstinence brings great reward." Manu
    EXERCISE
    Back to contents
    3.EXERCISE (Yoga Postures)~ is a system of making all parts of the body strong, healthy and supple. Even those not practicing the mystical aspects of yoga may do exercise to improve health. Exercise regulate breathing, ensure proper digestion of food and increase longevity. Exercise strengthen the nervous system, having a salutary effect on the brain centers and spinal cord. Exercise relaxes the five systems that make up the physical body:-
    1.The physical system which consists of all the tissues and fluids of the body from bone to skin.
    2.The vital systems
    3.The mento-motor system which comprises the principle of volition, the principle of individuality, and the five principles of action – articulation, grasp, locomotion, reproduction and excretion.
    4.The mento-sensory system which comprises the principle of judgment, the principle of memory, and the five principles of sensation – sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch.
    5.The Spirituo-emotional which is love, cheerfulness, happiness (little or much).
    The elementary matter is the medium through which the soul entertains these feelings. It is only when the physical body is in perfect health that the mind can concentrate.

    Next stages
    are Detachment, concentration, communion and supreme conciousness

  324. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Yes, you seem right here. We should not be slave of anyone. Slave is not correct word for following science & rationality. I think all people Hindu, Christian, Buddhist can sit together and live happily with each-other. And all these people can modify their stances it they found something wrong. But that is not possible in Islam. Islam is greatest threat to the world. Founder of Islam was rapist, looter, terrorist, pedophilia, mass-murderer. And he expected same from his followers.

  325. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    knowledge is a product of constant evolution ,the knowledge which had percolated in you through sense organs is limited to micro level ,restricted only to the visible world ( matter) .Through the process of comparative study (required two things ,they are aplenty in the form of matter) one acquire knowledge about the things.What about the things which the sense organs are unable to trace or your intelligence ,logical – illogical ,rational thinking will not work in that invisible realm.To know the invisible existence we have to become invisible,(that is going beyond time space and causation)that is possible only when we shut our sense organs firmly and to do that only tool is Meditation. This is what Vedas talk about .And this is what Buddha,s teachings are.

  326. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, one thing I do know about meditation is that it is a very dangerous activity because when a person's mind can be demon possessed unknowingly.

  327. Agracean says:

    Mr Sanatan Dharma, it's a great pity that in this 21st century, you and that Mr Sakat are slaves. xD

  328. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, like what I said earlier, it's really a pity that you see yourself as a miserable slave to science. Don't you know that all the wonders and marvels which you've discovered in Science are actual reality and it's always there, waiting for you to discover the mystery of it? If you haven't seen any atom yet, can you discount the fact that atom is fake and not real? It applies to my loving Creator God too, it doesn't mean that He is not real, just because an ignorant slave like you didn't see him yet. You are right to say that science means knowledge but do you actually know where does knowledge first originated from? Sometimes in life, you need to have faith and not proof all the time.

  329. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    I am witness to marvels of science ,but i haven't seen any God yet .I told you without verification i do not accept anything ,your tall claims are based on belief like the Muslims .By the way science means knowledge and i am proud to become slave to it rather then to ignorance (belief not proof).

  330. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Is slave of science not child of God? I think to be followers of science is in the line of Veda. As per Veda
    Yajurved 19.77
    – All humans at all times should have passion only for adoption of truth and rejection of falsehood. This should be a continuous process and one should keep detaching faith from what one discovers to be false and keep attaching faith to what one discovers to be true based on analysis, logic, facts and evidence.
    Yajurved 19.30
    – When one resolves to adhere to truth, she becomes eligible for bliss and truth. When she becomes eligible, she starts getting rewards in form of knowledge and satisfaction. Such rewards strengthen the resolve and enhance the faith towards pursuit of truth. As the faith enhances, so does the bliss and knowledge one gets. And eventually this leads to ultimate bliss or Salvation.

  331. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, it's a pity that you see yourself as a slave of science and not the child of the Almighty God. Every human being has a conscience that tells them that God exist. That's the reason why you find human beings worship God or idols because it's natural. You don't seem to know what you believe in and that's really a great pity in life.

  332. Agracean says:

    Dear xxx, the truth is that God should destroy all sinners in the beginning but He didn't do that because He love us. Not only did He spare us, He humbled Himself and became like one of us and willingly paid the price for the penalty of our sin, so that we may be perfect again. Now, do you understand the heart beat of my loving Creator God?

  333. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Do you know what is meditation? When meditation comes into picture for a aspirant who want to realize supreme force/God. What are stages are to be crossed by a aspirant before reaching to the stage of meditation?

  334. xxx says:

    How is that ….?! loving Creator God can kill , that is right , (WTF is Love here, who created them that way first of all) , But ALLAH can't say the same thing-
    for me LOVING CREATOR GOD=ALLAH ( BOTH are nuts) Those who believe One side is correct and the other side is wrong are ALL BDZ.

  335. Phoenix ( says:

    Yes of course, i am a slave of science and not any Almighty God"

    Don't be a slave to anything or anyone.The former is no better than the latter.Science is all bout constructing a hypothesis,then collecting evidence to either support or confute the hypothesis.This requires an objective state of mind,something which is in opposition to an enslaved state of mind.

    Phoenix (aka Serpent)

  336. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Yes of course, i am a slave of science and not any Almighty God .However i do not find in me, any '" placement of conscience in me which acts like a warning signal that goes off within me bla,bla ,bla things". My conscience is normal, like any other human being ,presently i have no problem of replacing it.My belief insist me to verify each and every movement of matter seen or unseen,therefore i hug it.For example if my belief settled down to say that the earth is only 6000 years of old ,then i have right to ask who say's so and why ?,in fact my belief is profound and not juvenile to toss such statements.

  337. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, as per your above comment, you need to see a psychiatrist too.

  338. Sakat says:

    The problem of widespread evil and other troubling issues can be aptly overcome by adopting the path of the Buddha. Evil arises from myopic vision. It cannot be curbed by stringent laws, severe punishment or exhaustive moral lessons but by transforming awareness of the working of the universe, law of karma, dependent origin of things and unending suffering caused by indiscriminate craving. Proper awareness gives birth to wisdom followed by wholesome, empathetic action to whole of humanity. The Buddha summarized his teachings by advising to develop cosmic awareness leading to empathetic compassion – from awareness of objects to awareness of subject, to awareness of awareness itself. No one can give us that alchemical awareness — no scripture, authority or religion. It has to be cultivated from within and assimilated so that evil is spontaneously removed like a thorn from the flesh.

    The Buddha was unique in asserting, “Be light unto yourself. Hold fast to the Truth. Look not for refuge to anyone besides yourselves. Know for yourself that certain things are unwholesome and wrong. Give them up. When you know for yourself that certain things are wholesome and good then instinctively accept the same and adhere wholeheartedly.”

    Buddhism is not a doctrine or belief system but a process of observation, introspection and self-inquiry. Any preconceived faith or belief is detrimental to objective inquiry. Hence the Buddha advised us not to accept even his ideas until we acquire ownership of the same through self-investigation.

    The Buddha observed that human plight is like that of a man shot with an arrow. He requires immediate mitigation of suffering and cure instead of investigation on who has shot the arrow and why. Hence he is silent on the theory of creation or God. Buddhism is a faith of the middle period in which we exist at present, and it attempts to annihilate the problem through a middle path.Being awakened, the Buddha realised that we live in a perfect universe. We need to realise that, beyond all our judgements and worries, goals and expectations. The perfection of awakening or fulfilment already exists right now in this eternal moment. But our mind fails to accept the same due to preconceived image of how things should be. This bias prevents us from accepting reality and truth as wonderful. The remedy is pure awareness.

    The path of the Buddha consists of the fundamental qualities of intellect and emotion. Awareness of phenomena and self-inquiry relate primarily to intellect. While developing an ability to feel compassion for all is a function of the heart.The pilgrimage from impermanent suffering to permanent peace can be attained through eightfold path which consists of ethical conduct, right observation, introspection, mindfulness and advanced meditation. Buddhist meditation is neither an exercise in relaxation nor an effort for an elevated state of consciousness. It is basically about living in each moment and observing the flow of phenomena.

    Nirvana is neither nihilistic nor sinking into bottomless oblivion. It involves dwelling in a state of non-reactive witnessing of reality knowing fully well that there is neither a doer nor sufferer but mere flow of phenomena amidst universal flux of mind and matter. Just as a man shudders with horror stepping on a snake but laughs finding it to be only a rope, so too when we find there is no such thing as me or mine we get settled in peace and enjoy the amazing cosmic drama of creation. The Buddha’s way offers permanent panacea for the pain of existence. This is my small " Tribute to the great master on the occasion of "Buddha Purnima"(25/5/2013). On this full moon day of the year the great master was born under a tree; on this day he was enlightened under the tree; and on this day he attained Maha Pari Nibbhana under a tree, what a coincidence.Let the peace prevail over violence.

  339. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Each one of us is having conscience ,but many time many people are referred to a psychiatrist for having abnormal conscience.Especially when one claims that I am the son of God or I am the last messenger or I am possessed with god or I know the future etc. Gullible like my friend believe such Charlton and emulate their masters ( but never ever try to verify the existence of this so called God ).

  340. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, my loving Creator God has placed a conscience in me which acts like a warning signal that goes off within me, especially when I know the truth and doing nothing to help gullible folks like you.

  341. Agracean says:

    Hi xxx, you have to look at the other side of the coin before making the final conclusion. Based on your above comment, I could see that a braindead zombie like you simply have no idea how great and loving is our loving Creator God.

  342. Agracean says:

    Hi Vijay, if you're really hardworking like me, you'll surely find the Way, the Truth and the Life.

  343. xxx says:

    another Brain dead Zombie….. ??

  344. xxx says:

    what would you call a person, who says , loving creator GOD has full rights to kill his own creation because they don't believe him, worshiping other gods. but ….. at the same time curses ALLAH for telling the same thing……

  345. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Your say applies to you ,not others .For example somebody bite you ,the pain will be yours and not somebody else's.So your IQ ;your EQ; your KQ belongs to you, you have liberty to make a saint criminal and criminal a saint . But expecting some one else to cry for your pain is silly thing isn't it.

  346. vijay says:

    Sister i have faith that Adam is first man if i go by religion but if i go by science, things are different. There is conflict between creation supporters and evolution supporters. I can not judge anything but could surrender to the supreme. In case i have offended you forgive me. In my faith of Sufism, Hazrat Adam AS lived in Sri Lanka and we have his foot prints. Hindus call him Sankara whose wife is Uma(Hwwa or Eve). His two sons Hazrat Habeel AS(Abel) and Kabil(Ken) ,their tomb /Dargah/pallivasam lies near Railway station of Rameshwram. Sinning by Adam was not his fault but the divine plan of Elohim.

  347. Agracean says:

    Hi Mr Sanatan Dharma, as an Indian yourself, don't you know that Buddha never ever mentioned in his sutra or mantra the word 'Vedas', neither did he ever acknowledge Ishwar at all. Don't you find it strange? What happened to the fate of the Vedas in Buddha's time? Was it born yet?

  348. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I did exactly what you suggested! I think out of the square box and exercise my special high IQ and KQ and finally, came to the ultimate conclusion that on Christ, the solid Rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand!

  349. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, it's really tiring for me to repeat everything all over again. I did explain before in this awesome website that nirvana does not exist at all. Extreme asceticism and even extreme meditation can lead to depression, hallucination and total madness. Buddha has been sitting under that Bodhi tree meditating, fasting and doing nothing at all ie. exercise for a extremely long period of time which can cause him to hallucinate easily and the joke of the century is that he thought that he has attained nirvana and many people believe his story! :p

  350. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Vijay, there are many lies in this world and if you're really interested to find out the truth, you have to try really very hard like me, to dig out all the truth from all those big and small lies floating around in the air. Let me help you start off by giving you a hint here. Many events took place after our first ancestors sinned against God and I'm not surprised at all to know that the Vedas contain a bit of similarities with the Torah and the Bible because in ancient times, there was only one human race but after the Towel of Babel incident, human beings began to disperse all over the world and they live together according to the language they spoke.

  351. vijay says:

    Dear Sister Agracean, I do not believe in Vedicism or Buddhism not Chritianism as yourself. But there are Catholics and Eastern Orthodox people, who try to bring divinity of Lord Jesus near to the Vedas and Lord Buddha. So far Sanatan Dharma(Who is actually an Arya Samaji) is decent with you regarding Lord Jesus but their founder Swami Dayananda Ji has questioned about the rational behind the birth of Lord Jesus from our Lady of grace being virgin. Or Holy spirit/Holy Ghost entering in our Lord Jesus in the form of dove after he was baptized by John The Baptist. A book called Holy Vedas and Holy Bible is also written by Mr M L Talreja, which has condemned Holy Bible. http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hvhb/ But there is something befitting both to the Evangelist Christians and Arya Samajis, what Lord Jesus said. See mote in the eye of others and missing the plank in our own. I love spirituality and Lord Jesus as symbol of great spritual role model and unlike Arya Samajis, i feel Holy Vedas being the work of God Brahama as told in Puranas and not by four sages as Arya Samaji claim. Like there are more then one versions of Holy Bible, so we have many versions of Vedas(all four) and Arya Samaj has standardized some versions for all four Vedas. Lord Buddha was the first person on earth in this age, who let the common man reach meditation. Which is called Vipasayan. Many Christians come and learn it and so do Jews. That only is tought to control the mind.

  352. Sanatan Dharma says:

    Did Buddha rejected Vedas ?
    9. Mahatma Buddha did not reject Vedas per se, but the malpractices happening in name of Vedas.
    Similarly, when Mahatma Buddha questioned birth-based casteism, animal sacrifice and other nonsense practices, he was answered that Vedas sanction so. Thus, like any sane morally upright person would do, Mahatma Buddha stated that: “If Vedas sanction these evil practices, then I reject Vedas.”
    Had Gautam Buddha obtained an opportunity to study the actual Vedas and not go by the false notions prevailing, he could no way have issued such a statement.
    And the country + entire world would have been strong enough to counter barbaric attacks of West/ Central Asian tribals that has resulted in the greatest problem of last 1000 years – terrorism.
    10. If you review the basic precepts of Buddhism, they are simply Vedic teachings reworded.
    – For example, the 4 cardinal truths on life, suffering, desire, cessation is straight from Yoga and Nyaya Darshan. In fact Nyaya Darshan 1.2 echoes almost the same essence in as many words.
    – The 8 fold path is adequately covered in a variety of ways in all ancient texts – Vedas, Manusmriti, Mahabharat and Yoga Darshan for example.
    – The emphasis on Ahimsa is adapted from Yoga Darshan that puts Ahimsa as the first essential discipline for progress in Yoga- the process of realizing self and God.
    – Theory of rebirth and Law of Karma that Buddhism is built upon finds its foundation in mantras of Vedas. Refer examples in http://agniveer.com/3203/islam-vedas/
    – Rejection of birth-based caste-system is also in lines with Vedas. Refer http://agniveer.com/series/caste-system-3/
    – Emphasis on meditation is straight adopted from the Yoga Darshan that itself is based on Vedas.
    – The 5 commandments for Buddhists and especially monks are from Yoga Darshan 1.2.3
    In summary, one can state that Buddhism, as preached by Gautam Buddha, was a system of morality based on Vedas.

  353. Sanatan Dharma says:

    Vedas in teachings of Mahatma Buddha
    3. In Sutta Nipat 192, Mahatma Buddha says that:
    Vidwa Cha Vedehi Samechcha Dhammam Na Uchchavacham Gachhati Bhooripanjo.
    People allow sense-organs to dominate and keep shuffling between high and low positions. But the scholar who understands Vedas understands Dharma and does not waver.
    4. Sutta Nipat 503:
    Yo Vedagu Gyanarato Sateema …….
    One should support a person who is master of Vedas, contemplative, intelligent, helpful if you desire to inculcate similar traits.
    5. Sutta Nipat 1059:
    Yam Brahmanam Vedagum Abhijanjya Akinchanam Kamabhave Asattam……
    One gets free from worldly pains if he is able to understand a Vedic Scholar who has no wealth and free from attraction towards worldly things.
    6. Sutta Nipat 1060:
    Vidwa Cha So Vedagu Naro Idha Bhavabhave Sangam Imam Visajja…..
    I state that one who understands the Vedas rejects attraction towards the world and becomes free from sins.
    7. Sutta Nipat 846:
    Na Vedagu Diththia Na Mutiya Sa Manameti Nahi Tanmayoso….
    One who knows Vedas does not acquire false ego. He is not affected by hearsay and delusions.
    8. Sutta Nipat 458:
    Yadantagu Vedagu Yanjakaale Yassahuti Labhe Taras Ijjeti Broomi
    I state that one who acquires Ahuti in Havan of a Vedic scholar gets success.
    These are just a few examples from works of Mahatma Buddha.

    Why Mahatma Buddha rejected Vedas
    9. Mahatma Buddha did not reject Vedas per se, but the malpractices happening in name of Vedas. For example, if you call someone – He is a Neta of India – today, he may get offended and feel as if you have called him corrupt and manipulative. This is not because Neta word in itself means ‘corrupt’, but because this is what we see of the so-called Netas today.
    Similarly, when Mahatma Buddha questioned birth-based casteism, animal sacrifice and other nonsense practices, he was answered that Vedas sanction so. Thus, like any sane morally upright person would do, Mahatma Buddha stated that: “If Vedas sanction these evil practices, then I reject Vedas.”
    Had Gautam Buddha obtained an opportunity to study the actual Vedas and not go by the false notions prevailing, he could no way have issued such a statement.
    And the country + entire world would have been strong enough to counter barbaric attacks of West/ Central Asian tribals that has resulted in the greatest problem of last 1000 years – terrorism.
    10. If you review the basic precepts of Buddhism, they are simply Vedic teachings reworded.
    – For example, the 4 cardinal truths on life, suffering, desire, cessation is straight from Yoga and Nyaya Darshan. In fact Nyaya Darshan 1.2 echoes almost the same essence in as many words.
    – The 8 fold path is adequately covered in a variety of ways in all ancient texts – Vedas, Manusmriti, Mahabharat and Yoga Darshan for example.
    – The emphasis on Ahimsa is adapted from Yoga Darshan that puts Ahimsa as the first essential discipline for progress in Yoga- the process of realizing self and God.
    – Theory of rebirth and Law of Karma that Buddhism is built upon finds its foundation in mantras of Vedas. Refer examples in http://agniveer.com/3203/islam-vedas/
    – Rejection of birth-based caste-system is also in lines with Vedas. Refer http://agniveer.com/series/caste-system-3/
    – Emphasis on meditation is straight adopted from the Yoga Darshan that itself is based on Vedas.
    – The 5 commandments for Buddhists and especially monks are from Yoga Darshan 1.2.3
    In summary, one can state that Buddhism, as preached by Gautam Buddha, was a system of morality based on Vedas.

  354. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Dear Gracey Lies are many but the truth is one ,you cannot ride it intellectually or rationally ,you have to go beyond your thought perception ,i mean beyond the slavery of senses. Exactly this is where Vedas comes into picture ,you are captive of your senses so your perception is limited ,it is your conditioned hallucination.

  355. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Which lies you have exposed still about Buddha? You have expose nothing. If any please let me know. How Buddha was a dreamer as per you say? How meditation makes one mentally ill as per you say.

  356. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, I'm a rationalist and that's the reason why I expose lies and share the truth here with you. Are you a dreamer like your idol who meditate until he is completely out of His mind?

  357. Sakat says:

    @Agracean ·
    Dear Gracey Many princess were there during the time of Buddha ,all have happily married and begot dozens of children but no one remembering them.Animals leave , for food ,sex and sleep.If we do not call our selves rationals then perhaps your accusations of Buddha is right.

  358. Agracean says:

    Mr Sakat, you're right to say that your idol never claimed any such title because he is honest enough to confess that he is just like you, a lost sheep, wandering in the wilderness and he has completely no idea how sin came about and what is the final solution to sin. All he could do is to dump his family to die at home and sit under a Bodhi tree and meditate until he is out of mind.

  359. vijay says:

    It shows the unity in spiritualism. Evangelist Christians and Arya Samajis, both are far from God. Good thing is that majority of Christians and Hindus keep them leashed. Same is true with some Ambedkarite Buddhist and Sikh Missionaries but non of these guys use violence like Islamists.

  360. vijay says:

    Both warring parties must read this Bible version by Catholics http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/aug/05bible.htm

  361. Sakat says:

    @Agracean ·
    Dear Gracey.,My idol never claimed he is Son of God or representative of God or I am the final messenger .He said i am an ordinary man like you ,i am not a miracle man, i haven't seen any God of your description either.Before me many people have realized this ultimate reality,now at this present moment too many people have realized or on the verge of realization of this truth ,in future many people will realize this state ,so everyone should salute them. "Buddham Sarnam Gacchami",this term apply's to all who have attained Buddha hood including Jesus as well. Buddha said there is nothing called sin exist,it is a state of mind .If you feel that you have committed sin than you are the sufferer.He who is greedy and miser commits sin ,this is in entirety applies to the western world .Buddha told us to abstain from developing these kinds of habits.Just imagine he was a prince, all comforts of life were at his feet ;a beautiful wife and lovely son,yet what made him so disillusioned.His sacrifices were greatest compared to any of the historical figure. Whatever he said was followed by practicality that is what the greatness of real savior or prophet .Only fools believe blindly but sane questions smartly.

  362. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sakat, you know not what you're talking about. You are spiritually blind and you have absolutely no idea at all about the great purpose why Jesus came into this sinful world and died such a horrible death on that cruel cross and rose again on the third day for our justification. Your faith deals with sins but the Bible alone deal with sin. All those cheats or murderers whom you've mentioned in your above comments were human beings like one of us and we are all sinners, in need of eternal redemption and only Jesus can redeem us from this sin problem. Please bear in your mind this important awesome truth that in this universe, only my beloved Lord Jesus Christ died in your place for your sins. You can't find anyone, no, not even your idol, who could go to the extent of loving you so much!!

  363. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Dear Gracey. In that case, i too know of a man who is highly esteemed by my friend .One day he suddenly appeared from no where and started calling himself the son of god,and begin to infuse hatred amongst his own people as well, against the government about his prophet hood ,his own disciple deceived him,this shows he is unable to prove himself as son of god to his own followers,a whore borrowed money to purchase perfume to wash his feet, while on moving to his death and, afterwords fought on repayment of the debts,such sensual love perhaps might have been taught by him to his followers, instead of higher realities( which he was unable to find like my friend under the tree was able to do ). He want to become king like this MAD MOHAMMED,but natives sensed this and on crucial moment was crucified. He was hypocrite ,so he hide his sexual relations .In that respect i salute MOHAMMED because he was open to that extent ,apart from Luke and Mathew none have seen his miracles.There are many million people in India who perform thousand time better and more powerful miracles. His so called followers had fought two world war ,subjugated innocent and week people ,they are the worst kind of terrorist compared to Muslims,and proudly pronounce him the apostle of peace hahaha.

  364. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sakat, what eternal or universal truth are you referring here? Don't you realize that the characteristics and standards of the Ishwar found in the Vedas are altogether different from that of my loving Creator God? So, how in the world can you anyhow jump to the silly conclusion that they are the same without searching for the absolute truth? Are you sure that truth can be understood through regular meditation? I knew of a married man, who was highly esteemed by you, has set regular meditation for the truth to be the top priority in his life, so much so that he just conveniently dumped his wife and his only son in the palace and renounced his duty as a husband and father and one day after years of meditating beneath a tree, he suddenly announced to the world that he has attained a state of mind which no man has ever attained! So, my dear friend, please don't meditate until you're mad. Last but not least, intellectual argument is not futile but helpful for people like your good self. 😉

  365. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, kindly please stop lying. Don't you know that the Vedas are the primary texts of Hinduism? Don't you have any idea that the Vedas contain hymns, incantations, and rituals from ancient India? Can you count how many times I've repeated the word 'India'? All hindus have no problem agreeing with me that the Vedas originated from India and has its root in India, except you.

  366. Sakat says:

    @Agracean
    Dear Gracy ,Vedas are eternal truth,they speak about a single entity (Hindus call it "Iswar" and for you he is God), which is pervading both mater and space. When you see it from the prism of matter you call it "he" or "him" or "She" because of the limited perception.But when you cross the boundary of the matter ,that is,when you travel beyond the identification of body ,you merges with that "one without the second" the "absolute truth" phenomena .Here the quest for finding truth comes to an end for an aspirant.Those who have realized this, have relayed it to other aspirants,who were equally aspiring for it. There is no substitute for truth ,it is hard to explain ,they used various resembling examples to explain it . The fact of its existence;the various mode how to realize it ;and the various example used to explain it , were called Vedas. They were not compiled earlier ,because it predates the invention of Sanskrit script,there is no single author to it ,no one knows where it was originated.It is the universal truth ,it operates on macro level ,apply to all and one in uniformity. These truth can be understood and can be realized by regular meditation .Intellectual argument is futile.

  367. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Here is not the matter of agreeing but fact. It is only belief of Indian Civilization started from India and and sages who enlightened the world first time should be Indian. It is only their belief not fact. Although in Veda there is no story of any country, place, person etc. while other books like Quran is filled with a stories around Arabia land and people. Godly knowledge/ Universal knowledge should be devoid of any particular places and people.And Veda have this.

  368. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, you are an Indian and I'm not. So, you are most eligible to check with all the Indians if they will agree with me that Vedas originate from the land of India and not from Saudi Arabia. ha ha ha

  369. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Dear, ask them for proof? I have not read anywhere in any scripture Veda originated from India. I already told in Veda there is no mentioning of any place and person which has historical background.

  370. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, do you know that every hindus will tell you that the Vedas orginated from India and it's a property of India.

  371. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Dear it is tough for me to answer your question is like Who provided intelligence? Why humans are the only intelligent species? etc etc.” I never said Veda appeared only in India.
    When someone asked to a sage similar kind of question
    Q how did Sages get vedas when god cannot be heard and is unseen pls answer
    Reply was something like that
    In almost similar manner as you feel an inspiration to do something worthwhile in life though no one is dictating you what to do. In a manner that a small child has the urge to try to walk despite falling and hurting again and again. . In a manner that great inventors and discoverers are inspired. The great social workers and reformers are inspired. In fact, each of us is inspired. Its the inner voice. That is how God communicates with all of us. Sages had perfected this art of communication with God to an extent that they got the clear pure knowledge instead of hazy glimpse that we witness.

  372. Agracean says:

    @Sanatan Dharma, please tell me who wrote the Veda? Please don't spin a story and tell me that the Veda appeared out of nowhere from the sky and suddenly ended up in India?

  373. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Whatever are lies are not Veda. Only universal & eternal truths are Veda. When we say "speak the truth" that is Veda but when say Mohammad was the last messenger or only Jesus is only way to salvation that is not Veda. Because Muhammad and Jesus are historical figure. Veda are not history.

  374. Agracean says:

    Hi Mr Sanatan Dharma, the universal truth is that the Veda contains many half truth and lies.

  375. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    The truth not having any history of any person or place is universal truth. That is why it is eternal because it has no history. Universal & eternal truths have no beginning. Only these universal & eternal truths are Veda. Gravitational force was flashed to Newton does it mean there was NO gravitational force before it flashed to him? Same way vedas are universal truths that why these are called anaadi(Without begning) since these truths were ever existing. Veda (Universal truths) are in Bibal, Quran, Geeta and other books) but these books are not Veda in themselves because these have also history of people and places.

    Any scholar can correct me If I could not write proper/correct word because English is not my mother tongue.

  376. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, what eternal and universal knowledge are you referring to? Only truth can last that long but not lies. Don't worry, it won't hurt me if you or any hindus worship idols because that's really none of my business anyway but the truth is that the Ishwar in your Vedas has no idea at all why there is such a thing called 'conscience' placed inside me and that this conscience in me acts like a warning signal that goes off when I knew the truth and do nothing about it.;)

  377. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Sanatan Dharma and Agracean, both of you must be called to order to quite this unnecessary altercation. History will keep on repeating itself when those who should come together against a common enemy decide to fight themselves and lay open their flanks for attack and destruction. Where has the muhammadan been more gracious to the Hindu over the Christian and visa versa? Each person knows what he believes in and should keep to that. QUIT THIS STUFF AND USE YOUR TIME AND TALENT FOR A PROFITABLE VENTURE.

  378. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Worshiping Idols or not worshiping Idols one’s personal matter. And How it hurts you if I worship Idols. It is my personal matter. I am not forcing you to worship Idols. Then Why do you have such fetish with Hindus.
    BTW there is no mention of worshiping Idols in Veda. And there is no mention in Veda of Jesus, Muhammad or any historical figure. As per ancient sages Veda are eternal & universal knowledge and eternal & universal knowledge can not have any history. In Veda there is no mention of any historical places, person etc.
    Yajurveda 32.11
    As per this mantra God is name of the entity/force that resides at each point in universe. No space is devoid of Him. He is self-sustaining and does not need help of any agent, angel, prophet or incarnation to perform His duties. The soul which is able to realize this http://agniveer.com/vedic-god/

  379. chuck says:

    @denialisnoproof,
    Though an expert on Hinduism/Vedanta can correct me, but as far as I have understood RigVeda it doesn't prohibit idol-worship in as many words. However prohibition is one thing and prescription is a different thing. The Vedas do prescribe monotheim and idol-less worship. For example, Swetha Yajurveda Chapter 32, Verse 3 clearly states: Na tasya pratimasti …There is no image of him. He is unborn and He should be worshipped.
    I can refer a few more verses from various Vedas and Upanishads and even Bhagvat Gita.

  380. denialisnoproof says:

    where in vedas it say not to worship idols?

  381. Agracean says:

    Dear Mr Sanatan Dharma, I laugh heartily at your above comments and your Vedic ideology. If the Vedas is the truth, then, why are there so many Hindus worshipping all kinds of weird idols? The God of the Universe cannot be confined in an object at all, so whom are they worshipping anyway? Can you explain who created matter before claiming and believing that the whole universe is created from unseen matter? It's no wonder that Dr Albert Einstein finally admit before he changed into dust that there is no limit to human stupidity. :p

  382. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Dont know correct
    Dear I was in the universe but I do not know on which planet. I may be Aadam. I believe nothing is created and nothing is destroyed. Only things changes its forms. I completely agree with this Vedic ideology
    Soul is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. Soul is not slain when the body is slain.

    Rigveda mandal 10, sukta 129 states that like potter makes pot from clay, similarly God creates universe from non-alive matter prakriti. Prakriti is unseen matter. From unseen matter, the whole universe is created in the visible form. Science also says that matter is never destroyed but changes its form. Suppose a paper is burnt, paper changes its form into ashes. Then ashes are crushed and thrown in air. At this moment, the paper changed into ashes becomes invisible but was never destroyed. Similarly the whole universe at the time of final destruction is turned into prakriti i.e., into unseen form.

  383. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Agracean
    Dear I was in the universe but I do know on which planet. I may be Aadam. I believe nothing is created and nothing is destroyed. Only things changes its forms. I completely agree with this Vedic ideology
    Soul is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. Soul is not slain when the body is slain.

    Rigveda mandal 10, sukta 129 states that like potter makes pot from clay, similarly God creates universe from non-alive matter prakriti. Prakriti is unseen matter. From unseen matter, the whole universe is created in the visible form. Science also says that matter is never destroyed but changes its form. Suppose a paper is burnt, paper changes its form into ashes. Then ashes are crushed and thrown in air. At this moment, the paper changed into ashes becomes invisible but was never destroyed. Similarly the whole universe at the time of final destruction is turned into prakriti i.e., into unseen form.

  384. Agracean says:

    Dear Sanatan Dharma, where were you when God created our first ancestors?

  385. Sakat says:

    @Sanatan Dharma
    Nice analogy indeed."It (that entity,loosely referred by our limited perception as God,Allah,Iswer etc)is there,it was there and it will be there.There is no beginning to it nor end ,it is beyond time ,space and causation,!!Hats up!!!.

  386. Sanatan Dharma says:

    @Azar
    I do not believe in any personal God who rewards or punish people and send prophets time to time. The God who changes his attributes over the time can not be God. Before 7th century God had attributes of sending prophet but after 7th century this attribute has missed from the God. Further I draw the attention of this belief in God.
    The concept of God sending Postmans/Prophets/Massenger is the most silly concept to have. For example, Muslims consider that Allah is all-powerful yet believe in Prophets. Thus they imply that Allah is not capable enough to directly guide the living beings and hence has to use agents like Prophets and Angels to help Him out.
    And look at the defective ways of God when he acts through Prophets. Jesus is supposed to be a Prophet and he could not help document the Bible properly. Whatever he did goes in vain because original Bible does not exist. Similarly Muhammad is alleged to be a Prophet of Allah but could not properly document Quran during his lifetime. He did not even know that his book will be called Quran. The Quran was later compiled only 20 years after his death, in most controversial manner. The oldest Quran available today is 300 years after Muhammad’s death and is said to be copy of the Quran compiled 20 years after his death. Such are the ways of those superstitious cults who believe in Prophets.
    God is entity/power/ universal force which resides everywhere. Had God been living at a particular place like some special sky or on some special throne, He could not have been omniscient, omnipotent, manager of all, creator of all and destructor of all. You cannot perform actions at a place where you are not present.
    If you say that God manages the world from one place just like sun illuminates earth from far off r you watch TV through remote control, this is defective logic. Because sun is able to illuminate the earth or remote control is able to operate the TV only through radiation waves that travel through the interim space. Just because we are unable to see them we call it remote control. In reality there is nothing like a remote control. Thus the very fact that Ishwar is able to manage something implies that it is present there to manage it.
    Christians say God is on 4th sky and Muslims say that Allah is on 7th sky. And their followers keep fighting each other to prove themselves right. Is it that God and Allah decided to live in separate skies so that they also do not start fighting like their angry followers

  387. Azar says:

    Is god exist or not? If there is no belief in god the world today exist is more worser. Do you agree with this , then said what is the gods real religion with proof.

  388. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Armaan, muhammadanism is perpetually at war with itself. That is why its own shadow frightens it. Not only women are barred from asking questions. The true believers are urged not to ask questions because the answers may be so unsettling that they will choose to dump the faith. Seeking knowledge is forbidden in muhammadanism. To be inquisitive is haram. There is to be no probing mind. A devout muhammadan must parrot and act like a robot which has no mind. For that reason muhammadans cannot argue rationally. They either resort to names calling or take refuge in threats and violence. A good example of this was shown by the maulama who is supposed to be enlightened. If he could do that, then don't expect anything better from the less exposed.

  389. armaan says:

    you cant even tolerate some one else's views.. and your maulana couldn't even argue properly to uphold his own views and apparently even your views. Anyway i believe that it is people on the wrong who cant argue back with any valid points, who in frustration issue threats to beat up people who use their brains and argue logically. Just like muslim men were told to beat their wives if they ask too many questions or disobey. If you have so much faith, then keep calm and argue like a civilised man. And do try and do better than the maulana.

  390. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Ali Sina will go to hell for exposing the fraud called islam and the mediocrity of the muhammadans? You are already in hell and need God's special grace to bring you out. Like the pig heard that you are, threats can never depart from you and your kind. Human beings don't cherish beheading people. They work to uplift mankind.

  391. Indus Hindu says:

    Converted Hindu ….shut Up.

  392. AmaanKhangoldy says:

    @Ali sina just go to hell with ur bloody cheap revengeable knowledge..
    Ù would surely go to hell with lots of sins..
    Go to hell quick
    if u come front of me i would behead u at that point..

  393. hakikat says:

    Unbelievable. This should be spread out …

  394. Sakat says:

    Well done!!!

  395. Richmond Timothy says:

    It is Zakir Naik who is fooling himself and all the muhammadans who are blinded by his theatricals. Naik is fond of quoting passages which do not exist and, even if they do, have nothing to do with supporting his view. He gives the impression to the audience that he is a scholar whereas he is intellectually fraudulent. Engaging in a written debate will enable the readers look up the references each person makes and then determine who is correct. Naik does not want this. A muhhamandan crowed has no time for facts. All they want to here are endless and irrelevant quotations from the accused quran and the hadiths. Dr. Ali Sina knows every bit of muhammadanism. That is why he is a pain in their arse to the point that a fatwa places a hefty bounty on him. Dr. Ali Sina is the latest blessing to humanity. Muhammadans cannot feel comfortable with him around. But he is going nowhere until the job of fully exposing muhammadanism and its demise are achieved. Tell your Zakir Naik that the world is waiting for him to accept Dr. Sina's challenge. Let him disprove all what Dr. Sina says about islam and Muhammad, that prophet of doom.

  396. cactus on ur throat says:

    Ali sina is fooling every dumb ass out here as he too is a dumb man. this man knows nothing about islam and this man is a coward man sitting behind the screen inviting muslims to debate with illogical statements. I hav heard this foolish man even dares to challenge Dr. Zakir Naik, that too on a written debate (hahahaha what a foolish to watch). This man doesn't wants to face the crowd bcoz he is a liar behind the screen misleading people with his tricks/ his name is jack ass not Ali Sina.

  397. truthseeker says:

    Interesting Words by Ali Sina. Ali Sina writes well. He is a very clever author and knows how to turmoil the truth and present falsehood in such a way that it represent the truth to other people. Ali Sina claims that he won all the debates he fought. But I doubt he won any. Reason is He knows the weak point of muslims. He knows if he insult the prophet(God forbid) people will run away from debate. Also people have realized that he is a fool who lacks enough understanding to understand the Quran.
    For example, his claim regarding the name of Allah mutakabbir meaning filled with takabbur. The prophet advised that don't have takabbur because this is one quality attributed to GOD alone. We humans are not fit for it. Whats wrong with that? Allah is almighty. Allah has power over all things. There is none superior to Allah. The name MUTAKABBIR suits to GOD alone. We are his servants.
    Now stupid enough Ali Sina could not understand it.

    Similarly, Ali Sina talks about shirk and falsely claims whatever he has said. Ali Sina even don't know We muslims don't associate partners with GOD. We worship him alone. We don't worship the prophet. But the prophet is the dearest of all. Ali Sina failed to realise the difference between GOD and his servants. Basically, Ali Sina is a windbag. He is not only a windbag. He is a stupid windbag.

  398. Demsci says:

    Thank you very very much, Lajid, this means a lot to me!!!

  399. Ali Sina says:

    Yes sorry your posts are lost. Our server has converted to Islam. It is misbehaving like a Muslim. So go ahead and smash me again. Keep your comments for a few days in a safe place so if this happens again you don’t lose them.

  400. yusufharto says:

    We can see here how educated of people to be after they left Islam, in contrast how poor and miserable of people to be when they adhere to Islam.

  401. ᠌᠌᠌᠌᠌ says:

    You are posting at wrong places !!! Please re-post this !

  402. ᠌᠌᠌᠌᠌ says:

    I don't know if you are facing technical problems but you have deleted our conversation where I smashed you with no comeback and you re-posted that article without those comments. If its not technical problem please restore those comments . I you are really unable to do , don't worry I will smash you again sometime.

    Abid also requested you somewhere to jump in discussion . If you are not willing I am closing that thread.

  403. Alvinasda says:

    Mr. Ali Sina, I'm from indonesia. I'm sorry for my comment that out of topic. Cause i don't know other place to ask you. If you wish you can remove this my comment.

    I just asking, what happen to faithfreedom? I cannot access it almost a week. I really miss it.

  404. Ali Sina says:

    Why? Do I make Muslims to act like savages? It is up to them to show that they are capable of acting like decent people. My responsibility is to clean our side of the debate. It would be nice that they did that and prove me wrong at least on this point. But I don’t count on it.

  405. ᠌᠌᠌᠌᠌ says:

    "I only allow misdemeanor from Muslims because it helps me to make my case. "

    By declaring this judgement already rejected your case for manipulating reality.

  406. Lajid says:

    Well said, Demsci. Excellent! I can't agree more.

  407. Lajid says:

    @Ali Sina, thank you very much for sharing your debate with A. Qadri. You're no doubt the superior debater; your arguments are hardly refutable. That arrogant troll Aminriadh is not worth arguing with. All he does is just show off his supremacist, meretricious intelligence, but that's all he could do–downgrade and dismiss others' opinions and arguments, hardly making any substantive refutation of the claims made against Islam. I regard him as a pseudo-intellectual because I could hardly believe that despite his skills at logic, he is unable to see what a fraud Mohammad is and his Koran.

    @Demsci, know that I am impressed by the way you argued with Aminriadh. You handled him well the way a civilized person should communicate with a pompous intellectual imbued with a savage ego. You have exposed his egregious method, and your exchange with him has shown how unsavory a character he is despite his “intellectual prowess”. Demsci, you claim to be average, yet I see you as a superior person. You debated with Aminriadh well. Aminriadh was mostly bluster, projection, and avoiding the issue—typical ill-mannered Mohammedan!

    @Julia, go, girl, go. Keep flaying that boorish troll, Aminriadh. He deserves it. Indeed, I see that instead of making a substantive refutation of your claims, he resorts to condescension.

    Keep up the good work, guys. Expose Islam for what it truly is, an evil ideology that has no place in a civilized world!

  408. Demsci says:

    I appreciated and enjoyed THAT! Thank you very much, J. Stillwater!

  409. J Stillwater says:

    @aminriadh… Here again… another perfect example of what I was stating in my response to your first comment above.

    Now you have shifted from your earlier "suspicion" to making outright statements suggesting Mr. Sina has lied about the opponent of the debate and fabricated emails (or has received fabricated emails).

    You make the statement that it is "obvious" the emails are not from Ajmal Qadri. That's an ad hominem argument… in other words, you're saying… "don't even pay attention to Mr. Sina's reasoning… because he is a fraud and a liar.)

    As I stated above, if you bring an accusation (albeit veiled), you must provide proof. Since none of us know you, or your expertise in linguistics or textual criticism, you must provide proof for your veiled accusations of fraud on the part of Mr. Sina. Otherwise, you are seen as a whining child who continues to jump up and down in the middle of the floor screaming "I'm right!!! I'm right!!! Listen to me!!!! I'm right!!!!.

    So, if it is obvious (okay, "kindo of" obvious), we would like to know what concrete, irrefutable evidence you have that makes it so obvious. For example… if you get an email from Ajmal Qadri, that states, "I never had a debate with Mr. Sina." Then it is OBVIOUS the emails are not from him. Or, if you get an email from his teenage nephew, who was visiting for ramadan from queens new york, and secretly engaged in a debate with Mr. Sina, then it would be OBVIOUS that he didn't write the emails. Or, if you can show, by comparing sentence structure, syntax, flow, etc., that the two writers are NOT the same (using other EMAILS from Ajmal Qadri), then it would be (POSSIBLE) he didn't write the emails.

    However, without direct denial from Ajmal Qadri… which I imagine would have been VERY QUICK in coming if he indeed DID NOT engage in a debate with Mr. Sina (he's had three years to go public and deny any involvement with Mr. Sina in any debates and not a word from him), then you are simply engaging in a campaign of slander… which is to be expected from someone who has no rebuttals to the arguments against his religion (before you reply to that last statement, take care, realizing that sometimes, the more you say, the more you inadvertently give away).

    Finally. The fact that it has been three years, and the fact that Mr. Sina is known by ALL the most senior of the islamic leaders, and the fact that entire countries are in a battle to remove (or block) his site, and because Ajmal Qadri's photograph is in the header of Mr. Sina's site, it can be deduced that Ajmal Qadri would have been told about this "fake" debate, and would have issued a statement denouncing Mr. Sina and calling for the removal of the debate.

    So, let's look at the two "suspicions" and compare them to see which "suspicion" is most likely the truth.

    1. (Your Suspicion) You suspect Ajmal Qadri didn't write the emails because, according to you, (a non-expert in linguistics and textual criticism), you believe the emails bear the writing style of a western teenager.

    2. (My Suspicion) I suspect he actually DID write the emails because he has had THREE WHOLE YEARS in which to (a.) learn about the debate, and (b.) make a public statement disavowing any knowledge of the debate.

    Now… on balance… which of the two "suspicions" I've just mentioned would appear to be more accurate and closer to the truth of the matter? Yours… or mine?

    Of course, you could always contact him and let him know he's being slandered and misrepresented. But, why would you do that? You already know the emails are authentic, now don't you? Of course you do.

    J Stillwater

  410. J Stillwater says:

    @aminriadh… here is a perfect example of what I stated in my above response to your first post. I only post this here to give you an illustration of what I stated above.

    Here, you state: "For example my reason for doubt that Ajmal Qadri never wrote those emails is because of the writing style. " And then you follow that by saying: "it's that simple."

    By making these statements, you are implying a few things:

    1. You are familiar with Ajmal Qadri's writing style.
    2. You are knowledgeable about the nuances of writing style in general.
    3. You are familiar with the writing style of a western teenager.

    Again… these are implied…

    Now, what you want to do, if you are really concerned about this, is to prove these points to us and show us that you've proven Mr. Sina to be dishonest about the emails. Note however, it still does not cancel the strength of Mr. Sina's replies to the "fake" emails. Mr. Sina's responses, and the logic of his arguments, must be addressed individually on their own merits, even if they are used to answer "fake" emails. If you were able to show that the emails are fake, all that does is show Mr. Sina to be dishonest (which would then become an ad hominem argument against the statements in his responses to his opponent). Your "suspicions" don't do anything of the sort… because they are only statements of opinion, and carry no weight with regard to elevating or demoting Mr. Sina.

    Finally, you state above: "If I make statements – i fully expect them to be challenged…" Now that you've made this statement, let's look at how this applies, or does not apply to Mr. Sina.

    Mr. Sina has made several statements in his debate. The first statement is that he is HAVING the debate, and the opponent is Ajmal Qadri. You have not challenged that statement. You have only doubted it. If you however, openly challenge the claim that these emails came from Ajmal Qadri, the burden of proof is on you. You have become the prosecutor of the crime of perjury. You have accused Mr. Sina of lying and saying that these emails are not from Ajmal Qadri… and as the person who is bringing the case against Mr. Sina, you must prove your case. The burden of proof is on you, not on Mr. Sina. Mr. Sina is presumed innocent until proven guilty by you, the prosecutor of the allegation.

    It's like a legal case in a court of law. Let's say an art dealer sells a painting purported to be a Rembrandt. Now, let's say the buyer of that painting, after looking closely at the brush strokes of the painting, accuses the seller of fraud and says the painting is a fake. When the case goes to trial, the burden of proof will be on the buyer to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they have been defrauded by the seller. It is on THEM to provide proofs, experts, other paintings, histories, timelines, etc. All the defendant must do is continue to say the same as always: "It is a real Rembrandt."

    I hope you will either make an outright accusation, and then provide proofs, or leave this childish, and meaningless course of dialogue.

    J Stillwater

  411. J Stillwater says:

    @aminriadh… why don't you contact this person and ask if he wrote these? Wouldn't that be more productive that to continue your tirade here? If Mr. Sina has faked this person's contributions to this discussion, don't you think it would be a good thing to do to contact the person and let them know their name is being slandered? If you instead want to attack Mr. Sina directly, wouldn't it be better to set up a site and refute his claims?

    If you read your posts here… you start your first post with casting doubt about the author of the emails (okay… that's your opinion… everybody's got one… and by your third post, you are attacking Mr. Sina (which I think was your goal in the first place).

    In the world of words, a statement is either true, or not true… so, this person either did write the emails, or he didn't. If you think he didn't, we are wondering why. When you state: "given the language style…" you imply that you are familiar with the language style of this writer. If you are, then please show us other samples of this person's writings so that we may see how you arrived at your suspicion. Otherwise, we can see that you are only here to pick a fight, which is fine, but please don't try and delude the readers with this nonsense about writing style.

    Now, let's say he didn't write these, and your suspicions are correct, and Mr. Sina made up his emails. Does that in any way change the logic of Mr. Sina's arguments in response to the so-called fake emails? And if so, how?

    I would like for you to show us some samples of this person's writing, so that we may also see why you have suspicions. When you say: "I doubt he writes like a Western teenager…" all you are doing, is creating a red herring… you are creating a point which is FAR off the topic in order to divert people's attention away from Mr. Sina's responses to this person. Here's why it is a red herring:

    You have made a statement which contains in it an argument. That argument is: "whoever wrote these, writes like a western teenager." That assertion must be proved (if only to yourself). You didn't make that statement outright… you "implied" it. Your suspicion is based on an internal conclusion you've reached, i.e., "these appear to have been written in the style of a western teenager… and can therefore not be from this person… so I am suspicious." Now… before you voice your suspicions, it is good to first have a point of reference, so you can show Mr. Sina that you're not just pulling this information out of your rear end in order to start a fight.

    Next, you should be ready with the information you used to arrive at your conclusion… the one that led to your "suspicion." i.e., "this is written like a western teenager."

    aminriadh… after having stated all this, I still think it would be easier to contact this writer and tell him you have suspicions…

    J Stillwater

  412. Julia says:

    Again , only the Alif,Lam,Meem-B.llSh!t is enough to destroy this EVIL CULT called Islam (= submission to a figment of the fake prophet Mohammed).
    It is really amazing to see how brainwashing works with these poor muslim morons.
    Even their OWN clerics and "scholars" write and say that muslims MUST HATE ALL NON-MUSLIMS, http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/alWalaawalBaraa1….
    I advise everybody to read especially chapter 4 :" Love and Hate and the Declatation of Faith". Only short pages 33-37 , but VERY,VERY CKEAR !
    Read and think about it . You too, muslims !!!!

  413. Julia says:

    Oh, Amiriadh….I have to admit : You have won the "hahaha"competition .
    Congratulations !

  414. Julia says:

    Hi,Aminriadh.
    WOW,thát was a great response. This must have been hard working. 🙂
    But I am glad your sóóóó happy now. Although I suspect that it is a painful "hahaha" .
    I think it would be better for you to really ponder about this little , but VERY EVIL, book of your "learned" muslim brother , Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani.
    Don't you find this Islamic principle (Al Wala wal Bara) extremely malicious.?Not even a little bit?
    You must hate ALL non-muslims, I repeat ALL NONMUSLIM, that is about 5 billion human beings.And you don't KNOW who they are!. This is what it clearly means. Even innocent little children !
    Isn't thát a bit strange at least ? Think man ….THINK ABOUT THIS .

  415. Julia says:

    Hi, Demsci.
    With the crazy "Alif,Lam,Meem "-thing and the Black Stone Idol and Salah-crap , I think to have shown how backward the Islam-CULT is. This alone, should be enough to refute this STUPID religion called Islam (submission to a figment ! How awful in inhuman).But with the clear booklet of his own muslim-Scholar Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani I have touched a very painful nerve . He dares NOT and of course CAN NOT refute this thesis. He admires these bastards even although they are clearly EVIL .
    His feeling of being BEATEN UP is obvious. The trollish(!!) " hahaha" and the other empty reactions show this without any doubt. He has nothing left and feels very humiliated. This is a good thing. He does not understand that we don't care about some silly jokes , muslims don't get this , thay are (also in this regard) immature too see the real things THAT REALLY MATTER. They are slaves according to themselves. They only obey.
    So I think the best thing we can do is to go on with things like the "al Wala wa'l- Bara" booklet.
    This stifled him. YEP ! I think , I can say HAHAHA !! 🙂
    Keep on fighting this EVIL CULT . Thank you !!

  416. Demsci says:

    Julia, we are here in a learning process, I suppose. And we should try to figure out the Modus Operandi of Aminriadh and try to improve our response to it.

    First of all, we are counterjihadists and he is an Islam-apologist. When we debate with him both sides try to persuade/ convince not each other, but some kind of audience, it may be only ONE reader, or even a hypothetical audience.

    Aminriadh IS smart and he indeed at times uses the concept of presenting opinions/ making claims and backing these up with good reasons and evidence. When his opponents do the same Aminriadh makes sure he too gives good reasons and evidence where he can in return.

    But while it is for the audience, the judge and jury, to judge, choose, decide etc he often acts like a prosecutor operating under some kind of law, or tacit agreements, or rules, or standards that he himself put forward; for example that:

    – opinions have to be backed up by reason and evidence and when they are not that they are to be considered: Invalid, Lies or nonsense, meaningless, irrelevant or containing false claims or false accusations against him or Muslims or Islam, in a word: BAD.

    He then uses his judgements to discredit his opponents by concluding in diverse varieties that they are dishonest or stupid; BAD.

    When opinions of opponents give opinions, even accompanied by abstract reasons, but without evidence, he will use the same tactic.

    When evidence is presented by opponents he will either present this as insufficient or irrelevant, or he will, feeling the pressure, resort to his own skills of providing opinions/ claims with good reason and good evidence. That is if he does not ignore it and cherrypick a weaker part of the opponents' post to attack.

    After a response is given by an opponent Aminriadh is very keen to demand evidence and reason for opinions, calling them claims. He demands answers. When these are not given to his satisfaction he will accuse opponents of failing to answer, hence being stupid or dishonest. As if there were some law, agreement that answers were obligatory. and as if he is the judge or jury, not just the prosecutor.

    But there is no such law as which he operates under. There is no agreement between counterjihadists and Islam-apologists or among debaters here that his rules and standards that he applies MUST be applied on pain of being accused of failing to follow rules, or living up to standards, which supposedly are agreed upon among counterjihadists and Islam-apologists.

    And even if there were such agreements, rules, standards, then still it would up to the audience, and not the prosecutor to judge and decide. So Aminriadh at best only can accuse and recommend.

    Look, this was my attempt to figure out what Aminriadhs tactics and tricks are.

    I realise this must be much improved upon but I hope ever better responses to these tactics and tricks can be found and used.

    Not to win from him, but to advance the greater good, that we have as our goal.

  417. Joe says:

    @aminriadh,

    "I pity you. You cannot even get a drinking buddy! "

    what is the real prize? a drinking buddy or to praise God?

    do you think we praise God when we defend that which God created?
    Do you think that we praise God when we Love that which God created?

    or do you just want to be a God and decide who gets their hands and feet cut off?

    Islam is Shirk and I pity those that Shirk .. even if you do not give a S**T

  418. Demsci says:

    And I have thought for a long time now that of the 2 of you, Aminriadh and you, you were the one with the greater stamina!

  419. Demsci says:

    Now he does say to me I don't have to answer his posts and I can let "the nonsense" go and do something nice instead. Exit strategy of him?

    It may indeed be a good idea to take a break and think about his strategies and ploys and how to counter them best in future. Not to win battles from him, but for the greater good; We firmly believe that there are better "religions/ ways of life and to organise society" than Islam provides available and we like as many Muslims as possible to exchange Islam for their better alternatives or just freedom from this unnecessary beliefsystem.

    But it was no waste discussing with him, because him opposing us so vehemently indeed gave me much opportunity to think and develop my thoughts and express them as best as I could. even if they were only directed to him + maybe a few readers.

  420. Demsci says:

    Quite right, Julia. It looks like Aminriadh is busy devising a credible exit-strategy. For a long time he ignored your ALIF LAM MEEM-challenge, until he finally came with an answer, which showed that in the so-called "Clear" Quran, of which there was no doubt contained letters and sentences that even the most learned Islamic Scholars did not the meaning of. The most likely explanation is simply some kind of human error, failure, some unnecessary, MEANINGLESS "bullshit" in that officially "Divine", hence Infallible "book".

    And now he avoids like the plaque speaking about this book of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani, which you clearly asked him to do, several times. With which you clearly challenged him.

    Endlessly he reminds that, according to him, I do not ANSWER when challenged. Or only with bullshit, in a meaningless irrelevant way. So now it is HE who does not answer (again) or only with bullshit or in meaningless irrelevant way when challenged!

    And now he does

  421. Ali Sina says:

    Have you gone mad?

  422. aminriadh says:

    Oh dear . . . . the lonely white man Julia.

    Lonely on a Saturday Night!

    I pity you . . .

  423. aminriadh says:

    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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

  424. aminriadh says:

    "You always had some "smart" (you thought) answer, but now you come only with Ad Hominems and so on. "

    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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

    You accusing anyone of "Ad Hominems "

  425. Julia says:

    What is wrong with you, Aminriadh.??
    You always had some "smart" (you thought) answer, but now you come only with Ad Hominems and so on. Exactly the answers you always seemed to despise so much ….. YOU LET US BELIEVE.
    Even BIG lies and racist reaction …I ma NOT a lonely whit man . But I don't care what you think of me.
    Stick to the topic here , which is THE EVILNESS OF YOUR CULT ISLAM.
    You are a cowardly little muslim . I pity you !
    I am curious what other readers will say about your behaviour !

  426. aminriadh says:

    Sure . . . just like all other times . . . what happened then?

    You made all these claims . . . attention seeking . . . desperate.

    But who is convinced by – YOU!

    – – –

    A lonely white man . . . nothing to do EVEN on a Saturday!

    I pity you. You cannot even get a drinking buddy!

    – – –

  427. Julia says:

    You are trying to escape , Aminriadh.
    We all see it clearly ! 🙂
    The more you spout silly excuses the more you expose yourself !
    Come on, man . I am sure you can do more than this.
    Ha,ha,ha …alone in not enough …it makes you into a TROLL ! 🙂 🙂 🙂
    This is a serious matter …you know. It is about Islam being EVIL or NOT !
    WE ( I ) say Islam is very ,very evil. And YOUR muslim scholar Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani proves us RIGHT in his booklet http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/alWalaawalBaraa1….
    So the conclusion is: THIS EVIL CULT ISLAM MUST BE DESTROYED ! Because it is a clear threat to the whole world.

  428. aminriadh says:

    I just have to stand next to you to look good.

    Well – anyone could.

    – – –

    "THE READERS ARE WAITING "

    Ego problems – dearest.

  429. aminriadh says:

    Boo Hoo.

    My love for Julie is as strong as ever.

    Ha ha ha . . . . you poor pitiful creature.

  430. aminriadh says:

    Ha ha ha – same things you claimed for all you little bits . . . and bats.

    What was the result . . . little lies and then whole lot of swearing.

    – – –

    Ha ha ha – Everything you say – you have already said. Change the channel – dearest.

  431. Julia says:

    Dear readers .
    Is this not strange ?
    Every time someone had some critic on Islam, THEN THERE WAS AMINRIADH , to defend his "peaceful" CULT, over and over again .
    But ,NOW, I showed you and him a little book written by a real muslim scholar , he runs away !
    This little book "al-Wala wa'l Bara " points out CLEARLY ( WITH PROOFS and references!) that ALL MUSLIMS MUST HATE ALL NON-MUSLIMS. http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/alWalaawalBaraa1….
    I think this booklet is SOOOOO clear, that even Aminriadh can not refute it . This muslim who said of himself that HE WAS THÁT GOOD !! 🙂
    This must be VERY HUMILIATING for this ARROGANT MUSLIM.
    It is not my goal though to humiliate people, on the contrary ! But I wanted to show this muslim how EVIL the Quran is , especially Quran 9:29 about the humiliation (disgracing!) of the dhimmies (non-muslims) ,see http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_contehttp://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_conte
    He does not have to anser to me

  432. Julia says:

    HAHAHA !!!
    RUN RAT,RRRRRRRRUN !!!
    By the way, all your comments
    were in deed full of love , we ALL COULD SEE THAT ! The real ISLAMIC LOVE !!
    Now….DEFEND YOUR CULT AS YOU SHOULD DO !!!

  433. Julia says:

    Hello STUPID muslim.
    You said: "In the end Sina banned you. "
    YEP, because i used many names. I explained that it was a TAQIYYA -joke .
    So he lifted the ban (of course) , he saw the humor…You can not …of course HAHAHA !
    All your answers were a BIG LOAD of BS .What else can we expect from a BRAINWASHED ARROGANT muslim dingbat .
    And now I ask you to refute your Islamic Scholar Shaykh Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani's (thesis) "Al-Wala' wa'l-Bara' , which says clearly that muslims MUST HATE ALL NON-MUSLIMS .
    GO ON !!!! NO SILLY EXCUSES !!
    THE READERS ARE WAITING 🙂

  434. aminriadh says:

    Anyone reading your comments Vs mine would term you the hate monger dear . . .

    Because that is what you are – I mean when likes of Sina ban you . . . .

    Well – says a lot doesn't it.

    My dearest poorest pitiable Julie.

  435. aminriadh says:

    Badges of Honour!

    Sure my love. . . . you have been claiming all these – anyway.

    It doesn't matter – whether I respond to you or not.

    So why waste all that time and energy . . .

    You are going to be abusive.

    So be abusive!

  436. Julia says:

    ALIF,LAM, MEEM 🙂 !!
    HAHAHA AmisRAT IS SAVING HIS A$S
    You are a HATEMONGER AND A
    SH!TTY COWARD.
    YOU ARE EXPOSED AS AN EVIL TAQIYYA MUSLIM !!!
    YOU ARE AFRAID OF YOUR OWN "SCHOLARS " . YOU CAN NOT DENY THIS ….ALL READERS SEE IT CLEARLY…..YOU ARE RUNNING!
    You are caught RED HANDED !!!

  437. Julia says:

    WOW ,what an intelligent response of Aminriadh !! And how short. Was that all there was left?
    Now , if you CAN, a "somewhat" longer reaction on my statement that Islam is hatemongering according to this little book of a muslim "SCHOLAR". That would be nice , Aminriadh.
    Don't run , you coward…you are in the corner and you know it.!! HAHAHAHA !!!
    You are being exposed, AGAIN. But NOW by your own learned muslim-brothers . 🙂

  438. aminriadh says:

    Sure . . . just like we talked about all your other nonsense . . .and to what end?

    When the arguments ran out – you started to left message after message of abuse.

    In the end Sina banned you.

    – – –

    Just like we talked about your little nonsense – over Salah?

    What did you do?

    Lied. When that was exposed . . . unashamedly . . .

    moved on to bring these so called experts . . .

    When all that finished.

    Some other nonsense . . . .

    – – –

    Hence the pattern continues.

    You do not have the ability to talk. .. other than to send whole load of abuse.

    – – –

    This time I am saving myself!

    – – –

    Free Love!

    My Dear Julia!

  439. aminriadh says:

    "My position would work fine in court. Average people accept and practice my concept. "

    No it wouldn't. What average people?

    – – –

    "In court opinions, claims COMPETE and are COMPARED. And only then evidence and reason are weighed, to choose the best opinion, or claim. Judge and jurors do not go around saying people lie just because they give opinions but not (enough) evidence and reason. They logically consider the alternatives and only because they have to consider people INNOCENT if not proven GUILTY they acquit in cases of doubt."

    What happens if they get someone like you . . . . who does not give evidence?

    Who claims that in some circumstances – you don't have to give evidence?

    Try answering that . . . rather than irrelevant spiels.

    – – –

    "They would certainly not convict me of any accused crime in cases of doubt, in a case where I failed to give evidence of my innocence, when the prosecution failed likewise. "

    He he he . . . here is the crucial bit:

    "when the prosecution failed likewise."

    What happens when you fail . . . and prosecution doesn't?

    . . . . you go down.

    – – –

    "You should be more like the people in court and consider your opponents innocent until proven guilty of what you accuse them of. "

    I DO prove you guilty of what I accuse – you have ample opportunity to counter argue – which you fail in.

    – – –

    "And Islam's own claims, explanations theories etc. should compete and be compared with alternative explanations of same issues and the truest and best explanations should be chosen. "

    Why don't you do THAT – rather than just talking about it?

    Let see it then . . . .

    Use WordPress.com it is free. Or other methods.

    This is PRECISELY what I mean . . . .

    You talk the talk . . . . but you cannot – walk the walk. . .

  440. aminriadh says:

    "I hope you do. I am so glad. Now let us agree to disagree and move on. "

    What do you mean move on? I hold your "position" to be fallacious and wrong and made-up.

    – – –

    I have given you chances to state you position clearly . . . and separately – so there is no confusion . .. .

    So far you have refused – why?

    Under this comment – once and for lets us hear it.

    Just state – you position . . . are you capable of that?

  441. aminriadh says:

    This person is intelligent!

  442. aminriadh says:

    "This backward muslim AminRAT thinks that he has EXPLAINED fot example his Alif,Lam,Meem -CRAP, by saying that it means "SOMETHING", but he doe not know what."

    Yet I have said rather more than that . . . a lot more.

    To claim this . . . shows exactly that I am right in saying:

    Julia is unable to counter-argue.

    Hence why it hopped from the argument.

    Also – why in the end . . . all it could do was – swear and abuse!

    – – –

    I mean what kind of intelligent person produce the above!

  443. Demsci says:

    "I have understood your position"

    I hope you do. I am so glad. Now let us agree to disagree and move on.

    My position would work fine in court. Average people accept and practice my concept.

    In court opinions, claims COMPETE and are COMPARED. And only then evidence and reason are weighed, to choose the best opinion, or claim. Judge and jurors do not go around saying people lie just because they give opinions but not (enough) evidence and reason. They logically consider the alternatives and only because they have to consider people INNOCENT if not proven GUILTY they acquit in cases of doubt.

    They would certainly not convict me of any accused crime in cases of doubt, in a case where I failed to give evidence of my innocence, when the prosecution failed likewise.

    You should be more like the people in court and consider your opponents innocent until proven guilty of what you accuse them of.

    this comparison of yours shows you the ultimate Islam-defender, with the attitude that Islam is innocent until proven guilty. Hence you are so bent all the time on discrediting evidence and reason against Islam being true and beneficial.

    You think that will leave Islam standing. But no, Islam has to compete and to be compared with other religions/ ways of life and the best one should be chosen is my opinion.

    And Islam's own claims, explanations theories etc. should compete and be compared with alternative explanations of same issues and the truest and best explanations should be chosen.

  444. aminriadh says:

    Ha ha . . . yet you COULD NOT SHOW ME WHERE!

    Simply claiming it . . . does NOT Make it so. . .

    Where many times . . .

    Where?

    – – –

    See you are LYING outright

    I know this also – becuase her Alif Lam mim – thing was pretty nonsensical thing.

    And "Julia" could NOT counter argue

    I even point this out – at all relevant places . . .

    Hence – you are LYING OUT RIGHT!!!

    = = =

    "She many times did! In previous discussions, with much detailed deep evidence and reason. "

    WHERE!

    = = =

    "See this is simply ignoring, denial and repeatedly asking about the same things on your part. "

    Which you could have put ot bed . . . by giving evidence . . .

    THIS IS EVEN MORE LYING!

    Else:

    It is real simple . . . .

    Where?

    – – –

    The whole Alif Lam Mim – Thing is pretty nonsensical . . . show me these:

    "much detailed deep evidence and reason."

    = = =

    See how you lie . . .

    Rather than pointing out evidence . . . .

    simply claims . . . lying claims!

  445. aminriadh says:

    "But you take Ali Sina and posters on his website to task with standards of logical thinking, which, if applied to Quran-Hadiths-Sira, would be devastating to them. "

    Here is your BS laid out . . . .

    Why don't you go and do this devastating work – rather than claiming it?

    Which makes it rather meaningless . . .

    Here is how:

    Sina claims to have done the same thing . . . when explored – I point out his lies and fallacies.

    – – – –

    ""Example; you always ask for evidence and reason and when that is applied to Quran-Hadiths-Sira, they cannot provide it to your own standards. "

    Examples of this? This BS you have already said – And I have asked for examples . . .

    I that endeavour you fail totally . . . but again repeat this baseless claim.

    – – –

    "But you don't admit that and don;t admit that you rely on divine revelation-argument to believe Quran-Hadiths-Sira (to a large extent). "

    Quran IS believed because of divine revelation – that is SO OBVIOUS – my admittance has nothing to do with it. Mere fact I am Muslim – this is true.

    Hadith is very different question – than Quran.

    – – –

    "You put much higher standards of providing evidence and reason on what counterjihadists say. "

    Nope – exact same . . . else evidence – for this claim?

    – – –

    "In short: Using double standards to Quran-Hadiths-Sira and Counter-jihadists is your achilles-heel. "

    It isn't – as this is YOU false accusation . . . . else prove otherwise?

  446. aminriadh says:

    "I advised you to respect me, to come to compromises with me"

    Why? How silly.

    – – –

    "The reason was that we can perhaps make peace and progress on at least some of our positions, so that we can have some agreements. "

    Nope – which would be idiotic.

    – – –

    "What good does it do for your reputation when you try to belittle your opponents so much as you do? Winning as it were of mental midgets? "

    This is another of your false accusation . . . it is CLEAR – as you are NOT up to the job . . . . you feel "belittled" – yet I am not the one who advocates swearing . . . and abusing opponents

    UNLIKE YOU!

    You can end this . . . by simply NOT answering . . .

    Why do you bother to answer then?

    If you hadn't answered – all this will go away.

    Why not go an make yourself a hot beverage then forget all about this nonsense?

    Or watch an amusing clip on Youtube or something?

    – – – –

    "Or are you belittling others in intelligence and integrity just to make yourself look better? Only a mediocre man needs to do that. "

    You do NOT have integrity . . . . you are DEVIOUS – EVASIVE and a LIAR.

    – – –

    "Why did you twist my advice of you better respecting me than being so contemptuous of me into that I BEGGED/ PLEADED? "

    Because that is what is was – begging!

    N one advises other for respect. What kind of BS is this?

    – – –

    "It is such a strawman-argument. "

    Once again . . . lying.

  447. Julia says:

    HAHAHA . Stupid muslim AminRAT !
    You write here : " It is also clear . . . that you always make such self-praising claims ."
    But it was you who said of himself : I AM THAT GOOD !!!
    Man,you are a real MUSLIM , A HATER of ALL non-muslims.
    React on this one ( I asked you many times) : http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/alWalaawalBaraa1….

  448. aminriadh says:

    "Oh, we ALL only partially react. And I can't with certainty say that you ran away when all I can say is that you did not answer specific things I said. The reason is that I never demand such answers from you and so tend to not notice what you do not answer. "

    In short – you cannot . . . .

    Yet you claimed:

    "If he does not ignore us, then what he does is saying that what we say is meaningless or stupid, ridiculous, devious. All the while pretending just to speak to us only. But that is simply running away from the argument. "

    Hence I am with my rights to point out – you are a LIAR!

    When it came to it you could NOT prove that I have ran away from an argument.

    – – –

    "But I was referring to your earlier altercation with Julia. About her being your favorite and you loving her and you joking around with her when in HER posts she was issuing challenges to you.
    "

    A person – which I have spent 100's literally hundreds of post answering – and often very very comprehensively.

    Yet in return – I do NOT get much in terms of "counter-arguments"

    Just posts filled with abuse. For which Sina even banned the person.

    So I am once again . . . right to point out:

    1. Julia isn't very intelligent.
    2. Educated or well read.
    3. Unable to counter-argue.
    4. Does not even know the difference between argument and statements.

    5. Is NOT honest and has tendency to lie. For example her idiotic claims regarding the word Salah.

    Hence such persons "challenges" – where you get abuse in return . . . . are meaningless.

    Best thing . . . to be equally meaningless. Which is the best method!

    – – –

  449. Demsci says:

    "When ever I bang a nail in – you change it . . . ."

    No, you never nailed it. and I never changed it, on the issue concerned.

    The game is for both sides to get agreement on what the positions on some issues are of the other side.

    And only when agreements is reached over the position of person on an issue, the opponent can honestly attack it.

    Witness my several exposures of your strawman-arguments, you have attacked positions that you said were my positions, which they were not. My positions were misrepresented by you and then those strawman-positions were attacked by you or used by you, against me.

    Go back and read my comments and ask me:

    Is this your position on the issue of:

    "opinions, the need/ reguirement of giving good (enough) evidence or reason, and the judgement of opinions with (sufficient) lack thereof as lies","

    And ask me also if I am prepared to give oftentimes evidence and reason to back my opinions or not?,

    Ask me about my opinion that I do NOT NEED to give (enough) evidence and reason for every one of my opinions. Whether or not I am challenged on them. Because we can simply agree to disagree.

    I hope your at times poor understanding mind can grasp this! Rightly, not twisted, as has happened before.

  450. Julia says:

    You are RIGHT Demsci.
    This backward muslim AminRAT thinks that he has EXPLAINED fot example his Alif,Lam,Meem -CRAP, by saying that it means "SOMETHING", but he doe not know what. In the same way he answers the Islam-nonsense about "The Black Stone" and the "Sallah"Sh!T .
    My Question about Al Wala Wa'l Bara http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/alWalaawalBaraa1….
    he even has NOT DARE to talk about ! HAHAHA ! Because it clearly proves that it is ISLAM that is HATEMONGERING. !!!
    Come on EVIL ,HATEFUL muslim AminRAT , give your reaction on this article of a REAL muslim "scholar".

  451. aminriadh says:

    "It is abstract thinking, maybe it is the weak spot in your logical mind, but it is done and appreciated often. "

    When it is relevant . . . so look up – and explain how when I pointed this out – why am I wrong.

    Rather than simply answering with EVEN more generalities?

    Again . . . . lack of specific example. . . rather concentrate on bieng as general and vague as possible. . .

    – – –

    "I learned about the difference between relying on "divine revelation" and on "Reason" from Sam Harris. "

    I hope your teacher isn't as poor as you!

    – – –

    "Sometimes it is the dumber person who ridicules the wiser one, not because of stupidity of the wiser one, but because of lack of understanding in the dumber one. "

    He he . . . I take you meant the "dumber" is you . . . as you were the one begging me for respect!

    – – –

    "And when 2 people speak. and B constantly declares that A (often) speaks meaningless, BS, ridiculous and so on, "

    I give reason and say exactly why . . . . look up – even YOU admit that you are vague!

    Rather than countering – what was a specific example – what did you do . . . .

    spewed and open accusation . . .

    How idiotic!

  452. Demsci says:

    "See this is simply lying . . . else you would prove otherwise – by showing where? "

    She many times did! In previous discussions, with much detailed deep evidence and reason.

    See this is simply ignoring, denial and repeatedly asking about the same things on your part.

  453. aminriadh says:

    "So it seems you say more than 50 % of mankind cannot produce "anything" (relevant, good on this issue). "

    So by which measurement or statistics did you come to 50%.

    Let us have you evidence?

    – – –

    "No, you just, in prejudice, judge opponents thus always and abundantly, without any independent control. You always deliberately or biased withhold acknowledgement and approval. "

    I can simply reverse this – and say it right back. Consider it done!

  454. aminriadh says:

    "I mean you saying me making things up (accusing me of lying deliberately or crazy) and not knowing much (not specifying about what subject). And yes, also about talking poor and confused, I hold that I am in that respect average too. "

    There you go . . . you admit it.

    Hence I am right.

    = = =

    "So go ahead, judge more than 50 % of mankind and also Muslims, as deficient in performance as your description of me. "

    Where is your proof of this 50%. . .

    . . . You made it up. I am saying it open . . . .you made it up. hence you lied.

    Else you will .. . . . .counter this proving me wrong.

    – – –

    Which you won't be able to – as I already know I am right!

  455. aminriadh says:

    "You seem to forget that almost all that I say that you call meaningless" is said in countless variations by countless people, including Muslims. "

    BS – and irrelevant. And you have made this up.

    Again vague – and meaningless.

    Else – examples . . . . evidence – proof?

    Oh – you are the one who say . . . you don't need to give proof every time . . . so when do you give it and when not?

    Hence:

    "That I only picked most of it up from other people, books, articles, tv, internet and other posters. "

    What did you pick up? Vague – no examples . . . meaningless.

    = = =

    I speak to you . . . . and matter specific . . . and look at the hoops you are jumping through . . . .

    "So your judgements are themselves pretty meaningless or at best pretty negative for mankind as a whole. "

    How and why?

    See – the BS you produce – see how meaningless it is . . .

    What has THIS all got to d with you . . . . making lying claims – and when challenged

    Finding excuses . . . . ?

    – – –

    "And since you do not benevolently admit that you too, speak meaningless guff at times, your judgements are very arrogant. "

    Why should I go around . . .saying things like – "I speak guff"

    . . . when in argument with you . . . isn't it YOUR job. . .

    Is that why you were BEGGING me for respect?

    – – –

    Now – rather than making this mysterious position clear . . . or answering specific charges . . . look at you . . . . making BS theories up.

    – – –

    Good playing these devious games aren't you.

  456. Demsci says:

    "Bring up an argument – that i have ran away from . . . . "

    Oh, we ALL only partially react. And I can't with certainty say that you ran away when all I can say is that you did not answer specific things I said. The reason is that I never demand such answers from you and so tend to not notice what you do not answer.

    But I was referring to your earlier altercation with Julia. About her being your favorite and you loving her and you joking around with her when in HER posts she was issuing challenges to you.

    And then you said this:
    "All the lies and swear and whatnot. Why waste time on likes of you.

    Go seek attention somewhere else.
    Sure my darling . . . But I put up with enough of your nonsense – with Salah. All the lies . . . "

    Now joking and evading reaction I called running away.

  457. aminriadh says:

    "I countered it plenty. But you kept saying things like "meaningless, bull****, not what I asked for". Did you deliberately withhold approval? "

    Where . . . show me. And what was it you were countering?

    See once again . . . .vague. I can predict your responses . . . . as you have done this before.

    You keep doing it.

    hence you were BEGGING me for respect. Wow!

    – – –

    "I said that for opinions to be considered (possibly) true, giving evidence and reason was not necessary every time. "

    When challenged . . . . YOU HAVE TO!

    It is like being in front of court – if you cannot DEFEND your position .. . . you go down.

    As SIMPLE as that . . . .

    There are NO 2 ways about it.

    See – now it you playing "straw men"! – I have already said – when challenged you have to give evidence . . . . which you rather conveniently did not mention.

    – – –

    "This looks suspiciously like you lying. But it might also be a case of poor understanding by you, of my (expressed) position. Or of youhastily reading, or of premature dismissal by you. "

    You do NOT have a valid position . . . when you make a claim – someone challenges you – YOU HAVE TO GIVE evidence.

    I have understood your position . . . it is an invalid position. There is no such a thing as NOT giving evidence.

    It would not work in court – you would be convicted of the accused crime.

    – – –

    You know FULL well I have told no lie – HENCE why you left a get out clause of "poor understanding"

  458. Demsci says:

    "So why were YOU the one – BEGGING me for respect?
    Why were YOU the one . . . . BEGGING AND PLEADING for respect?"

    I advised you to respect me, to come to compromises with me. The reason was that we can perhaps make peace and progress on at least some of our positions, so that we can have some agreements.

    What good does it do for your reputation when you try to belittle your opponents so much as you do? Winning as it were of mental midgets?

    Or are you belittling others in intelligence and integrity just to make yourself look better? Only a mediocre man needs to do that.

    Why did you twist my advice of you better respecting me than being so contemptuous of me into that I BEGGED/ PLEADED?

    It is such a strawman-argument.

  459. aminriadh says:

    "But YOUR presentation of my position was that I refuse to give ANY evidence when challenged. This means that I always have the same reaction when challenged; Refusal to give any evidence (which I supposedly then never give). "

    When have you? When I have challenged you?

    – – –

    "This is not my true (expressed) position. "

    Then what is? – Even you don't seem to know it.

    Or you are able to express it clearly enough.

    – – –

    " But there are also plenty examples when I do at least attempt to provide evidence en reasons. And whatever their quality they are I do present them. "

    Where?

    – – –

    "So you saying "that there are plenty examples of this" only shows your poor (lazy, hasty?) understanding of my true position or is an example of you failing in logical reasoning. "

    BS and you know it . . . hence in this whole comment – rather than presenting your "view"

    You chose to mess about.

    And put up a lying claim against me. Another one.

    – – –

    See – Honesty doesn't seem to be a virtue of yours does it. . . . .

    – – –

    What is this "true" position . . .why do you have so much trouble expressing it.

    It is rather clear . . . your "true" position is an ever shifting one. . .

    When ever I bang a nail in – you change it . . . . another nail in more shifting in.

    So pin your self down . . . . and below this comment – do NOTHING other than mention this holy position – so I can have it.

  460. Demsci says:

    Your achilles-heel?

    That is about that you are a Muslim and therefore people know that you support Quran-Hadiths-Sira, if not for 100 %, then to a very high extent.

    But you take Ali Sina and posters on his website to task with standards of logical thinking, which, if applied to Quran-Hadiths-Sira, would be devastating to them.

    Example; you always ask for evidence and reason and when that is applied to Quran-Hadiths-Sira, they cannot provide it to your own standards.

    But you don't admit that and don;t admit that you rely on divine revelation-argument to believe Quran-Hadiths-Sira (to a large extent).

    You put much higher standards of providing evidence and reason on what counterjihadists say.

    In short: Using double standards to Quran-Hadiths-Sira and Counter-jihadists is your achilles-heel.

  461. aminriadh says:

    "but could it be that the highly controversial nature of the book, and the risks involved, from violent Muslims attacking, trying to kill the publisher, made publisher refuse to publish Ali Sina's book? "

    So why are other

    Sina is hardly that well known – as he is NOT an academic of any kind.

    Yet all other people manage to get their books published.

    Rushdie is a big – controversial name . . . . one can still find many copies of his book.

    Then there are others . . . . Ibn Warraq . . . and what not.

    Those have much bigger profile than Sina.

    – – –

    Answer: Sina's book his rubbish!

  462. aminriadh says:

    "But literally hundreds of those articles are available on the websites of Ali Sina, Robert Spencer and on numerous other counterjihadist-websites, easy to find, through links. "

    huh? You are NOT serious are you . . . you have GOT to be kidding me. . .

    Either you are extremely dim – or devious.

    This:

    " "See if you had an argument – you would have brought a specific example . . . . rather than arguing about argument. . . which is sheer nonsense." "

    Is aimed at you . . . . so why answer talking about irrelevant things. . . . what has other arguments/articles on other sites go to do with it?

    No one asked you that . . . .

    alll that is irrelevant.

    – – –

    You admit you've understood what I asked:

    "This seems true on the face of it. And I could painstakingly pick arguments from the many books and articles I read. And perhaps I should start doing that. "

    Then still proceed to paste that irrelevance – why?

    – – –

    What have other articles got to do with you?

    – – –

    = = =

    "To me it is sheer denial to ask me to provide evidence and then not look at the abundance of evidence every visitor here has at his/ her fingertips, with articles, then with links, leading to more articles. "

    This is UTTER nonsense . . . if you make a argument – then it is YOU who gives the evidence.

    it is idiotic to say to someone in response . . . .what you have said.

    If it is THAT easy . . . why don't you give an answer.

    If it is DENIAL – then why have you NEVER pointed to such evidence?

    Why . . . ?

    See once again . . . you resort to making IDIOTIC nonsense up.

    This is stupidity to the extreme. . . .

    If it all that EASY . . . . then why do you have so much trouble NOT finding "evidence. . .

    Also:

    When you make a LYING ACCUSATION against me – and I challenge that . . .

    How is its answer here on these sites?

    Once again . . . . see how devious you are!

    – – –

    "
    I assure any reader that there is gigabytes of information to back me up. "

    Yet you are UNABLE to give it out?

    Anyone can claim this type of nonsense . . . . it is YOUR job to give it.

    This is meaningless claim:

    "I assure any reader that there is gigabytes of information to back me up."

    So what . . . . what relevance is it to a particular claim?

    – – –

    " And you have to decide if you want to find the highest truth you can find or if you just want to hold on to your beloved religion, however untrue it is shown to be, by those many articles on this website and accessible through links it provides. "

    Which has got NOTHING to do with you . . . .

    Hence whose website is – and whoever the author of something is . . . . then a person take up their beef with them.

    What has THAT got to do with you?

    – – –

    This is like a scientist . . . . who claims something say:

    "There are aliens"

    When asked for proof – he simply says . . . . oh there are billions planets out there – go and find it.

    he would laughed out of this world . . . for stupidity.

    – – –

  463. aminriadh says:

    He he – another wannabe smart types.

    No argument – rather hoping that personal attacks will lead to vindication.

    – – –

    Hence the usage of things like smileys and quips.

  464. aminriadh says:

    "It was rather that you disparaged it, than that you asked me to explain it."

    Doh! it is the usage of it . . . the explicit meaning inferred is that it would refer to being anti-Jihad.

    Yet your usage is far wider – meaning anyone anti-Islam.

    Hence rendering the obvious menaing pretty useless.

    – – –

    Often abuse of term such as these is to slip something dodgy in . . . . being devious.

    It is NOT calling spade a spade.

  465. Demsci says:

    The wikipedia-explanation it also says:
    "An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts."

    There is no mention that an opinion REQUIRED, NEEDED proof and reason. It says An opinion MAY be supported by an argument.

    People can make things up and lie, and then again they can express a very true and worthy opinion, if not accompanied by facts and good reasoning, then still in accordance with many facts and good reasoning.

    Only when 2 opinions on the same issue contradict then it would be wise to compare their basis of evidence and reason and try to choose the truest and the best. But even then people may "draw opposing opinion from the same set of facts"!

    We should respect each others opinions. Focus on our own opinions and why we have them.

    Your attitude of dismissal, your definition of lying as not giving (enough) evidence and reason, your judgements of what opponents say in varieties of their stupidity and dishonesty,

    these make you look like a person who is often negative, denying, nullifying, deferring to "not-know-about-this-issue-position", deferring to previous even more faulty opinions, even less based on evidence and reason. But kept for the wrong reasons, like :"Divine Revelation", it being the belief of my loved ones and community and culture to which I must be loyal. But you should only be loyal to the humans, not to their beliefs.

  466. aminriadh says:

    "Quite right Julia, well said. I think it is his achilles-heel. "

    What is?

    – – –

    "If he does not ignore us, then what he does is saying that what we say is meaningless or stupid, ridiculous, devious. All the while pretending just to speak to us only. But that is simply running away from the argument."

    huh?

    Every single thing here is a lie . . . . and obvious lies

    And I am calling you out agin

    – – –

    You so shameless at lying that – when challenged – you DO NOT BOTHER to respond.

    – – –

    There is NOT a single argument – that Julia has won . . . .

    Else mention it.

    – – – –

    "But that is simply running away from the argument. "

    How lying and devious of you . . . .

    THis is what you do . . . . then you make excuses . . .

    Bring up an argument – that i have ran away from . . . .

    See – how shamelessly you lie!

    – – – –

    Now what excuses are you going to make – for NOT answering?

    – – – –

    "And on the process he also tries to belittle our intelligence and abilities and knowledge, and to vilify us, questioning our motives and integrity. "

    So why were YOU the one – BEGGING me for respect?

    Why were YOU the one . . . . BEGGING AND PLEADING for respect?

    = = =

    Now you will answer this . . . . else I will keep asking.

    – – –

    See your morality – "lying" is something you don't even consider wrong . . . .

  467. aminriadh says:

    "Just as I crushed his silly explanation of the crazy letters like Alif,Lam ,Meem in his malicious Quran. ( It means something but he doesn't know what ! Hahaha)"

    Where?

    See this is simply lying . . . else you would prove otherwise – by showing where?

    – – –

    No one does believe you either. . . . else they would have to provide evidence.

    – – –

    Your Alif Lam Mim – thing is absolute nonsense. . . . and the thing is – you could NOT counter argue –

    Hence you are the one who moved on . . .

    This is abundantly obvious.

    – – –

    It is also clear . . . that you always make such self-praising claims

    Hence they mean nothing.

    – – –

    Anyone reading your comments is able to judge the amount of intelligence and learning you have. . .

    – – –

    If your Salah arguments and the idiotic lies are anything to go by . . . .

    – – –

    You have made plenty of challegens . . . . what happened?

    Yes – you left after swearing and abusing.

    – – – –

    When argument runs out – you always do this . . . . leave swears and abuse.

    Sina even banned you – your own master.

  468. aminriadh says:

    "strawman-argument. Twisting my words, attacking a position I do not have (expressed). "

    Once again – this is FALSE accusation – you do it again.

    When asked to explain – you go to pieces – yet you are NOT shy of making this accusation over and over . . .

    Yet you cannot explain it.

    – – –

    Devious, Dishonest and lying of you.

    = = =

    "I said indeed I did not have to bring up evidence,"

    There you go – you even admit it. How idiotic – silly and nonsensical.

    = = =

    " but I did NOT say YOU NEEDED TO BRING UP EVIDENCE. I suggested that you brought forth up your contradicting opinion and bolster that with some proof. But still I did not say anything like that you needed to do that. "

    Yes you did . . . . . see your own answer

  469. aminriadh says:

    "Bless you for this challenge, Aminriadh, "

    It is hardly a challenge dear . . . anyone could list books – hence the speed of answer mattered.

    – – –

    Sure – now would you like to talk about any of them?

    – – –

  470. Demsci says:

    "What does this mean . . . . speaking in such generalities – is simply meaningless. "

    It is abstract thinking, maybe it is the weak spot in your logical mind, but it is done and appreciated often.

    I learned about the difference between relying on "divine revelation" and on "Reason" from Sam Harris.

    And when 2 people speak. and B constantly declares that A (often) speaks meaningless, BS, ridiculous and so on,

    the question for C, other people, becomes whether B really understands what A is saying or not.

    Sometimes it is the dumber person who ridicules the wiser one, not because of stupidity of the wiser one, but because of lack of understanding in the dumber one.

  471. Demsci says:

    "neither are you clever or educated enough to produce anything."

    No, you just, in prejudice, judge opponents thus always and abundantly, without any independent control. You always deliberately or biased withhold acknowledgement and approval.

    And my cleverness and education are about average in mankind. So it seems you say more than 50 % of mankind cannot produce "anything" (relevant, good on this issue).

  472. Demsci says:

    For all your evidence and reasons you could as well respond thus to more than 50 % of humans for more than 50 % of what they say.

    I mean you saying me making things up (accusing me of lying deliberately or crazy) and not knowing much (not specifying about what subject). And yes, also about talking poor and confused, I hold that I am in that respect average too.

    So go ahead, judge more than 50 % of mankind and also Muslims, as deficient in performance as your description of me.

  473. Demsci says:

    "see how much meaningless guff you come out with."

    You seem to forget that almost all that I say that you call meaningless" is said in countless variations by countless people, including Muslims. That I only picked most of it up from other people, books, articles, tv, internet and other posters.

    So I hold the position on almost all of my utterances that they are average. Even on average with relevance to topics.

    And that you, with your standards and your attitude, therefore judge more than 50 % of what people, so Muslims too, as "meaningless".

    So your judgements are themselves pretty meaningless or at best pretty negative for mankind as a whole.

    And since you do not benevolently admit that you too, speak meaningless guff at times, your judgements are very arrogant.

  474. Demsci says:

    "No I don't – I have given my reasoning – which you did not counter."

    I countered it plenty. But you kept saying things like "meaningless, bullshit, not what I asked for". Did you deliberately withhold approval?

    I countered your way of defining lying also, among other definitions, as expressing an opinion, then not giving (sufficient) evidence and reason for that opinion. That is what you called (my) lying. I said that for opinions to be considered (possibly) true, giving evidence and reason was not necessary every time.

    then you withheld acknowledgement or approval of that counterposition of me to your position.

    This looks suspiciously like you lying. But it might also be a case of poor understanding by you, of my (expressed) position. Or of youhastily reading, or of premature dismissal by you.

  475. Demsci says:

    "There are MANY examples of this . . . . "

    My point is that I do refuse to give evidence EVERY TIME. And often indeed I don't (give evidence). But (perhaps more) often I do give evidence and reason, in answer to challenges.

    But YOUR presentation of my position was that I refuse to give ANY evidence when challenged. This means that I always have the same reaction when challenged; Refusal to give any evidence (which I supposedly then never give).

    This is not my true (expressed) position.

    There may be plenty of examples for me refusing to give evidence and hence examples that I do not give it. But there are also plenty examples when I do at least attempt to provide evidence en reasons. And whatever their quality they are I do present them.

    So you saying "that there are plenty examples of this" only shows your poor (lazy, hasty?) understanding of my true position or is an example of you failing in logical reasoning.

  476. Demsci says:

    "Yet for one specific view you attempted to shift the burden of proof your claim unto to me . . . claiming that in order to challenge your opinion – which you said you should NOT have to provide evidence for . . .

    I was the one who needed to bring up Evidence!"

    strawman-argument. Twisting my words, attacking a position I do not have (expressed).

    I said indeed I did not have to bring up evidence, but I did NOT say YOU NEEDED TO BRING UP EVIDENCE. I suggested that you brought forth up your contradicting opinion and bolster that with some proof. But still I did not say anything like that you needed to do that.

  477. Demsci says:

    "This is why no one has bothered to publish his book. . . because it is rubbish!"

    Hang on, I am not sure, but could it be that the highly controversial nature of the book, and the risks involved, from violent Muslims attacking, trying to kill the publisher, made publisher refuse to publish Ali Sina's book?

  478. Joe says:

    poor @aminraidh

    "Meaningless self-praise. . . . I don't give ****. Why do you think I care? "

    Plus .. you obviously do not care care about your muslim brothers that are suffering under islam.. do you?

    Plus .. you do not care about logic or facts

    what do you care about? maybe it is YOUR EGO that is hurt!.. That is ok because WE ALL FACE THAT.. no matter what belief we have..

    we will be here to talk to.. 🙂

  479. Demsci says:

    "This "counter-jihadist" is BS meaningless term – which I have asked you several times to explain. You repeatedly ignore it."

    It was rather that you disparaged it, than that you asked me to explain it. And explain it I did: it is a term coined by Robert Spencer, at least he describes what he is doing as some sort of "counter-jihad".

    And I explained that there is a distinct group of people, who react critically to Islam, which has grown much since 9/11. And I put forward that it seems to me highly important to at least give this people a recognizable name. Perhaps anti-Islamists will also suffice. But do give them a name. Not giving them a name is illogical, and unfavorable, disadvantageous to them.

  480. Demsci says:

    Quite right Julia, well said. I think it is his achilles-heel. As well as that it is the heart of the matter. If he does not ignore us, then what he does is saying that what we say is meaningless or stupid, ridiculous, devious. All the while pretending just to speak to us only. But that is simply running away from the argument. And on the process he also tries to belittle our intelligence and abilities and knowledge, and to vilify us, questioning our motives and integrity. But it's all to protect his beloved Islam. And NOT ONLY with logical methods.

  481. Demsci says:

    "See if you had an argument – you would have brought a specific example . . . . rather than arguing about argument. . . which is sheer nonsense."

    This seems true on the face of it. And I could painstakingly pick arguments from the many books and articles I read. And perhaps I should start doing that.

    But literally hundreds of those articles are available on the websites of Ali Sina, Robert Spencer and on numerous other counterjihadist-websites, easy to find, through links.

    To me it is sheer denial to ask me to provide evidence and then not look at the abundance of evidence every visitor here has at his/ her fingertips, with articles, then with links, leading to more articles.

    I assure any reader that there is gigabytes of information to back me up. And you have to decide if you want to find the highest truth you can find or if you just want to hold on to your beloved religion, however untrue it is shown to be, by those many articles on this website and accessible through links it provides.

  482. Demsci says:

    Bless you for this challenge, Aminriadh,
    recently I read, some quite recently, some in the last 2 years, i picked the titles from my bookshelves, quickly:

    1. Did Mohammed exist? Robert Spencer.
    2. Megachange. The world in 2050. The Economist.
    3. The rational optimist. Matt Ridley.
    4. This will make you smarter. New scientific Concepts to Improve your thinking.
    5. The Moral landscape. Sam Harris.
    6. Bourgeouis Dignity. Deirdre McCloskey.
    7. The Human Web. A bird's eye view of world history. J.R. McNeill & William McNeill.
    8. why the West rules for now. The Patterns of History and what they reveal about the Future. Ian Morris.
    9. Civilization. The West and all the Rest. Niall Ferguson.
    10. To the last man. Germany 1944-1945. Ian Kershaw.
    11. The Better Angels of our Nature. Why violence has Declined. Steven Pinker.
    12. The Blank Slate. Steven Pinker.
    !3. The Islam. Historical Essays. Sam van Rooij, Wim van Rooij (it is in Dutch and very thick, with multiple writers).
    14. The Historic Muhammad. Hans Janssen. It is in Dutch.
    15. Islamic Jihad. A legacy if forced conversion, imperialism, and Slavery. M.A.Khan.
    16. The 100. A ranking of the most influential persons in history. Michael Hart.
    17. the trouble with Islam. Irshad Manji.
    18. God is not Great. Christopher Hitchens.
    19. Energy victory. Robert Zubrin.
    20. The Greatest show on earth. Richard Dawkins.
    21. Defending the West. Ibn Warraq.
    22. Nonzero sum. Robert Wright.
    23. The Seekers. Daniel Boorstin.
    24. Persian Empire. Tom Holland.
    25. Rubicon. Tom Holland.
    26. Millennium. The end of the world and the forging of Christendom. Tom Holland.

  483. johan says:

    Apart from the 101 myths, you can put 'quotable quotes' just as found in Reader's Digest after each article.(e.g.drinking camel's urine) .Your site has plenty of them; or what Mohammad had copied from Jesus (1) Last day of judgement, (2) Mohammad intercedes between man and Allah, (3) Mohammad is sitting at the right hand of Allah etc.

  484. Julia says:

    Dear Rainbow.
    You wrote: "Most of your accusations to Mohammad are actually true…."
    I am glad you see that too ! Thank you for that.
    Of course was Mohammed not the only bad guy. EVERYBODY knows that.
    But the fact is, that THIS site is about the evilness of Mohammed (and Islam !). AND HE WAS VERY,VERY EVIL INDEED.
    ONE site is not enough to fight against ALL EVIL in the world.
    Fight with us ON THIS SITE against the EVIL CULT called Islam.
    Perhaps you can start your own website against other wicked religions (I am an atheist too 🙂 ), monarchs etc. That would be great, but let us stick HERE to ISLAM and MOHAMMED.
    Have a beatiful, long life in FREEDOM !

  485. Rainbow says:

    @ Ali Sina

    Most of your accusations to Mohammad are actually true….but do you know that all these
    crimes and even worse are committed later by the royal families in Europe and Russia?
    All the history of humanity is stained with blood and the hands of the monarchs are
    stained with it. Being a doctor and with a degree, it is hard to believe that you are not
    aware of these facts. Mohammad was not the only bad guy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErDq0laWHA

  486. Arash_Irani says:

    60: 8-9 (A Medinan Surah)
    "Allah does not forbid you to treat kindly and act equitably towards those who have neither fought you in the matter of religion nor driven you out of your homes…He only forbids you to take for friends those who fought you in the matter of religion, and drove you out of your homes… "

    Abul Ala Maududi's Interpretation: http://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/tafsir.php?chap

    "The instructions to severe relations with the disbelievers given in the preceding verses, could cause the people the misunderstanding that this was because of their being the disbelievers. Therefore, in these verses it has been made clear that its actual cause is not their disbelief but their hostility to Islam and their tyrannical treatment of the followers of Islam.

    The Muslims, therefore, should distinguish between the hostile disbeliever and the non-hostile disbeliever, and should treat those disbelievers well who have never treated them evilly."

  487. Demsci says:

    Agree on most. But you did not "challenge" respectfully my assertion. You DISMISSED it! As you tend to do so easily, lazily, almost in the way of a censor.

    See, challenging is different from dismissing. A true challenger presents a contradicting opinion. And gives some initial evidence, then the opinion-presenter (not always a claimer necessarily) either graciously acquiesces or presents counter-evidence.

    You made an attempt to dismiss an opinion HEAVILY backed up in the archives of counterjihadistwebsites. Probably KNOWN to you. You probably directed your remarks not so much to me as to Maria-Islamic or other Muslim-readers. In My Opinion. And both the truth OR untruth of this statement/ opinion cannot be established, but I just exercise my freedom of speech.

  488. Demsci says:

    "This shows that – it doesn't matter to you whether I am right or wrong . . . you simply had grudge that you wanted to off load. How childish!"

    No grudge (I admire you), it's about principles of arguing; I say that no matter whether one of us is right or wrong the other one can withhold approval, you AND I, too. So let us move on beyond that.

    "In your opinion . . . so have you given reasoning? No – rather . . . you are looking for ways NOT to give out any reasons. Ridiculous – in my opinion."

    You know me better than that! Oh, I am all about giving you reasons. I am afraid Ali Sina will cut me off, for all the reasons I give you.

  489. aminriadh says:

    I think you need to learn the difference –

    Let us say I claim

    "Sina is a Liar" – but when Sina turns around and says . . . why lie? Why have you called me a liar . . . then if I do not give him the reason . . . that would make me the liar . . . for leveling a false accusation at him.

    More:

    Let us say – Sina makes a claim:

    "All Muslim are Murderers"

    And I challenge this . . . why and how.

    Now he, Sina, can have this opinion and it is perfectly fine . . . but do you not see why someone would challenge this statement?

    If Sina makes such statements – it is up to him to provide evidence or reasoning.

    – – –

    Even opinion tend to be about facts:

    "In general, an opinion is a subjective belief, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts."

    Wiki – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion

    – – –

    Hence your opinion:

    ""It is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were in the past of the same amount"

    This DOES require proof. . . . and reasons when questioned. How do you know this . . .

    or did you just make it up.

    Opinions do not equal "make belief".

    – – –

    This is absolute basics . . . and you seem to be struggling EVEN with this.

    Why?

  490. aminriadh says:

    "Says YOU. Not some independent third party. "

    What has some independent party got to do with it? It is simple question . . . anyone can check. For example my reason for doubt that Ajmal Qadri never wrote those emails is because of the writing style.

    It is that simple.

    – – –

    "One judgement of difference between Demsci and Aminriadh could be: Demsci gave no evidence-proof-reasons at all, whereas Aminriadh gave some. So Demsci's comment was invalid, Aminriadh's valid. But this would be unsatisfactory because it leaves out a proper evaluation of the quality and completeness or indeed of the truthfulness of the evidence given. "

    But no one is talking about evaluation . . . YOU made the erroneous comparison . . . I have pointed it out.

    Let us see:

    "it is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were of the same amount"

    Why is it highly unlikely. . . ? This is all that is asked. Yet you think – you should not have to answer this when questioned – why?

    – – –

    "But who decides that?! If Aminriadh gives a verdict over Demsci's lack of evidence or insufficiency of it, then Demsci can return the favor by calling Aminriadhs evidence insufficient, and indefinitely too. "

    See you collude the two things . . . lack of evidence . . . and insufficient are 2 completely different things.

    In the example above – you did not say why you think this:

    "it is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were of the same amount"

    – – –

    Whereas when you say this:

    " If Aminriadh gives a verdict over Demsci's lack of evidence or insufficiency of it, then Demsci can return the favor by calling Aminriadhs evidence insufficient, and indefinitely too. "

    This shows that – it doesn't matter to you whether I am right or wrong . . . you simply had grudge that you wanted to off load.

    How childish!

    – – –

    "No, I think giving evidence-reasons for opinions is good, but that opinions (from both sides) without evidence can be true and beneficial and I think that only when comparing contradicting opinions it is important to carefully weigh the evidence-reasons each side gives in order to choose well between them."

    Whole load of meaningless BS – It is simple you made a statement . . . I asked for the reason. . .

    Hence my comparison to your statement would be. If I simply said "I don't believe Ajmal Qadri wrote those emails". . . then I do not give out nay reason WHY.

    Hence your above "opinion" does NOT give reason why . . . and I have the "democratic" right to challenge you over it.

    – – –

    ""It is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were in the past of the same amount"
    by saying it was invalid without evidence given was invalid itself in my opinion. "

    In your opinion . . . so have you given reasoning? No – rather . . . you are looking for ways NOT to give out any reasons. Ridiculous – in my opinion.

    – – –

    "And if he persists in this kind of dismissals it should be used against him and his fellow-Muslims, with reference to this judgement of him, at every opportunity. "

    Sure . . do so. If it is actually proper and correct – and not an embarrassing mistake like yours.

    If I make statements – i fully expect them to be challenged . . . you seem to be surprised at this.

    Why?

    – – –

  491. Demsci says:

    Oh, of course, good advice, taking in positive spirit, Aminriadh. Learning from you all the time.

    But I: I said it because both your and my "verdicts" or opinions are subjective, random, prone to prejudice and manipulation. Manipulation because both can withhold the other person APPROVAL.

    And II: You earlier said: When you make claims, posit opinions without sufficient evidence, then SOME-PEOPLE may accuse YOU of " being hostile to Islam and making up things to discredit it" or something similar.

    But when that happens and you catch this, I rely on you and your sense of fairness and logic to help ME against those SOME-PEOPLE, who then allegedly make the same mistake as I did; giving opinion without sufficient reasons/ evidence.

  492. aminriadh says:

    Yet – even when I am being careless and in haste . . . there are some mistake I never make in writing.

    My use of punctuation, vocabulary, language style leave many clues . . . for example often by my spellings one can deduce I use British English.

    Writing style of the above person reveals his/her cultural background.

    – – –

    People like Qadri tend not to write like that.

    – – –

    One can always tell I never write like that . . . even in comments section. Where one tends to be least careless.

    Look at the above writing:

    "you wonder why im saying this?cause i understand what is going on with you, i used to be “something” like you..an agnostic..studied all this anti islam stuff etc..westrn philosphy..but alhamdulillah ALLAH almighty gave me guidance.."

    Writing "cause" rather than "because" is Western English. And there are many other such clues . . .

    use of the word "stuff"

    "it will always mislead u, unless u dnt belive in"

    – – –

    The above extracts are ridiculously badly written and shortened. So if Ajmal Qadri was writing to you . . . he would be that careless? Why?

    That doesn't make much sense.

  493. Demsci says:

    "'''''The OBVIOUS difference being . . . that I have given my reasons for my suspicions. Where as you simply claimed it."

    Says YOU. Not some independent third party.

    One judgement of difference between Demsci and Aminriadh could be: Demsci gave no evidence-proof-reasons at all, whereas Aminriadh gave some. So Demsci's comment was invalid, Aminriadh's valid. But this would be unsatisfactory because it leaves out a proper evaluation of the quality and completeness or indeed of the truthfulness of the evidence given.

    So another difference could be: the quality of Demsci's evidence-reasons was insufficient on important criteria but that of Aminriadh was sufficient. Better than the first difference-judgement.

    But who decides that?! If Aminriadh gives a verdict over Demsci's lack of evidence or insufficiency of it, then Demsci can return the favor by calling Aminriadhs evidence insufficient, and indefinitely too.

    No, I think giving evidence-reasons for opinions is good, but that opinions (from both sides) without evidence can be true and beneficial and I think that only when comparing contradicting opinions it is important to carefully weigh the evidence-reasons each side gives in order to choose well between them.

    Aminriadhs earlier dismissal of Demsci's opinion:
    "It is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were in the past of the same amount"
    by saying it was invalid without evidence given was invalid itself in my opinion.

    And if he persists in this kind of dismissals it should be used against him and his fellow-Muslims, with reference to this judgement of him, at every opportunity.

    Let us all observe equal standards or rules in response to opinions of writers/ posters.

  494. aminriadh says:

    "I deem YOUR evidence in this case insufficient! "

    Again . . . this is simply a statement . . . . WHY do you deem my evidence insufficient.

    Try not to be over-smart. And THINK! – then answer.

  495. aminriadh says:

    "And the writing style of Muhammad is any better? Isn't the Quran the most stupid book ever written?"

    No it isn't. Of course you would say that . . . but you are UNABLE to discuss any further. I have already established that. Yes, you have your lying & fallacious articles. But discuss them? Ah . . .

    – – –

    "The reasoning reminds me of Edyp Yuksel who in order to prove that hadiths are false quotes stupid hadiths and asks Muslims how could Muhammad be this stupid. He can't accept the fact that his prophet was an ignoramus so instead tries to deny the authenticity of the hadiths. "

    Actually Yuksel says a lot more than that . . . this is the problem with such poor summaries. Simplifying leads to inaccuracies. The analogy doesn't work. Hadith are historical accounts – and often have false accounts. As various kinds of scholars point out.

    So how is this the same?

    Many works of literature are doubted on such basis. . . rather than dealing with the issue – you are finding ways to squirm out of answering.

    I doubt even you believe these were from A. Qadri.

    See how badly thought out your reasoning tends to be. . . . it aint' cutting the mustard.

    – – –

    "The email belongs to Qadri and there is no reason to doubt someone else has used his email account to send these emails."

    So what proof do you have to conclusively say – that account belongs to Ajmal Qadri – and he is the one emailing you?

    There is reason . . . I have given it. So far – you have failed to find credible explanation.

  496. Ali Sina says:

    “Did your “search” not reveal that Ajmal Qadri seems to be well educated. And he does not write like a Western Teenager?”

    I consider myself relatively educated and when I decide to wrote a good article I spend time and generally it comes out as a good article. But when I am careless and rapidly replying to a post or an email I make a lot of mistakes. But if an email is sent through my email account it is likely that I am the author. The fact that some of my writings are sloppy just shows I was sloppy at the time and not that those sloppy writings are not mine.

  497. aminriadh says:

    "In other words you don't know. "

    Yes I don't know for sure . . . HENCE why I say – I have my suspicions. That is kind of obvious . . .

    – – –

    " Well, quess what? I deem YOUR evidence in this case insufficient! "

    The OBVIOUS difference being . . . that I have given my reasons for my suspicions. Where as you simply claimed it.

    Maybe you missed that . . . in your haste to start an argument.

    – – –

    Rather silly wasn't it.

  498. Ali Sina says:

    And the writing style of Muhammad is any better? Isn’t the Quran the most stupid book ever written?

    The reasoning reminds me of Edyp Yuksel who in order to prove that hadiths are false quotes stupid hadiths and asks Muslims how could Muhammad be this stupid. He can’t accept the fact that his prophet was an ignoramus so instead tries to deny the authenticity of the hadiths. The email belongs to Qadri and there is no reason to doubt someone else has used his email account to send these emails.

  499. Demsci says:

    "'''''''I highly doubt these alleged emails are from Ajmal Qadri. Given the writing style."

    In other words you don't know.

    When I said that "it is highly unlikely that Jizya and Zakat were of the same amount"

    YOU, Aminriadh, responded to me also with:
    "In other words, you do not know" and you chastised me by saying that my words were lies when I did not back them up with proper evidence. Well, quess what? I deem YOUR evidence in this case insufficient!

  500. aminriadh says:

    " Why should I doubt that the email I received from his email account may have come from someone else?"

    Because of the writing style . . . which merits a closer look.

    – – –

    Sina is a hate-monger. Nothing more. His reasoning is unsophisticated . . . as is his discourse.

    That is the reason why after years of haunting the Internet – he has NOT managed to attract so little critical acclaim.

    – – –

    Although often critcised – even Ibn Warraq has some academic standings . . . especially in USA.

    – – –

    In order to explain away

    Best he could come up with is this:

    "How could someone else have access to Qadri’s emails account and why would anyone use his email to send me emails? It makes no sense. But again you are a Muslim and as such your brain power is limited. Be offended as is you like but this is a fact that Muslims are the most stupid people in the world. In fact all of us who leave Islam admit that we must have been fools for believing in that nonsense. If ever you come out of this asininity called Islam and stop worshiping a rapist charlatan, the worse piece of excrement that ever disgraced the world, you will also realize this stage of your life was the stage of stupidity. "

    Rather than finding an explanation for my objection . . . it's the old way of being abusive.

    Yet this places even more emphasis that Sina too has his doubts regarding the authenticity of these alleged emails.

    – – –

    I have pointed out often that Sina's thinking is poor – often really poor. His knowledge too is poor. Hence the remarks he makes.

    Enough material for my own site. To put this diatribe to bed.

  501. aminriadh says:

    I don't think anyone comparing my writing to yours would ever champion your style!

    – – –

    "YOU said that the you doubt that the email is from Ajmal Qadri ! So YOU have to prove your assertion ! "

    I have my doubts based on the writing style . . . which is quite but not as much poor as yours.

    I have NOT claimed to have conclusive knowledge one way or the other. . .

    – – –

    Once again – an iota of slightly sophisticated reasoning is beyond you.

    Hence why you think personally abusing me will give you credence.

  502. aminriadh says:

    "I had no idea who is Ajmal Qadri until I got his email and did a search on him. Why should I doubt that the email I received from his email account may have come from someone else?"

    Did your "search" not reveal that Ajmal Qadri seems to be well educated. And he does not write like a Western Teenager?

    I do NOT challenge the authenticity of all your debates . . . not at all. But I have clear and well founded suspicions about this.

    – – –

    " I have debated with other Muslim scholars and read many of their articles. None of them seem to be too brilliant or enlightened."

    As it goes . . . neither are you either enlightened or er . . . brilliant. You are NOT one would term an "Academic" – where as many [Not all] Muslim scholars are well educated an sophisticated scholars.

    Denying this is rather pathetic and idiotic.

    – – – –

    "Now there are some spelling and grammatical errors in those writings. But that is not a big deal. All of us who learned English later in life make such mistakes and my earlier writings are full of them. "

    We are NOT talking about few grammar mistakes here . . . but the "style" of writing. This is just one small extract:

    "you wonder why im saying this?cause i understand what is going on with you, i used to be “something” like you..an agnostic..studied all this anti islam stuff etc..westrn philosphy..but alhamdulillah ALLAH almighty gave me guidance.."

    This is poor . . . compare this person named Julia above . . . telling!

    Even if Ajmal Qadri has poor command of English – he would not write like that.

    – – –

    " I am willing to resume my debate with him any time. Write to him and invite him. "

    Not really my job – I don't know him personally . . . But I challenge the authenticity of that these alleged "emails" or even if the account is his.

    – – –

    "I have debated with other Muslim scholars and read many of their articles. None of them seem to be too brilliant or enlightened."

    And how many of these wrote in a style of language as poor as that? And who exactly are you talking about?

  503. Ali Sina says:

    I had no idea who is Ajmal Qadri until I got his email and did a search on him. Why should I doubt that the email I received from his email account may have come from someone else? I have debated with other Muslim scholars and read many of their articles. None of them seem to be too brilliant or enlightened. Now there are some spelling and grammatical errors in those writings. But that is not a big deal. All of us who learned English later in life make such mistakes and my earlier writings are full of them.

    I am willing to resume my debate with him any time. Write to him and invite him.

  504. Julia says:

    Evil MOHAMMEDAN RAT !
    You wrote: "You could not answer to a valid suspicion . . . why would Ajmal Qadri – write like that? "
    —————————————————–
    YOU said that the you doubt that the email is from Ajmal Qadri ! So YOU have to prove your assertion !
    It is YOU who writes like a BACKWARD , brainwashed muslim . All crazy muslims do.
    GO AminRAT GO !!! Don't take this humiliation of this "worst of creation".
    Fight inthe cause of your FAKE GOD, THE IDOL ALLAH !! 🙂 🙂

  505. Julia says:

    Hello AminRAT . The humiliation of you goes on and on ! 🙂 We keep you busy ! And the funny thing is : YOU CAN'T LET GO !!!!!!!! BWAHHAHAAAAAAAAA !
    I see you are also infected with "Hahaha", so you are a TROLL now too ! And an EVIL one too, A Mohameddan TROLL . A brainwashed backward muslim TROLL !! HAHAHA !!
    By the way PROVEr it ,that those emails are NOT from Ajmal Qadri !
    Fefend yourself Amin-RAT. You can't let this " fuel of hell", this " worst of anilmals" WIN !!
    Go RAT ,GO !

  506. aminriadh says:

    I had a disgusting email from you . . . Hence why you are a grubby little hate-monger.

    Even among non-Muslims you have struggled to find acceptance. . . that is why you haunt the internet. And resort to lavishing praises on your own self.

    You could not answer to a valid suspicion . . . why would Ajmal Qadri – write like that?

    – – –

    Sure . . . you would get set response from your usual collective of anti-Muslims/Islam . . . but a proper response . . . I very much doubt it. Given the past record.

  507. Ali Sina says:

    Actually you should read this debate. It turned out to be one of the best and revealing debates I had.

  508. aminriadh says:

    Ha ha ha . . . it is kindo of obvious those emails are NOT from Ajmal Qadri.

  509. Agnes says:

    Okay….
    So I did read and Ali Sina has 'won' again.
    It is sooooo funny to read these 'arguments' from 'true muslims'. They only claim the truth because it's in the quran and when you don't bite they start threatening you and saying you're going to burn in hell forever. Ali Sina shows that muslim beliefs are like "it takes one to know one". All accusing others of what they do themselves.
    I like Ali Sina's challenge, because everyone who takes it on only proves Sina's right.
    I hope many more 'scolars of islam' will take up the challenge, so I can have many more laughs!
    Go go Ali Sina!!! For me, you are something of a saint.

  510. aminriadh says:

    Hence why he probably didn't write these . . . given the language style.

  511. aminriadh says:

    I highly doubt these alleged emails are from Ajmal Qadri. Given the writing style.

    "his?cause i understand what is going "

    "DN BE SO ARROGAN"

    "i dnt know if ALLAH will show you that the way HE s"

    – – –

    I severely doubt he wrote this . . .

  512. aminriadh says:

    " DN BE SO ARROGANT ABOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE,CAUSE YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ISLAM,YOU REALLY LACK KNOWLEDGE OF ISLAM,
    IM WARNING YOU OF A TORMENT HERE AND HEREAFTER UNLESS YOU DNT REPENT AND IF ALLAH ACCEPTS,, JUST TO WAIT AND SEE.

    WHEN IT WILL COME TO YOU PLS. CONTACT ME"

    And you didn't have the brains to work out . . . this response is probably "likely" not to be from Ajmal Qadri.

    I doubt he writes like a Western teenager.

  513. Agnes says:

    "Mr. ALi
    you have earned a great name in the world of shaitan.."

    And this is where I stopped reading. Anyone who says this is certainly not a saint. Period.

  514. DCS says:

    You are really doing a great job. I salute you for all your sincere efforts that you are doing to save this world from evil.

  515. DCS says:

    Sina Ji tussi great ho!!

  516. pd45 says:

    Excellent debate

  517. raj says:

    Mulla never debated, he is fool

  518. papa romeo says:

    What a pathetic idiotic response of the Mighty Mullah. I can do better than him.

  519. denialisnoproof says:

    This jack ass knows nothing but giving threat. If islam is so true why do the they want to kill people for criticizing it. every religion accepts criticism except islam .stupid mullahs like this have ruined pakistan.
    they too will die a terrible death one day in the hands of fellow jihadists.
    taseer ahmed's killer was showered with rose petals in pakistan ,his name was mumtaz qadri.
    His only mistake was condemning blasphemy law .if politicians can't criticize law then why do they need democracy ? they should adopt mullacracy

  1. 12 December, 2012

    […] Sekarang bacalah perdebatan yang muncul mengenai orang ini di SINI […]

Leave a Reply