Quote: |
The Thalmud tells that he who "cleanses himself with sand has then done enough" |
BMZ wrote: | ||
I do not write at FFI anymore but sometimes I just read to see what the various goons are writing and I noticed you were talking to a few goons on Tayammum.
Here is something very interesting from the First Prophet of Ex-Muslim Kafirs, Ibn Warraq, another paralysed Kafir mind. In his book "Why I Am Not a Muslim", he wrote about the Tayammum carried out by the Jews:
Ask the FFI goons to have a talk with ygalg and other Jews. Jesus freaks have nothing on the Laws except a book which they do not really subscribe to. Next the goons at FFI will ask how to rub sand all over their face and the body? lol! I don't think sensible Western readers appreciate the gibberish and nonsense from these closet-apostates. It is the so-called idiotic ex-Muslim fakes who indulge in the garbage written. What this goon Ibn Warraq does not know is that Jesus did not bring anything new, had nothing new to offer and he gave no Scripture. The Laws were the same, only they had to be enforced again, as Christianity had pissed over the Laws. Roflmao http://www.scribd.com/doc/2309627/Why-I-Am-Not-a-Muslim-by-Ibn-Warraq Salaams, mate BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||
Thanks mate for this valuable information, I will make a copy of it on FFI and see if any of the goons has a reply to it Cheers |
BMZ wrote: |
Once you write, then check out how the notorious paralysed minds put another spin. lol!
Are the paralysed Kafir minds back home? Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Done cheers |
BMZ wrote: | ||||
Will take a look at the spinning by the goons. Salaams & Good night BMZ |
Quote: |
You can see for yourself why skynightblaze and others consider him nothing more than a troll. His post contains nothing but tu quoque. How does what he says defend the stupidity? It only seeks to prove that others were stupid too; but so what? |
Quote: |
16:125 CALL THOU (all mankind] unto thy Sustainer's path with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and argue with them in the most kindly manner-49 for, behold, thy Sustainer knows best as to who strays from His path, and best knows He as to who are the right-guided. 16:126 Hence, if you have to respond to an attack (in argument], respond only to the extent of the attack levelled against you;'-" but to bear yourselves with patience is indeed far better for (you, since God is with] those who are patient in adversity. |
Quote: |
"Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute." (Repentance, IX: 29) |
The filthy cheat debonked aka debunker wrote: |
I don't know why you're still arguing this with them?! Sex with slaves IMPLIES forced sex if they refused, since by definition, a slave has no rights. Period! |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Salam all
All Muslims on this web site should have realized by now that this piece of trailer trash named debunker, is nothing but a cheat who works for the kafirs on FFI, possibly he is one of them but multilinking This must prove the desperation of the kafirs on FFI, resorting to such cheap tactics by bringing a whore from them to pretend to be a Muslim, Let?????????????????????¢??s see what that whore said to Khalil:
See how the filthy cheat debunker is referring to the Muslims as ?????????????????????¢??THEM?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. This clearly means that he is not one of us (Muslims), how dumb he was exposing his cheating arse that easy, his stupidity did not stop there see what he said next: The filthy tard of a cheat debunker said: Sex with slaves IMPLIES forced sex if they refused, since by definition, a slave has no rights. Period! Well, the Quran exposes such freak big times, because the Quran clearly told us that to marry from those Ma Malakat Aymanikum we must take the permission of their parents, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: And whoever among you who can afford to marry the protected and believing women, then (marry) of those whom your oaths possess from among your believing young women; and Allah knows best your oaths between some of you and others; so marry them with the permission of their families, and give them their dowries in kindness if they are seeking protection, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours if they protected themselves, and if they commit an indecency, then on them is half the suffering which should be upon the protected women. This is for him who fears the sin from among you; and if you are patient is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. [The Quran ; 4:25] ومن لم يستطع منكم طولا ان ينكح المحصنات المؤمنات فمن ما ملكت ايمانكم من فتياتكم المؤمنات والله اعلم بايمانكم بعضكم من بعض فانكحوهن باذن اهلهن واتوهن اجورهن بالمعروف محصنات غير مسافحات ولا متخذات اخدان فاذا احصن فان اتين بفاحشة فعليهن نصف ما علي المحصنات من العذاب ذلك لمن خشي العنت منكم وان تصبروا خير لكم والله غفور رحيم -> See how the verse above is clearly telling the Muslims who cannot afford marrying from the well supported women: ومن لم يستطع منكم طولا ان ينكح المحصنات المؤمنات فمن ما ملكت ايمانكم من فتياتكم المؤمنات , i.e. And whoever among you who can afford to marry the protected and believing women, then (marry) of those whom your oaths possess from among your believing young women , see what is said next confirms that the word Aymanikum means YOUR OATHS: والله اعلم بايمانكم بعضكم من بعض , i.e. and Allah knows best your oaths between some of you and others; , i.e. an oath was taken to care for some of those poor humans that even their families cannot support them, see what was the condition to marry from them as stated next: فانكحوهن باذن اهلهن واتوهن اجورهن بالمعروف محصنات غير مسافحات , i.e. so marry them with the permission of their families, and give them their dowries in kindness if they are seeking protection, not fornicating, , HOW CLEAR, so if according to such fake and cheat of a deceiver debunker, that they have no right, then how come the men can only marry them after taking the permission of their parents? See how the Quran also commands those Ma Malakat Aymanikum too seek marriage and not fornication. Which means in no way the Quran allow their masters to force them into fornication by getting raped That should expose the lying, filthy, tard, fake and cheat debunker |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Salam all
It seems that the kafirs of FFI and their fellow cheat debonked, are too stupid to understand that my comment regarding 4:25 is irrefutable, let me do it with them in slow motion, perhaps their pinhead get it: Here 1s 4:25 again: And whoever among you who can afford to marry the protected and believing women, then (marry) of those whom your oaths possess from among your believing young women; and Allah knows best your oaths between some of you and others; so marry them with the permission of their families, and give them their dowries in kindness if they are seeking protection, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours if they protected themselves, and if they commit an indecency, then on them is half the suffering which should be upon the protected women. This is for him who fears the sin from among you; and if you are patient is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. [The Quran ; 4:25] ومن لم يستطع منكم طولا ان ينكح المحصنات المؤمنات فمن ما ملكت ايمانكم من فتياتكم المؤمنات والله اعلم بايمانكم بعضكم من بعض فانكحوهن باذن اهلهن واتوهن اجورهن بالمعروف محصنات غير مسافحات ولا متخذات اخدان فاذا احصن فان اتين بفاحشة فعليهن نصف ما علي المحصنات من العذاب ذلك لمن خشي العنت منكم وان تصبروا خير لكم والله غفور رحيم The kafirs stupid argument is simply this: The words Ma Malakat Aymanikum mean: what your right hands possess, i.e. slaves My argument is simply this: The words Ma Malakat Aymanikum mean: what your oaths possess, i.e. any poor human that is supported by another capable human who was bound by oath before Allah to support such poor human [size=150]4:25 CLEARLY PROVES MY ARGUMENT[/size] See, after Allah told us to marry of Ma Malakat Aymanikum: فمن ما ملكت ايمانكم, i.e. then (marry) of those whom your oaths possess He told us that: والله اعلم بايمانكم بعضكم من بعض, i.e. and Allah knows best your oaths between some of you and others Now if you take the words Ma Malakat Aymanikum to mean what your right hands posses, then the second bit above can never make sense, because in that case it should mean: and Allah knows best your right hands between some of you and others Therefore if the words Ma Malakat Aymanikum mean what your right hands possess, then the second part above should be: And Allah knows best what your right hands possess between some of you and others Which should be in Arabic as follow: والله اعلم بما ملكت ايمانكم بعضكم من بعض The underlined words NEVER APPEARED IN THE ARABIC WORDS Therefore: Ma Malakat Aymanikum means: What your oaths posses, and in this case The words والله اعلم بايمانكم بعضكم من بعض, should make 100% sense because it should mean and Allah knows best your oaths between some of you and others And that should slam dunk all the FFI kafirs and their fellow whore debunker |
KhaliL FarieL wrote: |
Of course, but I am yet to understand how and what one's oath possesses.
|
KhaliL FarieL wrote: |
Of course, but I am yet to understand how and what one's oath possesses. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Before you laugh at yourself and make a total fool of yourserlf, try to answer my last comment, and pay much attention to the Arabic words in red, mister Arabic speaker |
Agha Shaytani wrote: |
HERE IS THE TAFSIR OF 4:25 BY IBN ABBAS:
"(And whoso is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess) who are in the hands of the believers. (Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith) He knows best that your hearts are firm in faith. (Ye (proceed) one from another) You are all the children of Adam; it is also said that this means: some of you follow the religion of others; and it is also said that this means: you are strengthened by one another; (so wed them) marry the maids (by permission of their folk) their owners, (and give unto them) the maids (their portions) their dowry (in kindness) on top of the price given to the prostitute for providing sex, (they being honest) He says: marry those maids who are chaste, (not debauched) not those who commit adultery in the open (nor of loose conduct) nor those who have lovers who commit adultery with them in secret. (And if when they are honourably married) if when they marry maids (they commit lewdness) fornication (they) the maids (shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed)) lashing (for free women (in that case). This is) marrying maids is lawful (for him among you who feareth to commit sin) adultery and debauchery. (But to have patience) and refrain from marrying maids (would be better for you) in that your children would be free. (Allah is Forgiving) of the adultery you might commit, (Merciful) when He gave you a legal dispensation to marry captives in cases of necessity." |
Agha Shaytani wrote: |
This tafsir says you can marry slaves with the permission of their owners. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Hey bro BMZ
see what the fool Khalil said to inmate Cassie, and see how I cornered his kafir arse:
That is how confused and manipulated you are How about you explain to us how does a right hand possess a human? Also how about you explain to us, why the right hand?, why not the left hand, and why not both hands? That should corner you then send you back to the drawing board of your confusion table |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||||||
Ahl does not mean Owner you stupid dumb bum, Ahl means FAMILY You and them are : |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Hey goons
Let me totally demolish the confused and manipulated kafirs and their fellow traitor debonked see what I wrote in my last comment to Khalil, for which I am certain he will dodge as he dodged so many tough arguments in the past I asked him: 1) Why the right hand? 2) Why not the left hand? 3) Why not both hands? Now if we think of the slaves as almost equivalent to the POWs, then the POWs should also be described as being possessed by the right hands. Let's have a look at the following verse which is talking about the POWs, and let's see if they are controlled by the right hand, or by the left hand or by both hands, obviously by both hands is the most logical: O Prophet! Say to those who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war: If Allah knows good in your hearts, He will give you better than that which has been taken from you and will forgive you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. يأيها النبي قل لمن في ايديكم من الاسري ان يعلم الله في قلوبكم خيرا يؤتكم خيرا مما اخذ منكم ويغفر لكم والله غفور رحيم [The Quran ; 8:70] -> See you ignorant and confused FFI goons, Allah is telling us about the POWs: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war I am sure the confused goons can see the slam coming So if Ma Malakat Aymanikum means, what your right hands possess, how come the POWs were described as being controlled by both hands, let's see it again: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war If the right hand is the expression to express owning, controlling, enslaving others, then shouldn't the verse above be saying: لمن في ايمانكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYMANIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your right hands from among the prisoners of war Therefore, Ma Malakat Aymanikum MUST mean, What your oaths possess, which means that a capable human took an oath before Allah that he/she will care for and support any weak human. What a mother of all slams |
Quote: |
The Qur'an
Menstruation is a disease; can't have sex during a woman's period; after the period is over have sex in any manner, at any time and at any place; God loves those who are pure and clean...2:222 |
BMZ wrote: |
I really need a big Roflmao emoticon here for Ali Sina's FFI goons. This is really getting hilarious. Send some goons to my site. lol!
Salaams, mate BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
No worries mate, here is one big Roflmao for you: I will let the goons know your web site url, they are too coward to face you on a nuteral ground, they only want to face you on a bias web site ran by the confused whore BerberElla and her pimp OsmanThug Salam mate |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Here it is mate, http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2122
cheers |
Quote: |
Sright
He wrote WiSsAm's name in Arabic as ويسام Which would be pronounced "Wayassim". |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
I refer to your post of Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:38 am, addressed to Khalil at FFI regarding debates, discussions, etc. It appears to me as if Khalil is hesitant to write and discuss on Ixolite's site and I see him putting in conditions. I believe you and I were the first ones who introduced and brought civility to Khalil, before he was civil. Tell him, he can discuss Qur'aan on Ixolite's site by way of topics, if he is so hesitant about having a debate with Mastablaster. Mastablaster, you and me should be enough to handle a multitude of FFIers anywhere. I just hope Ixolite and her team enforce the rules of the Forum set up by them and make sure they are strictly followed. If Ixolite and her moderators are going to have it FFI style, then it would be a total waste of our time. Salaams BMZ |
de_punk_er wrote: |
I BEG you dear Fathom... I just realized that the case for my faith is extremely weak, but the case for JW is strong, could we now discuss JW which is free of all these arguments you brought up against my faith? |
debunker wrote: |
JW faith doesn't suffer from any of the drawbacks you brought up against Islam in my discussion with you, then why shouldn't we recommend it to him, rather than atheism? |
debunker wrote: |
Winston!
Your very presence here is an HONOR bestowed upon me! |
Aksel_Arkeson wrote: |
Sright
He wrote WiSsAm's name in Arabic as ويسام Which would be pronounced "Wayassim". |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Aksel wrote at FFI:
Do not comment and write anything, if you do not even know how Arabic is written in various scripts. You make an ass of yourself by doing so. How can you read it as WA-YA-SSIM? How do you get the YA sound? lol! Go, read Qur'aan in various scripts and figure. Roflmao! BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||||||
Sure mate, I am still waiting for a reply, they want it civil and we will give it civily to them Here is my last comment on FFI mate: Salam all I am sure everyone by now should have recognized the resident FFI traitor debunker, or debonked as I like to call him, or de_punk_er as M Blaster like to call him A freak who is portraying his filthy arse as a Muslim, yet he is telling us that the Quran condones raping the slaves. The freak also promotes Jehovah Witness crap, let?????????????????????¢??s see an example of such:
See what the filthy traitor is saying regarding Islam, which suppose to be his religion as the liar claimed on FFI: I just realized that the case for my faith (Islam) is extremely weak., see how he promotes JW crap afterward: but the case for JW is strong Let me explain to you, why the filthy traitor said the above, There is a new member on FFI named DrZaid, he sound like an atheist or an ex Muslim, or whatever, it does not really matter, what matters that he wants to discuss religions, so the filthy Muslim traitor on FFI debunker, is recommending for him JW, because JW faith have no concept of Hell, while Islam has such concept. Sort of those kafirs reject Islam because of such concept of Hell as a reward for them. So it will be better to be JW follower because they have no hell This is how the filthy Muslim traitor is justifying his crap:
See, it is like being an atheist is very bad thing according to such filthy and confused traitor, however he did not explain why it is bad? I guess the only answer is because if God exists then all atheists will be barbecued in hell What a nice guy of a freak debunker turned to be, he is very keen to save a stranger (DrZaid) from atheism and consequently save him from hell. Hahahah so instead he is sending him to another hell according to the freak own belief, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: And whoever seeks a religion but (the religion of) Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be among the losers. ومن يبتغ غير الاسلام دينا فلن يقبل منه وهو في الاخره من الخاسرين [The Quran ; 3:85] How clear, see above, according to debunker own belief: And whoever seeks a religion but (the religion of) Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be among the losers. Here is the facts again: 1- Debunker claims to be a Muslim 2- Debunker agrees that the case of Islam is weak 3- Debunker recommends JW for a stranger instead of being an atheist, simply to save him from hell 4- Debunker claimed religion (Islam) says that anyone who seeks a religion other than Islam, will be a loser in the hereafter, i.e must go to hell. This must prove to you how stupid, ignorant, freak, confused and dumb such traitor debunker is His stupidity does not stop there, let me show you another clear example: There is a kafir on FFI named Winston, looks like a young guy in his early twenties, or late teens, while I agree that guy seems nice, he is actually another malice enemy of Islam who consistently attack Allah, Mohammed, Islam and the Quran. Let?????????????????????¢??s see what the Quran tells us in relation to dealing with such clear enemy of our religion, I will use Shakir translation for now: O you who believe! do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of the truth, driving out the Messenger and yourselves because you believe in Allah, your Lord? If you go forth struggling hard in My path and seeking My pleasure, would you manifest love to them? And I know what you conceal and what you manifest; and whoever of you does this, he indeed has gone astray from the straight path. يأيها الذين امنوا لا تتخذوا عدوي وعدوكم اولياء تلقون اليهم بالمودة وقد كفروا بما جاءكم من الحق يخرجون الرسول واياكم ان تؤمنوا بالله ربكم ان كنتم خرجتم جهادا في سبيلي وابتغاء مرضاتي تسرون اليهم بالمودة وانا اعلم بما اخفيتم وما اعلنتم ومن يفعله منكم فقد ضل سواء السبيل [The Quran ; 60:1] -> See how clear according to the faith of traitor debunker: O you who believe! do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends: would you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of the truth , that he should never take the enemy of Allah and the enemy of Islam as guardians, see how the verse raised a valid argument: would you manifest love to them? This fact was stressed more clearly in another verse, saying the opposite that the true believers will never take the enemy of Islam as friends: You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their (own) fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him these are Allah????????????????????????????´s party: now surely the party of Allah are the successful ones. لا تجد قوما يؤمنون بالله واليوم الاخر يوادون من حاد الله ورسوله ولو كانوا اباءهم او ابناءهم او اخوانهم او عشيرتهم اولئك كتب في قلوبهم الايمان وايدهم بروح منه ويدخلهم جنات تجري من تحتها الانهار خالدين فيها رضي الله عنهم ورضوا عنه اولئك حزب الله الا ان حزب الله هم المفلحون [The Quran ; 58:22] -> See how clear it is: You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their (own) fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk Therefore, if we find one claiming to be a Muslim (debunker), while befriending those who act in opposition (Winston) to Allah and His Messenger, HE MUST NOT BE A BELIEVER Now let me show you how that filthy traitor dealt with his suppose to be enemy of his religion and the enemy of Allah It was a thread raised by the traitor, attacking the religion of Christianity, so Winston joined the discussion, and here is what the traitor said to him:
Here you have it all, the filthy tard of a freak debunker aka de_punk_er, is a clear cut kafir Salam |
Quote: |
Re: A challenge to FFIers from BMZ Postby yeezevee ????????????????????????????» Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:46 am That Buffoon Muslim Zombie comments How can you read it as WA-YA-SSIM? How do you get the YA sound? lol! Well dear A_B tell that ZOMBIE and take this message to BMZ.. It makes no difference whether one makes sounds from Arabic Language, African Languages, Asian Languages or American Languages or a Just from an Ass fart. Proof of of Islam is in its pudding. 1400 years of history that is based upon Mr. Muhammad + his followers + his life style and that copy/pasted silly book Q'uran .............."Islam is a religion of Warlords to start with ....................................and now .........it is a religion of Fools following Brutes ...................................and .........................Feudal ruling the Brutes and Fools." That is the bottom line of Islam. The political Cult of Mr. Muhammad and his followers. yeezevee |
shindeiru wrote: |
bros, you know what really made me puke with this dee-punk-er? i gave him a lengthy response with quran verses full of wisdom that he should take heed from them and at the end of my post, i included a very short sentence telling him not to hang out with sons of b*tches.
the guy did not even say one single word on all the verses from the noble quran and instead made a big drama not once, or twice but 3 posts about my last sentence because it might hurt the other FFI members' feelings, his fellow enemies of islam. his case is amply described in 60:1 brought by ahmed, and dee-punk-er is unmasked so obviously that im sure many non-muslims at FFI will agree with us. and about the debate with khalil, let him bring it and call his best elements. |
shindeiru wrote: |
bros, you know what really made me puke with this dee-punk-er? i gave him a lengthy response with quran verses full of wisdom that he should take heed from them and at the end of my post, i included a very short sentence telling him not to hang out with sons of b*tches.
the guy did not even say one single word on all the verses from the noble quran and instead made a big drama not once, or twice but 3 posts about my last sentence because it might hurt the other FFI members' feelings, his fellow enemies of islam. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Excellent note man, exposing such freak, Apparently he replied to my Quran comment above, however I yet to read it, when I have time for his filthy arse cheers |
Quote: |
@ Bahgat
Now, here is something for you to look at: http://www.tunisia-sat.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1650866 Can you see the name Weesam written with a Ya? therefore Weesam with a Ya or without a Ya is 100% right in Arabic, because it is a human name, do you get it? Cheers You are too much! Have you no shame whatsoever?! There is a big fucking difference between alphabet and vocalization marks! Only half-illiterates don't know the difference, and so-called Arabs from Tunisia making laughable spelling mistakes on online forums, does NOT mean that Wessam can be written ويسام... Have some integrity you lying freak! |
Quote: |
AhmedBahgat wrote:Here is another one for you Aksel:
الملف الشخصي لـ ويسام http://www.livearabictv.net/vb/member.php?u=13622 so, you got to admit, that I taught you something new, that Wessam as an Arabic name can be written with a Ya or without a Ya, as I have numerously showed. you should thank BMZ for teaching you so cheers |
Quote: |
Re: Does Quran Sanction Rape? Postby fudgy ????????????????????????????» Sat May 02, 2009 7:24 am Sum, I will assume that you have some brain. Can't you find the answer to your question from our posts? But since you are still in your diapers I will lay this out for you: NO! I would never want to force my wife into me, however I would want her to be all over me lol. Beside why won't your wife want to have sex with you unless something is really wrong. Happy now? |
hamid wrote: |
He was a prophet. Call him a prophet. |
KhaliL FarieL wrote: |
What does it mean Prophet? Is it a term you use for a lecherous mass-murderer? Then I am pretty cool with it. Oh stop.. I will call him ProFART Muhammad. Is it okay or? |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Hey goons
Let me totally demolish the confused and manipulated kafirs and their fellow traitor debonked see what I wrote in my last comment to Khalil, for which I am certain he will dodge as he dodged so many tough arguments in the past I asked him: 1) Why the right hand? 2) Why not the left hand? 3) Why not both hands? Now if we think of the slaves as almost equivalent to the POWs, then the POWs should also be described as being possessed by the right hands. Let's have a look at the following verse which is talking about the POWs, and let's see if they are controlled by the right hand, or by the left hand or by both hands, obviously by both hands is the most logical: O Prophet! Say to those who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war: If Allah knows good in your hearts, He will give you better than that which has been taken from you and will forgive you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. يأيها النبي قل لمن في ايديكم من الاسري ان يعلم الله في قلوبكم خيرا يؤتكم خيرا مما اخذ منكم ويغفر لكم والله غفور رحيم [The Quran ; 8:70] -> See you ignorant and confused FFI goons, Allah is telling us about the POWs: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war I am sure the confused goons can see the slam coming So if Ma Malakat Aymanikum means, what your right hands possess, how come the POWs were described as being controlled by both hands, let's see it again: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war If the right hand is the expression to express owning, controlling, enslaving others, then shouldn't the verse above be saying: لمن في ايمانكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYMANIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your right hands from among the prisoners of war Therefore, Ma Malakat Aymanikum MUST mean, What your oaths possess, which means that a capable human took an oath before Allah that he/she will care for and support any weak human. What a mother of all slams |
Quote: |
Moza (former Muslim)
From WikiIslam The following is a testimony of someone leaving Islam. The testimony was originally posted at the FFI Forum. Moza Testimony of Leaving Islam Dear friends, Kindly bear with my bad English coz English is not my first language, I am an Arabic gilr from middle east I want to share my experience here as a muslim, first being a muslim is so shameful for me after being here for the past few months, Now I am not a muslim & I am a free girl. Second iam so thankful to this FFI and its masters ( Ali Sina, Haik Monsieur, Sum, Yazwee, apricot and a lot of fantastic eye openers, I will never knew about stupid islam without their fruitful posts. I have seen a lot of stupid posts of Ahmed, reletomb, muslim to death and other islamic goons. ( I got this name from them only ) I left islam coz once we went to Haji & I had a lot of bad experience there, the idiost coming to Haji was very much interested to touch myself & my cousin?????????????????????¢??s back instead of touching the stone. Iwas so shocedk to see all this, I cried a lot there. I was so involved in islamic prayers & its bloody stuff when I was a muslim Through our house maid I came to know about Christianity, I used to watch when she prayed the way she prayed really touched my heart, when she prays to god she always prayes as though some one very close by is hearing her prayers, so many days I was thinking about this & I asked my mother about this and even she stared asking about christianity to our maid, she told us about the God Jehovah & his son Jesus Christ, from her point of view we started seeing Jesus Christ, it was a real wonderful feeling we both got and slowly I started reading bible & pray with her. I started reading bible a lot and I found so many good things there. I compare Jesus with mo MAD. Jesus never kill any one, never hurt any one?????????????????????¢??s feelings, when people try to kill him he just went away from that place & he never asked his people to kill them, the judgment he gave to a prostitute when people try to stone her was a real eye opening thing of me. I cried when I read that chapter. I prayed & really I got a feeling that someone is hearing my prayers, I can?????????????????????¢??t understand Trinity but my maid also told me that even she is not believing Trinity but she believes God Jehovah & his Son Jesus Christ. She told me she is some Witness.. any way its not a problem for me now. I have wonderful God Jehovah & his son Jesus. Each and every day I am happy now & I never be so happy liken how I am now. Dear Muslim friends please please try to read bible once & ask yourself a question & compare Jesus with Momad. Sure you will understand the difference. How come God sent a good prophet like Jesus to this earth to Love one another and the same time how he sent an idiot after words to kill the same people. Funny right? Read New Testament bible again and again you will get the answers. Moza |
BMZ wrote: |
The best joke is that there is not a single comment by Wissam, himself and he did not say a word at all. |
BMZ wrote: |
Let us write the nicknames of FFI goons and Homos in closest possible Arabic and see if they can come up with their own equivalents in Arabic.
Aksel Ankersen will come out as: اكسَل انكَرسَن ب م ز |
BMZ wrote: |
The link: http://the-real-islam.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=68
It seems fair to such dirty buggers and miserable souls to mock and ridicule Islam, Qur'aan, Prophet and Muslims but when they are sweetly fingered and screwed up nicely, they are unable to take even a finger, not to mention blows. I am really sick of such parlaysed, sick and brainless kafir minds. |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Hello, all
This is one of the most hilarious false testimonies, written by FFI gang members.
How hilarious can that be when this fake FFI goon wrote this? Looks like written by some Jesus freak at FFI. Rotflmao! This was written by some FFI goon, who learnt the word goon from Ahmed and me. We were the first to introduce the word goon to FFI goons. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Welcome Aksel
Let the fight begins, lol anyway, you are free to express your thoughts in anyway you see, this is free speech forum with no banning or warning in place, if you violate the only rule which is mocking Allah or any of his prophets, no worries, and no warnings, I just edit the comment and move any mocking to Allah and His prophets you can mock me, you can mock BMZ and you can mock all Muslims if you like, I have no problem with that cheers |
BMZ wrote: |
It has become a fashion for Indian Hindus and Zorats to sit on ex-Muslims' site and write junk and rubbish, when their own religions are complete rubbish. |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Hello, all
This is one of the most hilarious false testimonies, written by FFI gang members.
How hilarious can that be when this fake FFI goon wrote this? Looks like written by some Jesus freak at FFI. Rotflmao! This was written by some FFI goon, who learnt the word goon from Ahmed and me. We were the first to introduce the word goon to FFI goons. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
The word "goon" has been in use since the nineteenth century you moron. It's not your intellectual property.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=goon |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
The word "goon" has been in use since the nineteenth century you moron. It's not your intellectual property. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=goon |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||||
I think BMZ meant the use of the word to refer to the kafirs who mock Islam, i do not think he meant that he invented it, I actually learnt it from BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
Easy to say mr Baig MZ, let's see how you back it up. |
BMZ wrote: |
The best joke is that there is not a single comment by Wissam, himself and he did not say a word at all. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
WiSsAm's not a member of forum09, you fool. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
I would be inclined to spell my last name with an Ayn as the first letter and Kha instead of Kaf (like "Anchorson"), but I'm not here to discuss Arabic. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
I've come here because you keep fleeing when I try to engage you on any forum... Seems you don't dare to engage with a hostile poster unless you're the moderator. Very slippery behaviour and it doesn't do you any credit, but I'm here now. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
Well liar, where have I used the kind of language that you use about my people, to describe Muslims, Muhammad or Allah? Give a link or you will be proven a liar AGAIN. |
BMZ wrote: | ||||
What is the need to provide any back up? Just look at Rashna, a Fire worshipper and others at COEM and sunshine, skynightblaze and other Hindus at FFI, talking and churning out rubbish against Islam, Prophet and Qur'aan. BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
If you are sitting among a bunch of barbarians and filthy liars, nodding to them, I will count you among them. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Actually if AA can explain to me his religion but in a different thread, as I am really interested to know it from one who follow it, not from URL around
so please AA, describe to me the concept of your religion in very simple terms, it will be good if you bring a verse or a passage from your scripture to support any simplified term you used to describe your religion to an ignorant guy like me, I mean by my ignorance, is my ignorance concerning your religion, I actually know absoutely nothing about it, I know you have given me a few links to your scriptures, but that is no good for an introduction, as well I do not trust what I read on the net, so if the info from an adherent follower, it will have far more integrity in my eyes cheers |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||||||
Well, firstly thank you for civil reply, and I appologize for my abusive PM on the other board. I have edited my posts to remove the insults. However, you still betray your xenophobia. Skynightblaze is an atheist, not a Hindu, he has publically renounced Hinduism. Rashna, the child of a Muslim mother and a Zoroastrian father, is an agnostic. Denigrating a religion on the basis of a handful of followers is silly, denigrating an entire group of religions on the basis of one or two ex-followers who don't even believe in them is crazy.
That's a reasonable stance but scarcely applicable to me. I have condemned the hateful members of that FFI site and I've even got one or two of them banned so far. Now, since you are being reasonable I will open a new topic to discuss Islamic issues. Regards |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Hey AA
In reply to your comment on the real islam site, in which you suggested that 'breath' is better than 'blow' to translate the word "Yanfukh" I say no, because breath implies both air in and out, in fact more in, there is also a word for 'breath' in Arabic which is 'Yatanafas', however the Quran was very accurate in describing the action of breath as being two actions in one, i.e. air in, and air out, only the air out can be classified as blow, the Quran used the explicit worrds for each action: Shahiq (Air in), Zafir (Air out) Also the same word Yanfukh, was used numerous times in the context of blowing into the SOOR (Trumpet), and in here I can not say breath into the trumpet, so in my translation, I have to stick to the word 'blow' to translate the word Yanfukh, unless you have another english word that is better and still implies blowing (air out) Cheers |
BMZ wrote: |
I always enjoy reading these verses about Kafirs: هَٰذَا فَوْجٌ مُقْتَحِمٌ مَعَكُمْ ۖ لَا مَرْحَبًا بِهِمْ ۚ إِنَّهُمْ صَالُو النَّارِ قَالُوا بَلْ أَنْتُمْ لَا مَرْحَبًا بِكُمْ ۖ أَنْتُمْ قَدَّمْتُمُوهُ لَنَا ۖ فَبِئْسَ الْقَرَارُ قَالُوا رَبَّنَا مَنْ قَدَّمَ لَنَا هَٰذَا فَزِدْهُ عَذَابًا ضِعْفًا فِي النَّارِ وَقَالُوا مَا لَنَا لَا نَرَىٰ رِجَالًا كُنَّا نَعُدُّهُمْ مِنَ الْأَشْرَارِ BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
Really? How sadistic of you. Unfortunately it may prove to be no more than a pleasure of anticipation. |
Quote: |
I wonder mister Khalil
why you dodged the first words by Ibn Kathir in his tafsir to the above verse? Let me show it to you: اُخْتُلِفَ فِي سَبَب نُزُول صَدْر هَذِهِ السُّورَة Hahah, you know what the above mean which is said by ibn kathir? it means: the people differed to the reason of revealing those first verses in this sura Keep it itchy and shifty, mister Khalil |
Quote: |
Muhammad Maria Affair in Quran
Khalil Fariel Muhammad had a concubine named Maria. His only son Ibrahim was born in her though the child died in infancy. This is one of the secrets about Muhammad that most Muslims do not want to tell us. But an established fact does not require further substantiations hence I am not going to strive for proving Maria the Copt was Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s concubine. My attempt is to look into a notorious incident in Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s life which is connected to Maria our key figure. Quran chapter (63) Surah Tahrim: for those going through the first part of this Surah, there is enough to wonder what they ARE exactly for in a book claimed to be guidance to the entire humanity to the end of times. We see God compelling Muhammad to expiate his oaths in order to crush the rebellion of his wives. What does this have to do in our affairs in this living period? I am not hoping for an answer to this from Muslims but there is a little secret again for Muslims to bury or misinterpret to a great extent. The verses 1 to 5 tell us the story of Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s wives?????????????????????¢?? rebellion and Allah entering into the sight in a rather reproachful mode. After that god goes on to explain the reason of the rebellion of Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s wives: And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me. [Quran Chapter 63:5] I had to isolate the above because this contains the ingredient I want to dissect. Verse says of a secret prophet informed to one of his wives but she later discloses the secret to others. Muhammad's God informs him of this leakage in right time for his wives to wonder ?????????????????????¢??how come he has been alerted of it?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. It is the essence. Now, there is obviously something reeking with the above. What was that Muhammad had to conceal from some of his wives that is known to only one of them? What is all this drama about? Muslims will not tell us the truth. The fact about this is not been found in two Sahih Hadith collections namely Bukhari and Muslim. What we get to know is rather a laughable account in something called Maghafir (a drink) or honey is mixed up. |
Quote: |
Hello Ahmed,
I know there is "Ikhtilaf"(dispute) among Quran interpreters on which occassion was the verses been revealed. And I did not claim Ibn Kathir did not have different version. In fact I brought the second version of events first from the online translators and to expose those people's deception brought the instant account from Ibn Kathir. I did not claim there is another version. Besides, I brought Al-Shoukani too in which it said "scholars have disputed over the "Sabab" = reason". I translated it almost word to word and you can see it in my OP. But the first account all Mufassirs give is the one in "Muhammad is seen with Maria in Hafsa's house in latter's bed". And that can be the only fitting reason for Allah to reveal verses because the apologetic version does not make sense even for those who want to defend it. "Maghafir" is not a prohibited drink for Muhammad to have it privately and to keep it as secret from all of his wives except one. Regards KF |
Quote: |
MastaBlaster wrote:"its funny to sit back and watch the enemies of faith banging their hands and trying to find a new angle to try and scratch the noble quran with their dirty nails
so Aaron Spelling aka khalil fariel above (who mixed up his surah numbers) wants to make a BeverlyHills 90210 drama out of a simple set of 5 verses." |
Quote: |
Khalil Fariel wrote:I had to isolate the above because this contains the ingredient I want to dissect. |
Quote: |
Mastablaster wrote of course you have to isolate verses in order to concoct your drama movie. but lets see if the BeverlyHills 90210 scenario holds waters if we put your purposely isolated verse back in context
66:1 O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. the prophet forbid something lawful for himself for the sake of pleasing his lucky wives. a true gentleman ahead of his time, not abusing from his social position, taking into consideration the emotions and needs of his wives 68:4"And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality" 66:2 Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths and Allah is your Protector, and He is the Knowing the Wise. here we learn that muhammad went as far as taking an oath to forbid hismelf this lawful thing, but God says that He previously sanctionned the expiation of oaths when it is something lawful, because idealy one should not abstain himself from the lawful things in life. sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet, and in such cases the oath should be broken 2:224 and then atoned for 5:89. 66:3 And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me. the prophet shared a secret with one of his wives but she betrayed his trust. apparently the gentleman of sublim morality was not feared inside his household. 66:4 If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are already inclined (to this); and if you back up each other against him, then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders. the wife that betrayed his confidence and the one(s) that listened (contributing to the betrayal) are given the choice to ask forgiveness to Allah for this shameful act, their abuse of trust and leniency of the prophet towards them. This is done to reveal their true hearts, if they are true believers. the verse tells them that if they seek forgiveness it means their hearts incline to faith, that they are true believers who made a mistake without any evil intention. but if they persist in their attitude it means they do not fear Allah and they are not among the true believers who do good. Allah, the angels and the true believers will protect the prophet from the machinations of evil spirits, and at the end Allah might replace such wives with true Muslims (see next verse) 66:5 Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins. if they dont mend their ways and the prophet divorces them, God might replace them with other wives having the following qualities: muslims (muslimatin), true believers (mu'minatin), obedient to Allah, turn to Allah in repentence, worshipers of Allah, fasters, whether widows or virgins. As seen in Aaron Spelling's original post, there are several conflicting reports as to the circumstances surrounding the revelation of these verses, and this is enough to discard all of them. The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course, and the silence of the Quran regarding the thing which the prophet forbid himself from, testifies to this. The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else. It also shows that the prophet was but a human being, subject to human emotions and even liable to commit an occasional mistake. These verses also speak of the important notion of trust between husband and wife, that they should remain God-counscious in their interractions with eachother or else they could be replaced with other more pious husband/wife. |
Quote: |
Ahmed wrote: "That was awsome bro, thanks. I reckon it should be part of the slam dunk show, what do you think?" |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Hello, all
This is one of the most hilarious false testimonies, written by FFI gang members.
How hilarious can that be when this fake FFI goon wrote this? Looks like written by some Jesus freak at FFI. Rotflmao! This was written by some FFI goon, who learnt the word goon from Ahmed and me. We were the first to introduce the word goon to FFI goons. I laughed my ass off when I read this fake Moza wrote that Ali Sina, Haik Monsieur, Sum, Yazwee, apricot and other goons opened her eyes. Rotflmao. Here at my home, our Filipino maid is about to give up Christianity. We allowed her to go to church on Sundays but she refused. Looking at the family members praying at home, she was fascinated. In fact she is pushing us to speed up her Shahada but we have asked her to read and learn more first. Being a born and practising Christian, she now tells us, "I do not believe that a man like Jesus can be a son of God and how can he be God? Why should God have a son? " Salaams BMZ Link for the bullshit: [url=http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Moza_(former_Muslim)] CLICK[/url] |
BMZ wrote: |
Hey, Ahmed!
I can see the FFI goons talking to themselves and nodding to each other. lol! Can you take a short break, have mercy on the kids and spare them for a few days? lol! BMZ |
KhaliL Fariel wrote: |
Hey Nabil,
Since when have you been reduced to the level of a cheerleader? The man whom you quoted has been spanked all over this forum still shamelessly he stays around to expose more of his shallow brain. And you become such a shameless Muslim to cheerlead such miserable case..??? Are these guys your idols..? Have you no life? |
KhaliL Fariel wrote: |
I really feel pity for you pathetic boy; you deserve a lot better than this seventh century crap but unfortunately you have been infected with this virus way earlier for it to destroy the most vital organ in your body which is essential for thinking and reasoning. That is BRAIN. |
KhaliL Fariel wrote: |
"Hey Nabail..., boy; as I told you earlier, I preserve some morals. I have taken oaths in many things like I will not lie, I will not cheat my wife and family, I will not have second, third, fourt wives because that will hurt my wife, and after all, I will NEVER have a slave-girl and bonk her; these are some of them. |
sunshine wrote: |
Verses that cause laughter Postby sunshine ????????????????????????????» Sat May 09, 2009 6:18 pm whatever of good befalleth thee (oh man) it is from Allah, and whatever of ill befalleth thee it is from thyself --4:79 Then we revived you (Moses) after extinction so that ye might give thanks --2:54 if ye cometh close from a closet, or ye have had conduct with a women and if ye find not water then go the high ground and rub ye face and hands with dirt --5:6 There is not an animal in the earth, nor a flying creature on two wings, but they are people like you ---6:38 Those who deny what we hath revealed unto you (Mohammed) are like dogs. --7:116 oh my people, this is the camel of Allah, a token unto you, touch her not with harm lest a near torment seize you --11:64 And unto Allah falleth prostrate whosoever in the heaven as do the shadows in the morning and in the evening hours. 13:15 |
Ahmed wrote: |
Baghdad Bob, from where the hell you got the above crap?
The Quran never said that it is clear for everyone, neither it said that the Muhkamat verses will be clear to evryone I guess I know from where you got the above crap, from your wishful thinking kafir mind The Quran said more than once that the Quran is going to be hard and impossile to understand for the kafirs, i.e. for the likes of you, consequently you need to dismiss your kafir arse and stop finding excuses for your Kufr, your silly appolgies are dismissed. |
Quote: |
by MastaBlaster ????????????????????????????» Tue May 26, 2009 12:57 am
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Do you need me to repeat the question again what an abnormal sewer rascal. i originally told your flat white ass that mary is linked to aaron through faith and clan. then you ask why is she specifically called aaron's sis and not moses'. i tell its because of her priestly affiliation with aaron, not moses. then you bring back your flat embarassed ass after your boring question was answered, and try to deviate the smoke coming outta your burned flat white ass by telling me that i only originally claimed that she was aaron's sis in faith, which is false. thats the summary of your failure that so often takes you to the FFI garbage can, rascal hahahaha stay in the dark where you belong and keep feeding on my hash cakes viewtopic.php?f=22&t=2405&start=40#p40236 |
Quote: |
Koran 8:61.... Postby antineoETC ????????????????????????????» Fri May 22, 2009 10:42 am Koran 8:61 And if they incline to peace, incline you also to it.... The above is often referred to by Muslims to demonstrate that Islam is a religion which not only permits fighting solely in self-defense but, if fighting has commenced, advocates peaceful resolution to conflict if an aggressive enemy displays a willingness to cease hostilities. I contend that this is NOT the case and the line "if they incline to peace...." should be properly understood as "if the enemy inclines to peace ON ISLAM'S TERMS" ie shows a willingness to either embrace Islam or submit to Muslim rule as jizya-paying dhimmies. Any Muslims care to take issue? antineoETC |
Quote: |
debunker: Is the following sentence correct?
اتخذوا فتاة يتيمة ولدا "They took an orphan girl for WALAD"? Be careful. Choose your answer wisely. If you answer NO WAY then you'll be conceding that you were lying all along and I'll consider this as an apology and I'll accept it. If, on the other hand, you answer YES, then you'll just be doing the usual, lying shamelessly yet again. |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Hello, Ahmed
Thanks for thrashing the FFI's own created impostor Debunker. lol! http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2512&start=130 This guy is really hilarious. See how shamelessly he lies through his teeth and does not even know how to construct a translation.
Look at his translation emboldened by me. lol! This is what the FFI freaks and goons do. The goon could have translated his own quote in Arabic, as: "They took an orphan girl as their child." Salaams BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
Thanks for thrashing the FFI's own created impostor Debunker. lol! |
BMZ wrote: |
Look at his translation emboldened by me. lol! This is what the FFI freaks and goons do. The goon could have translated his own quote in Arabic, as: "They took an orphan girl as their child."
Salaams BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
Thanks for thrashing the FFI's own created impostor Debunker. lol! |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
Created by whom? |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
You do realize Debunker has been debating against FFI members for months?
His very appearance in that thread was to defend the Koranic version of Mary and the Trinity. |
BMZ wrote: |
Look at his translation emboldened by me. lol! This is what the FFI freaks and goons do. The goon could have translated his own quote in Arabic, as: "They took an orphan girl as their child."
Salaams BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
I take it he left the word Walad ambiguous as they were discussing whether it should be rendered as "child" or "son" when used in the singular. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
Now, what does this verse mean? وقالوا اتخذ الرحمن ولدا -Sura Maryam verse 88 |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
Created by whom? You do realize Debunker has been debating against FFI members for months? His very appearance in that thread was to defend the Koranic version of Mary and the Trinity.
I take it he left the word Walad ambiguous as they were discussing whether it should be rendered as "child" or "son" when used in the singular. Now, what does this verse mean? وقالوا اتخذ الرحمن ولدا -Sura Maryam verse 88 |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||||||||||
He clearly said, by the imposter and fake Muslim, dee-punker of FFI
What does it mean exactly? that he cannot be wrong?
Let me interfer in this as the subject was started all by myself. Well, if the Arabic word Walad is ambiguous then the English word Offspring (children) should be the same
And they said: Allah took a child What is your point, sorry? |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Salam all
It seems that my first slam dunk against the imposter dee-punker of FFI was not enough to convince him that he should shove himself in the nearest rubbish bin where he belongs, he is still arguing the meaning of the Arabic word WALD like any clear cut shameless biitch. Consequently I needed to mother slam dunk him, so let?????????????????????¢??s watch the next mother of all slams. Here is what the imposter alleged on FFI: debunker of FFI said: the word is "walad". It can mean either boy, son or offspring depending on the context. If the word was "Ibn" then there's only one possible translation: son. But the word used was "walad". ---------------------------------- Now, I told such imposter, that he is wrong: Ahmed said on FFI to the imposter: the noun "walad", can only mean one thing, "Children", therefore the context has no effect and that was proven by the evidence provided by dee-pinky himself. ---------------------------------- Such evidence provided by the imposter even confirmed what I said, it was the first slam dunk he was hit with, let me bring it in here: debunker of FFI said to Ahmed: ok, wait you poor Arabic ignorant. I'll get you a few examples... time to search. EDIT: Ok, here's one link O, Arabic expert! http://sirah.al-islam.com/Display.asp?f=rwd1012 سياقة النسب من ولد إسماعيل عليه السلام ---------------------------------- The imposter kept running like a biitch on FFI insulting me after I exposed his Arabic ignorance and lies as always, so let?????????????????????¢??s see how I slam dunked him, replying to his lies: Ahmed slam dunked the imposter as follow: See in the url he posted which is from an Arabic site, he posted the first sentence at the top: سياقة النسب من ولد إسماعيل عليه السلام The above means, sort of, searching the chain of relation from the CHILDREN of Ismael However the freak dee-punker, wants it to mean, searching the chain of relation from the SONS of Ismael, and for him to con such job, he deliberately did not post the second line which clearly indicates that what they are about to discuss is ONLY THE SONS OF ISMAEL FROM AMONG ALL HIS CHILDREN , see the second line how they specified so: أبناء إسماعيل عليه السلام , i.e. ABNAA Ismael peace be upon him, i.e. The SONS of Ismael peace be upon him Then they started the story by saying: ولد إسماعيل بن إبراهيم - عليهم السلام - اثني عشر رجلا, WALAD Ismael BIN Ibrahim (peace be upon them), 12 MEN, i.e. Isamel the SON of Ibrahim (peace be upon them), beget 12 MEN. Here you have it, such article outline is as follow: 1) It is titled "chasing the chain of relation of the WALAD (CHILDREN) of Ismail 2) Then it specifically told us that, it will only chase the ABNAA (sons) out of those WALAD (Children) 3) Then it confirmed to us by telling us that Ismael begot 12 men, i.e. ABNAA, i.e. SONS From the above evidence provided by dee-punky himself, we can conclude 100% that: 1) WALAD or AWLAD, means Children 2) IBN or BIN means SON 3) ABNAA or BANIN means SONS What a slam: ---------------------------------- Now, let me put the final nail into his coffin and send dee-punker to the filthiest cemetery on the planet: Remember what the imposter said regarding the word WALAD, sorry guys, let me bring it here again: debunker of FFI said: the word is "walad". It can mean either boy, son or offspring depending on the context. If the word was "Ibn" then there's only one possible translation: son. But the word used was "walad". ---------------------------------- I.e. for the imposter, the word WALAd can only mean any of the following: 1- Boy 2- Son 3- Offspring As you can see, he totally missed the fact that the word WALAD can also refer to daughters, in fact the word WALAD is ambiguous i.e. it means it can mean a son or a daughter when used as singular, and it can mean both sons or a daughters if used as plural. For example, if I want to refer to a boy in my children (explicitly) then I must use the word ?????????????????????¢??Son?????????????????????¢?? in English, or the word ?????????????????????¢??Ibn?????????????????????¢?? in Arabic, same with girls, if I want to refer to a girl in my children (explicitly) then I must use the word ?????????????????????¢??Daughter?????????????????????¢?? in English, or the word ?????????????????????¢??Bint?????????????????????¢?? in Arabic. Yet the imposter dee-punker claims that the word WALAD cannot be referring to daughters, so let me show you how the Arabic Quran exposes his ignorance fair and square: Firstly, the Quran message in general is to warn anyone who alleges that Allah took a child, regardless the child being male or female: And warn those who have said: Allah has taken a child. [The Quran ; 18:4] وينذر الذين قالوا اتخذ الله ولدا -> See how the Quran is a warning to all those people who allege that Allah took a child: وينذر الذين قالوا اتخذ الله ولدا, Wa Yunzir Al-lazin Qalu Itakhaza Allah WALADA, And warn those who have said: Allah has taken a child. See, the Quran message is for all those people who claim that Allah took a child, if the word WALAD means son, then it is ok for the people to claim that Allah took daughters for Himself, therefore the word WALAD must mean CHILD regardless being male of female for the message of verse 18:4 to be directed at anyone who allege that Allah took a son or a daughter REGARDLESS of specifics. This general message by using the word WALAD is confirmed in another verse: And it is not appropriate for the Compassionate that He should take a child. [The Quran ; 19:92] وما ينبغي للرحمن ان يتخذ ولدا -> See what is not appropriate for Allah: وما ينبغي للرحمن ان يتخذ ولدا, Wa Ma Yanbaghy Lil-Rahman An Yatakhiz WALADA, And it is not appropriate for the Compassionate that He should take a child. Again, if the word WALAD means son, then it is appropriate for Allah to take daughters for Himself, therefore the word WALAD must mean CHILD regardless being male of female for the message of verse 19:92 and 18:4 to be directed at anyone who allege that Allah took a son or a daughter REGARDLESS of specifics. Secondly, Allah ordered Mohammed in one of his 100% true hadith to inform some people that Allah did not take a WALAD, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: And say: Praise be to Allah, Who has not taken a child and there is not with Him a partner in the kingdom, and there is not to Him a guardian against disgrace; and magnify Him with (great) magnification. [The Quran ; 17:111] وقل الحمد لله الذي لم يتخذ ولدا ولم يكن له شريك في الملك ولم يكن له ولي من الذل وكبره تكبيرا -> See: وقل الحمد لله الذي لم يتخذ ولدا , Wa Qul Alhamdlilah Al-lazi Lam Yatkhiz WALADA, i.e. And say: Praise be to Allah, Who has not taken a child . Now, we know well that the Christians in their corrupt religion allege that Allah took a son, so some confused Muslims think that the verse above is directed at those Christians. The matter of the fact remains intact, that by using the word WALAD, the verse above must apply to those who claim that Allah took a child regardless of the child sex, this is because the message of the Quran is general (as we have seen in 18:4 & 19:92) to all people who allege that Allah took a child, being a girl or a boy, it makes no difference. The fact about our God that He does not take children (WALAD) for Himself is stated in another verse: The One, to whom belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, and Who did not take a child, and there is not to Him a partner in the kingdom, and Who created everything, and measured it according to a measure. [The Quran ; 25:2] الذي له ملك السماوات والارض ولم يتخذ ولدا ولم يكن له شريك في الملك وخلق كل شئ فقدره تقديرا -> See: و لم يتخذ ولدا , Wa Lam Yatkhiz WALADA, i.e. And He has not taken a child . i.e. the sex of the child makes no difference, the sin of claiming that Allah took a son, is the same sin as claiming that Allah took a daughter Thirdly, there was also other people who alleged that Allah took the angels as WALAD, while at the same time they alleged that the angels are females, i.e. they alleged that Allah took daughters, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: 26: And they said: The Compassionate has taken a child. Glory be to Him, rather they are honoured servants. [The Quran ; 21:26] 26: وقالوا اتخذ الرحمن ولدا سبحانه بل عباد مكرمون -> See how everything is clear it started to be, verse 21:26 is directed at the people who claimed that Allah took the angels as daughters, وقالوا اتخذ الرحمن ولدا سبحانه بل عباد مكرمون , Wa Qalu Itakhaza Al-Rahman WALADA Subhanahu Bal Ibad Mukramoon, And they said: The Compassionate has taken a child. Glory be to Him, rather they are honoured servants. See how the same word WALAD is used to refer to the angels who suppose to be females as the liars allege, such alleged feminine sex of the angels is explained in another verse, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: Then, has your Lord chosen for you sons, and taken from among the angels daughters? Indeed, you say a great saying. [The Quran ; 17:40] افاصفاكم ربكم بالبنين واتخذ من الملائكة اناثا انكم لتقولون قولا عظيما -> See how it is getting clearer and clearer regarding the word WALAD, that is how the Quran explains itself and its words. In the above verse, Allah is talking explicitly cornering the liars who claim that Allah took a child, by telling them: افاصفاكم ربكم بالبنين واتخذ من الملائكة اناثا , Aafaasfakum Rabukum Bil BANIN Wa Itakhaza Min Al-Malaika INATHA, Then, has your Lord chosen for you sons, and taken from among the angels daughters? , i.e. the word WALAD covers sons and daughters, REGARDLESS The fact about the word WALAD that it covers both sons and daughters, is confirmed in another verse using explicit words regarding sons and daughters, let?????????????????????¢??s have a look: Or has He taken daughters to Himself of what He creates and chosen you to have sons? [The Quran ; 43:16] ام اتخذ مما يخلق بنات واصفاكم بالبنين -> See how clear it is: ام اتخذ مما يخلق بنات واصفاكم بالبنين, Am Itakhaza Mimma Yakhliq BANAT Wa Asfakum Bil BANIN, Or has He taken daughters to Himself of what He creates and chosen you to have sons? Therefore, all the verses we read earlier regarding the message of the Quran of warning those who claim that Allah took a WALAD, must apply to those who allege that Allah took the angels as daughters. Again and again, the fact about the word WALAD is confirmed in another lot of verses, in which we read the word WALAD as a verb along with the explicit words for SONS and DAUGHTERS: 151: Surely it is due to their lie that they say: 152: Allah has begotten. And indeed, they are liars. 153: Has He chosen daughters over sons? [The Quran ; 37:151-153] 151: الا انهم من افكهم ليقولون 152: ولد الله وانهم لكاذبون 153: اصطفي البنات علي البنين , , -> See: Surely it is due to their lie that they say: . And here is what they say: ولد الله وانهم لكاذبون , WALAD Allah Wa Inahum La Kaziboon, i.e. Allah has begotten. And indeed, they are liars. then Allah used the same argument against those liars that He used in both 17:40 & 43:16 above: اصطفي البنات علي البنين , Istafa Al-BANAT Ala Al-BANIN, i.e. Has He chosen daughters over sons? Here you have it, the Quran indeed said more about those who alleged that Allah took the angels as daughters for Himself, than what the Quran said about the Christians alleging that Allah took Jesus as a son, therefore the word WALAD applies to daughters equally as it does to sons And that should send the imposter dee-punker to the rubbish bin where he will always belong. Another mother of all slams: |
Quote: |
Re: Mary and the Trinity Postby debunker ????????????????????????????» Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:19 am Bahgat said to MBL: what an ugly filthy sharmoot of an arse licker kafir bound to hell you are I have answered his stupid question you tard, stop deluding yourself or you will be life dismissed When I first read this I didn't notice the underlined threat. But then when I read it again, my eyes widened and I rushed to check Bahgat's life dismissal list: http://www.free-islam.com/modules.php?n ... opic&t=772 And to my shock, I noticed that MBL was not one of Bahgat's virtual reality inmates!!! Why, Bahgat?! Why?! Why do you think MBL doesn't deserve your punishment while I do?! I also noticed that you freed Sky! Oh, I beg you dear Bahgat, let me out, please, please! |
Quote: |
Re: Mary and the Trinity Postby skynightblaze ????????????????????????????» Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:47 am fudgy wrote:The God in the OT has more or less the same tone, voice, characteristics, etc. I don't know about the NT. skynightblaze wrote: You dumb answer my post if you can. I have exposed your so called holy book.It accuses other scriptures of corruption and yet itself supports them. Keep solving the fucked up errors made by your fake prophet. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Hey bro BMZ
Here is gem of a comment that I just posted to the goons on FFI: Hey arrogant goons bound to hell I am currently translating the Quran, I reached the following verse, which clearly talks about the filthy kafirs like you, let's have a look, then give me the pleasure to walk you through it: And those who argue concerning Allah after He has been answered to (by others), their argument is nullified with their Lord, and upon them is anger, and for them is a severe torture. [Al Quran ; 42:16] وَالَّذِينَ يُحَاجُّونَ فِي اللَّهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا اسْتُجِيبَ لَهُ حُجَّتُهُمْ دَاحِضَةٌ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ وَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ (16) -> See goons, I always wonder, why the filthy kafirs of FFI are so itchy about those who have believed, why fukin not, live and let others live?, well, as you know that I always describe such lowest of the lows on FFI as ITCHY, the verse above is actually telling us about such ITCH and it also tell us what will be the reward for those ITCHY kafirs, let me walk you through: -> The verse starts by telling us about those lowest of the lows of the kafirs, like the many goons on FFI, for example, sky, mental, yeakee, ugly, trojan donkey, ygang, chicken and so many filthy retarded freaks, the list just goes on and on, see: And those who argue concerning Allah, i.e. unquestionably, 42:16 is talking about such freaks, now what we will read next is what I told you about, the ITCH syndrome from which those filthy kafirs suffer, see: after He has been answered to (by others), wow, what an accuracy, so those lowest of the lows of the freaks argue with those who responded to and answered the message of Allah, what you guys call that?, well I call it ITCH, you filthy and itchy punks and hos, now here is the good news for you, ITCHY freaks, your Tom, Jerry and Barbie arguments will be nullified on the JD, see: their argument is nullified with their Lord, sort of your argument will be Dismissed, hahah, can't wait for that day, any way, let's see your reward and your achievement THEN: and upon them is anger, and for them is a severe torture., what an achievement you bunch of itchy losers, it deserves that every one on Cyber world give you a round of applause but by using their dirty feet: FLAP FLAP FLAP FLAP FLAP Cheers |
Quote: |
Re: The "Sura Like It" Challenge (just for fun) Postby AhmedBahgat ????????????????????????????» Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:40 am Natassia wrote:[Pickthal 2:23] And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave (Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your witness beside Allah if ye are truthful. Ahmed wrote:Idiot, the above suras you forged, are not in Arabic are you that dumb or somethin? stop deluding yourself you fool, you need to meet all the criteria before you claim your crap, yet you met not even a single one, obvioulsy you know that you are full of shit, by admiting that what you brought is nothing but fun, i.e. you are not serious, rather a confused kafir who is in the process of securing your grave in hell |
BMZ wrote: |
I count such freaks among asfalaa-saafileen, mate.
Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Exactly mate, that is why I call them 'the Lowest of the Lows', which is the exact translation to the above Arabic words you wrote using English letters |
Quote: |
Re: who said this? Sura 002.163 Postby expozIslam ????????????????????????????» Fri May 22, 2009 9:03 am Where are the Quran only muslims? Can someone QOM tell me who is speaking in this verse? Allah or Mohammad or doesn't matter because both represent the same person. |
Quote: |
Re: Did Abraham Build the Kaba? Postby LCD ????????????????????????????» Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:26 am skynightblaze wrote:[002:125] Remember We made the House a place of assembly for men and a place of safety; and take ye the station of Abraham as a place of prayer; and We covenanted with Abraham and Isma'il, that they should sanctify My House for those who compass it round, or use it as a retreat, or bow, or prostrate themselves (therein in prayer). LCD wrote:I wonder who did this translation, it's probably NEW, cause look at them trying to make a verb with Covenant. I bet the Word Coventant isn't in the origional at all. Lie and a half covenant. |
Quote: |
وَإِذْ جَعَلْنَا الْبَيْتَ مَثَابَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَأَمْناً وَاتَّخِذُواْ مِن مَّقَامِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ مُصَلًّى وَعَهِدْنَا إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ أَن طَهِّرَا بَيْتِيَ لِلطَّائِفِينَ وَالْعَاكِفِينَ وَالرُّكَّعِ السُّجُودِ |
BMZ wrote: | ||
An Appeal
I recommend that debunker be released on parole after tagging him. |
BMZ wrote: |
If you have let out this warped Hindu scumbag from your Life Dismissal List of FFI goons and freaks, the arthi should be put back in, so that our silent international readers, which include FFI goons and freaks also, can know about this fucked up Hindu freak from India, who has nothing to do but keeps on pouring out his verbal diarrhoea at FFI.
...Rama's lingam skynightblaze... |
BMZ wrote: |
The point is that all the ex-Muslims, after leaving Islam, have lost sense of reasoning, politeness, manners, decencies, courtesy and all cherished values imparted by Islam, and have become the vilest of all creatures, asfala saafileen (lowest of the low). |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
It is quite common to see FFI goons quoting a verse or a one-liner. We have repeatedly clarified and told the goons and freaks to try to read and understand the sections and topics. |
BMZ wrote: | ||||
Yes, you are right. And you will be surprised to know that in the ancient Hebrew text, the word serpent was actually similar to asfalaa saafileen, the lowest of the low and that is how it was translated to serpent in a silly way for Satan, despised as the lowest of the low and how low could he go . lol! |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
So, if Jesus fails the Deuteronomy 18:18 test... Therefore Muhammad passes it? YHWH said to the Israelites: "A prophet from among you" |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
I understand why you attack sky personally. He is attacking your beliefs after all. But why do you blame it on him being a Hindu after he's expressly stated he's not a Hindu? You apparently don't want to believe this, because someone evil enough to speak against Islam must be a Yahudi, or a Hinduvata extremist, or a fanatical Evangelical. I have been attacked on the internet and off by many people, but I have never responded by insulting their race, or their parents, or their religion.
Yeah, why not: http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1811&start=10#p27256 http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2287&start=0#p37685 |
BMZ wrote: |
I would like to see your responses to skynightblaze's filthy posts, when he attacks and assails the Prophet of Islam and Allah, using totally filthy and vulgur language. |
BMZ wrote: |
I am sure you remember, when I wrote the word Zorats, it hurt you. Right? |
BMZ wrote: |
That should make you feel how do I feel and why I blast the scumbags regardless of one being a theist or an atheist, a Hindu or Christian, who write filth. |
BMZ wrote: |
However, I must add that you appear to be a decent person in real life from the tone of your language in the post. I appreciate that.
Cheers BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
Actually the test does not apply to Muhammad and he does not need to pass it. I have already told you that the Jewish and Christian scriptures have gone through lots of forgeries.
However, if you look at the requirements, Muhammad meets them and passes it. He was from the lineage of Abraham, through Ishmael. Jesus, on the other hand, does not meet even an iota of the so-called test. BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
The Israelites were descended through Isaac, by way of his son Jacob. If the Biblical God adresses the Israelites and says "a prophet from among you" he cannot mean a descendant of Ishmael. You would need to reject both the Biblical and Islamic genealogies to understand Israelites as descendents of Ishmael. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||||||
Now that I look again I see some of his posts were OTT. K. I will have a word with him.
No, but it made me angry. The first time I simply said: "I never spelled the name of Muhammad or Allah disrespectfully and it reflects badly on you to stoop to this" When you kept on referring to us as Zorats I lost my temper. Zoroastrians are not rats.
Yes, but this doesn't explain why you respond by insulting the racial or cultural group they identify with. Did I dehumanize Muslims or Arabs ever? I have always said of myself that I am a very flawed Zoroastrian and the least representative of them. If you had just said: "Aksel, you are a filthy lying retard" I wouldn't have cared all that much.
Yes, you too BMZ, I may have been unfair to you. This kind of internet activism brings out the worst in people. |
Quote: |
The following is the full text of US President Barack Obama's speech in Cairo:
I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum. We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the west includes centuries of co-existence and co-operation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a cold war in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the west as hostile to the traditions of Islam. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust. So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the co-operation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end. I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us: "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan [the Muslim call to prayer] at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith. As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote: "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our founding fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library. So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum - "Out of many, one." Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected president. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the US government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity. Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all. For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings. This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared. That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as president to protect the American people. The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al-Qaida and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al-Qaida killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al-Qaida chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with. Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case. That's why we're partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace. We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5bn (????????????????????????????£914m) each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8bn to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon. Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its security forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron. And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guant????????????????????????????¡namo Bay closed by early next year. So America will defend itself, respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer. The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world. America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and antisemitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve. On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own. For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the road map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities. Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered. Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist. At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop. Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. Finally, the Arab states must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past. America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true. Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer. The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons. This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against US troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build. It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path. I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. That commitment is at the core of the treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal. The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere. There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people. This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy. The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it first-hand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshipped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways. Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfil zakat. Likewise, it is important for western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit- for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretense of liberalism. Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action- whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster. The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights. I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the west that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous. Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world. Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity. I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith. But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education. This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement. On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in online learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo. On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a summit on entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world. On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and south-east Asia, and appoint new science envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean wate and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health. All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life. The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together. I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world. All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort _ to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings. It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written. The Holy Koran tells u: "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another." The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace." The Holy Bible tells us: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244034998314&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter |
skynightblaze wrote: | ||||||
THE GREATEST TROLL- SIR BMZ
I am deliberately stating this issue here to show mentally handicapped BMZ his intellectual level.He has insulted many members other than myself like Khalil,Aksel,FinallyFree , Sunshine ,ExpozIslam ,Ixolite, Yeezevee, Rashna ,Debunker and many more and as usual this guy doesnt have a single point. http://www.free-islam.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=835&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90 The all time greatest troll cant even understand simple things . See how dumb he is .I have declared thousands of times publicly that I am a hindu by birth but atheist by nature but this idiot still cant grasp my message . I even had declared this in my first post in one to one debate with this troll at COEM.This guy still was questioning Aksel about my beliefs and abusing me.HE has a unique knack of not understanding the point even when it is repeated multiple times and thats why I say he is amazingly dumb. Let me make clear my stance so that this idiot can understand better.I dont like to hide facts. IF facts hurt you then you better stop visiting FFI or anti islamic sites or prove us wrong (which you obviously cant). IF I manage to prove my accusation I will call spade a spade and if that hurts you its not my fault you load of bullshit.Following are what I call facts: 1) Your quran is intellectually bankrupt and thats because your prophet wasnt good at logics and hence Muhhamad was a fake prophet. 2) Your prophet was a criminal(I dont say this but your own scriptures tell us). Now you dumb reality doesnt change just because you reject the hadiths. You tried proving age of Aisha as more than 16 but you failed miserably at COEM. 3) Trolls like you dont even deserve an iota of respect because you bloody have no point and yet you resort to making fun and abusing others for criticizing your fake religion. 4) Muslims are the greatest liars when it comes to their religion. In your case I would say you are not a liar but you are simply more than a dumb and thats why you end up making loads of nonsense posts. All my posts deal with the above . ITs not racism but these are plain facts.Calling spade a spade is not abuse nor racism. Now ofcourse a troll like you would still not understand what racism and bigotry is about. It seems that anyone who hates your religion is a racist and bigot according to you.
Idiot, how about writing a post that you can prove for a change? How about writing one sensible post to start with you junk specialist? IT seems to me that one forum isnt sufficient for you to troll. YOu own a private forum and are already wasting the bandwidth to the max but it seems to me that you are not satisfied by that and your mind simply desires to troll more and more and thats why I see you visiting other forums. You should be reported to your ISP and permanently banned from posting anywhere on the internet as you are simply waste of bandwidth. IT would also save some time of readers who scrutinize your crap with the anticipation that they would atleast find something for food of thought but eventually ending up wasting their precious time. Mate you are a naturally gifted troll .Words alone cannot describe the smoothness of your trolling.IF I was to use some words then let me try to describe your performance. You troll so smoothly just like a free fall i.e there is not a single evidence of wisdom in your words to disrupt the flow . If there exist a GOD of TROLLS then I testify either you are his messenger . You had said somewhere that you are allergic to the word TROLL because you write coherently . All the great men always under estimated themselves unless the world recognized the potential in them. Same is the problem with you. You are underestimating yourself by saying you arent a troll .The entire world has recognized your trolling ability and are now respecting it .All you need is PC and a forum and way you go.Please realize the hidden talents within yourself .
ITs not that you dont write at FFI but rather the fact is you are not allowed to write(trolling to be precise) at FFI . |
BMZ wrote: |
The FFI goons and Islamophobes have started their whining and rambling, without thinking outside the box. I refer to ygalg's opening post and looks like he was not happy hearing that good speech. lol!
FFI goons can't even appreciate a man's sincere and honest thoughts. However, I am pleased to note that dot-coms, dot-orgs and men like Ali Sina, Geert Wilders, fanatic Robert Spencer and many other fake internet characters have had no effect of their useless and meaningless tirades against Islam and Muslims. I will comment later. http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2603 |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
Obama has such a starry-eyed view of the situation, unwilling to admit that the conflict between Islam and the West goes a lot deeper and broader than a few violent extremists. He grew up, of course, with the Islam practised in Indonesia, which is substantially less belicose than that of Middle East/West Asian and African nations. However, I give him credit that he puts the pressure on those anti-semites like Ahmedinejad. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||||||
BMZ, sky has written a response to your acccusations:
|
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||||||
BMZ, sky has written a response to your acccusations:
|
Quote: |
He has insulted many members other than myself like Khalil,Aksel,FinallyFree , Sunshine ,ExpozIslam ,Ixolite, Yeezevee, Rashna ,Debunker and many more and as usual this guy doesnt have a single point. |
Quote: |
Kuttay ki dum ko hazaar saal tube main band rakho, nikalo aur dekho kay dum tayrhi ki tayhri |
Quote: |
Re: Zihar - Islam's less talked about way of divorce Postby Aksel Ankersen ????????????????????????????» Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:37 am The Koran says not to do Zihar: "Those among you who estrange their wives (by declaring them as forbidden in sex) as their mothers know full well that they are not their mothers. Their mothers are the women who gave birth to them. Indeed, they are committing a blasphemy and a falsehood. GOD is Pardoner, Forgiver." |
Quote: |
Mods banned him for trolling. I actually want him back but mods wont allow him. Believe me it would be his nightmare if he is allowed back. |
Quote: |
Just felt like posting this from our honourable member THHuxley:
According to THHuxley, Muhammad is truly a demigod of Muslims. He states it blatantly here: THHuxley wrote:Muhammad is your version of the Christian Jesus. They call him the ?????????????????????¢??word?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? and you call Muhammad the ?????????????????????¢??light.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? They have a trinity, you have a duality. This is from his discussion on the subject Do Muslims worship Muhammad? |
KhaliL FarieL wrote: |
But some accusation can be true, and Allah eulogizing Muhammad along with his angels does not make sense. And if necessary, it can be argued Allah and angels are praying to Muhammad too. Any doubt?
I will quote Quran to define Quran. It is the best way since Quran explains Quran better: See the verses below: فَنَادَتْهُ الْمَلآئِكَةُ وَهُوَ قَائِمٌ يُصَلِّي فِي الْمِحْرَابِ أَنَّ اللّهَ يُبَشِّرُكَ بِيَحْيَـى مُصَدِّقًا بِكَلِمَةٍ مِّنَ اللّهِ وَسَيِّدًا وَحَصُورًا وَنَبِيًّا مِّنَ الصَّالِحِينَ And the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: Allah giveth thee glad tidings of (a son whose name is) John, (who cometh) to confirm a word from Allah, lordly, chaste, a Prophet of the righteous.[Quran: 3:39] See the bolded part, it reads as ?????????????????????¢??Yusallee?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? = Praying. It was prophet Zachariah praying in Quran, so we see the singular ?????????????????????¢??Yusallee?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. The same term but since it is Allah and angels are involved, we see its plural form, instead of ?????????????????????¢??Yusallee?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? singular, it is ?????????????????????¢??Yusalloona?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? in Quran 33:43: إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا Indeed, Allah and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation.[Quran 33:56] I have bolded the term in both verses. There is not much difference a non-Arabic speaker can see. What makes it here showering blessings on the prophet instead of praying? Zachariah was praying as he was ?????????????????????¢??yusallee?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. But Allah is not even though he too ?????????????????????¢??Yusalloon?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. Swalla = is used to denote prayer in Quran. I can show you verses pertaining to it. أَرَأَيْتَ الَّذِي يَنْهَى عَبْدًا إِذَا صَلَّى Hast thou seen him who dissuades, A slave when he prays? [Quran 96:9-10] فَلَا صَدَّقَ وَلَا صَلَّى وَلَكِن كَذَّبَ وَتَوَلَّى For he neither trusted, nor prayed. But he denied and flouted.[Quran 75:31-32] Allah indeed made Muhammad a demigod, and I have debated on this matter many times in this forum. Muhammad has been given a godly attribute in Quran which Rashad Khalifa felt like blasphemous and scrapped from his Quran. He paid his life for it. |
Aksel Ankersen wrote: |
I didn't respond to Khalil's post, because I didn't see anything in it that hadn't already been covered in the topic. There is no explanation why, if Salla exclusively means pray, that Allah yusalloona upon his believers. الذين اذا اصابتهم مصيبة قالوا انا لله وانا اليه راجعون اولئك عليهم صلوات من ربهم ورحمة واولئك هم المهتدون who, when they are visited by an affliction, say, 'Surely we belong to God, and to Him we return'; upon those rest blessings (3layhum salawat) and mercy from their Lord, and those -- they are the truly guided al-Baqara 157 Sir, my advice to you is to drop this subject of Allah praying either to or for Muhammad, because it contradicts the doctrine of the Koran in many other places and is logically untenable. Rather like Luxemberg and his "white raisins". |
Quote: |
Postby AhmedBahgat ????????????????????????????» Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:48 pm
KhaliL FarieL wrote: Blah blah I hope I made it clear. Regards KF |
KhaliL Fariel wrote: |
Dear Ahmed,
You brought this argument earlier too which I overlooked at that time. Now I will deal with it. This is a very good argument but unfortunte for you, will get refuted easily. Focus on the verses below: I bring Arabic too for you to grasp easily: ثُمَّ خَلَقْنَا النُّطْفَةَ عَلَقَةً فَخَلَقْنَا الْعَلَقَةَ مُضْغَةً فَخَلَقْنَا الْمُضْغَةَ عِظَامًا فَكَسَوْنَا الْعِظَامَ لَحْمًا ثُمَّ أَنشَأْنَاهُ خَلْقًا آخَرَ فَتَبَارَكَ اللَّهُ أَحْسَنُ الْخَالِقِينَ Then fashioned We the drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump, then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators![Quran: 23:14] أَتَدْعُونَ بَعْلًا وَتَذَرُونَ أَحْسَنَ الْخَالِقِينَ Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the best of Creators,[Quran: 37:125] I hope you should have noticed the bolded part in Arabic and translation. What does it tell you? Are there creators beside Allah for him to talk ?????????????????????¢??He is the best of creators??????????????????????¢?????????????????????? It can not be so. Especially see the verse 37:125. Very scary for a Muslim like you because of its structure; So, it can be somewhat idiomatic? Or allegorical? Whatever, Allah is only mentioning himself as best among the creators means he is perfect. He can not be indicating creators besides him. Can he? So is the verse Allah describing himself as ?????????????????????¢??Arhamu Al-Rahimeen = Merciful of the all merciful ones?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? This verse can not be produced to counter my argument ?????????????????????¢??Muhammad is assigned Allah?????????????????????¢??s essential, exclusive attribute ?????????????????????¢??Raheem?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. If Allah has used the exact term ?????????????????????¢??Raheem?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? in Quran to denote any others too, I will concur but this ?????????????????????¢??Raheem among the ?????????????????????¢??Rahimeen?????????????????????¢?? should be dealt as ?????????????????????¢??Ahsan among the Khaliqeen?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. I hope I made it clear. Regards KF |
Quote: |
Hello Khalil
We are not discussing the english word 'Pray', we are discussing the Arabic word "Salla" Now, I don't need to refute your opening post, you have that silly habit of repeating your crap, and I say, it is if a Muslim like me and a Kafir like Aksel refuted you, then you must be the one who is wrong. Cheers |
Quote: |
Re: THHuxley on Allah-Muhammad Dualism in Islam...!!! Postby skynightblaze ????????????????????????????» Fri Jun 12, 2009 3:28 pm @Aksel I got in touch with Sam Shamoun and he had a new article that was coming up on answering islam. Here are some quotes from his recent article. Here are some quotes from Ibn Kathir, Ibn Hisham and some hadiths.This should be sufficient to prove that Allah does pray. Now Sam doesnt believe that Allah prays to Muhhamad like us but he believes that Allah prays to angels as some quotes from Ibn Kathir suggest.To whom Allah prays isnt important really . The claim that Allah prays destroys everything in islam. .HE had send me the word document but I was waiting for it to get uploaded on AI before I could use them.Here is where you can access the full article http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/allah_worships.html |
BMZ wrote: | ||
KhaliL's foolish topic is really getting into full hilarious mode now.
Amazing the FFI goon in above approaches an extreme Christian Fundy goon Sam Shamoun, who is exactly like FFI goons in his polemics. Please read and see how the pervert distorts and twists. He even leaves KhaliL far behind in writing ridiculous. Instead of coming and talking to Muslims, the FFI goon goes to Sam Shamoun for clarifying KhaliL's idiotic topic. One simple part of verse 20:14 should make all the FFI goons understand that Allah, the God Almighty wants people to worship only HIM and to establish prayers. إِنَّنِي أَنَا اللَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنَا فَاعْبُدْنِي وَأَقِمِ الصَّلَاةَ لِذِكْرِي أَقِمِ الصَّلَاةَ لِذِكْرِي says it all. I am amazed at the idiocity of FFI goons. No wonder they are! BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||
Exactly bro The most important point which is totally ignred by such stubborn goon and his likes, is simply, the word AQIM before the word Salat, i.e. ESTABLISH the pryaer, or STAND UP for the prayer, the word SALAT alone does not really mean to ESTABLISH the prayer, we need the word AQIM, or IQIAMAH, or QUM, before it, to mean ESTABLISHING the physical prayer You know man, I am sick and tired of their stubborness, these people don't deserve knowledgeable Muslims to educate them, simply they do not want to be educated because all they care about is their deceitful agenda Salam |
BMZ wrote: |
I have also posted here: http://the-real-islam.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=156
Do not write but do read when I write. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Sure, matey |
Quote: |
Can you answer this for me.
Qur?????????????????????¢??an 18:9, makes into real history, the second century myth of youths who were persecuted for their faith and went to sleep in a cave for 300 years and then woke up with no ill effects. In the original myth the hero is a Christian, but in the Koran the hero is a Muslim. My question is: in the absence of any copyright laws when the Koran was written, are you at least prepared to pay compensation to the living relatives of the author of this myth? If not, would you be in favor of going starting up a charity fund to compensate for damages of copyright infringement? IF YOU TELL ME ITS A LIE HERE IS ALL THE REFERENCES.ALL THE QURANS SAID THEY SLEPT FOR 300 + 9 YEARS THE QURAN MUST HAVE BEEN WRITEN AFTER THEY WOKE UP TO PROOF ITS AUTHENTICNESS THEN MUHAMMAD MUST HAVE BEN ALSO LIVED 300 +9 YEARS BECAUSE HE MUST HAVE WITNESSED IT TRUE OR FALSE YUSUF ALI Al-Kahf [18:9] Or dost thou reflect that the Companions of the cave and of the Inscription were wonders among Our Signs? Al-Kahf [18:10] Behold, the youths betook themselves to the cave: they said "Our Lord! Bestow on us Mercy from Thyself, and dispose of our affair for us in the right way! Al-Kahf [18:11] Then We drew (a veil) over their ears, for a number of years, in the cave, (so that they heard not): Al-Kahf [18:16] "When ye turn away from them and the things they worship other than Allah betake yourselves to the cave: your Lord will shower His mercies on you and dispose of your affair towards comfort and ease." Al-Kahf [18:17] Thou wouldst have seen the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left while they lay in the open space in the midst of the cave. Such are among the Signs of Allah: he whom Allah guides; but he whom Allah leaves to stray for him wilt thou find no protector to lead him to the Right Way. Al-Kahf [18:25] So they stayed in their cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine (more). OR IS THIS ALSO A MISCONCEPTION. |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
I was reading the link: http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2756 Is this Rajesh an FFI clown or what? Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Not sure mate, however due to the fact that there are any clowns in there, so it might be possible cheers |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Khalil opens this silly topic again assuming THHuxley is a genius and quotes:
http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2645 First, who cares who THHuxley is, who knows who THHuxley is and who THHuxley is to make such silly and stupid statements. Khalil, who pretends to be an ex-Muslim, a closet-apostate like Ali Sina, should tell everyone first if he and his "Muslim" family and friends, ever believed if Muhammad was a partner of God. Rofl. If Khalil confirms that he, his parents, his family and relatives, associated Muhammad as a partner with God, then surely it bursts his own bubble of ever being a Muslim. It would clearly indicate that he was never a Muslim. lol! Ahmed, Can you ask Khalil this question? Khalil does not realise what a pickle is he in? The entire world knows that Muslims hate and abhor associating anyone to Allah. "La sharika lahu" is the slogan of Islam. I am really amazed to see FFI lead goons writing such silly posts. BMZ |
Quote: |
Re: THHuxley on Allah-Muhammad Dualism in Islam...!!!
Postby THHuxley ????????????????????????????» Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:36 pm KhaliL FarieL wrote:Follow the link carefully. Huxley does claim Allah is praying to Muhammad. THHuxley wrote: "Shirk is a component of Muslim belief and behavior, but still not a reflection of reality. My discussion regarding Muslim shirk was an exploration of Islam's internal contradiction. But I would no more claim that Allah prays to Muhammad than I would claim that Unicorns pray to rainbows." |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Hey goons
Let me totally demolish the confused and manipulated kafirs and their fellow traitor debonked see what I wrote in my last comment to Khalil, for which I am certain he will dodge as he dodged so many tough arguments in the past I asked him: 1) Why the right hand? 2) Why not the left hand? 3) Why not both hands? Now if we think of the slaves as almost equivalent to the POWs, then the POWs should also be described as being possessed by the right hands. Let's have a look at the following verse which is talking about the POWs, and let's see if they are controlled by the right hand, or by the left hand or by both hands, obviously by both hands is the most logical: O Prophet! Say to those who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war: If Allah knows good in your hearts, He will give you better than that which has been taken from you and will forgive you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. يأيها النبي قل لمن في ايديكم من الاسري ان يعلم الله في قلوبكم خيرا يؤتكم خيرا مما اخذ منكم ويغفر لكم والله غفور رحيم [The Quran ; 8:70] -> See you ignorant and confused FFI goons, Allah is telling us about the POWs: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war I am sure the confused goons can see the slam coming So if Ma Malakat Aymanikum means, what your right hands possess, how come the POWs were described as being controlled by both hands, let's see it again: لمن في ايديكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYDIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your hands from among the prisoners of war If the right hand is the expression to express owning, controlling, enslaving others, then shouldn't the verse above be saying: لمن في ايمانكم من الاسري, Li Mn Fi AYMANIKUM Min Al-Asra, i.e. who are in your right hands from among the prisoners of war Therefore, Ma Malakat Aymanikum MUST mean, What your oaths possess, which means that a capable human took an oath before Allah that he/she will care for and support any weak human. What a mother of all slams |
BMZ wrote: |
I noticed you have added a new FFI goon in the Life Dismissal List, who holds rank #17 Lets Lie (letstalk).
Could you add the name Rajesh Kumar to the item? Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Done, mate Cheers |
Quote: |
Till date you havent been able to prove that why every single narrator would lie about age of Aisha . Also regarding robbing there is a chapter in quran. I need not say anything more. |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
I read your note on FFI, warning the weasel yeezevee to behave when writing about Prophet, Allah and Qur'aan. I must say that such filthy posters do not even deserve a response from you or any Muslim. I think you should totally ignore him. The man or the woman is not worth any attention. I am sure you know what a weasel thrives on! You might have to go ignore another Sub-Continental freak soon and place him in the dungeon. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Salam mate He acts like a jerk most of the time, I really don't want to life dismiss him as he reads my translation and alwasy advice me of any typo error, which I appreciate All he needs to do is show respect to my religion, See, showing respect does not mean that they bloody believe in it, however it seems that those filthy kafirs have no respect for anything in life, they only want to take the signs of Allah for a mockery, well, I am translating sura 45 now, and I found a message that can be explicit to such people we see on FFI, I will make a comment about it after I finish the first 20 verses in sura 45, so keep an eye Cheers |
Quote: |
Re: Mission "Terror Annihilation" Postby letstalk ????????????????????????????» Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:39 pm A Suggested Petition / Recommendations to US and other High Commands OR ANYONE IN POWER WHO "WILL"TAKE AN ACTION (I am not an experienced petition writer. Please forgive me if I cannot make the right tone. However, I know that I am making the right MEANINGS. And now I need your suggestions. You may send me PMs or write to me @ dharma.raksha.yudh@gmail.com) The US High Command United States of America (OR someone more practical) CC: High Commands of Other Super Powers Subject: Petitions-cum-Recommendations against Islam and Muslims of the World Respected Sir/Madam With regret, I am obliged to submit that terrorism has started growing "even faster" than ever instead of getting under control. To me, the reason is that so far, the root cause of terrorism, i.e. Islam and Muslims, has not seriously been looked into. Having passed 27 years of my life as a Muslim, I have now turned to Hinduism for last 03 years and know very well, the tactics Muslims use, to promote Islam, to prove other religions false, to foster terrorist activities and to dominate others by hooks or by crooks. I will now come to the point directly: 1. Since Islam has long been proven a false, unethical and "dangerous" religion, it is now time to challenge Islam openly. I suggest: a. Books questioning Islam be published and distributed all over the world in English, Hindi, Urdu, Persian and Arabic languages. b. The top Muslim Scholars be challenged for public debates, which may later be broadcasted on TV. c. Muslim preachers and sticky Islamists be arrested and given death penalty on being responsible for encouraging the so-called "Jehad", the filthiest terrorist activity. My request may sound "impractical" but I believe, if not acted upon, is sure to bring harm to the whole humanity and the lovely planet Earth. On behalf of all my loving and caring friends and myself, I submit this request expecting a positive response from your side. With kind regards, Rajesh Kumar and Friends |
Quote: |
Aksel Ankersen wrote:
I know how Muslims will respond. Qawl (قول) = speech Kalima (كلمة) = word |
Quote: |
letstalk aka Rajesh wrote in reponse to Aksel:
Postby letstalk ????????????????????????????» Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:28 pm And I know how to respond to such Muslims. According to the Rules of Arabic Language: Kalima(1)+Kalima(2)+Kalima(3)+....+Kalima(n)=Qaul Simple dude. Rajesh Kumar http://www.challenge2islam.wetpaint.com |
Quote: |
I would've though it'd be Kalimaat (كلمات). |
BMZ wrote: | ||||||
Hello, Ahmed
Read this and see how silly is Rajesh Kumar of FFI. I believe this goon has challenged you for a debate. Before you enter any debate with this goon of no calibre, take a look at the exchange between him and Aksel. http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2809
And now look at the idiotic response from Ali Sina's student Rajesh Kumar:
Aksel replied:
Aksel, a non-Muslim wrote better and has actually thrashed Rajesh Kumar. And this man is challenging you for a debate. Please tell him to go and learn Arabic and come back after seven years. lol! @Aksel_Ankersen Thank you very much for your responses. I appreciate that. Rajesh, after all, is a student of Ali Sina. lol! BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||||||
LOL bro, Aksel exposed and fuked him, mate, how did I miss that Cheers |
Quote: |
The Turmoil in the Middle East Next Post
Jun 20 My Open Letter to Barack Hussein Obama Politics Add comments Mr. Obama, I am an Iranian and I want to comment on your stance about the situation in Iran. You said you don?????????????????????¢??t want to intervene in the affairs of my country. Speaking on behalf of all Iranians we don?????????????????????¢??t want you to intervene either. To put it more emphatically we will not allow you or anyone to intervene. Election is an internal matter. What we expect is moral support. Instead you made it clear that you do not give a hoot about the people and their vote and will do business with anyone who wins the power even if that is through cheating and by force. You said that both candidates are the same because they both represent the same regime. Sir, if both were the same why would millions of Iranians risk their lives to favor one over the other? You don?????????????????????¢??t have to be a seasoned politician to know this. All you need is commonsense and a bit of intelligence. An unprecedented 85% of Iranians voted because they saw in Mousavi a glimmer of hope. Mousavi is only an excuse. He is a cut from the same cloth, a man coming out of the same nefarious establishment. However, the difference is that he has promised freedom of pen and of speech. That is all that Iranians need to topple the regime. They are looking for a crack in the dam of the Islamic Republic. Once that crack is made the dam can be demolished. Furthermore, it will be a lot easier for America to negotiate with a moderate pragmatic president in Iran than a loony who thinks he converses with the Hidden Imam. We know you don?????????????????????¢??t care about human rights or even human life. Your stance as senator on letting the babies that survive abortion die made this clear. But shouldn?????????????????????¢??t you at least care about what benefits America? When in 9/11, the Muslim terrorists killed nearly 3000 Americans, and while other Islamic nations, particularly your favorite Palestinians, cheered and danced in the streets, the Iranians were the only people in the Middle East that took candles in the streets and shed tears. I bet as American haters at that time you and your wife also were cheering and thinking that ?????????????????????¢??American chickens have come home to roost.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? That too is clear from all the apologies that you have made on behalf of America to all the terrorists of the world. The Iranians do not want the foreign countries to intervene in their affairs. What they want is recognition that they matter and that the dictators that oppress them will not be recognized as a legitimate government. Instead you made it clear that you don?????????????????????¢??t give a damn about the people and that you are prepared to give legitimacy to any thug, as long as he manages to come to power, even fraudulently and by killing the people. This does not surprise me. You yourself came to power fraudulently. There are many similarities between you and Ahmadinejad. Both of you have no experience, but have gigantic egos. Both of you have messianic complex. Both of you have never done anything worthy to show forth and yet your campaign slogan was ?????????????????????¢??Yes We Can.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? Both of you are admired by Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, the leaders of Hamas and every other thug on the planet. Both of you are favored by the gullible people and the less educated folk that unfortunately are in big supply. Both of you are pro Palestine, anti Israel and anti Zionism. But above all, both of you believe in the power of the Big Lie. Adolf Hitler, in his Mein Kampf defined the Big Lie as so ?????????????????????¢??colossal?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? that no one would believe that someone ?????????????????????¢??could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously?????????????????????¢??????????????????????. Taking their lead from Hitler, Ahmadinejad and his gang of thugs thought that if they cheat, just enough to make him the winner by a little margin, it won?????????????????????¢??t be believed. But if they make his victory look like a landslide, no one will doubt it. Your Big Lie is your claim to be eligible for the U.S. presidency. Today, I am a proud Iranian. My people did not buy Ahmadinejad?????????????????????¢??s Big Lie. They are coming to the streets, facing bullets and batons, to stand for the truth. Whereas the Americans sheeple have swallowed your big lie, hook line and sinker and the majority of them are still enamored with you, and despite the fact that you are making them bankrupt they still love you. These people are going to wake up with a rude awakening. Iran is in a great peril. Things can turn ugly overnight. A Civil war can erupt. With an emasculated America under your incompetent leadership, Russia can move in to bring ?????????????????????¢??peace,?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? and never move out. It?????????????????????¢??s not just the Iranians who will lose; America will be also a big loser. The world will lose. This is the worse time to have a rooky posing as president of the USA. The world is in a great peril and the Americans have given the rudder of their country, in the middle of the worst storm, to a pretender who acts and thinks like a juvenile and who has no more grasp of reality than a teenager. It is so pathetic to see people call you ?????????????????????¢??Mr. President,?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? when in reality you are obly a sad joke. No Mr. Obama, you don?????????????????????¢??t know what you are doing. You lied. The truth is that YOU CAN?????????????????????¢??T, and it shows. Written by Ali Sina |
Quote: |
Dear Mr. Ali Sina, I have been asked to respond to your email as no one has time to read junk mails at the White House. I have found out that you have left Iran and you are now a Canadian. You should be proud of being a Canadian instead of calling yourself an Iranian. You, therefore, cannot speak on behalf of Iranians and you are not entitled to do so. The President and I agree that the Election in Iran is an internal matter and only the Iranians should handle the issue through their legal process. Iranians are very smart and they know how to handle problems and situations. You can see how well Iran is handling her military, missile and nuclear development and has not given any chance to our Admin and others in EU to go in. Democracy was also achieved through the same process in our country and the few notable EU members. Out of chaos, comes order and we have been through that but we did not abandon our country and never ran away, like your goodself did. If you were a true and sincere Iranian, you would have stayed in your country. You should have stood up for the rights of the people, including yours. We do legitimate business with legitimate folks, who are in charge of a country. We deal with real folks but we do not listen to and deal with fictitious cyber characters, wearing Burqas, hiding behind veils and sitting in closets. We have expressed our concern and told Iran that the world (EU and us) is watching. The people of Iran do have our best wishes and moral support for their success and progress. We believe that ordinary folks like your goodself do not have any common sense and lack intelligence. Last time, our Admin listened to the Iraqis in our country and the EU, we were misled and all information provided was wrong. We went in to change a regime under the excuse and pretext of WMD and ended up in a mess. This has taught us a lesson that we should not believe in what any ex-of-anything says. Both candidates are the same because they both represent their people. We have to recognise any who is officially declared In-Charge. There is nothing that you and us can do. Of course, you reserve your right to sit and whine but you are not really there on the ground. Yes, we know they are a cut from the same cloth and so are you. We are stuck up in Afghanistan, we have had it enough in Iraq and other countries under our previous administrations. Our President has travelled a lot before becoming President. He has been on ground in his young days and is aware of what is going on in the world. That is why he gave the most vital speech in Egypt, addressed to the entire Muslim world, which was ignored by the past US regimes. Iranians are very smart people. They love their country and cannot be bought. It was easy to buy the Afghan and the Iraqi forces. This Admin does not believe in toppling governments. We remember well, when our past Admin toppled the government of Mussaddeq on the request of the Brits and destroyed the democracy which was established. We listened to them and we ended up with loss of goodwill of people of Iran. We would like to see a strong dam and we are not into destroying dams and bridges. And we are also no more in the business of introducing cracks. America's benefit is close to the heart of our President and that is why the majority of the Americans elected him. They did not believe in the foolish propaganda carried out by whiners writing from closets. We believe you do not want to see a strong Iran but you want to see it destroyed. We don't want that. Regarding your whining about 911, Iran and other Muslim countries had nothing to do with it. Our past president and the military did not do a good job, when they rained Cruise missiles aimlessly and Bin Laden and his men managed to escape. 911 was his revenge and his doing. You may stop whining about that because we are moving forward. We have made apologies to the Muslims. We do not consider Muslims terrorists. The terrorists happen to belong to Islam. We see a great potential, desire and eagerness in you to become a terrorist against Islam and the Muslims. We will not permit that and we do not consider runways as sincere to their nation, which they have abandoned. We gave legitimacy to one thug and you have seen how many people he got killed, including our own sons of soil. We do give a damn and it is evident from the runaways, living in our land and milking us. We believe that you are the greatest thug who is trying to fool people and we are also happy to note that nobody knows you on the ground. Israel is our friend. When a friend commits blunders and misbehaves, we must tell our friend to behave. We are sure your friends would do the same to you, when you misbehave. Perhaps, you do not know that many of our Jewish friends are anti-Zionists. Your letter sounds like it was written by some Jewish friend of yours. Muslims hate Adolf Hitler and so do we. Our President has lived with Muslims and knows well that Muslims hate Hitler. Your Big Lie has not convinced anyone. We have read your lies and our decent and honorable citizens have already taken you to task for your silly and useless tirade against our President. No wonder your juvenile letter was delivered to me by the White House gardener's little daughter. We strongly suggest that you leave Canada and go back to where you came from, if you are a decent and caring Iranian who believes in standing up for his country. Whining does not help. Yours was a silly but funny email and thus the reason for this reply. We hope to see you as a man of character and conviction, standing out among the protestors in Teheran and please forward a pic to the White House. Best Regards Barber |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
BMZ wrote: | ||
You read it so fast? Cheers, mate BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||
Not really, I started reading it then I cracked laughing so I posted my laughs while reading it, LOL |
BMZ wrote: |
Hey, Ahmed! Is there a way, you can get those excellent irritating emoticons like the other Con sites have? Time for my Asr prayers.
Salaams, mate BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Yeh mate we can of course, I just need to find the emotions you are talking about, can you show me a sample? cheers |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
I will need a bit of time to make this happen mate, just be patient with me and if I forget, please remind me
cheers |
BMZ wrote: |
Hello, Ahmed
I refer to the FFI link: http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2670 I was reading about the troll LCD's whining, a jerk with massive hatred in his own heart, talking to the moderators in 'report a troll', complaining that another member hijacked his thread. |
BMZ wrote: |
The ignoramus does not know or prefers not to know that anti-Semitism originated and spread from the Christian lands in Europe and also showed it's ugly face in America.
I was glad to see some Kafirs coming to your defence and Ixolite gave him a one weak ban. It is so hilarious that it makes one laugh his/her ass off. lol! Salaams, mate BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
Dear all,
Here is the reply to Ali Sina's email addressed to President Obama. The reply was sent by the President's barber, which is self-explanatory and is appended below for everyone's reading pleasure. The barber has assured me that the reply can be posted on any website, freely. |
Quote: |
We deal with real folks but we do not listen to and deal with fictitious cyber characters, wearing Burqas, hiding behind veils and sitting in closets. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
Did Obama's Barber really write this? This line:
Sounds like something you would write BMZ. What's your source? |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
That forum is only visible to logged in members, have you set up a new account at your favourite cesspit/pig-sty i.e. FFI?
Coming from someone who posted links to Stormfront as part of his refutation of the Holocaust, I believe that's a bit rich. |
Rigel wrote: | ||||||
The source is the internet. |
BMZ wrote: |
Also, not accepting the uproven and unsubstantiated figure of six million killed, does not make anyone an anti-Semitic. |
BMZ wrote: | ||||||||
Right, bro The source is the internet. http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/20/my-open-letter-to-barack-hussein-obama/ Salaams BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||
Did Obama's Barber really write this? This line:
Sounds like something you would write BMZ. What's your source? |
BMZ wrote: | ||||||
Aksel, Aksel I thought you had a good sense of humour. Chill out, mate. Even the Presidential Barber would not care to respond to Ali Sina's idiotic mail. It was just plain fun, mate. Ali Sina writes so much junk and stuff and I thought it would be fun to do this for the clown. Please let the FFI goons know that I wrote it, not the Presidential barber. Ali Sina is notoriously famous for writing emails to himself and answers himself under various accounts. Did you enjoy that? BMZ |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
Perhaps not, but giving credit to the writing of the posters on an obvious Jew-hate-site like Stormfront is anti Semitic. If I tout the opinions of Ali Sina does that make me an anti-Islamic? |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||||||||
Ok thanks, it was a pretty funny letter. |
Quote: |
Re: Rajesh vs. Ahmed Bahgat
Postby expozIslam ????????????????????????????» Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:04 pm "Even if AB wishes to, he cannot because he is known publicly and if he apostates, we know what is going to happen. So he has no choice but continue to appear dumb. |
Quote: |
Quran claims in 4:82 that had it not been the Book of God, there would have been a lot of contradictions in it. And there are contradictions in it. Read the following verses in contrast:
41:11 vs. 21:30 54:19 vs. 69:6 and 69:7 42:31 vs. 5:55 and 9:71 45:14 and 109:6 vs. 9:5 and 9:29 52:35 vs. 19:9 and 19:67 57:22 vs. 53:39, 44:3 and 44:4 63:5 vs. 4:107 69:35 and 69:37 vs. 37:62 to 37:66 So Quran is proving itself to be NOT FROM GOD. Waiting for your kind response, Your well-wisher Rajesh Kumar |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
Ok thanks, it was a pretty funny letter. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Your banning on FFI was unjustified, If they will ban those who call others peadophile, then they should also ban those who call the Muslims paedophile worshippers, or what do you think? Salam |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Your banning on FFI was unjustified, If they will ban those who call others peadophile, then they should also ban those who call the Muslims paedophile worshippers, or what do you think? Salam |
BMZ wrote: |
a person like Aksel Ankersen, who is a young man of substance and has a noble soul |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: |
Ali Sina has been libelling Obama for perhaps 12 months now, but President Obama is yet to notice. |
skynightblaze wrote: |
Reply to the questions that Rajesh asked. Tell us how many days were the people of AD destroyed? 1 or 7-8 days. |
Aksel_Ankersen wrote: | ||
Ah, you're too kind BMZ... I'm no better than an average man off the street, or forum. Besides, they only gave me a temporary ban. |
Thumbnail, click to enlarge. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Here is something for you bro BMZ that I posted on FFI for bin lyin:
http://www.forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=2908&p=48585#p48585 |
BMZ wrote: | ||||
Great! So that is what he was really hiding all the time the "pubic" beard. lol! Roflmao! I think he was nonstop asking for this. lol! Could you please post this in the Slam Dunk topic on both sites? Salaams, mate BMZ |
BMZ wrote: |
Forgot to add, Ahmed. Can you please put that Holiday Inn towel on the head? It will be awesome!
Salaams BMZ |
Thumbnail, click to enlarge. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||
Like this:
|
Quote: |
I believe that it took the ex-Muslims a long time to renounce Islam and that is what I have noticed, looking at various
closet-apostates and others here. My questions: 1. How does an ex-Muslim instantly start believing in things which he/she did not believe and never accepted? For example, the ex-Muslim straight away acknowledges Israel, defends the actions of Israel, believes in the holocaust and the figure of six million Jews killed? 2. Most of the ex-Muslims are closet-apostates and they have not declared that even to their loved ones. And if any expires, he/she will be laid to rest according to Islamic rites led by a Maulana and attended by Muslims. It would be like an "Ashaddal-Azaab" (Severe punishment) for the expired ex-Muslim to be subjected again to. What have the ex-Muslims done to prevent this from happening? Would appreciate an honest and frank to-the-point reply. BMZ |
Quote: |
Salvation is of the Jews
John 4:22 (Amplified Bible) 22You [Samaritans] do not know what you are worshiping [you worship what you do not comprehend]. We do know what we are worshiping [we worship what we have knowledge of and understand], for [after all] salvation comes from [among] the Jews. |
Quote: |
Dear Muslims, why does Allah describe himself as the best deceiver in: * Quran 3:54 * Quran 7:99 * Quran 8:30 * Quran 10:21 * Quran 13:42 http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Makir Now now, before you shout me down with "you're ignoring the context!" I must say it is irrelevant, because: (a)You have a [supposedly] all-knowing being telling you he is the BEST deceiver. This is not a conditional statement (ie. it does not matter what the situation is). (b) We can see in Quran 8:43-44 that Allah deceived Muslims (indeed Uswa Hasana himself!) (c)Allah created Christianity by his deception. So my question to you is, if an admitted "best liar in existence" tells you that he's not lying to you - he may even swear by the moon and the stars or somesuch.......would you believe him? How can you trust someone like that? Thanks! |
Quote: |
@ Sanitarium
Hello Sani, My nephew Chiclets has asked me to respond to your post. What is the Arabic word for deceive? And write out the following transliterated in Arabic: "They deceive God." Cheers BMZ |
Quote: |
Does not matter, bhateejay.
She can consult the entire FFI and WikiIslam team and come back with an answer. She can bring all the FFI goons here. I did not ask her to write Arabic here. I asked her to transliterate. If she does not know Arabic, then she should shut up, bhateejay. Let us see what she comes up with. I want her to withdraw the bullshit she wrote and apologise for the balderdash she wrote. Cheers BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
What I found after 9 years debating on the net, dear brother, that the kafirs will never concede their ignorance and arrogance, therefore let them sink into it
Take care |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Indeed, Ahmed That is why, after making the point, I have stopped discussing that silly and idiotic OP of Sanitarium. Salaams BMZ |
Rigel wrote: | ||||
Alhamdulillah! |
Rigel wrote: |
Were you following that silly thread by Sanitarium, Rigel?
There was an influx of FFI goons in the topic but almost all fell silent and left Sani away. Salaams BMZ Salam brother BMZ, Yes I been reading that thread and many others but I never liked it. I feel they do it to keep you folks buzy within their crap. Sani n goons are nobody, I think no sane person be it from any religion will accept their crap. Salaams, Rigel You can't hammer these FFI goons on their cesspoool site, but at Topix, we can hammer them. That is the only advantage. BMZ takecare! |
Quote: |
وَمَكَرُوا مَكْرًا كُبَّارًا And they planned a tremendous plan. [Al Quran ; 71:22] |
Quote: |
Matthew 27:
11Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. |
Quote: |
Matthew 27:11-14 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
Jesus Faces the Governor 11 Now Jesus stood before the governor.(A) "Are You the King of the Jews?" the governor asked Him. Jesus answered, "You have said it." "Matthew 27:11-14 (Young's Literal Translation) 11And Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor did question him, saying,`Art thou the king of the Jews!' And Jesus said to him,`Thou sayest.'" |
Quote: |
078.033
YUSUFALI: And voluptuous women of equal age; PICKTHAL: And voluptuous women of equal age; SHAKIR: And voluptuous women of equal age; Notice all three translations say voluptuous. |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Most of the FFI goons and other freaks point out the following:
I have all the translations at home with me and the word VOLUPTUOUS does not exist in the above translations. Can anyone provide link to any junk site that provides the above misinformation? BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||||
I think man that the words Hoor Ein, should be translated simply as Beautiful women, nothing more and noothing less Take care |
Quote: |
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." |
Quote: |
John 14:7-9 Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us."Yashua said to him, "Have I been with you such a long time, and do you not know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. Why do you ask then,'Show us the Father?'
John 9:37 And Yahushua unto him, Thou hast both seen Him, and it is he that talketh with thee. |
Quote: |
Luke 23 Pilate asked Yahushua,'Are you the king of the Jews?''...Yes, it is as you say...' Yahushua replied." |
Quote: |
Hebrews 1 (New International Version)
Hebrews 1 The Son Superior to Angels 1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. 5For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father"? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son"? 6And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him." 7In speaking of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire." 8But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy." 10He also says, "In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. 11They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment. 12You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end." 13To which of the angels did God ever say, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet"? 14Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation? |
Quote: |
Hebrews 1 (New International Reader's Version)
Hebrews 1 The Son Is Greater Than the Angels 1 In the past, God spoke to our people through the prophets. He spoke at many times. He spoke in different ways. 2 But in these last days, he has spoken to us through his Son. He is the one whom God appointed to receive all things. God made everything through him. 3 The Son is the gleaming brightness of God's glory. He is the exact likeness of God's being. He uses his powerful word to hold all things together. He provided the way for people to be made pure from sin. Then he sat down at the right hand of the King, the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became higher than the angels. The name he received is more excellent than theirs. 5 God never said to any of the angels, "You are my Son. Today I have become your Father." ?????????????????????¢??(Psalm 2:7) Or, "I will be his Father. And he will be my Son." ?????????????????????¢??(2 Samuel 7:14; 1 Chronicles 17:13) 6 God's first and only Son is over all things. When God brings him into the world, he says, "Let all of God's angels worship him." ?????????????????????¢??(Deuteronomy 32:43) 7 Here is something else God says about the angels. "God makes his angels to be like winds. He makes those who serve him to be like flashes of lightning." ?????????????????????¢??(Psalm 104:4) 8 But here is what he says about the Son. "You are God. Your throne will last for ever and ever. Your kingdom will be ruled by what is right. 9 You have loved what is right and hated what is evil. So your God has placed you above your companions. He has filled you with joy by pouring the sacred oil on your head." ?????????????????????¢??(Psalm 45:6,7) 10 He also says, "Lord, in the beginning you made the earth secure. You placed it on its foundations. The heavens are the work of your hands. 11 They will pass away. But you remain. They will all wear out like a piece of clothing. 12 You will roll them up like a robe. They will be changed as a person changes clothes. But you remain the same. Your years will never end." ?????????????????????¢??(Psalm 102:25-27) 13 God never said to an angel, "Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your control." ?????????????????????¢??(Psalm 110:1) 14 All angels are spirits who serve. God sends them to serve those who will receive salvation. New International Reader's Version (NIRV) |
BMZ wrote: |
Just for info:
Here is a response to some polemic Jesus Freaks and ex-Muslims and other goons,: Prophet taught and explained Qur'aan. The key words are 'Marry women" in Qur'aan. There are no such verses telling men or prophet to "Marry little girls". lol! Prophet's own daughter Fatima, born in 605, was married to Ali when she was about 18 in 623 AD. Ayesha was also born in 605 AD. Both were almost the same age. If as alleged, prophet had married Ayesha at six or 9, Fatima would have asked, "Dad! What are you doing?" lol! So, the goons here should forget these two garbage ahaadith which are similar to the garbage in the New Testament and instead read Qur'aan, which clearly tells to marry the girls when they have attained adulthood and mental strength. A little girl may get her periods but she is not considered an adult. Another point is that Ayesha's parents, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, prophet's other wives, companions and the people of the tribe had not grumbled and had not accused him at all. Even his enemies, the Jews, Christians and the pagan Meccans and nobody else reported that Muhammad married a little girl. Nobody discussed the age of Ayesha and here we have Jesus freaks and other non-Muslim goons talking about it based on a rotten hadith. Ayesha was present with other ladies at the Battle of Uhud, when boys under fourteen were turned back as Prophet never allowed anybody under fourteen in the battles and she was not married to him then. Thus she would have been 17-18 when she became Prophet's wife. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Salam bro
I think the problem may be related to your computer, try to delete the cookies and temp internet files and let me know please, however your post above was posted Take care |
BMZ wrote: |
Salaams, mate
Have you completely read the translation of Qur'aan by Free Minds? Who are these folks? Did you find the translation good? I have been asked to comment on that translation but I do not have time to read and comment on it. Please let me know. BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Salam dear brother I read most of it, it is not that bad actually, but they committed fatal mistakes, in addition to that, the man who translated it "Layth" the owner of Free Minds cannot be trused because he promotes that Hajj should be to Jerusalem, for him those who do Hajj in Meccah are idol worshippers, so I have to dismiss him along with his translation, that wont stop me though from supporting anything right he says or anyone for that matter And possibly that is why I have to dismiss his trnalsation because it have to serve it purpose through what he wrongly promotes about Islam He will never hate hadith as much as I do, yet I did not deny the practical sunnah that we inherited, he seems to deny it Salam mate |
Quote: |
Genesis 18:11 (New Living Translation)
Abraham and Sarah were both very old by this time, and Sarah was long past the age of having children. |
Quote: |
Genesis 20 (New Living Translation)
Abraham Deceives Abimelech 1 Abraham moved south to the Negev and lived for a while between Kadesh and Shur, and then he moved on to Gerar. While living there as a foreigner, 2 Abraham introduced his wife, Sarah, by saying, ?????????????????????¢??She is my sister.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? So King Abimelech of Gerar sent for Sarah and had her brought to him at his palace. 3 But that night God came to Abimelech in a dream and told him, ?????????????????????¢??You are a dead man, for that woman you have taken is already married!?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? 4 But Abimelech had not slept with her yet, so he said, ?????????????????????¢??Lord, will you destroy an innocent nation? 5 Didn?????????????????????¢??t Abraham tell me, ?????????????????????¢??She is my sister?????????????????????¢??? And she herself said, ?????????????????????¢??Yes, he is my brother.?????????????????????¢?? I acted in complete innocence! My hands are clean.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? 6 In the dream God responded, ?????????????????????¢??Yes, I know you are innocent. That?????????????????????¢??s why I kept you from sinning against me, and why I did not let you touch her. 7 Now return the woman to her husband, and he will pray for you, for he is a prophet. Then you will live. But if you don?????????????????????¢??t return her to him, you can be sure that you and all your people will die.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? 8 Abimelech got up early the next morning and quickly called all his servants together. When he told them what had happened, his men were terrified. 9 Then Abimelech called for Abraham. ?????????????????????¢??What have you done to us??????????????????????¢?????????????????????? he demanded. ?????????????????????¢??What crime have I committed that deserves treatment like this, making me and my kingdom guilty of this great sin? No one should ever do what you have done! 10 Whatever possessed you to do such a thing??????????????????????¢?????????????????????? 11 Abraham replied, ?????????????????????¢??I thought, ?????????????????????¢??This is a godless place. They will want my wife and will kill me to get her.?????????????????????¢?? 12 And she really is my sister, for we both have the same father, but different mothers. And I married her. 13 When God called me to leave my father?????????????????????¢??s home and to travel from place to place, I told her, ?????????????????????¢??Do me a favor. Wherever we go, tell the people that I am your brother.?????????????????????¢???????????????????????¢?????????????????????? |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Quote: |
BMZ,
Muhammad thought that Christians held to a Trinity consisting of Mary. Which is not, nor has ever been, the case. Apparently it is in the Quran The Angel Gabriel would have known that, therefore would not have passed on the notion to Muhammad. To put it another way, it would not be in the Quran! |
Quote: |
EXCHANGING SALAAM WITH NON-MUSLIMS
The Prophet said: "Do not greet the Jews and the Christians with salaam." However, if they salaam first, we may reply by saying "wa alaykum" (and upon you)." (Bukhari and Muslim) im sick of debating muslims that dont know their faith |
Quote: |
واذا سمعوا اللغو اعرضوا عنه وقالوا لنا اعمالنا ولكم اعمالكم سلام عليكم لانبتغي الجاهلين |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
That must be added to the slam dunk show, mate |
Quote: |
Dr Bum
Read the verse again, it was what Ibrahim said to his father and family, you confused Cheers |
Quote: |
skynightblaze wrote:
Is there something called as freedom of speech in the muslim world? |
Quote: |
Ahmed wrote
Haven't I told you before, kid, to address me as Dad? Well, I am sure you realized that a decent father like me cannot be the dad of a manipulated ex cows, elephants and rats worshipper teen like you, so thanks for that Now, I am not living in a Muslim world, confused kid, I am living in a kafir world, consequently, i apply your kafir laws on you kafirs, so let me fix your confusion, what you are after is not the freedom of speech, as I appreciate the freedom of speech, what you are after is the freedom of attack, which canot be appreciated whatsoever, however it can only be merited, so you attack when you have reasons to attack. For example: I attack the main stream Muslims because of the rubbish found on their own man made books, but you attack me because of that rubbish found in their man made books, consequently you are for me an enemy of my religion like them, and consequently both of you will have absoutely no mercy offered, and the only reply both of you will get is to shove your man made rubbish books up your filthy arses. See, that is what I call freedom of speech. |
Quote: |
XYZ Wrote: Interesting point. However, I think that Paul had some strange views about the relationship between his savior and his god. Didn't you read where he called Jesus his "great God and Savior"? |
Quote: |
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men?????????????????????¢??the testimony given in its proper time. And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle?????????????????????¢??I am telling the truth, I am not lying?????????????????????¢??and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles. |
Quote: |
Titus 2:13 (Today's New International Version)
13 while we wait for the blessed hope?????????????????????¢??the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, Titus 2:13 (New International Version - UK) 13 while we wait for the blessed hope?????????????????????¢?? the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, Titus 2:13 (Worldwide English (New Testament)) 13All this is while we wait and hope to see the one who brings blessing. We are waiting for our great God to come in Jesus Christ. He is the One who will save us. He is wonderful! Titus 2:13 (Wycliffe New Testament) 13 abiding the blessed hope and the coming of the glory of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13 (21st Century King James Version) 13looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ, |
Quote: |
:Titus 2:13 (Contemporary English Version)
13We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. Footnotes: 1. Titus 2:13 the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ: Or "the glorious return of our great God and our Savior Jesus Christ" or "the return of Jesus Christ, who is the glory of our great God and Savior." |
BMZ wrote: |
Everyone knows that I dislike Paul, the self-loathing sinner.
I have something new for all to think about and bring to the attention of polemic Christians: "Galatians 1:7-8 If we or an angel from heaven should preach to you any message other than that which we preached to you, let him be accursed." Another version: "Galatians 1:8 (New International Version) But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" Now, please mark the time, the period and keep in mind the person who said that. Question: Who were the people, who then stand eternally condemned? Answer: All those people who created various Doctrines, Trinity and the Triune God because that was not preached by Paul and those with him. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Done:
http://www.forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=6015&p=105270#p105270 |
Quote: |
AhmedBahgat the Messenger gets message from that Bum Muslim Zombie
yah.. yadi..yadi.. that bum writes as if Quran is NOT a created doctrine, Where do you guys think Quran came from?? tell him to jump in to a well without water and break his legs.. So he can spend his time walking on crutches Bum yeezevee |
BMZ wrote: |
I refer to the topic:
http://www.forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=595&start=360 You posted the pic of your sweet son. I don't have to worry about the foolish remarks from goons like Wootah, yeezevee, charleslemartel and Cassie but I find the Clown, the FFI Janitor aka Towelhead extremely idiotic, when he wrote: "Your daughter is very cute and I'll bet she's really wonderful. Sincere congratulations!!!" lol! You really handle these incompetent goons well. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
LOL mate, indeed, ugly was so drunk, but you know it is sunday morning |
Quote: |
13 But others in the crowd ridiculed them, saying, ?????????????????????¢??They?????????????????????¢??re just drunk, that?????????????????????¢??s all!?????????????????????¢??????????????????????
14 Then Peter stepped forward with the eleven other apostles and shouted to the crowd, ?????????????????????¢??Listen carefully, all of you, fellow Jews and residents of Jerusalem! Make no mistake about this. 15 These people are not drunk, as some of you are assuming. Nine o?????????????????????¢??clock in the morning is much too early for that. |
Quote: |
8:39 just like 2:193 says that the opressor must be fought until he desists from his opression. This means that the phrase "religion should be only for Allah" has nothing to do with erasing other forms of worship.
On the meaning of "oppression", since you are bent on denying the Truth and will dispute anything coming from God, read Hajj:39-40 and finish your education with Mumtahina:8-9. |
Quote: |
I guess you must have been really exhausted with lying because I see now you are denying the meaning of simple english sentences. "Fight them until religion of Allah is everywhere" . What does this mean to you? |
BMZ wrote: |
Eagle is a very intelligent and knowledgeable Muslim, who is handling the FFI goons very well.
I enjoyed reading his post addressed to the Towel-head: http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=6048&start=60 Ahmed, Are you aware that yeezevee is an Israeli? I read it in a short article by a genuine ex-Muslim, whose name I won't reveal here. I will PM you later after finding that article. Salaams BMZ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: | ||
Indeed mate, Eagle is a good Muslim and he is slam dunking those agnorant goons for some time now, may Allah bless him Yeh mate, I suspected it since day one, but I really careless about that, the race or country of anyone good or bad makes absolutely no difference to me. An enemy is an enemy regardless where they came from Take care mate |
Quote: |
Moreover, if you Quranists solidly belief in ONLY the Quran and refer to literally nothing else, then I can bring contradictions and inconsistencies in the Quran, in which Quranists (according to his/her criteria) would NOT be able to solve, without referring to the authentic Hadiths and historical background from Hadiths.
So, the real "Mushriks" are people like you, who lack knowledge of Islam, and then make claims with no proof. |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Salam mate
The link does not show the the thread, can you check it please |
Quote: |
skynightblaze:
We will be the same when it comes to quran. You will publicly admit that you have understood the true meaning of quran and were a kafir all your life and you will hence return to the deen by accepting hadiths. I wish you become hadith only muslim. |
Quote: |
Got it! Sex with slave is ok if "unforced". |
BMZ wrote: | ||
Wrong! That is absurd and nonsense. That is not what the verses say. Ibn Ishaq, the poster, quoted correctly to show that people were told not to force slave girls or maid servants against their will, into prostitution. Verse 24:33 is connected to 24:32 in that section and both must be read together. Only then one will get the right message. Let me do a simple translation:
So, the message is that those who cannot afford to marry should exercise self-restraint and control their desires. They should not go forcing the poor girls and fuck them against their will or lead them into prostitution. This verse forbids forcing girls into prostitution. And if one forces a defenseless girl, who wishes to remain noble and chaste, into prostitution against her will, then Allah will be merciful and forgiving to her but Allah will never forgive the man who forced her into prostitution. That man will be eternally damned! Let pimps beware! lol! You will note that Jesus and Christianity neither addressed nor tackled such issues. Now, if one can read and understand all articles, one must be able to understand what I explained in English. lol! Good night BMZ |
Quote: |
Today the Islamic Qur'an (Koran) is made up of only 114 chapters called Suras and then sub-divided into verses. In the days of Muhammad's wife A'isha, one chapter of the Koran (the Sura) had about 200 verses. Shortly after her death, this Surah had only 73 verses. Muslims say that 127 verses of the original text were lost and never found. Also, After the sudden death of Muhammad, Zaid-ibn-Thabith was ordered to compile and write down the Qur'an (Mishkat'ul Masabih). It is attested that at least three revelations were left out. One of these, according to Muhammad's wife, A'isha, with whom he resided at this death, was kept under their bed at the time of Muhammad's death, but was eaten by a domestic animal (a goat). When Uthman compiled the Qur'an, the missing verses could not be found. One of them was called the verse of Stoning, and is said to have contained the order to stone a man or woman who had committed adultery....This verse is said to have been part of the original Qur'an. Many early authorities say so, and what is very significant is that the first Caliphs punished adulterers by stoning; this is still the penalty prescribed in Muslim law-books, whereas the Qur'an (Surah 24:2) prescribed a hundred stripes." ("Islam" by A. Guillaume, p. 191). References: Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. page 269; Sunan Ibn Majah, page 626; Ibn Qutbah, Tawil Mukhtalafi 'l-Hadith (Cairo: Maktaba al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyya. 1966) page 310; As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol. 2. page 13:
Another tradition states (Sahih Muslim, page 912, Mishkat II, page 534 and others): "Umar said:'Verily Allah sent Muhammad with truth and revealed the Book to him. Out of the verses, the Almighty Allah revealed. there was the verse of stoning to death. The Messenger of Allah stoned to death (Sahih Muslim, page 920) and after him we also stoned to death: And in the BOOK OF GOD stoning to death is a truth against one, who commits adultery. The verse was thus:'The old man and the old woman, if they have committed adultery, they stoned them both assuredly.' " This passage too, is not in the Qur'an. See other corruptions of the Qur'an here. Many Hadith, including Sahih Bukhari give proof that Stoning was ordered and practiced by Muhammed, for example: Volume 2, Book 23, Number 413: Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar : The Jew brought to the Prophet a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque." |
BMZ wrote: |
Another Ignorant Fool! Looks like an FFI goon. lol!
That must have been some very intelligent, learned and scholarly Jewish goat, who chewed only a line to save the Jews from being stoned. LMAO It looks like the goat entered the room, looked for the book under the bed, picked it up, opened the page and chewed out only one particular line. How silly and idiotic is that! If the goat had eaten or chewed up, what then about the reciters and many others, who had memorized the entire Qur'an? You wrote: "In the days of Muhammad's wife A'isha, one chapter of the Koran (the Sura) had about 200 verses. Shortly after her death, this Surah had only 73 verses. Muslims say that 127 verses of the original text were lost and never found." Which Surah? You did not mention at all. Read another Hadith on the subject, where the Jews would bring the accused and asked the prophet for punishment and prophet asked them what was the punishment according to Torah? He asked them to follow what was prescribed for the adultery, etc. Since you talk about Hadith, go and read this: "When a question was asked if Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam,(stoning to death) before or after the revelation of Sura An-Nur, the answer given by 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa was: "I don't know".(See Sahih Al-Bukhari 8:804 and 8:824). So, this Hadith confirms that the Prophet never carried out Rajam. So, there goes the story of the goat and rajam, debunked and dismissed. That is why I recommend that Muslims should check a Hadith under the light and shade of Qur'aan. Also, instead of being a Hadith freak, they should read and understand Qur'aan, which is the authority Supreme. Surah 24 Noor confirms the punishment by 100 stripes. That is all. |
Poster wrote: |
You mean he (Muhammad) made up his own versions of the stories which totally contradict the earlier versions? |
BMZ wrote: |
No. |
Poster wrote: |
According to this verse the old stories are true. 010.094 |
BMZ wrote: |
No. |
Poster wrote: |
YUSUFALI: If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. |
BMZ wrote: |
The key point in above is: "as to what We have revealed unto thee,".
So, whatever was not revealed, was not true. The verse 10:94 is part of three sections of verses starting from 10:71 to 10:102 and in these sections, stories of Noah, Moses, Pharoah and Yonah, were being told. And he was told that if he had any doubts, he could go and check with the people who knew these stories as they did have them in their book. Thus he was to believe only what was revealed about the past. He was not supposed to believe anything that wasn't revealed to him. Another interesting point is in verse 10:68, which I will translate to make the message easy to understand: "They say: "Allah has taken a son. Glory be to Him. He does not need anything. All in the heavens and the earth belong to Him. Do you have any proof to support this? And you talk about Allah what you do not know?" So, 10:94 is not applicable to the biblical story of Jesus as that story was not at revealed because it was not true. Only true stories and events were revealed to Muhammad. Thus, we will never check with Christians, "Hey, is Jesus really the son of God?" For we know that is not true. We will also never check with the Christians, "Hey, was Jesus the son of Mary?", because it was revealed to the Prophet that Jesus was the son of Mary. |
Quote: |
From http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Allah:_I_sent_J...
In Qur'anic verses 21:91 & 66:12, Allah says that he breathed into Maryam's (Mary's) vagina in order to conceive Isa (the Islamic Jesus). When looking at the tafsir's we find that Allah did this by sending the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel) to complete this task. The word "Farj" is used in this verse to indicate where Allah/Jibreel blew, and Farj means "vagina." The verse uses "Farjaha" which means "her vagina." Qur'an 21:91 * Literal: "her genital parts , so We blew into her"[1] * Malik: "who guarded her chastity, We breathed into her of Our Spirit"'[1] * George Sale: "who preserved her virginity, and into whom We breathed of our spirit" [1] * JM Rodwell: "who kept her maidenhood, and into whom we breathed of our spirit" [1] * Asad: "AND [remember] her who guarded her chastity, whereupon We breathed into her of Our spirit" [1] * Tafsir Ibn Kathir: "And Maryam, the daughter of `Imran who guarded her chastity. And We breathed into it [her garment] through Our Ruh)[66:12]." [2] Qur'an 66:12 * Literal: "her genital parts between her legs, so We blew in it" [3] * Malik: "and into whose womb We breathed of Our spirit" [3] * George Sale: "and into whose womb we breathed of our spirit" [3] * JM Rodwell: "and into whose womb we breathed of our spirit" [3] * Asad: "whereupon We breathed of Our spirit into that [which was in her womb]" [3] * Tafsir, Ibn Kathir: "(And We breathed into it (private part) through Our Ruh,) " [4] Many translators of these verses were likely embarassed to translate the word into its real meaning so they used alternate and sometimes widely varying meanings that appeared more 'holy' such as seen in the following versions: * Yusuf Ali: "who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit" [3] * Pickthall: "therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit" [3] * Hilali/Khan: "the daughter of Imran who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (the sleeve of her shirt or her garment) through Our Rooh" [3] |
Quote: |
Poster wrote:
In Qur'anic verses 21:91 & 66:12, Allah says that he breathed into Maryam's (Mary's) vagina in order to conceive Isa (the Islamic Jesus). When looking at the tafsir's we find that Allah did this by sending the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel) to complete this task. The word "Farj" is used in this verse to indicate where Allah/Jibreel blew, and Farj means "vagina." The verse uses "Farjaha" which means "her vagina." |
Quote: |
Qur'aan does not deny. It refutes the misinformation and the misreports written by men who wrote the Bible.
Just look at what the biblical Jacob said in the Bible about Joseph's dream and look at what Jacob said beautifully in Surah 12, according to Qur'aan. So, Qur'aan refuted what was passed on wrongly, corrected it and gave the true message showing what had actually happened. |
Quote: |
Qur'aan has not at all re-written the Jewish Tanakh, the Christians' OT and the NT. Not at all.
Qur'aan ignores most of the junk and stuff in the Bible as it considers it not worth addressing. It only refutes all misinformation, wrong claims and other false reports in both the Bibles. Also, you will not find any obscenities like Lot and his daughters, Genesis 38, Killings carried out by God, Moses and Joshua, etc. |
Quote: |
They say every one must convert to Islam or pay a tax or be killed. Is that not claiming to be GOD? |
Quote: |
And once again I will ask this question, and I need to know from you as to how fables & fairytales woven by men inserted into the Koran when this same anecdote can be found in the Jewish Midrash?
Here is the verse: 21:68-69 - They said, "Burn him and protect your gods, If ye do (anything at all)!" We said, "O Fire! be thou cool, and (a means of) safety for Abraham!" I will not leave you alone until you come up with a sensible rebuttal. In fact I will begin showing you other examples of plagiarism by the authors of the Koran. |
Quote: |
"The word for girl is bent. The word is composed of three letters which are Ba, noon and Ta. When these three letters are connected to each other without diacritical marks they will appear identical. They will look like three adjacent crescent facing upwards. The difference between them is nothing. Only the diacritical marks can differentiate between them. Here is how is works:
If you put one point below any one of them, it's "Ba" If you put two points below any one of them, it's "ya" If you put one point above any one of them, it's "non" If you put two points above any one of them, it's "Ta" If you put three points above any one of them, it's "Tha" " |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
No worries mate:
http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=7796&p=124051#p124051 |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
And if you put dummah over the M and dummah over the R and sikoon at the end, she becomes Moron |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
And if you put dummah over the M and dummah over the R and sikoon at the end, she becomes Moron |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Salam mate
where I can find to be said by Malik about Ibn Ishaq? Cheers |
Quote: |
Muhammad wrote letters to the kings of other lands and those letters were started with Salamun ala manil-tabaa al-huda which essentially means peace be upon those who are truly guided.
Might I ask you what it means truly guided Who are these truly guided people? It does mean Muslims only. So even to the kings, Muhammad did not initiate the greeting peace be upon you. He meant his greeting is only intended to the guided people (Muslims). Muhammad said to his Muslim followers to say salam to those you know and do not know. All Muslims were NOT known each other in Medina. But the Jews and polytheists among the Medinites were well known to Muslims. Do you get the point? Does not it make sense now? |
Quote: |
The Cat wrote:My personal opinion is that the former prophet lived in the al-Ula (thalmudic Dedan)/Mada'in Saleh region and that he was Salman The Persian, whom has a shrine over there. But he's most probably not the same as the warring Medina one. We have testimonies that he was alive and feared at least still by 640. It's noteworthy that we have no inscription mentioning this Mhmd before around Marwan, just to spread like wildfire right after.
Mada'in Saleh was then rather known as Hegra or Hijir, names strangely recalling that of the Hegira (departing, splitting). It looks like the Medina Charter, dated 622, is the true beginning of what we now call Islam. Mecca is nowhere in sight until 710. |
Quote: |
EM wrote:
Since you do not believe in Sira, Hadises, and whatever there is, how do you interpret the Koran in its correct context? |
Quote: |
Your wacko! If GOD is one then the term oneness of GOD must apply to Him. In explaing GOD in the simple term GOD is one is the explaination of man. For man is one. In the term-man is created in the image of GOD implies that GOD is a man. But GOD is not a man! So your simple term that GOD is one does not apply to that simplistic term. So you are not allowing GOD to be GOD, LO! |
Quote: |
EM wrote:
Your argument has two flaws concerning this verse: 5:51 - "O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk. " 1) It does not specify which Jews & Christians, therefore your interpretation of this verse is incorrect. 2) There isn't any evidence of Christian involvement with the enemies of Islam during the early years of animosity between Mohammad and the pagans. It was the Christian king of Abasynia (Negus, who provided assylum to the muslims during the years of persecution. 3) Neither tafsirs - Ibn Abbas or Jalalayn collaborate with what you are saying. |
Quote: |
Hello, Paralyzed American and Western minds
All of you are Drama Queens! The so-called "raping of a wife" is a Western sickness. We don't have this sickness. Your nation?????????????????????¢??s shared values, including belief in gender equality and the right to self????????????????????????????determination, have always been under threat from your own people. Read this: http://www.paralumun.com/issuesrapestats.htm You guys lead the world in rapes and nations even if combined can not match you. An extract from the site: AMERICAN RAPE STATISTICS Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault.(NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.) Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a rape or sexual assault.(National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.) The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States wereraped last year.(Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.) SILENT VICTIMS : One of the most startling aspects of sex crimes is how many go unreported. The most common reasons given by women for not reporting these crimes are the belief that it is a private or personal matter and the fear of reprisal from the assailant. Approximately 28% of victims are raped by husbands or boyfriends, 35% by acquaintances, and 5% by other relatives.(Violence against Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1994) |
Quote: |
Parables in Quran and Senseless meanings Muslims Extract Out Of Them
Religious scriptures are full of Parables & fables and Quran is no exception to that rule. Both narrate a simplified version of a story put in few words as a prose or verse and often supposed to illustrates a moral/religious lesson. In fact the word "Parables" appears in Quran in the following verses 13.017, 14.024, 14.025, 24.035, and 59.021 and there are many other verses in Quran that can be categorized as "parable". The difference between Fables and Parables is while parables generally feature human characters as an analogy to tell a story and set up a rule for the moral guidance of the followers; the fables use animals, plants, inanimate objects, and natural forces as characters. Here in this thread let us figure out Parables and fables and their uses to Humanity in particular to nominal Muslims and Muhammad following Muslims. So let us start with verses that has the word "Parable" and explore rest of the Quran what I think are nothing more and nothing less that "Parables or metaphors" |
Quote: |
So let us read such verses as above and figure out, how many verses out of those 6346 consists of such Parables and fables.. |
Quote: |
Going to sleep so soon mr bagget. Perhaps you may dream up an excuse for why Mose's mother believed in god before moses. |
Quote: |
Exodus 2 (New Century Version)
Baby Moses 1 Now a man from the family of Levi married a woman who was also from the family of Levi. 2 She became pregnant and gave birth to a son. |
Quote: |
You fcking bastard muslim....Have you decided who was put on the Cross and how he got off the Cross alive when Muslim ISA was told to hide by Allah before the Crucifixion. |
Quote: |
Donald
I would like to respond to your post here. There have been other ex-Muslims turned athiests who have come out and spread lies against Islam. Their lies stem from their lack of understanding of the Deen and their own cultural experiences, which has nohing to do with Islam. People like: Salman Rushdie Irshad Manji Ayan Hirsi Ali and many others have come forward with their claims. They have done so openly and you could find a lot of information about these people on the internet, including pictures and video. When we look at Ali Sina we see something different. There is little to no information about this person. All we know is that he is a supposed doctor from iran who was once a Muslim and that Ali Sina is not his real name. I was suspicious of this myself and my suspicions only grew after my personal interactions with this person named Ali Sina. If you read all seven parts of the debate i had with this person you see something suspicious. The person who called themself Ali Sina writes with great grammar and structure in the English language. HE demonstrates his ability to use complex words and sentence structures. This is most evident in parts 1 to 4 of the debate. When you look at parts 5 to 7 we see something different. the writer od thses entries appears to have an elementary understanding of the English language. The complex sentence structures and wordings that were present in parts 1 to 4 are not to be found in parts 5 to seven. the person who worte the first 4 parts of the debate is equal to a native English speaking person, whilr the person who wrote parts 5 to 7 clearly looks like a person whose second language is English. This lead me to the conclusion that I was not debating a single person named ALi SIna but a group, of at least 2 people. I still believe that there is not a single person who calls himself Ali Sina. I believe that Ali Sina represents a group of people who are bent on slandering Islam. |
Quote: |
According to the most reliable traditions, Aisha brought her dolls to Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s house for play (Muslim 3341) and he would fondle the little girl in the tub while taking baths with her (Bukhari 6:298). Aisha was just a teenager by the time Muhammad died, but she had already spent over half her life in marriage to him |
Quote: |
lets see what ibn isham says:
The books written on the life of Muhammad relate that it was Muhammad who wrote the reconciliation of Hudaibia himself. It was said in his biography written by Ibn Hisham, "... and we have with us the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, who can write, together with Suhail." |
Quote: |
وَمَا كُنْتَ تَتْلُو مِنْ قَبْلِهِ مِنْ كِتَابٍ وَلَا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمِينِكَ إِذًا لَارْتَابَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ |
AhmedBahgat wrote: |
Who is this FFI goon on facebook, mate? |