Thread: THE REAL [GOD] = ALLAH ...... join here you all need to know

  1. #261
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,993
    Quote Originally Posted by DiamondHearts
    Thanks for your enlightened insight. It seems that some of the people on this board are so hopeless and desperate that the only way they can find to insult Islam is by saying Islam is violence or by inventing lies and making up quotes in Islamic holy books. There excuse is because a few of Muslims killed their fellow westerners.
    But if people read your holy books, and find injunction to kill unbelievers, what conclusion should they then draw.

    The West invaded their countries, they are fighting back, that's their right. It's their country, they have every right to fight for freedom. The situation will spread and more countries will be under attack, and then will you blame them for resisting. Resisting occupation is a basic human extinct.

    How can you blame it on the 1.7 billion others who are just sitting in their homes in shock at what is happening?
    This is interesting - first you say that terrorism is a basic human 'instinct', and therefore understandable, then you say that the rest of the ummah is 'in shock' at what is happening. Which is it then?

    These people are pure evil. They want others to hate us. They want to make life difficult for us because we are a different skin color, because we believe in One God, and also because they are jealous of what we have.
    Ahhhhh - the old 'Trinity' fallacy. You mean the Christians, by the oblique inference of 'polytheism', the ancient charge. Unfortunately for you, this is incorrect. The Christians also believe in one God - and why would anyone either i) fight you because you believe in this 'allah', or ii) be jealous of islam?

    I would like more people in this forum to argue with Islam on an intellectual platform rather than a hate-mongering kill, behead, nuke them all because they have different attitude toward life. It's not a debate if you say Muslims should die and death to Islam and such things. Also they have a habit of lying when trying to present a point. I will give a few examples:
    None of those are lies, though you may disagree with their content. I do not call for nukes to be dropped on muslims, yet I still find islam to be a religion terribly incompatible with the freedoms my civilization has. I am happy to argue with you on an 'intellectual platform'. Should we start with women's rights, or those of homosexuals, or dhimmitude, jizya, jihad, or what?

    Geoff

  2. #262
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,993
    Quote Originally Posted by DiamondHearts
    Respect for a person does not come in the form of giving them utmost freedom to do whatever they wanted. To encourage what is best for them and to discourage what is harmful to them is the best form of respect for any one. Islam does nothing but ban what is degrading, dishonorable, and harmful to people, while encouraging and praising actions which lead to a healthy and happy life.
    And if they're not happy? If they reject islamic rules? Are they then out of islam, or suitable for punishment?

    Take for the example the issue of abortion. Many Muslim women do not want to do this and certainly do not need to. Many Muslim women would not object to a law banning this practice. This goes for all issues of women's rights in Islam.
    ...so women want their own rights banned? This is illogical.

    In Islamic culture, it is dishonorable to cut your hair past a certain length to where a woman resembles a man. Wearing jeans is okay, however wearing tight revealing jeans as many women wear in the West is completely against Islam for obvious reasons.
    Why? What constitutes 'dishonour'? Seems to me that 'dishonour' only amounts to how a man sees their wearing jeans or cutting their hair.

    Most Muslim women care little for what anyone else would say about how they live. If they choose to live this way. Who are you to tell them how to live?
    They seem to care a very great deal for how islamic societies tell them to live. What happens to those who ignore islamic rules? Does someone 'then tell them how to live'?

    Indeed, many Muslim weddings have dancing and partying in them, however women and men are seperated. Women and men can mingle and dance even if they are part of the same extended family. Again this is a rule of Islam which is preserving chastity and preventing the possibility of an affair, thus making a healthy family and healthy marriages. The problem of dancing with a member of the opposite sex is the fact that it promotes sexuality between two individuals who should not have such feelings.
    Sexual slavery does not constitute a "healthy relationship".

    Geoff

  3. #263
    Registered Member
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Yazdajerd
    Do u mean Mohammed who started the thread or the Prophet, it seems the second... but nevermind, nobody expects you to buy what we sell, but don't come with a ("peaceful" ARMY) telling us what we should buy too
    That specific reference was intended for Mohammed the poster; I just threw a little slur in there for entertainment purposes only. If I offended anyone in any way, I apologize.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yazdajerd
    Well, this u've seen is hezbollah's masses of the shiite sect in lebanon, and since i'm a pro hezbollah, i'm intitled to reply....

    When we say "Death to America" it meens the american government not the people,
    They were cutting their foreheads, while screaming "death to america"!

    To be honest, I view this violent ritual as a legitimate threat to my safety, and the safety of my neighbours to the south. Terrorist groups will stop at nothing to kill innocent men, women and children. Especially children, according to Bin Laden.

    I can understand your support for Hezbollah though. I mean, you have a reason to be upset with the United States and Israel for that matter. My question to you would be: "Does it feel good to support an organization whose single goal is to kill innocent civilians in the name of 'peace'?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Yazdajerd
    Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (hezbollah's leader) has pointed this numerous times, not to mention he was amongst the first to condemn the 9/11 attacks, and he did condemn the targetting of western civilians in Iraq,
    Is he being sincere?

    *pause*

    You know, I threw up a little inside when I saw muslims dancing and singing in the streets or arabia on 9/11. Perhaps the suggestion would be to light one of their "brothers" on fire, and throw him off the 80th floor of a highrise building so they could understand what they're cheering for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yazdajerd
    It is the same when we say "Death to Israel", we don't mean the Jews, some prominent Jewish figures and Rabbis (Natouri Karta) were visiting him a year ago...

    You can feel very safe for no one means you harm amongst these masses, provided you don't come with a tank or F22 to demolish their houses and kill their children in the name of Bush's "Democracy" and Sharon's "Right of Self-Defence".
    Hey listen, I agree to an extent. Bush/Sharon haven't done anything to promote peace in the region.

    Where I disagree is when you state I can feel very safe, for no one means me/us any harm.
    Last edited by november; 02-28-06 at 10:35 AM.

  4. #264
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,993
    That's the thing, november -

    "no one means you any harm...unless you insult our prophet, or our religion, or are deemed to have done so, or if you object to sharia, or if you support the Jews, or if you fail to agree with us that Christianity is polytheism".

    This is islam, which means "slavery" or "submission". It is not enough that imams in the ME are allowed to insult and degrade the other "Abrahamic religions" (Judaism, Christianity) - no, one must also never dare to consider that islam needs to change, nor ever be critical of it. This, too - besides anything the US or Israel may or may well not have done - is the essence of the harm that is indeed directed at you, me, and everyone else.

    No harm - if we behave like good little dhimmis, whether we're part of the ummah or not.

    Geoff

  5. #265
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by usp8riot
    I agree with you DiamondHearts. I admire your dedication to your religion and to get your point across. I myself find nothing wrong with Islam. Just as christians are persecuted for the things a few other christians (or govt ran by supposed christians) does, Islam experiences the same. I consider Islam a brother religion and there are lots of disbelievers out there that try to seperate us from God. A lot of people have hate. The disbelievers, for one, use it to smite believers. And religious people use it to smite disbelievers. It's just another output for their hate.
    You are right. I completely agree. Christian religion is very peaceful and nice and I have said many times that I agree with alot of what the Christian religion says. I also believe in alot of what the Jewish religion says because these two religions are both from the same God and have the same basic commandments. The only difference is in our belief of God with Chrsitians, and our belief of the chosen people in Judaism. In Islam we believe in One Absolute God and don't believe Holy Messiah (peace be upon him) was divine but rather was a holy man, one of the best in history. We also believe that after the advent of Islam, the Jews were no longer the chosen people because they tried to kill the Porphet Jesus (peace be upon him) and earned God's anger. When the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was sent, he came from the seed of Abraham (pbuh), from Ismail (pbuh), to convey the universality of man and deliver the true faith to all the people of the world.

  6. #266
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    But if people read your holy books, and find injunction to kill unbelievers, what conclusion should they then draw.
    You mean like the question of chapter At-Tauba which I already answered. These are orders that say when someone does injustice against you, fight back and never accept it.

    "There is nothing in our book, the Koran, that teaches us to suffer peacefully. Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. That's a good religion. If fact, that's that old time religion. That's the one that Ma and Pa used to talk about: an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, and a head for a head, and a life for a life. That's a good religion. And nobody resents that kind of religion being taught but a wolf who intends to make you his meal... No, preserve your life, it's the best thing you've got. And if you've got to give it up, let it be even-steven." - Malcolm X (Al-Hajj Malik Al-Shahbaz)

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    This is interesting - first you say that terrorism is a basic human 'instinct', and therefore understandable, then you say that the rest of the ummah is 'in shock' at what is happening. Which is it then?
    What I said was: The West invaded their countries, they are fighting back, that's their right. It's their country, they have every right to fight for freedom. How is this supporting terrorism? Muslims are in shock because they see killing of their civilian people in great numbers, perpetual occupation, and sexual, inhumane prison torture from the Americans and their allies. This not a way on terror, it's a war on Islam and Muslims.
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Ahhhhh - the old 'Trinity' fallacy. You mean the Christians, by the oblique inference of 'polytheism', the ancient charge. Unfortunately for you, this is incorrect. The Christians also believe in one God - and why would anyone either i) fight you because you believe in this 'allah', or ii) be jealous of islam?
    I never doubted that. You are twisiting my words.Christians believe in the One God (Allah (swt)) like me. The only difference is their divinity of the Messiah (pbuh) and the angel Gabriel (pbuh). If I did not believe in Allah, you people would be happy. One member said it was his point to make me no longer Muslim. Indeed, lies, deciet, jealousy are the characteristics that I am seeing in you people.
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    None of those are lies, though you may disagree with their content. I do not call for nukes to be dropped on muslims, yet I still find islam to be a religion terribly incompatible with the freedoms my civilization has. I am happy to argue with you on an 'intellectual platform'. Should we start with women's rights, or those of homosexuals, or dhimmitude, jizya, jihad, or what?

    Geoff
    Indeed many of those are lies, but some are also racist comments. The reason why I presented them was to show the extent of racism and evil of those who are calling for murder against Muslims, calling us uncivilized, barbaric, and murders, while they are calling for nukes to be dropped on us. How hypocritical is this? This is an age-old tactic which the imperialists and colonialists used against the Muslims when they massacred our people, killed our leaders, destroyed our mosques, and enslaved our people. How strange that they would have the audacity after doing such a thing to come back and try to do the same after only a few years. They will never defeat the will of the Muslim people.

    There are also some people who lie to try to win the argument and also copy and paste from anti-Islamic and Zionist articles. Obviously though this backfires because they have no knowledge of this and in the end they up proving how little they no of Islam. Your responses prove just that to me.

    Islamic laws regarding

    Homosexuality: death or exile. Muslims do not accept homosexuality, we believe it to be unnatural and vile. This is the majority view of the Islamic world.

    Dhimmi: First, there is no Islamic state that practices this in this day because no Islamic state exists. Dhimmi means 'protected.' Dhimmi are Non-Muslims who live inside Islamic countries. They are exempt from military service (which is obligatory on Muslims), exempt from the ban of alcohol (they can drink in private, in churches, or in the home), exempt from paying Zakat (2.5% tax on Muslims). They are obliged to pay Jizya (military service exemption tax), and also obliged under the laws of their religion. For example, Christians would not be allowed to be practice adultery, or gambling. Dhimmi have the right to go to either the Muslim state court, or their own private religious courts. The Islamic state builds temples, churches for the Dhimmi as well as funding and health care using the money from the Jizya. They still have to adhere to the basic human rights of all the people in the state, no adultery, no homosexuality, no interest, no insulting of religious figures of any religion, etc.

    Jihad: means struggle in Arabic. Any struggle against oppression which Muslims have to be involved. Jihad is not only war, but includes war as well. Jihad is very general, it can mean saying something good in front of bad people, it can be worshipping Allah, it can be not listening to cursed Satan, many things. The Prophet (pbuh) said one time, 'Women's greatest jihad is childbirth. ' Patience in Jihad will yield great rewards. Ofcourse, Jihad against oppression and occupation is rewarded greatly. When asked why a Mujahid (one who practices Jihad) would go straight to Heaven without judgement if fighting a war of justice. The Prophet (pbuh) said, the clashing of swords above his head is enough judgement of his character. Jihad does not mean Holy War, the arabic word for holy war is Harb Muqadasa which is not mentioned in the Quran.

    Women's rights: We already talked about that in great detail before. Please refer back to my responses a few pages ago.

    Allah give you Mercy. Peace.

  7. #267
    So? You presented several aspects of muslim society that are not compatable with western culture.

  8. #268
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Islamic society is different from Western society. Why should we desire to be compatible with the West, especially after they have invaded our nations? We want to live the way we believe is right, hence I showed the justice of Islam over the Western principles. Maybe you will change your outlook on Islam and fix your avatar.

  9. #269
    As long as muslims are using Islam as justification for terror, such as suicide bombing, I think my avatar is appropriate. As long as muslims live in western countries, they should be tolerant of our freedom of expression.

    The war in Afghanistan was against Al Quida, not Islam, so it was righteous.
    Last edited by spidergoat; 02-28-06 at 03:38 PM.

  10. #270
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat
    As long as muslims are using Islam as justification for terror, such as suicide bombing, I think my avatar is appropriate. As long as muslims live in western countries, they should be tolerant of our freedom of expression.
    Islam is a justification of resistance against occupation. So you say as long as one Muslim in the world is suicide bombing, then that gives you the right to proclaim all Muslims terrors and to insult the Prophet (pbuh) of Islam? As long as Westerners proclaim to respect freedom of religious belief and freedom of others to live without threats of harm, then they should practice it otherwise they will be seen as hypocrites?

    "A truth that has been largely forgotten in the post-9/11 frenzy is that terrorism is a technique, not an ideology or a country." - Sean Gonsalves

    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat
    The war in Afghanistan was against Al Quida, not Islam, so it was righteous.
    That's why 30,000 innocent civilians were killed, mosques, schools, hospitals bombed, and the infastructure of the country was destroyed. All this to kill one person? Is this righteousness?

  11. #271
    I'm not insulting Mohammed, that cartoon is for terrorists to consider if Mohammed himself would endorse the murder of women, children, and other innocent people.

    As far as Afghanistan, your numbers are off by a factor of 10.

    3,485 AFGHAN CIVILIANS KILLED and 6,273 SERIOUSLY INJURED is more like it, and the Afghanistan government of the Taliban supported Al Quida, which is more than one guy. Mosques and schools were never purposely targeted, and Afghanstan never had an infrastructure.

    I would accept the 30,000 number for Iraq, which is a war I don't support.

  12. #272
    charles cure
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by DiamondHearts
    Respect for a person does not come in the form of giving them utmost freedom to do whatever they wanted. To encourage what is best for them and to discourage what is harmful to them is the best form of respect for any one. Islam does nothing but ban what is degrading, dishonorable, and harmful to people, while encouraging and praising actions which lead to a healthy and happy life.
    islam is a farce in this respect especially. how do you know that you ban what is degrading, dishonorable, and harmful to people? you have only your own cultural standards by which to judge this, and since your culture and your religion are in essence the same thing, you are totally divorced from any objective understanding of what would promote peace, happiness, justice, or equality under any other circumstances than the narrow definitions of those things provided by your religion.
    take marriage for example. many Muslim marriages are arranged and occur between two people that have had very limited contact with each other prior to the marriage ceremony. the couple is then expected to learn to love one another and the wife is supposed to learn to accept being subjected to her husbands whims and serve him in good will while he does more or less as he pleases. how does this foster happiness? equality? how does this benefit the woman at all? the answer is that it doesnt, instead it ENFORCES a facade of happiness and an illusion of benefit on the part of the female in the relationship. the most likely truth is that the couple are trapped in the relationship and must either learn to love it or at least accept it, or flee from it at their own risk.


    Take for the example the issue of abortion. Many Muslim women do not want to do this and certainly do not need to. Many Muslim women would not object to a law banning this practice. This goes for all issues of women's rights in Islam.
    you could not be more wrong. people's desire for freedom from tyranny on any scale is a universal element of humanity. Muslim women do not desire "womans rights" because religious inculcation has warped them into believing that freedom to express yourself sexually and emotionally comes at an incredibly high spiritual cost. in addition to that, Muslim women know that even if they were given equal rights, the attitudes of Muslim men towards womens role in society would not change at all, and their exercise of said rights would only beget violence and intolerance against them.

  13. #273
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat
    I'm not insulting Mohammed, that cartoon is for terrorists to consider if Mohammed himself would endorse the murder of women, children, and other innocent people.

    As far as Afghanistan, your numbers are off by a factor of 10.

    3,485 AFGHAN CIVILIANS KILLED and 6,273 SERIOUSLY INJURED is more like it, and the Afghanistan government of the Taliban supported Al Quida, which is more than one guy. Mosques and schools were never purposely targeted, and Afghanstan never had an infrastructure.

    I would accept the 30,000 number for Iraq, which is a war I don't support.

    If you are not insulting the Prophet (pbuh) of Islam, then why do you have a negative portrayal of him? If you dislike Al Qaeda why not make an avatar insulting Al Qaeda, why does the insult have to be against Islam?

    Now about your statistics, they come from western sources and are based on the statistics presented by the Americans and western agencies in only a few events which were publicized by washington. The statistic total which I got was from the Middle East from Afghan sources. The difference of the statistics shows American 'unwillingness' to show the correct civilian deaths total.

  14. #274
    It's called satire. It's not against Mohammed, it's against hypocrites that use Islam to do ostensibly un-Islamic things. Anyway, I'm against western religion in general, so I'd insult any so-called "holy" figure.

    You are wrong about my statistics, they don't come from any government source, in fact it's a very liberal source. I have a feeling you are being lied to, but you listed no source, maybe you should. There is no way 30,000 people were killed in Afghanistan. There was no large scale invasion, only selective bombing of mountainous regions and a few special forces troops assisted by warlords.
    Last edited by spidergoat; 02-28-06 at 05:26 PM.

  15. #275
    Behold... The Bringer of Light Yazdajerd's Avatar
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by november
    That specific reference was intended for Mohammed the poster; I just threw a little slur in there for entertainment purposes only. If I offended anyone in any way, I apologize.
    Apology accepted, although i didn't take it as an offence, but anyhow..

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    They were cutting their foreheads, while screaming "death to america"!
    this is an old shiite ritual (of tradition not religion) done even by shiites who support US policy, it goes hundreds of years ago even before the US existed, it is done during the mourning of Ashoura, it has nothing to do with politics.....

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    To be honest, I view this violent ritual as a legitimate threat to my safety, and the safety of my neighbours to the south. Terrorist groups will stop at nothing to kill innocent men, women and children. Especially children, according to Bin Laden.
    Hindus pul knifes inside there skin and bodies, nobody said that they were threatened by it, why the shiites then, not that I aid this type of act... just to add some info to who doesn't know, you mixed up between to processions, the hezbollah procession and that which traditionally takes place in other areas, hezbollah's clergy clearly forbid shiites from doing these acts, now back to politics

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    I can understand your support for Hezbollah though. I mean, you have a reason to be upset with the United States and Israel for that matter. My question to you would be: "Does it feel good to support an organization whose single goal is to kill innocent civilians in the name of 'peace'?"
    sorry if we gave u the wrong message, if other islamists r blind to kill innocent people u can't throw it on us all... name one innocent civilian hezbollah has ever killed! we only targeted Israeli military personnel and their camps... but it seems ur press isn't all that of an angel isn't it? the're too biased....

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    Is he being sincere?
    Even according to the israelis, you can review their military sites and politicians, Nasrallah never says anything he doesn't mean, nor does he promises something he doesn't fulfil, it has urned him respect in various communities in lebanon, from shiites, sunnis, christians, communists, druze, nationalists... even those who r biased against shiites respect him, so irrespective of my aid to hezbollah, all lebanese know that Nasrallah means it...
    and you condemn hezbollah for what al qaeda is doing forgetting that to al qaeda we as shiites r worse than america and it is us mostly being targeted in iraq not american military (i wonder y?) and we operate from different view points and ideologies........ this is even said by political ooficials in the US!

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    You know, I threw up a little inside when I saw muslims dancing and singing in the streets or arabia on 9/11. Perhaps the suggestion would be to light one of their "brothers" on fire, and throw him off the 80th floor of a highrise building so they could understand what they're cheering for.
    Mexicans did also, so as koreans and south americans and serbs and vietnamese, another evidence to ur biased press... it seems the US government has had everyone upset in the world that its losing any popular support among the nations!

    Quote Originally Posted by november
    Hey listen, I agree to an extent. Bush/Sharon haven't done anything to promote peace in the region.
    Where I disagree is when you state I can feel very safe, for no one means me/us any harm.
    I understand ur fears, and God knows we muslims are furious with al qaeda and other fanatics who helped build this picture... but let me ask u this, who suffered the most from terrorism, muslims or westreners? so u see, we've got more to fear than u do...

  16. #276
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,993
    Quote Originally Posted by DiamondHearts
    You mean like the question of chapter At-Tauba which I already answered. These are orders that say when someone does injustice against you, fight back and never accept it.
    And should Christians and Jews then adopt the same injunction against muslims?

    I'm all for self-defense, of course, but what constitutes an "attack"? A few weeks ago, it was a free press. Before that, it was the presence of infidel feet on Saudi Arabian soil. Should the West now treat islam and muslims as islamic nations treat us? Do you consider that to be fair or just?

    "There is nothing in our book, the Koran, that teaches us to suffer peacefully. Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. That's a good religion. If fact, that's that old time religion. That's the one that Ma and Pa used to talk about: an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, and a head for a head, and a life for a life. That's a good religion. And nobody resents that kind of religion being taught but a wolf who intends to make you his meal... No, preserve your life, it's the best thing you've got. And if you've got to give it up, let it be even-steven." - Malcolm X (Al-Hajj Malik Al-Shahbaz)

    Ah. So we should, indeed then, take harsh punitive measures against all muslims - you know, apply the rules of religious intolerance fairly. Treat muslims in the West as non-muslims are treated in the ME. After all, our countries are being invaded by Saudi imams and terrorists. Why should we hold ourselves to a higher standard than other civilizations? Doesn't that smack of cultural imperialism?

    What I said was: The West invaded their countries, they are fighting back, that's their right. It's their country, they have every right to fight for freedom. How is this supporting terrorism? Muslims are in shock because they see killing of their civilian people in great numbers, perpetual occupation, and sexual, inhumane prison torture from the Americans and their allies. This not a way on terror, it's a war on Islam and Muslims.
    Oh? The Shi'ites want the Americans to stay. They aren't committing acts of terrorism. It's their country, too. They like having a government that represents them more equitably and they often seem They want more American protection, not less. You talk as if the Sunnis refer to all muslims. And how about women in Afghanistan? It's also their country. Do they want the Americans - and the civil rights they've installed - to just go away? And how about those who just want human rights and no sharia?

    I never doubted that. You are twisiting my words.Christians believe in the One God (Allah (swt)) like me.
    Then why did you say that those who attacked islam were jealous of its "one god"?

    There are also some people who lie to try to win the argument and also copy and paste from anti-Islamic and Zionist articles. Obviously though this backfires because they have no knowledge of this and in the end they up proving how little they no of Islam. Your responses prove just that to me.
    If you're referring to me, then let's just see, shall we?

    Islamic laws regarding

    Homosexuality: death or exile. Muslims do not accept homosexuality, we believe it to be unnatural and vile. This is the majority view of the Islamic world.
    That's right on par with my claims: homosexuality is not accepted. What happens, then to homosexuals in the islamic world? I have yet to debate with a single muslim who will say what happens. Why is that?

    Dhimmi: First, there is no Islamic state that practices this in this day because no Islamic state exists. Dhimmi means 'protected.' Dhimmi are Non-Muslims who live inside Islamic countries. They are exempt from military service (which is obligatory on Muslims), exempt from the ban of alcohol (they can drink in private, in churches, or in the home), exempt from paying Zakat (2.5% tax on Muslims). They are obliged to pay Jizya (military service exemption tax), and also obliged under the laws of their religion. For example, Christians would not be allowed to be practice adultery, or gambling. Dhimmi have the right to go to either the Muslim state court, or their own private religious courts. The Islamic state builds temples, churches for the Dhimmi as well as funding and health care using the money from the Jizya. They still have to adhere to the basic human rights of all the people in the state, no adultery, no homosexuality, no interest, no insulting of religious figures of any religion, etc.
    Seems I was bang on. The only novel aspect was the claim above that there's no such thing as a dhimmi ("protected person", which is laughable given the oppressive restrictions on such a person) because no islamic state exists. So then non-muslims are not "protected" in islamic countries today? Hardly surprising.

    Some of this is actually insulting: they are "not allowed" to practice adultery. Really? Wow, what a setback for a religion that already condemns it as sinful. Other things that Christians are allowed to do, for example, under dhimmitude is marry their cousins, as I recall. One of the major purposes of this legislation appears to be to demean other religions.

    I note further that you admit that dhimmis must pay jizya - which is usually considerably higher than zakaat (the muslim tax) and which, unlike zakaat, is mandatory, not optional.

    This one is laughable: "the Islamic state builds temples, churches for the Dhimmi...from the Jizya." Uh huh. I don't imagine that went on too much, frankly. Isn't that money supposed to go to the war effort in place of fighting? And you're telling me they built synagogues and churches out of it.

    They still have to adhere to the basic human rights of all the people in the state, no adultery, no homosexuality, no interest, no insulting of religious figures of any religion, etc
    No insulting of religious figures...does this law apply to muslims as well? Dubious, mon ami. I've yet to hear of a muslim ever charged with blasphemy against Christians or Jews in islamic nations, to say nothing of the kind of bile emitted on TV, radio or in mosques in the ME.

    Jihad:When asked why a Mujahid (one who practices Jihad) would go straight to Heaven without judgement if fighting a war of justice. The Prophet (pbuh) said, the clashing of swords above his head is enough judgement of his character. Jihad does not mean Holy War, the arabic word for holy war is Harb Muqadasa which is not mentioned in the Quran.
    But Mohammed also said that the greatest kind of jihad was that where arms are taken up. Fact.

    Women's rights: We already talked about that in great detail before. Please refer back to my responses a few pages ago.
    But your responses were insufficient, unless you can dispel Q 4:11 and 4:34, among others.

    Allah give you Mercy. Peace.
    There is no allah.

    Geoff

  17. #277
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    And should Christians and Jews then adopt the same injunction against muslims?

    I'm all for self-defense, of course, but what constitutes an "attack"? A few weeks ago, it was a free press. Before that, it was the presence of infidel feet on Saudi Arabian soil. Should the West now treat islam and muslims as islamic nations treat us? Do you consider that to be fair or just?
    If any country invades a country for no reason and and with no provocation or on the basis of lies (US attack on iraq, Afghanistan), then they should be subject to tough action form the side of the UN and the rest of the world, but instead the Muslim world was pressured through fear of attack to not resist.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Ah. So we should, indeed then, take harsh punitive measures against all muslims - you know, apply the rules of religious intolerance fairly. Treat muslims in the West as non-muslims are treated in the ME. After all, our countries are being invaded by Saudi imams and terrorists. Why should we hold ourselves to a higher standard than other civilizations? Doesn't that smack of cultural imperialism?
    Your ignorance and deciet have no bounds. You are using a response concerning the right to fight back against injustice and occupation to show that America should persecute peaceful Muslims living in America who include such professions as doctors, and normal people like simple taxi cab drivers, store owners, who don't do any harm to anyone. Indeed, if terrorists enter any country, they should be subject to arrest, however they have to be charged with evidence first. Your country is hardly being invaded from imams. You are saying Muslims are trying to culturally control the West, that's ridiculous. If anything, it is the West which is invading and controlling the Middle East.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Oh? The Shi'ites want the Americans to stay. They aren't committing acts of terrorism. It's their country, too. They like having a government that represents them more equitably and they often seem They want more American protection, not less. You talk as if the Sunnis refer to all muslims. And how about women in Afghanistan? It's also their country. Do they want the Americans - and the civil rights they've installed - to just go away? And how about those who just want human rights and no sharia?
    Some of the Shiat political parties do want the Americans to stay. Most of them agents paid by the Americans to listen to their orders. But many parties, especially popular leaders like Imam Muqtada as Sadr want America to leave and are fighting day and night for that to happen. The Sunni Muslims as a whole were made weak so that America could exploit the new Shiat leadership. Sunni Muslims have been attacked, massacred, and jailed in mass numbers. The attacks on cities like Fallujah make this clear, where the Americans used phosperous against enemy soldiers and civilians (like they did in Vietname). Infact the American army spokesman asked if they are worried about civilian deaths, said there are no civilians in Fallujah. Even though a large number of the killed were women, elderly, and children. The Iraqi people will likely never forget Fallujah for generations, and especially for the victims and family it will be a source of understandable hatred against the Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Then why did you say that those who attacked islam were jealous of its "one god"?
    Why did you automatically assume that I was refering to Christians?

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    That's right on par with my claims: homosexuality is not accepted. What happens, then to homosexuals in the islamic world? I have yet to debate with a single muslim who will say what happens. Why is that?
    I just did. Exile or death. That is the law supported by the majority view of the Islamic World and even the minority Christian and Pagan groups in Muslim countries. It's also part of the culture. Unlike the Western view, we deem it as unacceptable, unhuman, disgusting, and we want it to be banned from our communities.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Seems I was bang on. The only novel aspect was the claim above that there's no such thing as a dhimmi ("protected person", which is laughable given the oppressive restrictions on such a person) because no islamic state exists. So then non-muslims are not "protected" in islamic countries today? Hardly surprising.
    As a matter of fact, in many Muslim countries, the state builds churches and temples for minorities, offers minority scholarships in universities, and often reserves seats in parliament strictly for minorities. An Islamic state does not exist, and when a religious party wins, usually Western countries invade and change the governments (for example Algeria and Afghanistan) or put social, financial pressure on them (Iran, recently Hamas in Palestine).

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    Some of this is actually insulting: they are "not allowed" to practice adultery. Really? Wow, what a setback for a religion that already condemns it as sinful. Other things that Christians are allowed to do, for example, under dhimmitude is marry their cousins, as I recall. One of the major purposes of this legislation appears to be to demean other religions.
    The purpose is to ensure protection of minorities' rights and also to enforce Islam as the dominant religion in the public. That is why it is the law of the 'Islamic' state to perserve the character of the state, but at the same time protect minorities' rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    I note further that you admit that dhimmis must pay jizya - which is usually considerably higher than zakaat (the muslim tax) and which, unlike zakaat, is mandatory, not optional.
    First of all, the zakat is the obligatory tax which is collected from Muslims. It is a set 2.5% of all income earned for those above poverty. The tax is given to the poor, hence why it is referred to as the poor tax. The Jizya is a military exemption tax is obligatory on all non-Muslims. Considering this law has not been instituted for 200 years, because of European dominance, it is quite hard to give the exact rate of Jizya. The Jizya historically has had different rates, I don't know of where you have read it was usually higher. These are not the only taxes charged by the government, these are only the religious taxes. The other taxes depended on the state and were much larger than these two and subject to all citizens of the state, except the women, children, elderly, and the poor.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    This one is laughable: "the Islamic state builds temples, churches for the Dhimmi...from the Jizya." Uh huh. I don't imagine that went on too much, frankly. Isn't that money supposed to go to the war effort in place of fighting? And you're telling me they built synagogues and churches out of it.
    Indeed, the Jizya was used for the policies of the government which could include war, but they were particularly used for the non-Muslims' affairs.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    No insulting of religious figures...does this law apply to muslims as well? Dubious, mon ami. I've yet to hear of a muslim ever charged with blasphemy against Christians or Jews in islamic nations, to say nothing of the kind of bile emitted on TV, radio or in mosques in the ME.
    Have you ever heard a Muslim insult a religious figure of another religion? It's not very common because we respect other people's religious beliefs. Disagreement is allowed, however insulting and ridiculing is illegal in the Islamic State.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    But Mohammed also said that the greatest kind of jihad was that where arms are taken up. Fact.
    I agree. The greatest jihad is where one fights for the rights of the oppressed and downtrodden, those who cry under the oppression of tyrants and unjust armies. Indeed, war for justice and to help a people is a blessed act. So are many other things like prayer, fasting, charity to other people, feeding the poor, protecting a weak person from harm, as well as many other types of jihad.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    But your responses were insufficient, unless you can dispel Q 4:11 and 4:34, among others.
    Surat An-Noor

    4:11. "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah. and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise."


    The Islamic law of inheritance is stated here. Men have more of a right to wealth than women, because they have monetary obligations to their families. Islamic tradition sets the man in charge of his wife, his children, his parents, and all his poor relatives. Women's wealth is preserved for them only, while their male relatives are in charge of their living expenses. Hence, Islamic law shows its justice again.


    4:34. "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)."

    4:35. "If ye fear a breach between them twain, appoint (two) arbiters, one from his family, and the other from hers; if they wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation: For Allah hath full knowledge, and is acquainted with all things."


    Men are given more strangth to men to earn livelihood and be protectors of the whole family. Women should guard the husband's property in his absence and well as remain chaste. Adive regarding if a husband suspects cheating from a wife. First, Tell them not to do anything like that or cause any suspicion of it. If they don't listen, then don't sleep with them at night. If they still don't listen, you allowed to beat with a piece of cloth. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us that if you believe a wife is committing adultery or seeing a man without telling you and you wish to beat her, do not hit her with anything but a cotton cloth. So that it doesn't hurt or cause bleeding, but it shows her that you are angery with her. If she doesn't heed any of these, then a husband is allowed to take the case to an Islamic court, where if she is found guilty, the wife and the man she was cheating with will be executed. However the Quran says, it is preferable to settle the matter without going to court between the two families, the husbands and the wife's.

    Islamic law has no tolerance for adultery, and the break up of the family unit which is a fundamental part of the strength of Islam and its values in a household. The West allows consentual adultery, however the West also has a major problem with illegitimate children and break up of families. Such a thing is regrettable and this law has prevented this from happening in the Muslim world. I would also like to add that most families in the Muslim world are strong and close, many have large families with 5 to 7 children and many children live with their own elderly grandparents. In Islamic culture, one's main duty after his personal family is to his extended family.

    To show Allah's mercy and love, the next verse is:


    4:36. "Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: For Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious.

    Quote Originally Posted by GeoffP
    There is no allah.

    Geoff
    You may believe that if you choose. It doesn't effect me.

    Allah give you Mercy. Peace.

  18. #278
    Just a quick point..

    You are using a response concerning the right to fight back against injustice and occupation to show that America should persecute peaceful Muslims living in America who include such professions as doctors, and normal people like simple taxi cab drivers, store owners, who don't do any harm to anyone.
    This pretty much comes down to you saying that innocent muslims should not be suffering because of the specific muslims that go around causing death and destruction. Right?

    It is well worth noting that in every single instance where you have been talking to specific - and innocent - individuals, you seem to lump them as guilty of attacking your country and people as anyone else that happens to come from the same country or region. You continually refer to "the west" and "america" while trying to justify the actions of some muslims because of the actions of some westerners.

    I never killed a muslim in my life - innocent or otherwise, and yet am seemingly being branded as some kind of criminal along with everyone else that happens to live on this part of the planet.

    That is hypocricy.

    Indeed you said: "the resurgence of Islamic activism and Islamic zeal is due to the fact of a Western threat against the culture and survival of the Middle East. Resistance is natural when under threat", and yet not it's unlikely that even one of the people killed here by muslims had anything to do with it.

    You have total right to fight back. Fight back against the army, and the politicians that make the decisions. Us innocents had nothing to do with it, and yet you're trying to justify their deaths because you suffered. It is ridiculous.

  19. #279
    Registered Senior Member DiamondHearts's Avatar
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by SnakeLord

    It is well worth noting that in every single instance where you have been talking to specific - and innocent - individuals, you seem to lump them as guilty of attacking your country and people as anyone else that happens to come from the same country or region. You continually refer to "the west" and "america" while trying to justify the actions of some muslims because of the actions of some westerners.
    I agree with you on this point. I'm sorry if I offended you, that was not my intention. By America, I only mean the government and those that support the military actions against Muslims. By the West, I mean those in power of the Western governments and those who are powerful and influential who support this action against Muslims. I have mentioned before that there are alot of kind people in the West who try to defend us and stop invasion of the Muslim world and we thank them from the bottom of our heart. The Islamic religion teaches that if someone helps you in any way, it is your duty as a believer to repay them the same or better. Those in the West that are against military aggression and respect us and our religion, we are greatful to them and they are our true friends.

    But the reason why I refer to the West and America this way is that we have been colonized for 200 years by the European countries who used us a slaves and abused our people. The Europeans (British and Spanish) also shipped our brothers in Africa to America to work as slaves for them and made them convert to Christianity. Some families of African-Americans still don't east pork or drink wine, which is a remnant of their forgotten Muslim past. Some of the churches in South America were built by converted Moorish slaves who built some churches facing the Holy City Makkah, which signified that infact they practiced their religion in secret. The situation of the Islamic world is much worse, in that Palestine was taken over by immigrant jews, Chechnya was invaded by the Russians, and also many Muslim regions were taken over by more powerful neighbors after and during the European conquest and remain under control. Almost all countries on the borders of the Islamic world have conquered Islamic regions from the Islamic Khalifahs which were destroyed by the Europeans. Such countries include China, Phillipines, Burma, Thailand, Russia, Serbia, Greece, Ethiopia, India, and many others.

    Allah give you Mercy. Peace.

  20. #280
    Caput gerat lupinum GeoffP's Avatar
    Posts
    20,993
    Quote Originally Posted by DiamondHearts
    If any country invades a country for no reason and and with no provocation or on the basis of lies (US attack on iraq, Afghanistan), then they should be subject to tough action form the side of the UN and the rest of the world, but instead the Muslim world was pressured through fear of attack to not resist.
    What was wrong with the attack on Afghanistan, or Iraq for that matter? The women of Afghanistan were finally freed from the oppression of extreme sharia, and the Shi'ites to hold their own elections free of oppression by Saddam Hussein and the Sunni-dominated government. This is not what I am saying; it is what the Afghani women - who now have the right to vote and go to school - and the Shi'ites themselves are saying.

    Your ignorance and deciet have no bounds. You are using a response concerning the right to fight back against injustice and occupation to show that America should persecute peaceful Muslims living in America...Indeed, if terrorists enter any country, they should be subject to arrest, however they have to be charged with evidence first. Your country is hardly being invaded from imams. You are saying Muslims are trying to culturally control the West, that's ridiculous. If anything, it is the West which is invading and controlling the Middle East.
    I'll ignore the ad hominem attack - for the moment. Are you saying that imams from Saudi Arabia are not preaching evil in the US? There are many Wahhabi mosques in which hatred and islamic supremacy was being shrieked from the pulpit. And muslims worldwide raged and threatened violence over what? A few cartoons. And now you tell me that MalcolmX of the NOI said that any attack must be responded to. And you wonder why then I must assume that we in the West should "do unto others" as they would do unto us? Is there some reason we should hold ourselves to some higher standard of behaviour?

    Some of the Shiat political parties do want the Americans to stay. Most of them agents paid by the Americans to listen to their orders.
    This is completely unsupportable propaganda. It has no place in this debate; hence, it is refused.

    But many parties, especially popular leaders like Imam Muqtada as Sadr want America to leave and are fighting day and night for that to happen.
    Is this the same Sadr?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050805/...tes_2;_ylt=AkI

    "Al-Jaafari later met with radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who has toned down his opposition to the U.S.-led coalition since his supporters staged a failed uprising last year..."

    The same one who's followers infiltrated the police and murdered Steven Vincent?

    He's entitled to his opinion, but not terrorism.

    Sunni Muslims have been attacked, massacred, and jailed in mass numbers. The attacks on cities like Fallujah make this clear, where the Americans used phosperous against enemy soldiers and civilians (like they did in Vietname).
    If the terrorists will not adhere to international rules of combat, it seems hypocritical to complain that the Americans used phosphorus, if they indeed did. And why did the brave resistance fighters take shelter behind civilians? And how many civilian deaths were there?

    Geoff: Then why did you say that those who attacked islam were jealous of its "one god"?

    Why did you automatically assume that I was refering to Christians?
    Who else is supposed to have "invaded" Iraq? Hindus?

    Geoff: That's right on par with my claims: homosexuality is not accepted. What happens, then to homosexuals in the islamic world? I have yet to debate with a single muslim who will say what happens. Why is that?

    Diamond: I just did. Exile or death. That is the law supported by the majority view of the Islamic World and even the minority Christian and Pagan groups in Muslim countries. It's also part of the culture. Unlike the Western view, we deem it as unacceptable, unhuman, disgusting, and we want it to be banned from our communities.
    Thanks for making my point for me. You would murder homosexuals, and you would do so in the name of islam. I would not. I consider your viewpoint unacceptable, inhuman and disgusting and it will be banned from our communities. You need mental help.

    As a matter of fact, in many Muslim countries, the state builds churches and temples for minorities, offers minority scholarships in universities, and often reserves seats in parliament strictly for minorities. An Islamic state does not exist, and when a religious party wins, usually Western countries invade and change the governments (for example Algeria and Afghanistan) or put social, financial pressure on them (Iran, recently Hamas in Palestine).
    The comment about minorities being in islamic parliaments is laughable. And so the only kind of islamic states that can exist are oppressive ones? Afghanistan, Palestine, Iran. Again, you make my points for me.

    The purpose is to ensure protection of minorities' rights and also to enforce Islam as the dominant religion in the public. That is why it is the law of the 'Islamic' state to perserve the character of the state, but at the same time protect minorities' rights.
    But they are not free. That is not the point of dhimmitude. Q 9:29 "feel themselves oppressed" gives the real state of "kufr" in islamic nations. Anywhere that there is no freedom of religion is not free; that is, where apostates are sentenced to death.

    First of all, the zakat is the obligatory tax which is collected from Muslims.
    This is incorrect - zakaat has not always been obligatory. It became obligatory with the decline of the non-muslim tax base over the centuries.

    The Jizya is a military exemption tax is obligatory on all non-Muslims. Considering this law has not been instituted for 200 years, because of European dominance, it is quite hard to give the exact rate of Jizya.
    It is first on the "to do" list of Hamas. It seems they feel quite strongly about it. Hello, 7th century oppression. And it has gone both to war and the poor in the past, as you yourself admit:

    "Indeed, the Jizya was used for the policies of the government which could include war, but they were particularly used for the non-Muslims' affairs."

    The other taxes depended on the state and were much larger than these two and subject to all citizens of the state, except the women, children, elderly, and the poor.
    Again, incorrect. The jizya was often levied on women in North Africa, and it was usually higher than that of zakaat - about twice as high.

    Have you ever heard a Muslim insult a religious figure of another religion? It's not very common because we respect other people's religious beliefs.
    I have heard it many, many times both on this forum, on other forums, on TV from the Middle East and in transcripts of mosque speeches worldwide. You are sadly mistaken. There appears to be precious little respect paid any other religion by islam, especially when even the threefold offering of conversion, suppression or death is not even considered for religions other than "the People of the Book" - Christians and Jews.

    I agree. The greatest jihad is where one fights for the rights of the oppressed and downtrodden, those who cry under the oppression of tyrants and unjust armies.
    So service against the armies of islam is a good use of jihad? Jihad in the name of oppressed religion minorities in islamic nations is a good idea? I agree wholeheartedly. Or do you see dhimmitude as being an acceptable state of affairs? From your perspective, I'm sure it is. Not so from theirs.

    Thanks for the Quranic quotes. They are a great help to me in illustrating the inequality of literal islam; sharia, to give it a name:

    4:11. "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah. and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise."
    But not too wise, apparently, to foresee the coming of human rights for women. Why could he not see to the present day? My understanding was of his omnipotence.

    4:34. "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in their absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and beat them ; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means : For Allah is Most High, great."
    I have seen no translation which includes the phrase, anywhere, "lightly". I have therefore removed it from the text so that it may be seen in its pure reading.

    Men are given more strangth to men to earn livelihood and be protectors of the whole family. Women should guard the husband's property in his absence and well as remain chaste.
    And men - should they remain chaste also? Funny, I don't find that anywhere.

    The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us that if you believe a wife is committing adultery or seeing a man without telling you and you wish to beat her, do not hit her with anything but a cotton cloth.
    Never seen that reported anywhere. List your chain of evidence.

    If she doesn't heed any of these, then a husband is allowed to take the case to an Islamic court, where if she is found guilty, the wife and the man she was cheating with will be executed.
    Ah - death for estrangement. A fair exchange! LOL

    Islamic law has no tolerance for adultery, and the break up of the family unit which is a fundamental part of the strength of Islam and its values in a household. The West allows consentual adultery, however the West also has a major problem with illegitimate children and break up of families.
    It also allows abused women to escape their partners, which islam apparently does not allow, keeping those chains "strong", as you say. We in the West prefer to try to form equal unions and treat our partners as humans, with full rights, relying on the goodness of character of each partner in the marriage. I regret that islam does not apparently see things this way.

    4:36. "Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: For Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious.

    "What your right hands possess": that is, slaves.

    Allah does not exist.

    Geoff

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •