More barbarity from the Israelis

[simplyme]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

Your comment about "Crazy Christian" religions is in bad taste. Imagine if somebody had made a comment about "Crazy Islam", I know what your reaction would be.

I dont think there are any Christian religions which advocate having more than one wife. Maybe US should allow the keeping of slaves too since a religion actively advocates the same.

[CM]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

Aww shut up. You are the guy who uses Saudi Arabia as an example of how all Muslims act. Pot meet kettle. You are the last person on this website who should get on a the morality bandwagon.

[simplyme]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

When confronted with facts, you turn abusive. Why am I not surprised. Good for you...

[CM]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

Yes of course. Your opinion is a fact.

[Raj_ind]

@hareem01

LOL

First of all, I’m not stating facts based on what present Muslim countries do or don’t do. My replies are based on the teachings of Islamic Sacred Law.

So you’re saying that there isn’t any church or mandir left in a Muslim Land today???

Because I know what I’m talking about.

Those Christian diminated lands are “Secular” not “Christian”. And secular countries allow you to preach and practice as long as you don’t involve politics in it.

India is also a Secular Country and there’s no particular religion is in command in India. Btw, Hindus are not “most tolerant nation” on earth because it has a dark history regarding religious tolerance. Everyone knows that.

And, yes. Bring it on.

U say that idols of hindu faith wont be destroyed in an Islamic state and hindus will be granted full religious freedom. Here is how an Islamic state would deal with idols.

Islam Question and Answer - Obligation to destroy idols

Is it obligatory to destroy statues in Islam, even if they are part of the legacy of human civilization? Why is it that when the Sahaabah conquered other lands and saw statues there they did not destroy them?.

Praise be to Allaah.
The evidence of sharee’ah indicates that it is obligatory to destroy idols, for example:
1 – Muslim (969) narrated that Abu’l-Hayaaj al-Asadi said: ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib said to me: “Shall I not send you with the same instructions as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent me? ‘Do not leave any image without defacing it or any built-up grave without leveling it.’”
2 – Muslim (832) narrated from ‘Urwah ibn ‘Abasah that he said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “With what were you sent?” He said, “I was sent to uphold the ties of kinship, to break the idols, and so that Allaah would be worshipped alone with no partner or associate.”
The obligation to destroy them is even stronger if they are worshipped instead of Allaah.
3 – al-Bukhaari (3020) and Muslim (2476) narrated that Jareer ibn ‘Abd-Allaah al-Bajali said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to me: “O Jareer, will you not relieve me of Dhu’l-Khalsah?” That was a house (in Yemen) belonging to the (tribe of) Khath’am, which was called Ka’bat al-Yamaaniyyah. I set out with one hundred and fifty horsemen. I used not to sit firm on horses and I mentioned that to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He struck me on my chest with his hand and said, ‘O Allaah! Make him firm and make him one who guides others and is guided on the right path.’ " So Jareer went and burned it with fire, then Jareer sent a man called Abu Artaat to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, “I did not come to you until we had left it like a scabby camel.” Then the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) blessed the horses of (the tribe of) Ahmas and their men five times.
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said:
This hadeeth indicates that it is prescribed to remove things that may tempt or confuse the people, whether they are buildings, people, animals or inanimate objects.
4 – The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent Khaalid ibn al-Waleed (may Allaah be pleased with him) on a campaign to destroy al-‘Uzza.
5 – and he sent Sa’d ibn Zayd al-Ashhali (may Allaah be pleased with him) on a campaign to destroy Manaat.
6 – And he sent ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allaah be pleased with him) on a campaign to destroy Suwaa’. All of that happened after the Conquest of Makkah.
Al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah, 4/712. 776. 5/83; al-Seerah al-Nabawiyyah by Dr. ‘Ali al-Salaabi, 2/1186.
Al-Nawawi said in Sharh Muslim when discussing the issue of image-making:
They were unanimously agreed that whatever casts a shadow is not allowed and must be changed.
Images that cast a shadow are three-dimensional images like these statues.
With regard to what is said about the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) not destroying idols in the conquered lands, this is merely conjecture. The companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would not have left idols and statues alone, especially since they were worshipped at that time.
If it is asked, how come the Sahaabah left alone the ancient idols of the Pharaohs and Phoenicians? The answer is that these idols fall into one of three categories:
1 – These idols may have been in remote places that the Sahaabah did not reach; when the Sahaabah conquered Egypt, for example, that does not mean that they reached every part of the land.
2 – These idols may not have been visible, rather they may have been inside Pharaonic buildings etc. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told us to hasten when passing through the abodes of the wrongdoers and those who had been punished, and he forbade entering such places. In al-Saheehayn it is says: “Do not enter upon those who have been punished unless you are weeping, lest there befall you something like that which befall them.” He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that when he passed by ashaab al-hijr [the dwellers of the rocky tract – see al-Hijr 15:80], in the land of Thamood, the people of Saalih (peace be upon him).
According to another report narrated in al-Saheehayn, “If you are not weeping, then do not enter upon them, lest there befall you something like that which befall them.”
What we think is that if the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) saw a temple or building belonging of these people, they did not enter it or even look at what was inside it.
This will dispel any confusion about why the Sahaabah did not see the Pyramids or what is inside them. There is also the possibility that their doors and entrances were covered with sand at that time.
3 – Many of these idols that are visible nowadays were covered and hidden, and have only been discovered recently, or they have been brought from remote places that the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not reach.
Al-Zarkali was asked about the Pyramids and the Sphinx etc: Did the Sahaabah who entered Egypt see them?
He said: They were mostly covered with sand, especially the Sphinx.
Shibh Jazeerat al-‘Arab, 4/1188
Then even if we assume that there was a statue that was visible and not hidden, then we still have to prove that the Sahaabah saw it and were able to destroy it.
The fact of the matter is that the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) would not have been able to destroy some of these statues. It took twenty days to destroy some of these statues even with tools, equipment, and explosives etc that were not available to the Sahaabah at all.
This is indicated by what Ibn Khuldoon said in al-Muqaddimah (p. 383), that the caliph al-Rasheed was unable to destroy the estrade of Chosroes. He started to do that, and he gathered men and tools, and burned it with fire, and poured vinegar on it, but he was unable to do it. And the caliph al-Ma’moon wanted to destroy the Pyramids in Egypt and he gathered workers but he could not do it.
With regard to the excuse that these statues are part of the legacy of mankind, no attention should be paid to such words. Al-Laat, al-‘Uzaa, Hubal, Manaat and other idols were also a legacy for those who worshipped them among Quraysh and the Arabs.
This is a legacy, but it is a haraam legacy which should be uprooted. When the command comes from Allaah and His Messenger, then the believer must hasten to obey, and the command of Allaah and His Messenger cannot be rejected on the grounds of this flimsy excuse. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“The only saying of the faithful believers, when they are called to Allaah (His Words, the Qur’aan) and His Messenger, to judge between them, is that they say: “We hear and we obey.” And such are the successful (who will live forever in Paradise)”
[al-Noor 24:51]
We ask Allaah to help the Muslims to do that which He loves and which pleased Him.
And Allaah knows best.

Can a muslim be punished with capital punishment for killing a non muslim?

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 50:

Narrated Abu Juhaifa:

I asked 'Ali “Do you have anything Divine literature besides what is in the Qur’an?” Or, as Uyaina once said, “Apart from what the people have?” 'Ali said, “By Him Who made the grain split (germinate) and created the soul, we have nothing except what is in the Quran and the ability (gift) of understanding Allah’s Book which He may endow a man, with and what is written in this sheet of paper.” I asked, “What is on this paper?” He replied, “The legal regulations of Diya (Blood-money) and the (ransom for) releasing of the captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever).”

How Islam deals with apostates?

Sahih Bukhari: Book 52, Hadith 260

Narrated Ikrima: Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish (anybody) with Allah’s Punishment.’ No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’ ”

Bukhari, volume 9, #17

“Narrated Abdullah: Allah’s Messenger said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”

Bukhari, volume 9, #58

Narrated Abu Bruda, “Abu Musa said…..Behold there was a fettered man beside Abu Musa. Muadh asked, “Who is this (man)?” Abu Musa said, “He was a Jew and became a Muslim and hen reverted back to Judaism.” Then Abu Musa requested Muadh to sit down but Muadh said, “I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and his messenger,” and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, “Then we discussed the night prayers….

Hareem, U dont live in shariyah abiding state, and further there is only one state which has the guts to implement shariyah rulings. So non muslims dont have any other mean to understand shariyah rather than look at the state where shariyah is being implemented practically. Those who enjoy the liberty of western nation or imitation of western nation’s policies sitting in so called muslim nation just would tell us that this is not real shariyah and shariyah is different. But their opinion isnt worth buying. I hope I can make U understand the whole thing.

Now plz have a look at Saudi Arabia who is alone following and implementing shariyah. A chiristian cant imagine of wearing a cross for fear of Mutawwas.

Saudi Arabia was home to many christians and jews before Islam took over it, there has to be many synogouges and churches. But we find none, what happened to them? Why no non muslim is a citizen of Saudi Arabia? because Islamic state kicked all of them out of their homes.

Even now, in presence of so many ahadith and presence of the only shariyah abiding state, if U guys still keeep on demanding proof that Islam doesnt limit the religious and political rights of non muslims, than I will say that U are not honest in debate.

Giving example of how Pakistan allows hindus to idol worship or how indonasia allows hindus to build temples or how turky allows jews to build syongogues is of no use, because these states are hypocrite muslim states and full of munafiqeen. U know very well the reason of my this comment.

Peace to U all.

[hareem01]

@Raj_ind

U say that idols of hindu faith wont be destroyed in an Islamic state and hindus will be granted full religious freedom. Here is how an Islamic state would deal with idols.

Islam Question and Answer - Obligation to destroy idols

This is a site running by false salafis, most likely by Saudis themselves, and even the ahadith they posted do not suggest to destroy the idols of non muslims like Buddah’s statues.

@Raj_ind

Can a muslim be punished with capital punishment for killing a non muslim?

The hadith you posted does not give out any ruling and especially when there are incidents when Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), when a Muslim from the Bakr tribe killed a Christian of Hira, his verdict was that the killer be handed over to the heir of the deceased who could either accept blood money or kill him. The heir decided to take his revenge and the Muslim was killed.

And when a similar incident happened in the time of Umar ibn Abdul Aziz, the fate of the killer was the same. The unequivocal legal Islamic verdict was that the life of a Dhimmi was equal to the life of a Muslim and so was his blood money.Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) spelled out this principle: *“*Whoever has accepted our protection (Dhimmi) his blood is like our blood and his blood money is like our blood money.” This was not a sound byte meant for the media. It was the law of the land.

@Raj_ind

How Islam deals with apostates?

There’s no ayah in Quran that states the worldly punishment for apostates but there are more than few verses that talk about the grand punishment for a muslim who changes his religion.

Ahadith give the details of punishment for an apostate only if he leaves the muslim community and wages war against them.

The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah is not lawful to shed unless he be one of three: a married person who commits adultery, in which case he is to be stoned to death; or someone who goes out waging war against Allah and His Messenger, in which case he is to be killed, crucified, or expelled from the land; or someone who killed another, in which case he is to be killed in retaliation. (Abu Dawud and `A’ishah)

@Raj_ind

Hareem, U dont live in shariyah abiding state, and further there is only one state which has the guts to implement shariyah rulings. So non muslims dont have any other mean to understand shariyah rather than look at the state where shariyah is being implemented practically. Those who enjoy the liberty of western nation or imitation of western nation’s policies sitting in so called muslim nation just would tell us that this is not real shariyah and shariyah is different. But their opinion isnt worth buying. I hope I can make U understand the whole thing.

Now plz have a look at Saudi Arabia who is alone following and implementing shariyah. A chiristian cant imagine of wearing a cross for fear of Mutawwas.

Saudi Arabia was home to many christians and jews before Islam took over it, there has to be many synogouges and churches. But we find none, what happened to them? Why no non muslim is a citizen of Saudi Arabia? because Islamic state kicked all of them out of their homes.

Even now, in presence of so many ahadith and presence of the only shariyah abiding state, if U guys still keeep on demanding proof that Islam doesnt limit the religious and political rights of non muslims, than I will say that U are not honest in debate.

Giving example of how Pakistan allows hindus to idol worship or how indonasia allows hindus to build temples or how turky allows jews to build syongogues is of no use, because these states are hypocrite muslim states and full of munafiqeen. U know very well the reason of my this comment.

Peace to U all.

There is no Shariah in Saudi. The SAudi rulers are secularists who have separated the sacred law from state affairs and they carry out strict punishments for common people just to control them.

Saudi is no different than other muslim states, infact they are worse than others.

Western countries are more suitable for Shariah than muslim countries because West has already adopted half of Islamic Law.

[Decent_6Chora]

@Raj_ind

…And hindus are most tolrant to let muslims and christians both preach and propogate their religion in hindu dominated nation thats India. I hope U will accept this ultimate truth…

Perhaps an eye opener?

India: where Christians are a target for the religious murder mobs - Times Online

Persecuted Church Weblog: Christians targeted throughout India

Christians Targeted in India - Wellsphere

Christians still targeted in India | Spero News

Orissa Christians: We will not renounce our faith

[bittu]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

***Reason* & ** *Raj_ind* do you agree with me

...frankly speaking...no one can convince a muslim mind...when you talk and condemn their practices...they for ask proofs from quran...or confuse you with interpretations...or they simply lie...

and ultimately you will be declared ignorant.

[Reason]

That’s not the point. There shouldn’t be any insult based on false accusations in the first place.

Why? Are you afraid that Islam is a house of cards that cannot handle the slightest pressure? That is odd. Every “fake” religion can handle it but not the “one true” religion?

Moreover, who determines what is false? Islamic texts say every other religion is false. Those religions believe this is a false accusation and that they are the “right” religion. Does this mean imam should be banned from saying Islam is the “one true” religion and the like?

I don’t blame them because Mirza Ghulam Ahmed in his own books abuse Prophets and Muslims.

So you are only for not insulting “prophets” when you believe in them. At least you admit it. Just come out and say you want to ban all criticism, questioning of Islam or any historical figure relating to Islam (how far does that go. The 4 caliphs too? What about the other caliphs? Who else?)

Not true. We’re not allowed to do that.

This is false. Islamists do it all the time as do many other Muslims. Just read this board.

Umar also ordered the expulsion of the Christian and Jewish communities of Najran and Khaybar allowing them to reside in Syria or Iraq. He issued orders that these Christians and Jews should be treated well and allotted them the equivalent land in their new settlements.

And what’s wrong in that?

Ethnic cleansing is wrong in modern eyes. He also ordered that no “kafir” be allowed to live in Saudi Arabia and that any “kafir” in Arabia for business would have to leave after 3 days. This is tolerance? Muhammad offered tolerance and equal rights in Medina but this was corrupted right from the beginning with Abu Bakr and Umar (who, it has to be said, did a lot of great things in other areas).

Nobody killed the tribe. They were only exiled because of the treason and attempt for mudering women and children. Get this in your head.

In Umar’s case no. Pakistani-based people killed Indians in Mumbai. Does this justify forcing all Pakistanis to go into exile? Using your logic it does.

Yes they did.

Back that up with sources. Ottoman law did not declare equality for minorities until nearly 1900. Why was that the case if they were equal during the previous 700 years?

		 		 	 	 We love and respect the Prophet(SAW) more than our parents. And you should also even if you're not muslim. 

So what? If anyone criticizes someone you order their murder? This is savagery.

Would you believe me if I tell you?

Sure. Examples?

No, Quran doesn’t say the same about Moses(AS) and we don’t believe that he killed infants. Thanks

Read what Paine said:

People in general do not know what wickedness there is in this pretended word of God. Brought up in habits of superstition, they take it for granted that the Bible is true, and that it is good; they permit themselves not to doubt of it, and they carry the ideas they form of the benevolence of the Almighty to the book which they have been taught to believe was written by his authority. Good heavens! it is quite another thing; it is a book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy; for what can be greater blasphemy than to ascribe the wickedness of man to the orders of the Almighty?

Are you one of those? Have you actually read the Koran or are you simply assuming that since you have been brought up to believe that Moses is good that he did not order murder? What are the relevant verses of the Koran regarding Moses/Musa?

Because Islam is the second biggest religion here and English Law also allow Muslims to practice their religion. What the big deal?

Why can’t Muslims do the same for minorities in Muslim lands?

The big deal is you claimed their is censorship of Islam in the UK. That is false. There is only censorship of things that lead to violence, just as you cannot be a mobster and order someone to be killed or yell fire in a theater.

Yeah and?

Earlier you claimed the UK was not a Christian country. At least you recognize this basic fact now.

I don’t agree with that because this concept is not Islamic. And Islam didn’t spread this way in the past.

There is debate on whether it is Islamic. What is clear is that it was accepted by around the 9th century. Only now when jihadists are invoking that is it being re-examined about Muslims.

How did Islam spread? Islam went from Arabia to an empire stretching from India to France? That was defensive? That was naked imperialism and the stated reason given at the time was that it was a jihad to expand Islam.

told you not to make up things on your own.

It is well-documented that the Ridda wars involved forcing tribes to remain Muslim.

The English lack nothing to make them sound Mussulmans, and need only stretch out a finger to become one with the Turks in outward appearance, in religious observance and in their whole character.?

Answer the question: do you want 10th century shariah law to replace the laws of the UK?

What is this Islamist version? Show me a legal document.

Read the laws of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Taliban Afghanistan, Sudan, etc.

This has nothing to do with Indonesia. Stick to the topic.

Yes it does–the freeze on Ahmadiyaa activity is in Indonesia.

hy doesn’t the US recognize the right to have more than one wife as dictated by local “crazy christain” religions?

That is ridiculous logic. You are comparing state discrimination in recognizing religions and in the provision of basic rights such as the right to marry or go to school with polygamy.

The US recognizes all religions. You can have a religion with 10 members and so long as it is a sincere religion you are given IRS tax exemptions.

Answer the question: why can’t Indonesia do the same if it believes in equality?

I dont think there are any Christian religions which advocate having more than one wife.

A sub-sect of the sect of Mormonism does.

LOL at CM comparing the example of the government of Saudi Arabia, which uses shariah and says the Koran is its constitution, with that of a small sect within a sect.

Raj, first of all props to you for bringing facts to the table–straight from Muslim sources.

Hareem, U dont live in shariyah abiding state, and further there is only one state which has the guts to implement shariyah rulings. So non muslims dont have any other mean to understand shariyah rather than look at the state where shariyah is being implemented practically.

There are other examples. Iran, Sudan, the Taliban in Afghanistan, SWAT, and Pakistan has a lot of shariah as well. The best examples are Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the Taliban. They are indeed very chilling for those of us who live liberty and freedom. You are right. The best way to predict how shariah will be implemented is to look at how it was implemented in the past.

Saudi Arabia was home to many christians and jews before Islam took over it, there has to be many synogouges and churches. But we find none, what happened to them? Why no non muslim is a citizen of Saudi Arabia? because Islamic state kicked all of them out of their homes.

Correct and this is not because of some random molvi. This comes straight from the injunction of Umar, one of the most revered figures in Islam.

The hadith you posted does not give out any ruling and especially when there are incidents when Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), when a Muslim from the Bakr tribe killed a Christian of Hira, his verdict was that the killer be handed over to the heir of the deceased who could either accept blood money or kill him. The heir decided to take his revenge and the Muslim was killed.

And when a similar incident happened in the time of Umar ibn Abdul Aziz, the fate of the killer was the same. The unequivocal legal Islamic verdict was that the life of a Dhimmi was equal to the life of a Muslim and so was his blood money.Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) spelled out this principle: *“*Whoever has accepted our protection (Dhimmi) his blood is like our blood and his blood money is like our blood money.” This was not a sound byte meant for the media. It was the law of the land.

You are engaged in dissimulation here. Every Muslim knows the hadith trump the precedents under the caliphs. He posted a hadith which clearly said: “no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever).” This is what is cited. No one is cited a few isolated examples. They cite things like this to justify their view on this.

There’s** no ayah in Quran** that states the worldly punishment for apostates but there are more than few verses that talk about the grand punishment for a muslim who changes his religion.

There is no ayah–but there is a hadith saying this, and again, this is where Islamic laws on apostasy stem from.

Ahadith give the details of punishment for an apostate only if he leaves the muslim community and wages war against them.

This is false.

Bukhari *Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57: * Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to **the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.’” **

*Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58: *
[INDENT] Narrated Abu Burda:
Abu Musa said, “I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash’ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah’s Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, 'O Abu Musa (O ‘Abdullah bin Qais!).’ I said, ‘By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.’ As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, 'We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or ‘Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.’” The Prophet then sent Mu’adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu’adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu’adh asked, “Who is this (man)?” Abu Muisa said, “He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.” Then Abu Muisa requested Mu’adh to sit down but Mu’adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, “Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, ‘I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.’”

[/INDENT]

How about after Muhammad? Again, Bukhari:

*Volume 9, Book 84, Number 59: * Narrated Abu Huraira:
When the Prophet died and Abu Bakr became his successor and some of the Arabs reverted to disbelief, 'Umar said, "O Abu Bakr! How can you fight these people although Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, 'and whoever said, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, Allah will save his property and his life from me, unless (he does something for which he receives legal punishment) justly, and his account will be with Allah?’ "Abu Bakr said, “By Allah! I will fight whoever differentiates between prayers and Zakat as Zakat is the right to be taken from property (according to Allah’s Orders). By Allah! If they refused to pay me even a kid they used to pay to Allah’s Apostle, I would fight with them for withholding it.” 'Umar said, “By Allah: It was nothing, but I noticed that Allah opened Abu Bakr’s chest towards the decision to fight, therefore I realized that his decision was right.”

These are straight from respected Islamic hadith. These are the things Islamists and jihadists cite.

It has to be said, there is an effort to revise the hadith from 162,000 to 10,000 under the belief that most hadith were fabrications. Who is leading this effort? The Islamist government of Turkey. BBC NEWS | Europe | Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts We will have to say what they do regarding these hadiths. What matters right now is that these hadith are accepted as legitimate and they are cited by Islamists/jihadists.

There is no Shariah in Saudi. The SAudi rulers are secularists who have separated the sacred law from state affairs and they carry out strict punishments for common people just to control them.

What? Surely you do not believe this. Saudi law comes straight from the shariah of the Islamic and Ottoman empires.

Western countries are more suitable for Shariah than muslim countries because West has already adopted half of Islamic Law.

Western laws originates from Roman law, not Islamic law. The similarities that exist are because shariah is a fusion of Islamic religious texts, ancient Arab law, and Roman law as well.

…frankly speaking…no one can convince a muslim mind…when you talk and condemn their practices…they for ask proofs from quran…or confuse you with interpretations…or they simply lie…

I don’t think it is just Muslim minds but religious minds in general. Christians do the same thing. That is why Paine’s quote hit it on the head. Much of religiosity is based on emotions cultivated through brainwashing since your infancy. Then when they are confronted with some disturbing evidence they simply cannot even fathom that what they have been told to be holy could have some bad things in it.

What is disturbing is the outright distortion. We are quoting straight from hadith, not some liberal secularist journalist are an Islamophobe like Geert Wilders.

[hareem01]

@Reason

You are engaged in dissimulation here. Every Muslim knows the hadith trump the precedents under the caliphs. He posted a hadith which clearly said: “no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever).” This is what is cited. No one is cited a few isolated examples. They cite things like this to justify their view on this.

There is no ayah–but there is a hadith saying this, and again, this is where Islamic laws on apostasy stem from.

This is false.

How about after Muhammad? Again, Bukhari:

These are straight from respected Islamic hadith. These are the things Islamists and jihadists cite.

It has to be said, there is an effort to revise the hadith from 162,000 to 10,000 under the belief that most hadith were fabrications. Who is leading this effort? The Islamist government of Turkey. BBC NEWS | Europe | Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts We will have to say what they do regarding these hadiths. What matters right now is that these hadith are accepted as legitimate and they are cited by Islamists/jihadists.

.

As I told you before you can just pick one or two hadith give out rulings. This is what false salafis do and whatever suits their agenda they adopt and rest they leave.

I’ve explaned the Law regarding a non-muslim’s rights in Shariah that’s described by the traditional Islam.

I have nothing more to add. You can carry on showing your intolerance and hatred for Islam and Muslims, no one’s gonna pay attention to it.

[hareem01]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

You're calling UK a Christian country because the magor religion is Christianity, so if in ten years time Islam becomes the major religion of UK(which is quite likely according to a recent survey), would you then call UK an Islamic country?

[Reason]

@hareem01

As I told you before you can just pick one or two hadith give out rulings. This is what false salafis do and whatever suits their agenda they adopt and rest they leave.

I’ve explaned the Law regarding a non-muslim’s rights in Shariah that’s described by the traditional Islam.

I have nothing more to add. You can carry on showing your intolerance and hatred for Islam and Muslims, no one’s gonna pay attention to it.

Abu Baker and Umar were run-of-the-mill “false salafis”?

so if in ten years time Islam becomes the major religion of UK(which is quite likely according to a recent survey), would you then call UK an Islamic country?

England is a Christian nation because it calls itself that via its official church. If Muslims replace it with a mosque then it becomes a Muslim nation. Is this your goal? Replace the most successful laws in the world with medieval Arab shariah?

Show me that survey. Muslims are 3% of the UK population right now. Even* if *Muslims keep having 10 kids a piece they will not overtake the rest of society and reach a majority until the end of the century. This projection also assumes that “kafirs” in the UK continue to have low birth rates and that the UK continues to allow unfettered immigration for Muslims.

Face it: shariah will never reign in the land of the Union Jack. Immigrant birth rates decline when they move to advanced nations and the global trend of declining birth rates is hitting people from developing nations too now (i.e. Saudi Arabia down from 6.3 to 3.9 from 2000 to 2008, Pakistan down from 4.6 to 3.7) . In France Muslim women now have only as many kids as non-Muslim women. In Germany the gap is down to 0.5 more for Turkish women over German-born women (it was 2.0 in 1970 and 1.0 in 1996). And so on.

Besides, do you want to try to impose shariah in the UK? If Muslims pull that stunt anywhere in Europe there will be a swift reaction, perhaps even deportations. Listen to the BNP. Is this what you want? Do you think they are going to succumb to an Islamist takeover and throw away the laws and culture they developed over centuries for foreign, medieval Arab law? If you want shariah immigrate to one of the countries with shariah…

[hareem01]

@Reason

Abu Baker and Umar were run-of-the-mill “false salafis”?

No, you are.

@Reason

England is a Christian nation because it calls itself that via its official church. If Muslims replace it with a mosque then it becomes a Muslim nation. Is this your goal? Replace the most successful laws in the world with medieval Arab shariah?

Show me that survey. Muslims are 3% of the UK population right now. Even* if *Muslims keep having 10 kids a piece they will not overtake the rest of society and reach a majority until the end of the century. This projection also assumes that “kafirs” in the UK continue to have low birth rates and that the UK continues to allow unfettered immigration for Muslims.

Face it: shariah will never reign in the land of the Union Jack. Immigrant birth rates decline when they move to advanced nations and the global trend of declining birth rates is hitting people from developing nations too now (i.e. Saudi Arabia down from 6.3 to 3.9 from 2000 to 2008, Pakistan down from 4.6 to 3.7) . In France Muslim women now have only as many kids as non-Muslim women. In Germany the gap is down to 0.5 more for Turkish women over German-born women (it was 2.0 in 1970 and 1.0 in 1996). And so on.

Besides, do you want to try to impose shariah in the UK? If Muslims pull that stunt anywhere in Europe there will be a swift reaction, perhaps even deportations. Listen to the BNP. Is this what you want? Do you think they are going to succumb to an Islamist takeover and throw away the laws and culture they developed over centuries for foreign, medieval Arab law? If you want shariah immigrate to one of the countries with shariah…

I asked you a simple question and in reply you only showed your hatred for muslims, feel sorry for you. You’re a fascist and fascists are unreasonable creatures. Even with 3% population of UK, Islam is the second largest religion, and the largest religion of the world. Now burn in your jealousy. lol

My God! You’re so full of hatred and contempt. May you be guided. I’m not going to argue with you on this further.

[dhj786]

@hareem01

No, you are.

I asked you a simple question and in reply you only showed your hatred for muslims, feel sorry for you. You’re a fascist and fascists are unreasonable creatures. Even with 3% population of UK, Islam is the second largest religion, and the largest religion of the world. Now burn in your jealousy. lol

My God! You’re so full of hatred and contempt. May you be guided. I’m not going to argue with you on this further.

So why are you obsessed with trying to implement Saudi-style Islamic law in Britain? Can’t you feel comfortable living in England without trying to impose your worldview on others? Isn’t that imperialistic to begin with?

It’s funny how you accuse him of being hatred when you displayed your hatred and contempt of non-Muslims and apostates. Why so obsessed with subjugating non-Muslims? Why so obsessed with trying to outbreed the “kuffar”? Unable to live at peace with non-Muslims? I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re another al-Muhajiroun member anyways.

[hareem01]

@dhj786

So why are you obsessed with trying to implement Saudi-style Islamic law in Britain? Can’t you feel comfortable living in England without trying to impose your worldview on others? Isn’t that imperialistic to begin with?

It’s funny how you accuse him of being hatred when you displayed your hatred and contempt of non-Muslims and apostates. Why so obsessed with subjugating non-Muslims? Why so obsessed with trying to outbreed the “kuffar”? Unable to live at peace with non-Muslims? I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re another al-Muhajiroun member anyways.

Where did I say that I want to implement Saudi Style law in anywhere? And you surely haven’t read what I wrote about non-muslims’ rights in Islamic state because if you had then you wouldn’t be accusing me of displaying hatred for non-muslims.

If I’m Al-Mahajurun then you are Jack Straw.

[Reason]

So Abu Bakr and Umar were not Salafists. Can you explain why what they said--according to Bukhari's hadith--was incorrect?

[QUOTE]
Even with 3% population of UK, Islam is the second largest religion, and the largest religion of the world.
[/QUOTE]

And? It isn't the largest religion in the world; Christianity is.

How are you going to impose shariah with 3%? Oh yeah...

[QUOTE]
So why are you obsessed with trying to implement Saudi-style Islamic law in Britain? Can't you feel comfortable living in England without trying to impose your worldview on others? Isn't that imperialistic to begin with?
[/QUOTE]

He continues dodging this basic question: does he want shariah (9th century Arab/Roman law) implemented in the UK? We know why he won't answer...

Why doesn't he just move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where they have the shariah?

[QUOTE]
non-muslims' rights in Islamic state
[/QUOTE]

Are a joke. We have seen what shariah does to women and minorities for 1,000+ years and in several countries today.

[hareem01]

So Abu Bakr and Umar were not Salafists. Can you explain why what they said--according to Bukhari's hadith--was incorrect?

And? It isn't the largest religion in the world; Christianity is.

How are you going to impose shariah with 3%? Oh yeah...

He continues dodging this basic question: does he want shariah (9th century Arab/Roman law) implemented in the UK? We know why he won't answer...

Why doesn't he just move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where they have the shariah?

Are a joke. We have seen what shariah does to women and minorities for 1,000+ years and in several countries today.

They were Salaf not salafi, salafist or false salafi. Get acquainted with the islamic terms before try to act like a scholar and historian.
Oh and which hadith out of several you posted, can you please point out?

Christianity used to be the largest religion few years ago but now it's Islam.

How am I going to impose Shariah? By not imposing it.

I want God's law everywhere because if I don't then I'm not a muslim.

You saw nothing.

[Reason]

[QUOTE]
They were Salaf not salafi, salafist or false salafi.
[/QUOTE]

I know. So they were the real mccoy then. What disagreement do you have their comments in the hadiths posted in this thread?

[QUOTE]
Oh and which hadith out of several you posted, can you please point out?
[/QUOTE]

Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Numbers 57 and 59.

Christianity is still the largest although if Islam is projected to overtake it given its high birth rate.

[QUOTE]
How am I going to impose Shariah? By not imposing it.

I want God's law everywher
[/QUOTE]

Which is it? If you want shariah everywhere then it has to be implemented.

[happyheart]

Re: More barbarity from the Israelis

also active here
defending israel
u said already ur not a Pakistani
ur not a muslim
so anything u say against muslims and islam does not surprime me any longer since u lost any credibitly because for you Muslims are (1 1/2 billion people ) are FASCISTS.

[Raj_ind]

@Decent_6Chora

Perhaps an eye opener?

India: where Christians are a target for the religious murder mobs - Times Online

Persecuted Church Weblog: Christians targeted throughout India

Christians Targeted in India - Wellsphere

Christians still targeted in India | Spero News

Orissa Christians: We will not renounce our faith

So what does this stories prove? That hindus are intolrant ppls? I dont know what U want to prove about hindus, but if U wanna paint all hindus with same brush than I m afraid that U seem to be from the group of ppls who would say since U are a muslim, therefore U are a terrorist. And I reject any such idea as a trash. Plz be clear what U want to prove.

BTW hindus are only ppls who gave minorities equal rights through democracy. U can check out following facts,

Our PM Dr. Manmohan singh is from minority community.

The most powerful politician of India is from minority community, she is Smt Sonia Gandhi.

Our vice president Mr. Hamid Ansari is from minority community.

This is because overwhelming majority of hindus are secular and tolerant ppls, so whats the point in bringing out actions of a few to defame hindus? However if U have quoted those shameful example of hindus to criticize those religious bigots, than I m with U along with majority of my hindu bretherns.