Islamic protesters sparked fury today after they burned a model of a poppy and deliberately broke the silence at Armistice Day commemorations in central London.As the clock struck 11am, the Islamic protesters burned a model of a poppy and chanted ‘British soldiers burn in hell’.They held banners which read ‘Islam will dominate’ and ‘Our dead are in paradise, your dead are in hell’.
linkFirasat has published a trailer of the film in which he appears speaking in the Plaza de Colón in Madrid with the Spanish flag in the background, and in which he asks, among other things, is the prophet of Islam was "a holy man sent by Allah or a rapist of children and a murderer". In the last year he issued a series of caricatures of Mohammed. [The Ministry of] Interior has initiated an inquiry to see if the status of refugee can be withdrawn from him, according to sources within the ministry, although the legal grounds for this decision have not been specified - indicating that an order for search and capture may be issued against him, a point which has not been confirmed.
Dear Predator, strongly recommend that this post be deleted as it can get this forum into unessecary trouble.ramana wrote:Muhammad is a original proponent of the doctrine of 'excess cruelty". He is a mass murderer and inspirer of mass murderers. His founding a religion allows him to escape the tag of pre-modern Hitler.
The predator is right and he echoes the views of billions of people worldwide and those are his personal views and have nothing to do with the forum.Aditya_V wrote:Dear Predator, strongly recommend that this post be deleted as it can get this forum into unessecary trouble.ramana wrote:Muhammad is a original proponent of the doctrine of 'excess cruelty". He is a mass murderer and inspirer of mass murderers. His founding a religion allows him to escape the tag of pre-modern Hitler.
Lets just focus on current events.
He's not insulting a religion , he has just laid bare the personality traits of a person. Just like Kasab is a terrorist and a criminal to an Indian but a martyr , a ghazi to a paki. It all depends what lens you are wearing when watching.Aditya_V wrote:My concern is that post brings BRF very easily under 66A of the IT act and unlike the Mumbai girls, MSM will not cover or share 2 tears for us. it is too much of a risk and why insult a religion. Lets keep it to the misdeed of its followers.
If you are afraid for yourself, don't say anything and stay off for a while. Let those who want to speak say what they want to say.Aditya_V wrote:My concern is that post brings BRF very easily under 66A of the IT act and unlike the Mumbai girls, MSM will not cover or share 2 tears for us. it is too much of a risk and why insult a religion. Lets keep it to the misdeed of its followers.
A gourmet dining at Crewe
Found a very large rat in his stew
Said the waiter "Don't shout"
"And wave it about"
"Or others will want one too"
Aditya V ji, Get rid of the fear. Try to develop a warrior mindset.Aditya_V wrote:My concern is that post brings BRF very easily under 66A of the IT act and unlike the Mumbai girls, MSM will not cover or share 2 tears for us. it is too much of a risk and why insult a religion. Lets keep it to the misdeed of its followers.
I concur.Aditya_V wrote:It is too much of a risk and why insult a religion. Lets keep it to the misdeed of its followers.
Aditya_V wrote:Dear Predator, strongly recommend that this post be deleted as it can get this forum into unessecary trouble.ramana wrote:Muhammad is a original proponent of the doctrine of 'excess cruelty". He is a mass murderer and inspirer of mass murderers. His founding a religion allows him to escape the tag of pre-modern Hitler.
Lets just focus on current events.
"Obey The Prophet, Even If He Tells You To Kill"
by Raymond Ibrahim
Gatestone Institute
November 26, 2012
http://www.meforum.org/3394/qaradawi-murder
Print Send RSS Share: Facebook Twitter Google +1
Be the first of your friends to like this.
Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi—one of the most influential Islamic clerics in the world, author of over 100 books on Muslim doctrine, head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood—maintains that Muslims must obey the commands of Islam's prophet Muhammad, even unto murder. This would be the same Dr. Qaradawi that American academics like Georgetown professor John Esposito praise for engaging in a "reformist interpretation of Islam and its relationship to democracy, pluralism, and human rights."
Missed in the West, Qaradawi made this declaration two years ago on his popular Arabic program, Al-Sharia wa Al-Haya ("Sharia and Life"), broadcast by al-Jazeera to an estimated audience of 60 million worldwide.
Towards the end of the show, the host asked Qaradawi what he thought about the fact that Sheikh Ahmad Hassoun, the grand mufti of Syria, had earlier said to an American delegation: "If [Muslim prophet] Muhammad asked me to reject Christianity or Judaism, I would have rejected him." Visibly agitated, Qaradawi erupted as follows:
No scholar of Islam or even average Muslim would ever say such words. If you believe that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, then you must obey him—for he does not command except that which is good. So, even if he tells you to kill, you must— … The story about our prophet Musa [Moses], when al-Khidr killed the boy and Musa said "you killed and you did!" But then he [Khidr] revealed why he killed the boy, and why he punctured the boat. So we cannot distort the facts in order to please the people. Let the people be satisfied with the Truth [Sharia teachings], not the false.
Syria's grand mufti said many other things concerning goodwill for Christians that roused Qaradawi's ire. For instance, before a large Christian gathering in Syria, where he was a guest speaker, he insisted that there were no differences between Christians and Muslims:
If Christianity is about believing in one God, so I believe in one God; if Christianity is about believing in Jesus, so I believe in Jesus; if Christianity is about believing in the New Testament, so I believe in the New Testament; if Christianity is about believing in the Old Testament, so I believe in the Old Testament; if Christianity is about believing that Mary was a pure virgin, so I believe she was a pure virgin, untouched by man; and if Christianity is about believing in the resurrection, so I believe in the resurrection—so what is the difference between me and Christians?
Qaradawi offered correct Muslim doctrine in response to this otherwise egalitarian talk, confirming that, yes, Islam believes all these things—but according to its own narratives, not the ones recorded in the Bible, which, as the Quran teaches, have been distorted. Hence, if Muslims believe all those things that the Syrian grand mufti mentioned, they do not believe in the fundamentals of Christianity—including the Trinity, Christ's divinity or resurrection, and atonement of sins—hence they reject Christianity, as understood and practiced by over a billion Christians.
As for believing in the Old and New Testaments, the Quran claims that, once upon a time there were "true" versions, but that the current texts which we possess—and which are many centuries older than the Quran itself—were "corrupted" (to include, for instance, the aforementioned fundamentals of Christianity). Thus the only "authentic" remnants of Christianity and Judaism are the ones Muhammad narrated in the Quran—where we meet many doppelgangers, like Isa, a very different "Jesus" who was never crucified and will return to break all Christian crucifixes and kill all pigs.
Indeed, it is this Muslim proclivity to create "parallel" characters based on biblical figures that explains Qaradawi's justification to murder people in blind obedience to the prophet. His reference to "Musa," based on the Hebrew Moses, is a reference to a story—possibly rooted in the 3rd century Alexander Romance and popularized by the 1970s martial arts movie, Circle of Iron—which, nonetheless, occurs in Quran, and so must be accepted literally.
According to the Quran's narrative (18:65-82), Musa seeks out al-Khidr—"the Green Man," who possesses powers of sight—and asks if he may follow and learn from him. Al-Khidr reluctantly agrees, on condition that Musa not question anything he, the Green Man, does, until such time as the latter chooses to reveal the significance of his actions.
However, the Green Man does strange things—randomly killing a young boy and destroying the boat of people who helped give them passage—to which Musa demands immediate answers. The Green Man eventually explains that he killed the boy because his parents were good Muslims, while the boy was an infidel who would have burdened them with his transgressions; and he destroyed the boat of the good people because a king was about to seize it anyway.
Such is the alternate worldview and value system of Islam. Just as Islam introduced parallel characters based on Christian and Jewish figures, so did it introduce a parallel system of ethics and morality—one not to be questioned, for, as the Quran's Green Man shows, who are we mortals to know what good these ostensibly bizarre or murderous actions will lead to? Only the prophet of Allah knows—hence why he must be blindly obeyed, even if he commands you to murder.
Which leads to another parallel, one lethal in its implications: Just as a Western general's orders—including to kill—are not open to question by his soldiers, in Islam, the orders of "general" Muhammad are not open to question by the world's 1 billion plus Muslims, all of whom become, according to top Islamic scholar Qaradawi, Islam's "soldiers," ever ready to kill for their prophet-general.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
After Nasser died in 1970, and the pro-Western President Anwar Sadat secretly sponsored militant Islamist cells to counter nationalists and communists, British officials were still describing the Brotherhood as “a potentially handy weapon” for the regime
The story of how Britain has, for decades, consistently undermined secular forces in the Arab world and colluded with radical forces to maintain its place in the global financial order.
Question for Qadri: How did he recognize that "person" in his dreams to be Muhammad if he had never seen him before (in person or his photo)? If he had, he should have reported it. Clearly, this qadri guy is wajib ul cattle. His dreams are anti islamic and he must be forbidden to dream again.Carl wrote:Dr. Tahir ul-Qadri...revealed that the Prophet Muhammad (saw) had appeared in his dream and said that he had come to stay in Pakistan, but only if Tahir ul-Qadri himself agreed to be his personal host.
cimple onlee. A 60 year old with a 6 year old, in hisanupmisra wrote: Question for Qadri: How did he recognize that "person" in his dreams to be Muhammad if he had never seen him before (in person or his photo)? If he had, he should have reported it. Clearly, this qadri guy is wajib ul cattle. His dreams are anti islamic and he must be forbidden to dream again.
anup ji, thij deep and emotional koshchan provej that joo are maulaner material.anupmisra wrote:Question for Qadri: How did he recognize that "person" in his dreams to be Muhammad if he had never seen him before (in person or his photo)? If he had, he should have reported it. Clearly, this qadri guy is wajib ul cattle. His dreams are anti islamic and he must be forbidden to dream again.
Am I reading this right ?Kerala, land of the alleged Love Jihad, has just managed to reverse a Hindu-Muslim marriage on the ground that a religious conversion just before marriage sounds suspicious. The interesting twist to the tale is that this is a case of a Muslim groom who converted to Hinduism, apparently with the blessings of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP).
The Kerala High Court, reports The Times of India, deemed the conversion of the groom Shaiju M to Hinduism before his marriage to Ashwathy Ravindran as invalid. Even though both were adults, and thus entitled to marry according to their wishes, Justices Pius C Kuriakose and Babu Mathew P Joseph said their marriage would be valid only if they registered it under the Special Marriage Act.
The judgement is controversial—and is sure to be challenged by religious organisations—for three reasons.
) and the thugs and gangstas who want to conquer Kafir lands.You are reading that right. A short while ago, the Indian judicial system declared that Hinduism is not a religion. Everyone knows that Islam is a religion. How can you convert from a religion of yours (that prevents apostasy by death) to a non religion. Everyone also knows that everyone in India has to have a religion.jamwal wrote:Kerala court ruling implies: Before marriage, it's halaal for Hindu to convert in Islam, but not the other way around.
Am I reading this right ?Kerala, land of the alleged Love Jihad, has just managed to reverse a Hindu-Muslim marriage on the ground that a religious conversion just before marriage sounds suspicious. The interesting twist to the tale is that this is a case of a Muslim groom who converted to Hinduism, apparently with the blessings of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP).
The Kerala High Court, reports The Times of India, deemed the conversion of the groom Shaiju M to Hinduism before his marriage to Ashwathy Ravindran as invalid. Even though both were adults, and thus entitled to marry according to their wishes, Justices Pius C Kuriakose and Babu Mathew P Joseph said their marriage would be valid only if they registered it under the Special Marriage Act.
The judgement is controversial—and is sure to be challenged by religious organisations—for three reasons.
As per my current understanding of Islam, I see zero contradictions. Everything is explainable. If anything should fall outside this definition, I'll be more than happy to be corrected.KJoishy wrote:Islam is so full of contradictions and loopholes that it is mindboggling. It's the ultimate well designed religion for this purpose. All things to all people.
No wonder it caters both to the honest decent people who wail (Islam is peace onleee
Actually there is something called temporary marriage in Islam which is meant to take care of manly needs. Wimmens of course are not Hu-Man.JE Menon wrote:>>unlawful and sin for male to see any strange woman without need
What about a strange woman with need? Would that be ok? If not, then does that mean its not ok to see strange women, period? Then the question arises: What if the woman is not strange? Would it still be unlawful and sin?
No Contradiction in Chamleonslam!!RajeshA wrote:As per my current understanding of Islam, I see zero contradictions. Everything is explainable. If anything should fall outside this definition, I'll be more than happy to be corrected.KJoishy wrote:Islam is so full of contradictions and loopholes that it is mindboggling. It's the ultimate well designed religion for this purpose. All things to all people.
No wonder it caters both to the honest decent people who wail (Islam is peace onleee