olabowale:

@Nimshi: « #58 on: Today at 07:17:42 PM »
Are you here as a critic, or you will give me your "view" about the topic?

I am here as both; to critique opinion I may find unclear, and to express mine. Do you have a problem with that?

I wonder what prompted Salman Rushdie to write a book that he himself, according to your statement
above, "condemned" his own attack of Islam, after he had been "lionised" so much about his brilliance in this work?

I could give an answer to that: Sir Salman gave the statement in 1990, that's shortly after the sentence of death. Apparently, the man feared for his life, after the threat became very present and very credible. It is also been suggested that the agencies protecting him thought making such a statement would help douse the fire; he may have had other motivations, but it is quite credible that his safety was a major consideration.

And, please, don't fall for the popular talk of Rushdie being lionised: even those who disagreed with him - including Muslims who were quite furious at the events following the publishing of the book - knew he must be protected from harm. And there are some who agreed with what Rushdie wrote but felt he should face the bad music all the same; things weren't as simple and straightforward as "for or against".

For the attention of Plus_Queen, Salman Rushdie, has just done exactly what Allah says about the "chances to return to Islam after leaving it," if what Nimshi said above, is correct. You see the miracle of Qur'an, predicting what will happen to those who may want out, temporarily of Islam?

What I wrote was a public event, and it is easily verifiable. But of course, by then, the terror unleashed by the Ayatollah was already out; few of those willing to liquidate Rushdie thought anything of the statement. In fact, many on his side made him out as a coward, and a cop-out. Damned if he did; damned if he didn't.

Nimshi, innocent people die in the hand of good people, even in time of peace. When people are upset they are emotional and often irrational. bad things do happen. This reminds me of the ahadith of Prophet Muhammad (AS), where he advised a person who asked him, not to get upset, each of the three person asked him, in one single occasion; "Laa Dubdub!" (don't be angry: 3 times).

I agree with you here. But must things be this way? Can we argue that it was right of the ayatollah to unleash this sort of thing on Rushdie (and the world and British tax payers?). If people can be prevented from getting irrational and emotional and submit to rational thought, things will probably be better, no?

According to your answer above, it is true that no one was upset because "Rushdie" left Islam. Now tell me what is not a lie in any of his "writing" that upset the Muslims who were "angry" at him? Please don't be shy! Is there any truth in the portions that the Musliims say he "lied?"

First, you have restated your claim; the original claim was about 100% of the things in Rushdie book; I will not be reserved in debunking the claim that everything in the SV was 100% lies. I respond to the last question above in my post below.

If his name is Salman Rushdie, we know that he was correct in telling us his name. The muslims are not saying that he lied about his names. Talk to me about anything Truthful about what the Muslim says he lied about on "ISLAM?"

His full name: Ahmed Salman Rushdie; and yes, his family are (were?) Muslims.

By the way, I did not read the book for a very simple reason; "It is garbage and I have no interest in wasting my time on it."

Twice above you've requested a discussion of some of the contents of the book; since you haven't read the book, how did you come to a conclusion about its contents? This is what is irrational: to assert that something you haven't examined is garbage. People do this all the time; people say it about Al Quran, some do about the Bible. And I suspect the Ayatollah Khomeini did not read Rushdie's book before rushing to pronounce an execution. You have shown that in your case, there's no need of suspicion.

How could you possibly intelligently discuss a book you haven't read?
.

How could you possibly intelligently discuss a book you haven't read?

He can't.

So instead, expect more smoke and mirrors, more changing the subject and more illogical rhetoric.

He cannot even answer a simple question like the one in the thread title without resorting to lies and brainwashed drivel. How do you expect him to answer your question when he has even less information?

He resorts to defending murder by saying "Look!!! Here's one person who wasn't murdered when they left Islam!!!". Big deal. Is that meant to justify all the thousands of other killings?

Olabalwe is an extremist. He is what we call a fanatic. There is no other way of looking upon people with his disgusting views. The amazing thing is that he parasites on a Christian society whilst holding these disgusting views. So not only an extremist but also a hypocrite.

Olabowale you have done a lots to give a nice precise answer in the question regarding Apostasy. Our reader like Plus_Queen is a hard header hypocrite who like to trick us about this issued. He did not even answer any of the above question you have been ask before and he still struggle to comeout with a literal reasoning. I see how this people are freaking accusing us of becoming pathetic that we cannot deal with them. All of a sudden the repeated argument are recycling every time you heard they allegation are noteworthy of a penny. Keep the good job Brother Olabowale.


@Nimshi

I am here as both; to critique opinion I may find unclear, and to express mine. Do you have a problem with that?

Then we have a neutral fellow who like to be a referee in this Issue. Welcome judge’s Nimshi. Are you a male or female prosecutor?

@Nimshi: « #64 on: Today at 02:58:19 AM »

I am here as both; to critique opinion I may find unclear, and to express mine. Do you have a problem with that?

I have no problem with either and neither. Whatever make your roll is okay with me. I just needed to check your status, and intention.



[Quote]
I could give an answer to that: Sir Salman gave the statement in 1990, that's shortly after the sentence of death. Apparently, the man feared for his life, after the threat became very present and very credible. It is also been suggested that the agencies protecting him thought making such a statement would help douse the fire; he may have had other motivations, but it is quite credible that his safety was a major consideration.
[/quote]

So his pronouncement, or renouncement is based on "fear" and not true conviction? We call those types of people in islam Hypocrites. And their case with Allah is worse than outright Disbelievers. The outright disbelievers are always not in the Muslim's camp. But the Hypocrites drape themselves in the garment of Islam, while what is inside them is the 180 degrees to what is seen on the outside!

By the way MI5 and MI6 are few of the best agencies of the world. If they have difficulty in protecting Salman Rushdie without a tentative apprehension about their full capability, know that the only One to rely upon and put your trust in is Allah the Almighty.

And, please, don't fall for the popular talk of Rushdie being lionised: even those who disagreed with him - including Muslims who were quite furious at the events following the publishing of the book - knew he must be protected from harm. And there are some who agreed with what Rushdie wrote but felt he should face the bad music all the same; things weren't as simple and straightforward as "for or against".

And where do you stand? Do you agree with him, in anything that he wrote against Islam? Those muslims who agreed with him, where and what do they agree with him on agaisnt Islam? Remember Rushdie did not not write about the Islamic figures of todays, The Qur'an itself and Muhammad and his generation. Please tell me what is wrong with either the Qur'an and or Muhammad (AS)?

We want to see the the faces of Hypocracy; Its those among the "muslims," who are against Qur'an and or Muhammad (AS)! Is there a third category apart from the "simple and straight forward 'for or against' categories?

Allah says in His Book, the Al Qur'an, which means; When Allah and His Messenger have "decided" on a matter, it does not befit a "believing Muslim" to have any "opinion" but to say, "I hear and I Obey!" Tell me your own position. You already know mine; it is I hear and I obey.



[Quote]
What I wrote was a public event, and it is easily verifiable. But of course, by then, the terror unleashed by the Ayatollah was already out; few of those willing to liquidate Rushdie thought anything of the statement. In fact, many on his side made him out as a coward, and a cop-out. Damned if he did; damned if he didn't.
[/quote]

I am not but point out the fact that his action proofed out exactly what Allah said in the Qur'an! My interest stops there. Read my original entry, again. You and I do not know the future. I pray that our heart is firm on "true guidiance that will make us be favored and mercied by Allah." Amin. I am still working hard on my ways. But I will not want to end up in a wrong camp whereby I may receive the Anger in Justice of Allah.



[Quote]
I agree with you here. But must things be this way? Can we argue that it was right of the ayatollah to unleash this sort of thing on Rushdie (and the world and British tax payers?). If people can be prevented from getting irrational and emotional and submit to rational thought, things will probably be better, no?
[/quote]

You are correct. Allah says in His Book, which means: Do not be unjust because of the hatred you perceive a person have for you. Another verse also talks about avoiding injustice because of the evil of a person. Yet another verse encourages that when an enemy of a muslim seeks the protection of muslims, even in war, this enemy should be treated with kindness and then help to reach a safe and secure place, away from any harm. Muslims were also encouraged, rather demamnded to be kind to captives of war.

If muslims do not practice this, it is not an endctment on islam, rather endictment on the unjust muslims who do this evil. This is why Islam stands alone, at a higher level and the muslims have to attain to the HIGH Standard prescribed in Islamic Holy Books; Qur'an and Sunnah/Hadith!



[Quote]
First, you have restated your claim; the original claim was about 100% of the things in Rushdie book; I will not be reserved in debunking the claim that everything in the SV was 100% lies. I respond to the last question above in my post below.
[/quote]

And if anything was a true, apart from his obvious personal info and what the Muslims always know from The Qur'an and Sunnah/Hadith and Sirah, etc, why did anyone from the Muslim camp got enraged? Did Ayatollah made his "fatwa" on Rushdie because of his reinstatement of what are in Islamic Books without any "lies?"



[Quote]
His full name: Ahmed Salman Rushdie; and yes, his family are (were?) Muslims.
[/quote]

LOl. Nimshi, this is your debunking my statement that there as no truth in his Book? Man. I leave it for others to form their Opinions.



[Quote]
Twice above you've requested a discussion of some of the contents of the book; since you haven't read the book, how did you come to a conclusion about its contents?
[/quote]

Its title is a dead giveaway. Then the fact that it is said things that are "Untrue" about Islam. I did not say Muslims, but Islam, which included Muhammad (AS), the prophet and he being described as a "walking Qur'an." Should I take what Rushdie say wrong about Islam to be "true?"

Imagine the honesty of Muhammad (AS) who devulged Surah "Abasa," just as it was revealed. Should I even consider that there is anything he did not tell us the "absolute truth," about? We knew from the Qur'an his veracity; In Surah Mariam, or isra, we read were he was commanded to tell mankind, as he was asked by the "visiting Jew" to the masjid in Madina, that his knowledge about the spirit/soul of man is "little and very insignificant." We read in Surah Kahf, where he was commanded to declare to mankind that he "was just a human being like all of you, as human beings."

This is what is irrational: to assert that something you haven't examined is garbage. People do this all the time; people say it about Al Quran, some do about the Bible. And I suspect the Ayatollah Khomeini did not read Rushdie's book before rushing to pronounce an execution. You have shown that in your case, there's no need of suspicion.

How could you possibly intelligently discuss a book you haven't read?

If a man says evil things about my beloved father (ra), who I carry his blood. If I heard from others what he has said about my father were all lies. If I was told that he was giving a speech in the civic center, talking about the same thing, should I go to listen to him before I know that I should avoid his lies? The decision is clear, since my father (ra) is even more beloved to me than my mother. Yet my mother Mariam Victoria Samuel is less beloved to me than "Muhammad (AS)." What would prompt me to read "Satanic Verses?" Please tell me what I need to learn from it?

Look, one of the ways I avoid sexual temptations is not to indulge myself in what will lead me to "think hard," about it. So I do not read overtly sexual materials. How do I keep my Iman over the "borderline;" is not to read garbages. Satanic Verses is nothing short of it. From your statement about Rushdie'srecounting of his own book, if he did it with sincere heart, it simple shows that he probably suffered from "temporary insanity or disollusionment" when he penned it. If he recounted it under duress, fearing for his life, then you see him as the face of hypocracy. What do I need from either?
.



@Bastage: « #65 on: Today at 09:13:26 AM »

He can't.

Lol. Yes, I can. You think I am like you who can't up make his own mind? I can read and think at the same time. About Rushdie's book, I found it unworthy. And I do not think with my elbow. I am not irrational. I just dont jump into everything. I can appreciate your position, since you come out clearly as irreligious. Whats with my man, Nimshi? How can a muslim opposes Qur'an and or Sunnah/hadith?

So instead, expect more smoke and mirrors, more changing the subject and more illogical rhetoric.

How you arrived at lack of Powerful Creator Godhead is the illogical rhedoric here.

He cannot even answer a simple question like the one in the thread title without resorting to lies and brainwashed drivel. How do you expect him to answer your question when he has even less information?

I am not like you, man. I do not have to run to a book to learn "everythin, everytime." There is what is basic about human thinking. I, at least have a full cup of that. No one had to tell me, before I knew my mother was my first love. The fact that she was constant in my life and cared terrible about me made that a foundaion of understand to me.

And in my much earlier post I had indicated that not a single apostate is worthy of death, if he does not do any harm to Islam. Afterall there is a chance for people to return to Islam. Furtherthere is no compulsion in religion, since no human can know the full truth that lays in the heart.

However, for the bigger good of the community, the right of the individual can not be trampled upon. The same goes for the bigger freedom of the individual, the collective rights and peace of the community, at large can not be circumvented and unenforced. If a person walks away from an idea, he or she should make a clean break. If anything is ever discussed about it it should be what is true, and not lies. For example, Islam discourages backbiting. It discourages evil speech about an exspouse, because she is a potential spouse of another man. There is no reason to say evil things about her.

Now when a person leaves Islam, but turns around and begins to speak "lies," and not just the truth that he may disagree about in Islam. This person, if it becomes a communual problem, should be warned as being challenged to back up his statement with veriable evidences. If he does not astop, I will not be against it if the community set up a court and gives him to defend his accusations! If he is unable and he is found guilty, if he had caused a tremendous amount of damages and cracks in the fibre of the society, if they pronounce death sentence on him, or give him wholesale amnesty, I will not have problem with either decision.

Even though I will prefer that he be forgiven, but I will not lose any sleep if it is not. For example, cousins are not forbidden as a spouse, but it is not for me, because of my personality. It has nothing to do with the larger Yoruba marital protocols.

He resorts to defending murder by saying "Look!!! Here's one person who wasn't murdered when they left Islam!!!". Big deal. Is that meant to justify all the thousands of other killings?

Bastage, and many more thousands are/were left alone to have their "disbelieving lives!" Pilgrim and her family is a good example. Malik and others on Nairaland are further testimonies. Stop acting goofy, man.

Olabalwe is an extremist. He is what we call a fanatic. There is no other way of looking upon people with his disgusting views. The amazing thing is that he parasites on a Christian society whilst holding these disgusting views. So not only an extremist but also a hypocrite.

Oh boy, your tone is terrible. I am not a parsite, or hypocrite, or fanatic, or extremist, etc. Stop calling what you are not sure that I am. I enjoy life and I have well balanced view of what I am in Islam and when I am in other settings. I am never unaware of my role in my family, and communities of friends and associates. And I have Jews and Christians and hindu and others in this extensive group of associates. I am not close minded like you man.

DO YOU HAVE CLOSE ASSOCIATES FROM ISLAM? lol. Omo 9ja is closed hearted. Hard heart, I will say.

olabowale:

@Nimshi: « #64 on: Today at 02:58:19 AM »
I have no problem with either and neither. Whatever make your roll is okay with me. I just needed to check your status, and intention.

And you think my response would've helped with checking my intention? Chasing after intentions is like chasing after the wind, especially on iNet discussion boards.

So his pronouncement, or renouncement is based on "fear" and not true conviction? We call those types of people in islam Hypocrites. And their case with Allah is worse than outright Disbelievers. The outright disbelievers are always not in the Muslim's camp. But the Hypocrites drape themselves in the garment of Islam, while what is inside them is the 180 degrees to what is seen on the outside!

You're missing the point. One could speculate as to Rushdie's motivation when he issued the statement; you could hardly be sure about why he did it; in any case, the statement should have been taken at face value; but that did not happen. the murderers still chased after him.

By the way MI5 and MI6 are few of the best agencies of the world. If they have difficulty in protecting Salman Rushdie without a tentative apprehension about their full capability, know that the only One to rely upon and put your trust in is Allah the Almighty.

Here: reasonable agencies attempt to diffuse tension, they don't chase after trouble if it could be avoided. So everything was in accordance with strategy. And the fact that Sir Salman is alive is a triumph for freedom of speech, and the British security apparatus. Good work they did; excellent work. Almighty Allah isn't a bodyguard, so Rushdie was correct to employ the services of those who knew how to do the job.

And where do you stand? Do you agree with him, in anything that he wrote against Islam? Those muslims who agreed with him, where and what do they agree with him on agaisnt Islam? Remember Rushdie did not not write about the Islamic figures of todays, The Qur'an itself and Muhammad and his generation. Please tell me what is wrong with either the Qur'an and or Muhammad (AS)?

Why would this discussion be worth it when you haven't read the book? You're not qualified to have a rational discussion about anything Rushdie wrote since you don't meet the fundamental requirement for discussing it. How did you know what he wrote about? Your attitude isn't any different from that of the murderous crowd: you heard Rushdie wrote sth offensive, so you accept that must be it. And, I didn't say some agreed with him, only that even those Muslims who disagreed with him knew he must be protected from harm, and rightly so. And, in case it's of interest to you: I did support the protection of Rushdie (in principle only, not materially); my opinion was that he needed to be protected and alive for the sake of Islam. And I am happy he lives.

We want to see the the faces of Hypocracy; Its those among the "muslims," who are against Qur'an and or Muhammad (AS)! Is there a third category apart from the "simple and straight forward 'for or against' categories?

One of the most dangerous things I see with people like yourself, Olabowale, is that you only see things in "black" or "white"; you must recognise that there're shades of gray, and seldom are issues as simple as "for" or "against". There are Muslims who don't like the trouble caused by Rushdie's work, but who also knew Rushdie mustn't die at the hands of an assassin carrying out the Ayatollah's order. Those are true Muslims, and they're the voices Islam needs. Do you understand why?

Allah says in His Book, the Al Qur'an, which means; When Allah and His Messenger have "decided" on a matter, it does not befit a "believing Muslim" to have any "opinion" but to say, "I hear and I Obey!" Tell me your own position. You already know mine; it is I hear and I obey.

Obedience is fine. But look, I don't obey against my own understanding, ok? I'm not a robot. And I'll never teach anyone to obey without the conviction that what they're doing is fine. And, is the Ayatollah God? How do you encourage people to carry out an execution within the borders of a sovereign State where murder is illegal? Please, stop defaming Islam and supporting the illegal.

You are correct. Allah says in His Book, which means: Do not be unjust because of the hatred you perceive a person have for you. Another verse also talks about avoiding injustice because of the evil of a person. Yet another verse encourages that when an enemy of a muslim seeks the protection of muslims, even in war, this enemy should be treated with kindness and then help to reach a safe and secure place, away from any harm. Muslims were also encouraged, rather demamnded to be kind to captives of war.

So, where's the goodness shown above? This are the verses that need to be drummed into the hearts and minds of those who wish to murder. These are the truths that we propose to spread. This is the face of compassionate Islam; why are people covering it up?

If muslims do not practice this, it is not an endctment on islam, rather endictment on the unjust muslims who do this evil.

You have a good point here; yet, why is it that Islam now has a reputation synonymous with violence? Why has this happened? One reason is that the reasonable voices within Islam do not speak loudly and consistently enough to denounce violence. For example, your earlier posts on this thread appear to have sidestepped the condemnation of random murder, and you sounded defensive (as at least one other poster has mentioned); it is important the we condemn what is wrong and unlawful without reservations.

Its title is a dead giveaway. Then the fact that it is said things that are "Untrue" about Islam. I did not say Muslims, but Islam, which included Muhammad (AS), the prophet and he being described as a "walking Qur'an." Should I take what Rushdie say wrong about Islam to be "true?"

If a man says evil things about my beloved father (ra), who I carry his blood. If I heard from others what he has said about my father were all lies. If I was told that he was giving a speech in the civic center, talking about the same thing, should I go to listen to him before I know that I should avoid his lies?

You would be acting irrationally were you to listen to reports in evaluating a heavy crime. What if all the reports you've heard are wrong? This isn't impossible.

The decision is clear, since my father (ra) is even more beloved to me than my mother. Yet my mother Mariam Victoria Samuel is less beloved to me than "Muhammad (AS)." What would prompt me to read "Satanic Verses?" Please tell me what I need to learn from it?

Since you did not read Rushdie's SV, you are not qualified to offer any opinion about the contents of the book.

Look, one of the ways I avoid sexual temptations is not to indulge myself in what will lead me to "think hard," about it. So I do not read overtly sexual materials. How do I keep my Iman over the "borderline;" is not to read garbages.

If this works for you, fine. Yet, if there was a magazine said to be sexually explicit, you would be out of your depths to comment on it if you haven't read it. And what pollutes your mind may not disturb another's; it isn't correct or right to condemn others for reading material you shun.

Satanic Verses is nothing short of it. From your statement about Rushdie's recounting of his own book, if he did it with sincere heart, it simple shows that he probably suffered from "temporary insanity or disollusionment" when he penned it. If he recounted it under duress, fearing for his life, then you see him as the face of hypocracy. What do I need from either?

You're very ill-equipped to comment about Rushdie's work. And, I don't consider a man who made a tension-dousing statement in the wake of threats to his life a hypocrite. You may not have anything to learn from Rushdie, but he's got empathy; that's perhaps sth that you'd need loads of. What Pope Benedict (XVI?) attempted to do not so long ago, Rushdie has attempted in his work. You don't have to be a supporter of a writer to consider the writer's work.

.

@Nimshi: « #68 on: Yesterday at 06:24:33 PM »

And you think my response would've helped with checking my intention? Chasing after intentions is like chasing after the wind, especially on iNet discussion boards.

You know your "intention. Allah knows it more than you." Thats what matters.


[Quote]
You're missing the point. One could speculate as to Rushdie's motivation when he issued the statement; you could hardly be sure about why he did it; in any case, the statement should have been taken at face value; but that did not happen. the murderers still chased after him.
[/quote]

You seem to desire evasiveness than having a clear and firm position. The action of the people is what i am here to talk about. But the Qur'an and hadith. If the action is against either, to me it is "wrong." And Islam prefers "Mercy1" Muslims, by and large may not practice it. Thats another matter entirely. The muslims wil have to be measured against Islam.


[Quote]
Here: reasonable agencies attempt to diffuse tension, they don't chase after trouble if it could be avoided. So everything was in accordance with strategy. And the fact that Sir Salman is alive is a triumph for freedom of speech, and the British security apparatus. Good work they did; excellent work. Almighty Allah isn't a bodyguard, so Rushdie was correct to employ the services of those who knew how to do the job.
[/quote]

And Allah says in the Qur'an: If Allah decides to kill Isa, his mother and all mankind, who will stand to prevent it? Now is there anyone alive, except that God Almighty Allah has put all the mechanizm to keep him alive in the equation. Yes Allah is not the "body guard" that you see, but He is the "Body Guard" of everyone, including the "body guard" you thought is a body guard. You think with your eyes only. My brother there are more things unseen than what you see!



[Quote]
Why would this discussion be worth it when you haven't read the book? You're not qualified to have a rational discussion about anything Rushdie wrote since you don't meet the fundamental requirement for discussing it. How did you know what he wrote about? Your attitude isn't any different from that of the murderous crowd: you heard Rushdie wrote sth offensive, so you accept that must be it. And, I didn't say some agreed with him, only that even those Muslims who disagreed with him knew he must be protected from harm, and rightly so. And, in case it's of interest to you: I did support the protection of Rushdie (in principle only, not materially); my opinion was that he needed to be protected and alive for the sake of Islam. And I am happy he lives.
[/quote]

I gues "Satanic Verse," that expression is not a means of "praising" Islam, even from the title. You do not have to read it to know that the intent was to put a "doubt," to the veracity of "Islam!" What was your take, since you read it? Did the book raise the "Islam" many notches, or give an opening to doubting thomases to doubt even more?

Can you read the Book as if you are reading "a true story of the life of the prophet," and come out feeling 100% positive, and satisfied, if you are a muslim?



[Quote]
One of the most dangerous things I see with people like yourself, Olabowale, is that you only see things in "black" or "white"; you must recognise that there're shades of gray, and seldom are issues as simple as "for" or "against". There are Muslims who don't like the trouble caused by Rushdie's work, but who also knew Rushdie mustn't die at the hands of an assassin carrying out the Ayatollah's order. Those are true Muslims, and they're the voices Islam needs. Do you understand why?
[/quote]

Allah says "Believers and then Disbelievers." Tell me any shade of gray in this human category, at "time T in consideration?" Can anybody be a 100% believer and 100% disbeliever at anytime? Nimshi. Brother face reality. Reality is not always a child of secular suffistication!


[Quote]
Allah says in His Book, the Al Qur'an, which means; When Allah and His Messenger have "decided" on a matter, it does not befit a "believing Muslim" to have any "opinion" but to say, "I hear and I Obey!" Tell me your own position. You already know mine; it is I hear and I obey.

Obedience is fine. But look, I don't obey against my own understanding, ok? I'm not a robot. And I'll never teach anyone to obey without the conviction that what they're doing is fine. And, is the Ayatollah God? How do you encourage people to carry out an execution within the borders of a sovereign State where murder is illegal? Please, stop defaming Islam and supporting the illegal.
[/quote]

Alllah did not qualify obedience to Him by "understanding" but simply by "believership!" And I never said anything about Ayatollah here. I have ot betrayed my position about him and others like him, in this discussion. I am talking about Islam. Not talking about Muslims.



[Quote]
So, where's the goodness shown above? This are the verses that need to be drummed into the hearts and minds of those who wish to murder. These are the truths that we propose to spread. This is the face of compassionate Islam; why are people covering it up?
[/quote]

You seem to be chosing " parts" and Ignoring parts of Qur'an and Islam. Islam talks about Mercy in greater quantity and qualities than "Punishment." Islam is very natural. In nature, you can be angry, but not over do it. But it is nobler to be kinder, gentler, more overlooking.



[Quote]
If muslims do not practice this, it is not an endctment on islam, rather endictment on the unjust muslims who do this evil.

You have a good point here; yet, why is it that Islam now has a reputation synonymous with violence? Why has this happened? One reason is that the reasonable voices within Islam do not speak loudly and consistently enough to denounce violence. For example, your earlier posts on this thread appear to have sidestepped the condemnation of random murder, and you sounded defensive (as at least one other poster has mentioned); it is important the we condemn what is wrong and unlawful without reservations.
[/quote]

Does the "reputation" of somebody else get you away from what is "good?" I concentrate on Islam and not "every muslim." I hope tht every muslim changes for the "better." Even I do not agree with every action I take, after a better look at the "issue!" All of us, muslims and non-Muslims need improvement. But it is not to say we become "irreligious" because "religion" is now a "poison!"



[Quote]
If a man says evil things about my beloved father (ra), who I carry his blood. If I heard from others what he has said about my father were all lies. If I was told that he was giving a speech in the civic center, talking about the same thing, should I go to listen to him before I know that I should avoid his lies?

You would be acting irrationally were you to listen to reports in evaluating a heavy crime. What if all the reports you've heard are wrong? This isn't impossible.
[/quote]

Does this apply to what is above? How about its application to "Islam?" This idea that you are putting forward is not "ideal" in the issue at hand. God should be out of bound. When that is not the case, the discussant's statement is a clear "give away," of his unbelieving mindset.

For example, my statement about "3 gods of the Christian" is a give away of my "disbelieving in it!" Please apply this to all things that you disagree with. You can not disagree except you do not agree with it. But you cannot say you agree with it, and argue disagreeable aout it!



[Quote]
Since you did not read Rushdie's SV, you are not qualified to offer any opinion about the contents of the book.
[/quote]

Thats so lightweight.


[Quote]
Look, one of the ways I avoid sexual temptations is not to indulge myself in what will lead me to "think hard," about it. So I do not read overtly sexual materials. How do I keep my Iman over the "borderline;" is not to read garbages.

If this works for you, fine. Yet, if there was a magazine said to be sexually explicit, you would be out of your depths to comment on it if you haven't read it. And what pollutes your mind may not disturb another's; it isn't correct or right to condemn others for reading material you shun.
[/quote]

I did not condemn anybody. I simply put a barrier between me and what will be "my trial." That does not mean that I will perform adultery or fornication, if I read a sexually explicit material. I just want to safeguard myself, since I have a concern about any possible residual effect.



[Quote]
You're very ill-equipped to comment about Rushdie's work. And, I don't consider a man who made a tension-dousing statement in the wake of threats to his life a hypocrite. You may not have anything to learn from Rushdie, but he's got empathy; that's perhaps sth that you'd need loads of. What Pope Benedict (XVI?) attempted to do not so long ago, Rushdie has attempted in his work. You don't have to be a supporter of a writer to consider the writer's work.
[/quote]

Your gimmick is to claim that since that I did not read this "book of Salman Rushdie," my opinion does not count! Do I have to be in the bathroom to know that it smells bad after it has been used by someone who is spraying up the place with "scented air freshner" to give it the smell from the can?

Now thats what "Satanic Verses," is to me. Is the book, in your view in-praise of "Islam?" Sometimes, your writing critises instead of critiquing! That I do about "empathy" towards creations of Allah is between me and Allah. But than you for being a "reminder." I need to improve.

Ha! Ha! Olabowale. You lost this one. You keep deviating from the point and coming up with excuses left and right when you know in your concience you cannot justify the killing of Apostates in your religion.

Your logic is the Christians do it, the Jews do it so what is wrong if we do it!!
 

Some Logic?

Whatever gave you the "impression" that I "justify it" by "Jews do it, Christian do it, why can we do it?" My friend, thats not the way I think. Read me, loud and clear; My judment is only from Qur'an and Sunnah/authentic Hadith. Even if it is against myself.

If this how I "lost" in your view, I am very grateful to God.

Your gimmick is to claim that since that I did not read this "book of Salman Rushdie," my opinion does not count!

That's correct. Your opinion on the contents of SV does not count because you confess to not having read the book. What's there to discuss with you? You want to tell me things you've heard about the book? How do you begin to discuss the details of a book you haven't read

Do I have to be in the bathroom to know that it smells bad after it has been used by someone who is spraying up the place with "scented air freshner" to give it the smell from the can?

Let's show up your logic for what it is: perhaps the fellow spraying the place is doing it perfunctorily? Perhaps all he's done is pee? Perhaps the the bathroom had a non-smelly stale air, and the fellow simply wanted to spice things up? You see, because someone's spraying the bathroom with stuff from a can of air freshener isn't a guarantee that the place was smelling bad; the "bad smell" is the fault of your assumption, which you've been conditioned to make about the bathroom.

Now thats what "Satanic Verses," is to me. Is the book, in your view in-praise of "Islam?"

Is "praise of Islam" the condition for your reading a book? Which newspapers do you read? Which books have you read this year? Do you screen all you read for this "in praise of Islam" litmus test before reading? For starters, Rushdie didn't invent the SV term; so there's histroricity there, predating Rushdie; so, what's the beef?

Sometimes, your writing critises instead of critiquing! That I do about "empathy" towards creations of Allah is between me and Allah. But than you for being a "reminder." I need to improve.

As do yours. This is a discussion board, and many times, we write as we speak; sometimes we don't. And, as you've extended it, we could all do with a bit of empathy, myself included.
.

@ olabowale

really watching your responses, i think you'd have nailed this discussion if only you had read the book
its a major minus commenting based on hearsays.
Go read it and come bash nimmy.
cheers!

@Reindeer: lol. I intend no "bashing," of anyone. To bash is really to be overtly or covertly deceitful. And I do not want to rob anybody's nose or face in "mud." Thats what is important to me.

Your advise about the book falls on deaf ears with me. I do not have to put what is rotten to my nose, before I know it has a disagreeable smell to me. There is something you know by mere observation. The Title "Satantic Verses," means just that; Satanic.

Maybe he was under the influence at the time of writing or he was playing Satan at that time, in the same way many infer "devil advocacy!"

@Nimshi: « #72 on: Yesterday at 05:29:22 PM »

That's correct. Your opinion on the contents of SV does not count because you confess to not having read the book. What's there to discuss with you? You want to tell me things you've heard about the book? How do you begin to discuss the details of a book you haven't read

At least you are honest about your ploy; the gimmicky system you have engineered in this discussion. It is obvious that I am sincere about my position on Rushdie's Book. I do not need to read it because the title betrays its content.

I wish you are as sincere as me, in your regards to Qur'an and Sunnah. Have you read enough, and, convinced enough to follow the directives of the Speakers? In the Qur'an, where Allah is the Speaker, He states that When He, and, His Messenger (as), have decided on "a matter," there is no option for a "believer," to have an "opinion." What is required is to "hear, and, obey."

Now since you have an opinion about what has said. And what Muhammad (as), His Mesenger have said and did, in Ahadith and actions, can you be called a "believer?" Have you followed the road map that has been laid down by Allah in Islam, and, have you accepted what is 'authentic' about Prophet Muhammad (as)? If I follow your writing in this case, I will infer that you have not read the Qur'an and do not know enough about Muhammad (as), and it is hard for anyone who read your piece to say that you are qualified to comment on Islam, as a muslim. So I will follow your logic: You are ignorant about islam, hence your comment does not count, because of this deficiency.



[Quote]
Let's show up your logic for what it is: perhaps the fellow spraying the place is doing it perfunctorily? Perhaps all he's done is pee? Perhaps the the bathroom had a non-smelly stale air, and the fellow simply wanted to spice things up? You see, because someone's spraying the bathroom with stuff from a can of air freshener isn't a guarantee that the place was smelling bad; the "bad smell" is the fault of your assumption, which you've been conditioned to make about the bathroom.
[/quote]

You must not have heard Fela Anikulapo Kuti's " S, t dey smell" Sorry. Go listen an then comment. People like you go crazy for Fela. You shoud have heard that song: Obinrin na woman for Yorubaland o. She go , (I can't help you with the rest).



[Quote]
Is "praise of Islam" the condition for your reading a book? Which newspapers do you read? Which books have you read this year? Do you screen all you read for this "in praise of Islam" litmus test before reading? For starters, Rushdie didn't invent the SV term; so there's histroricity there, predating Rushdie; so, what's the beef?
[/quote]

Nimshi, you are almost writing as if you are totally and intentionally dishonest (in Islam it is called Munafiq). Nowhere I told you that I am boxed into "praise of Islam." But I will not at any time read "disgrace or denegrate Islam!" For you is your way, and for me is mine. I will bear your burden and you will never bear mine.



[Quote]
As do yours. This is a discussion board, and many times, we write as we speak; sometimes we don't. And, as you've extended it, we could all do with a bit of empathy, myself included.
[/quote]

I criticise what is "wrong" in my view. Examples of what I criticise: Trinity, Paganism, partnership with God, Big God, small gods concept, Racist superiority complex in ethnic or religion platforms, improper recognition and disregard or elevation of any and all prophets. Whats yours in Islam? Tell us how you arrive at criticism of Qur'an and hadith if you are a muslim? That alone takes the critic out of the fold of Islam.

I critique what is "not given its due place," in my view. Example of what I critique: A person who wears part of Quran as a Charm or armlet for protection, etc. What do you critique in Islam.

Olabowale: from pilar to post; you've displayed the attention span of an attention deficit kid; questions, you never answer; reason, you never employ. I am firm in my repudiation: you do not speak for Islam; your intellect is beneath what is required in any discussion of anything Muslim; a disservice to Muslims, one must wonder what impression your associates have about Islam. Of course, your type may be useful in enclosed caves where openness and the ability to understand the world are useless; but in this modern world, you'd have to walk millions of miles to expand your knowledge so as to find a relevance that may contribute to socio-religious discourse.
.

I do not have to put what is rotten to my nose, before I know it has a disagreeable smell to me.

Put it to your nose? You've never even had a copy anywhere near you, let alone near your nose. All you've done is rely on other brainwashed people to tell you that the book is "bad". You criticise it without even the slightest awareness of what it's content is. That's not the sign of an educated person, it's the sign of someone being an unthinking drone.

People like yourself can be called to commit acts or hold an opinion just on the basis that someone tells you to. Not because you think for yourself or from your own experience.

And you say that's not the actions of an extremist or a fanatic? Get a clue. You live in a fantasy land.


But aside from that, isn't it amazing that you've been accused off dragging this off-topic dozens of times and now want to discuss a book? What has the Satanic Verses got to do with murdering people for not believing in the same god as you?
Well, for once, this advertises your way of thinking and does explain something.
You would hate the author of a book you know nothing about simply because other people tell you to. You would kill people who leave your religion simply because other people tell you to. Both are the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep.

@Nimshi: « #76 on: Yesterday at 04:04:55 PM »

Olabowale: from pilar to post; you've displayed the attention span of an attention deficit kid; questions, you never answer; reason, you never employ. I am firm in my repudiation: you do not speak for Islam; your intellect is beneath what is required in any discussion of anything Muslim; a disservice to Muslims, one must wonder what impression your associates have about Islam. Of course, your type may be useful in enclosed caves where openness and the ability to understand the world are useless; but in this modern world, you'd have to walk millions of miles to expand your knowledge so as to find a relevance that may contribute to socio-religious discourse.

Sincerely, everyone of my associates is appreciative of my frankness. They know that Islam is the garment that I wear 24 hours a day. They respect my opinion and often considered and many atimes adopted as the Primary opinion of my organization. I have influenced many in my circle of association that non will indulge in Interest giving or taking in matters that they know am part of. Thats what my associates feel about me and Islam.

lol. Nimshi, in your anger mode, you are just dishing accusations. I understand. Alhamdulillah, if I am a cave man, then the rest of the world must have been under a big cayon! Maybe its all under a glazier.
.


@Bastage « #77 on: Yesterday at 04:19:05 PM »

Quote
I do not have to put what is rotten to my nose, before I know it has a disagreeable smell to me.

Put it to your nose? You've never even had a copy anywhere near you,

Thats why my statement is very condition appropriate. Why get dirt in my hand.

let alone near your nose. All you've done is rely on other brainwashed people to tell you that the book is "bad". You criticise it without even the slightest awareness of what it's content is. That's not the sign of an educated person, it's the sign of someone being an unthinking drone.

How about the unclothedness of its content from the Title? In this case, you can definitely judge a book by its cover, its title.

People like yourself can be called to commit acts or hold an opinion just on the basis that someone tells you to. Not because you think for yourself or from your own experience.

And you say that's not the actions of an extremist or a fanatic? Get a clue. You live in a fantasy land.

The capital city of the whole Free-world. Fantasy land, indeed.

But aside from that, isn't it amazing that you've been accused off dragging this off-topic dozens of times and now want to discuss a book? What has the Satanic Verses got to do with murdering people for not believing in the same god as you?
Well, for once, this advertises your way of thinking and does explain something.
You would hate the author of a book you know nothing about simply because other people tell you to. You would kill people who leave your religion simply because other people tell you to. Both are the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep.

Stop that Bastage. It seems to me that you are describing somebody strange in my world. Alhamdulillah, I am a leader and never a follower. I lead both Christians and Jews, in my circle of associates. Read again, Rushdie was used as an example of an apostate who was not killed. Thats topic appropriate. But of course, you can see that.

olabowale:

@Nimshi: « #76 on: Yesterday at 04:04:55 PM »
Sincerely, everyone of my associates is appreciative of my frankness. They know that Islam is the garment that I wear 24 hours a day. They respect my opinion and often considered and many atimes adopted as the Primary opinion of my organization. I have influenced many in my circle of association that non will indulge in Interest giving or taking in matters that they know am part of. Thats what my associates feel about me and Islam.

So much for your associates

Bastage wrote: But aside from that, isn't it amazing that you've been accused off dragging this off-topic dozens of times and now want to discuss a book? What has the Satanic Verses got to do with murdering people for not believing in the same god as you? Well, for once, this advertises your way of thinking and does explain something. You would hate the author of a book you know nothing about simply because other people tell you to. You would kill people who leave your religion simply because other people tell you to. Both are the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep.

". . . the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep"; precisely. That lack of curiosity about the rest of the world, the anti-intellectual stance, the recital by rote of rules, the absence of thinking based on principle, all characterise that poster. It is a dangerous thing; and to present himself as one who wears Islam 24/7

.

@Nimshi: « #79 on: Today at 04:42:08 AM »

Quote from: olabowale on Today at 01:27:53 AM
@Nimshi: « #76 on: Yesterday at 04:04:55 PM »
Sincerely, everyone of my associates is appreciative of my frankness. They know that Islam is the garment that I wear 24 hours a day. They respect my opinion and often considered and many atimes adopted as the Primary opinion of my organization. I have influenced many in my circle of association that non will indulge in Interest giving or taking in matters that they know am part of. Thats what my associates feel about me and Islam.

So much for your associates

And they are people of substance in their societies: all of them across the West; US, Europe, Asia. Many are counted among the top 100 in their specializations. Nimshi, Alhamdulillah that I am what I am!

Quote
Bastage wrote: But aside from that, isn't it amazing that you've been accused off dragging this off-topic dozens of times and now want to discuss a book? What has the Satanic Verses got to do with murdering people for not believing in the same god as you? Well, for once, this advertises your way of thinking and does explain something. You would hate the author of a book you know nothing about simply because other people tell you to. You would kill people who leave your religion simply because other people tell you to. Both are the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep.

". . . the act of somebody who cannot think for himself and just follows the rest of the sheep"; precisely. That lack of curiosity about the rest of the world, the anti-intellectual stance, the recital by rote of rules, the absence of thinking based on principle, all characterise that poster. It is a dangerous thing; and to present himself as one who wears Islam 24/7

Is there a time that a person should not be a muslim within the course of the day? This very principle have guided me, as my guard away from 'major sins.' Try it, if you are a muslim. Be conscious of your Islam, 24/7. I did not say you don't pursue "life and living." But do it with that consciousness that you are a muslim in mind.

My "major" associates know the time that I may be making Salah. So they give me my space and I am not ashamed of being known as muslim in my organization. Should I hide Islam because of Trillions of Euros, USD, etc? I am happy that I am a muslim. I am grateful to Allah who has allowed my heart to be unwavering in it.

My "major" associates know the time that I may be making Salah. So they give me my space

They offer you the tolerance which you deny to those who don't follow your beliefs.

olabowale:

@Nimshi: « #79 on: Today at 04:42:08 AM »
And they are people of substance in their societies: all of them across the West; US, Europe, Asia. Many are counted among the top 100 in their specializations.

Jeez; what a crock!

Which people of substance? What specializations??

You're immune to logical reasoning, so it's not strange that you don't get it that because you're a friend to Einstein doesn't mean you've got good sense. So what if you have associates who're tops in their specializations?? First off, one must wonder: do you communicate with them in languages other than English? Is how you write on this site the way you write with them? Look, no offence, but it's quite unlikely your claims are true, unless, of course, your abilities to reason are way beyond what you've displayed on these pages.

My "major" associates know the time that I may be making Salah. So they give me my space and I am not ashamed of being known as muslim in my organization. Should I hide Islam because of Trillions of Euros, USD, etc? I am happy that I am a muslim. I am grateful to Allah who has allowed my heart to be unwavering in it.

Don't you know that invoking your "major associates" is meaningless unless you're called out on your claims? What has having "major associates" got to do with having an opinion on a book you haven't read??

.

@Nimshi: « #82 on: Today at 02:43:10 PM »

Jeez; what a crock!

Which people of substance? What specializations??

Field of Medicine, specifically pharmaceutical. Field of governance, specifically executive and legislature. Field of Business and Industry, specifically Finance and banking. Please I will be wasting my time with you if I continue this dialogue any further.

The Yorubas say "Ai lora Ogongo, ki se ka fi we tadi beren ku!" Remember that I practice Islam 24/7. The association is not impairing my Islam. And you expect me to give you the names of my friends and associates? You think this is "Nigerian" game of pompousity? No. If we are friends you would know. But we are not and my life is not for "Public consumption."

You're immune to logical reasoning, so it's not strange that you don't get it that because you're a friend to Einstein doesn't mean you've got good sense. So what if you have associates who're tops in their specializations?? First off, one must wonder: do you communicate with them in languages other than English? Is how you write on this site the way you write with them? Look, no offence, but it's quite unlikely your claims are true, unless, of course, your abilities to reason are way beyond what you've displayed on these pages.

Straight talk express if it is practiced right should be just that. There is no need for interpretation. Everyone of my associate know that when I talk to them, I am talking from the heart. And by the way, they know me by my Islamic name. My style of writing is never an issue with them. I am in a free flowing mode on Nairaland, and in other situation, my thought is always condition appropriate.

More importantly, its the "knowledge that Allah gives me" that matters. You know there are such a thing call "Personal secretary, or office manager or in house legal personnels. Please Nimshi, lets drop your pushing me to unveil myself. If I am from your family or your friend, you will be grateful to Allah that we have a commonality. Just the same way I will be grateful that I have in my life person(s) who truly is not fake. And by the way, how could Einsten have had a good "friend" in the field of Physcis and mathematics, except that friend is almost as good? Birds of the same feathers flocks together.

Am too old for this type of dialogue, because you a doubting the "potentials" that Allah makes available for mankind.

Don't you know that invoking your "major associates" is meaningless unless you're called out on your claims? What has having "major associates" got to do with having an opinion on a book you haven't read??

So this is a board for resumes? No Nimshi. I simply let you know that I am an elephant or a male lion in the mist other beasts. There is no reason for me to hide my Islam. If anything is against Islam, I do not participate in it. Those who surround me of the muslim friends, are also a means protection for my trying to remain on a straight and narrow path. I don't know about you. But I like my life. I am always trying to improve, though.

.

olabowale:

@Nimshi: « #82 on: Today at 02:43:10 PM »
Field of Medicine, specifically pharmaceutical. Field of governance, specifically executive and legislature. Field of Business and Industry, specifically Finance and banking. Please I will be wasting my time with you if I continue this dialogue any further.

You're very welcome. Sooo, what has the company you keep got to do with the validity of your comments about a book you've not read??

The Yorubas say "Ai lora Ogongo, ki se ka fi we tadi beren ku!" Remember that I practice Islam 24/7. The association is not impairing my Islam. And you expect me to give you the names of my friends and associates? You think this is "Nigerian" game of pompousity? No. If we are friends you would know. But we are not and my life is not for "Public consumption."

It is pomposity, but it needn't be specifically Nigerian. You're parading dignity and importance by mentioning people you claim to be your associates. Why was that necessary? First, because you supposed your words/opinions wouldn't command the respect you desire, and second, because you suppose you would impress anyone by such pretentious talk.

More importantly, its the "knowledge that Allah gives me" that matters. You know there are such a thing call "Personal secretary, or office manager or in house legal personnels. Please Nimshi, lets drop your pushing me to unveil myself. If I am from your family or your friend, you will be grateful to Allah that we have a commonality

What's worse than thinking these things is actually writing them. . .

And by the way, how could Einsten have had a good "friend" in the field of Physcis and mathematics, except that friend is almost as good? Birds of the same feathers flocks together.

You're not thinking correctly. Einstein had phycisist and mathematician friends. He also had as friend an art historian, at least. Your thinking is thus wrong; and quite elementarily so. And, while birds of a feather may flock together, that says nothing of their smartness 

Am too old for this type of dialogue, because you a doubting the "potentials" that Allah makes available for mankind.

Yeah. You get back with informed opinion when you read that book. Until then, your opinion on it is meaningless.

I simply let you know that I am an elephant or a male lion in the mist other beasts.

Elephant? What's that?

Male lion? Is there any other type of lion??

I am always trying to improve, though.

Good. We all need that. You, though, need shiploads of it.

@Nimshi

Your contribution is still needed here

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-183074.64.html#msg2997233

Let us educate ourselves about Islam, Quran, Hadith and Sunnah of the prophet (saw) which you called lies.

@Nimshi: lol. « #84 on: Today at 07:02:11 PM »  

You're very welcome. Sooo, what has the company you keep got to do with the validity of your comments about a book you've not read??

I tend to feel this way about you, when it comes to Qur'an and Sunnah/hadith. Have you read either, with the heart of a Muslim? I know it could be difficult to understand. But with a good amount of Iman, the Ilm comes to you. Try it.

It is pomposity, but it needn't be specifically Nigerian. You're parading dignity and importance by mentioning people you claim to be your associates. Why was that necessary? First, because you supposed your words/opinions wouldn't command the respect you desire, and second, because you suppose you would impress anyone by such pretentious talk

In Islam it is permissable for a person to defend his "honor, within reason." Since you think you can "pull me down," then it is in my "Islamic right" as a man who is honored by the Will of Allah, to remind you that your opinion is just opinion and completely wrong about me.

I do not parade dignity and importance, sinc I did not mention any name. My claim is real. I guess thats something doubtful in your eyes. At my age, I wonder if there is any reason for me not to be able to attain the highest possible "place of honor," since it is my Lord who is Honoring me by His Mercy and Power. There is nothing pretentious about me.

If I want to pretend, it will not be with you. Heck, if I let people know that I am a Nigerian and a Muslim, in todays market place, is there anything to hide from you, a Nigerian? I am guessing you are or at least a friend of Nigeria.

What's worse than thinking these things is actually writing them. . .

Should I hide the "favor of my Lord in my Life?" Allah says that ", abdan shakurah", (grateful slave); I am one of them.

You're not thinking correctly. Einstein had phycisist and mathematician friends. He also had as friend an art historian, at least. Your thinking is thus wrong; and quite elementarily so. And, while birds of a feather may flock together, that says nothing of their smartness  

Nimshi is getting off on "responses." I will let you have the "last words," so that you can be happy that you won. However I said "friend" in the field of Physics and Math. I did not mention History, etc. It shows that his "friend," as thought about by me are specialists in Math and or physics.

I guess when he was a the Polytecnics, in Berlin, he must have been hanging out drinking with those "historian friends in your definition of his friends." Nimshi, quite while you are ahead. Your jokes are very stale. I guess that Parrot that flies with the flocks of "black crows," may in times be mimicking the temperament of its friends.

Elephant? What's that?

Male lion? Is there any other type of lion??

lol. I think Nimshi forgot that if there are no lionesses, the lion as a specie among the family of cats would have been extinct. Okare. Too much effort to impress us, kind make you forgot that it takes a male and female lions to make lion cubs. Thanks for the comedy. have a great night.

see long long meaningless sermons

see who is taliking; mr. dauda. ijebu onibon. lol. i am in good mood.

@ Nimshi

It is a dangerous thing; and to present himself as one who wears Islam 24/7

how do you level this kind of pricinple in your own if you really a Muslim or deceiver of a fraud

DavidDylan:

see long long meaningless sermons

David: There, you may have a point; yet, not all of it is meaningless; but much if it, yes. I've written it before: the intellectual volume of the Islam section on this board is so light as to be laughable; many times, you get to read Sarah Palin-ish stuff: "content-free blizzard of words"; it's annoying, and many times, you gets sucked in too.

olabowale: have you realized the foolishness of insisting on commenting on a book you've not read?
And, have you changed your opinion on random murder (either by fatwa from the Ayatollah or any other religious leader) in defence of the name of The Prophet? These are the two relevant issues henceforth; stop dragging important discussion into the mud of your nonsensical talk and name/associate dropping.
.

here too?

Alhaji olabowale

why you dey allow people drag you around now.
go read the book and then talk, its only logical that you'd be better informed to make meaningful and well considered conclusions. before then, any contribution is based on other people's convictions and not yours and for someone who prides himself on reasearch and quotes.its a major dragdown.
peace

And of what use is his reading of the book? If you reindeer and nimshi wish to read it, go ahead, it's your life, why do you insist that he has to read it to know that it is bad.


porn movies are bad for you spiritually. Do you have to watch one to know they are truly bad?

ayinba1:

And of what use is his reading of the book? If you reindeer and nimshi wish to read it, go ahead, it's your life, why do you insist that he has to read it to know that it is bad.

No; no one's forcing him to read the book; only that, for him to discuss the book, he'll need to read it. And since he's not read it, he ought to keep mute when there's a discussion of the contents of the book. It's simple as that.

porn movies are bad for you spiritually. Do you have to watch one to know they are truly bad?

This is an example of the 'slippery slope' argument. SV isn't a Indecency movie. But more importantly: a sentence of death was issued on the writer. If you do not condemn the writer, ten there's no problem; but if you suppose the write has a case to answer, then you can't advance that course of reasoning without having read the book. It's only fair. How would you decide a case without examninign the evidence? Better to recluse yourself if you're not going to consider the most important piece of evidence.
.
.

@nimshi

slippery or sturdy slope, na you sabi. I was not implying that SV is porn. I have only asked a question as an example.

You have assumed that the judgement was passed on S. Rushdie without the concerned authorities actually reading the publication. Can you actually prove this? We find it so easy to pass judgements on other authority once it's not the US of A, or Britain.

Note that I do not know the details but since you are so vehement about how wrong the sentence was, can you say for sure that it was passed with no knowledge of what Satanic Verses contained?