^^^

I have no objection against your write up. This is probably the best post of yours on NL in years. You seem to know the truth when you see one.


The only thing I am a little skeptical about is Ottoman downfall. These immoral attributes you linked to Ottoman, I'm learning first time from you mainly on homosexuality. I'm not denying at this moment but I would prefer you bring supporting evidence to validate your post.

Anything else you post I agree with. So you can perhaps speak less on the so called child marriage when they themselves have the worst. At least the so called "child" knows the father of her children unlike these outrageous Western kids.

Another thing I wanna talk about that is not necessarily part of this discussion but usermane did laid emphasis on it is "freedom of speech". He said traditional Islam (using Hadith) doesn't allow freedom of expression. Can he tell us why Julian Assange was arrested?. What crime did he commit other than the fact that he expressed and exercised his freedom of speech and freedom of information?. He may be extradited to US to face capital punishment.

This is the same thing username accused Muslims of especially Saudi and Iran. This is why I keep making examples from Western world anytime he accuses Islam of something. The same way he accused Muslims of child marriage while he turned blind eye elsewhere.

What does he have to say about Assange's arrest who was betrayed by Ecuadorian authority?. Where is his freedom of speech?

Ngasky:

So you don't know they exist in the bible before your writeup but you googled up fake translation of Quranic verses?

Fake translation?

These are the teachings of all the scholars of antiquity; Bukhari, Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Tamiyya, Abu Hanifa.

Read their works and instead watching only Mufti Menk or Nouman Ali Khan.

usermane:


Fake translation?

These are the teachings of all the scholars of antiquity; Bukhari, Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Tamiyya, Abu Hanifa.

Read their works and instead watching only Mufti Menk or Nouman Ali Khan.

This shows how shallow your knowledge is. The real Arabic text is still available. Write the full text of each quotation you wrote just like the texts I quoted not just edited half sentences

Empiree:
I have no objection against your write up. This is probably the best post of yours on NL in years. You seem to know the truth when you see one.

I don't do selective judgement; I condemn evil when I see one. For the fact that I identify as a christian does not mean I am only critical of Islam. In my office my christian colleagues see me as a backslider, an apostate, a pretender and an unbeliever for some of my critical view on Christianity, while on Nairaland, the Muslims see me as a kafir and an 'islamophobe' because of my often critical stance on some Islamic beliefs.

Empiree:
The only thing I am a little skeptical about is Ottoman downfall. These immoral attributes you linked to Ottoman, I'm learning first time from you mainly on homosexuality. I'm not denying at this moment but I would prefer you bring supporting evidence to validate your post.

The following link might help you on homosexuality during the Ottoman empire. Though some of the assertions might be subjective but you can study the issue indepently to reduce any sort of bias in your approach towards the issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_Turkey
https://gagrule.net/homosexuality-in-the-ottoman-empire-praying-in-his-hand/
https://islamicommentary.org/the-roots-of-homophobia-and-anti-gay-sentiment-in-the-muslim-world-by-ali-olomi
https://historum.com/threads/decriminalization-of-homosexuality-in-ottoman-empire.100727/

Empiree:
Anything else you post I agree with. So you can perhaps speak less on the so called child marriage when they themselves have the worst. At least the so called "child" knows the father of her children unlike these outrageous Western kids.

I condemn child marriage whether in Islam or in the church. The US does not encourage prepubescent marriage; someone can be jailed for dating a minor. The problem is the US not encouraging sexual sanctity but promoting sex education.

Empiree:
Another thing I wanna talk about that is not necessarily part of this discussion but usermane did laid emphasis on it is "freedom of speech". He said traditional Islam (using Hadith) doesn't allow freedom of expression. Can he tell us why Julian Assange was arrested?. What crime did he commit other than the fact that he expressed and exercised his freedom of speech and freedom of information?. He may be extradited to US to face capital punishment.

Julian Assange issue is a political witch-hunt by the DNC, especially during and after the US presidential election which brought Donald Trump into power. The DNC are yet to recover from the loss and are going after anybody deemed responsible for Hilary Clinton's loss in the last US presidential elections. Besides, it de-classification of sensitive national security documents to some foreign powers is a grave risk to the US' national security. There is always press and speech freedom as long as such 'speech' is not a threat to national security.

Now relating this back to Islam and free speech, If I say Mohammed married a 6 yr old child, which can be found in the hadith, this is never a hate speech. If I say mohammed killed 600-900 Jews of Banu quraiza, which is contained in the sirah rasool Allah, this cannot be classified as a hate speech but a historical fact. If I Mohammed expelled/killed the Jewish tribe living in Khaibar, this is a historical facts that is recorded in both the sirah and the hadith. The kafir can see this as a bad phase during the early days of Islam while the muslims will see it as an attack against Islam and it prophet. It now depends on the side of the Isle you belong. Most of what kafir accuse Islam of are well documented in the hadith and the sirah; the Muslims can however provide a better explanation why those incidents took place.

Empiree:
This is the same thing username accused Muslims of especially Saudi and Iran. This is why I keep making examples from Western world anytime he accuses Islam of something. The same way he accused Muslims of child marriage while he turned blind eye elsewhere.

Ayatolla Khomeni refused to set age limit for marriage in Iran using the hadith as a justification while the saudis are yet to ratify the new age limit for marriage. As for the western world, they are spiritually and morally dead.

Empiree:
What does he have to say about Assange's arrest who was betrayed by Ecuadorian authority?. Where is his freedom of speech?

The issue not the Ecuadorian government but the British government who, by default, are known for their betrayal; they dont have morality and principle. They believe in the policy of 'self preservation'. This means that you can destroy anyone, anything, anybody, anywhere and/or every other people to protect your national interest. The British people destroyed the French navy and destroyed the Polish political structure (Polish govt in exile) during the second world war, to save their skin from the Germans and later from the Russians. The US put pressure on them and, instead of compromising their 'special relationship' with the US, they rather use him as a scape goat. This has always been the British foreign relation policy.

Ngasky:

This shows how shallow your knowledge is. The real Arabic text is still available. Write the full text of each quotation you wrote just like the texts I quoted not just edited half sentences

I have no desire to get into linguistic analysis that will never be resolved between us. There is no issue of mis-translation, I assure you. In fact, you can find hadith behind every one of these sharia laws. I invite you to my former thread where I go into details on 10 of them; https://www.nairaland.com/4594366/why-quran-alone-2.0

Even your own classical scholars championed these laws and their writings bear witness to the above list. That is why I urge you to study Islam earnestly from their works. Cut back modern apologists, for your own good.

True2god,

First all, before I address your last post up there, from your responses, you can see reason why I said numerous times that op's hatred for Sharia laws is useless and irrelevant because everything he condemns Sharia or "traditional muslims" as he called us are similarly seen in modern Western societies.

So this begs question, what's his point exactly?. Also what's exactly CHRISTIANs problems for condemn Islam when everything is also done by them in the past (Christian crusade in medieval times) and modern time. So for him to open threads up and down maligning Islam makes no sense. It means he had ulterior motives.

Empiree:
True2god,

First all, before I address your last post up there, from your responses, you can see reason why I said numerous times that op's hatred for Sharia laws is useless and irrelevant because everything he condemns Sharia or "traditional muslims" as he called us are similarly seen in modern Western societies.

So this begs question, what's his point exactly?. Also what's exactly CHRISTIANs problems for condemn Islam when everything is also done by them in the past (Christian crusade in medieval times) and modern time. So for him to open threads up and down maligning Islam makes no sense. It means he had ulterior motives.

I am equally confused. I don't know where 'usermane' stands; for the ummah or for the kafir. 'usemane' was initially sympathetic to Islam going by his old threads but seems to have drifted to the left; maybe more knowledge has taken hold of him but as I said earlier, it is very difficult to judge a man's intention. He is however close to Islamic 'apostasy' if he is not an apostate yet. I might be wrong though, I might have judged him wrongly; no man is perfect.

true2god:


And FYA, I am against western military intervention in the Arab world.

Your comments in the Islam section invariably smack of mischief, deception, dissimulation, hypocrisy, and much worse dispositions. I'm definitely not on the cudgel here, certainly not. But can you tell me you honestly and truthfully mistook invasion for intervention?
Honest world-politics enthusiasts would cringe at the level of unabashed dishonesty you have just demonstrated.

aadoiza:

Your comments in the Islam section invariably smack of mischief, deception, dissimulation, hypocrisy, and much worse dispositions. I'm definitely not on the cudgel here, certainly not. But can you tell me you honestly and truthfully mistook invasion for intervention?
Honest world-politics enthusiasts would cringe at the level of unabashed dishonesty you have just demonstrated.

Ad hominem attack! Teach me a better word I should have used instead of attacking my personality since you have a better understanding of international relations. Mind you, I am not posting on Nairaland to seek your patronage.

true2god:
I condemn child marriage whether in Islam or in the church. The US does not encourage prepubescent marriage; someone can be jailed for dating a minor. The problem is the US not encouraging sexual sanctity but promoting sex education.

Whatever their "sex education" is doesn't really work. I need not to say more. Again, it depends on what they consider "child marriage"

Julian Assange issue is a political witch-hunt by the DNC, especially during and after the US presidential election which brought Donald Trump into power. The DNC are yet to recover from the loss and are going after anybody deemed responsible for Hilary Clinton's loss in the last US presidential elections. Besides, it de-classification of sensitive national security documents to some foreign powers is a grave risk to the US' national security. There is always press and speech freedom as long as such 'speech' is not a threat to national security.

This shows there is still limit to "freedom of speech" contrary to what they want us to believe. You said "as long as it doesn't go against national security". I get that but not only this. If you speak against zionists you will be rebuked. If you speak against or deny holocaust you will be called anti semite and excommunicated. If you speak against Jewish lobby (AIPAC) you will be chastised and called anti semite and if you hold political office you will be pressured to resign for your comments. Are these national security too?.

Take Ilan Omar for example. She's being attacked left and right by both parties. Trump said she should resign from senate for her "anti-semitic view". How about Marc Lamont Hill who was fired by CNN for his commonet of Israeli mistreatment of palestinians. There is nothing like absolute freedom. So why blame islam for something they are similarly guilty of?. This is why i condemned this dude called "usermane".

Now relating this back to Islam and free speech, If I say Mohammed married a 6 yr old child, which can be found in the hadith, this is never a hate speech. If I say mohammed killed 600-900 Jews of Banu quraiza, which is contained in the sirah rasool Allah, this cannot be classified as a hate speech but a historical fact. If I Mohammed expelled/killed the Jewish tribe living in Khaibar, this is a historical facts that is recorded in both the sirah and the hadith. The kafir can see this as a bad phase during the early days of Islam while the muslims will see it as an attack against Islam and it prophet. It now depends on the side of the Isle you belong. Most of what kafir accuse Islam of are well documented in the hadith and the sirah; the Muslims can however provide a better explanation why those incidents took place.

These are not hate speeches. We would pardon their ignorance first. Clarification and education is what needed. And after teaching them and clarifying doubts but the fellow vehemently continues to drag it which means such fellow as motives like ifeann used to do. In this case it will be determined to be hate speech bcus the person is no longer ignorant. So all or most of these evangelical christians are guilty of hate speech in this sense bcus they simply said these things to create artificial problems and hatred for muslims I need not go back to analysis of these topics anymore. We dealt with this years ago. Another example is recent attacks in Sri Lanka. It is an attempt to create backlash for muslims. Only people with wisdom would not be fooled by them. From the reports we got, they said Sri Lankan security forces were alerted 3 yrs ago about some crazy people. Two weeks to the attack, security forces said they were aware of pending predicament but they did nothing to avert the threat until it actually happened which means they themselves have questions to answer. What is the duty of law enforcement?. Is it not to protect their citizens?. And now Sri Lanka govt published footage of alleged bomber wearing simple T-shirt and Jeans and had backpack on. Although the video doesn't prove he did anything wrong. My point is, bcus of this incident, govt of Sri Lanka said they will ban burqa. Abeg, tell me how burqa relate to a person wearing Western cloth and backpack?. This means their intention was to deliberately create artificial hatred for muslims. Their trademark is boldly written on the wall. They had to kill innocent lives to make Islam and muslims look bad. This is hate bcus there will be people who fell for their trash and this breeds hate speeches and attacks on muslims.

Ayatolla Khomeni refused to set age limit for marriage in Iran using the hadith as a justification while the saudis are yet to ratify the new age limit for marriage. As for the western world, they are spiritually and morally dead.

In another word, we need not to say more. If later is not better then there is no need to condemn former. Still brings us back to kettle calling pot black. Is usermane ready to admit this fact?

true2god:
The following link might help you on homosexuality during the Ottoman empire. Though some of the assertions might be subjective but you can study the issue indepently to reduce any sort of bias in your approach towards the issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_Turkey
https://gagrule.net/homosexuality-in-the-ottoman-empire-praying-in-his-hand/
https://islamicommentary.org/the-roots-of-homophobia-and-anti-gay-sentiment-in-the-muslim-world-by-ali-olomi
https://historum.com/threads/decriminalization-of-homosexuality-in-ottoman-empire.100727/

.

I got this now. This actually took place towards the end of Ottoman which kinda proves that when a nation goes beyond boundaries set by God, it is bound to perish. Example of this was the time Lot. Their homosexualism reached pinnacle of self destruction. This is what happened to Ottoman in their late empire.

This was not the time of Sultan Muhammad Fatih (D. 1481). He was still considered pious as some point. In my opinion, their homosexual practices is identical to modern Catholics where priests are pedophiles. But this practice in Catholic Church is not legalized. So the difference is that Ottoman before it's dismantlement did not legalize homosexual practices unlike today. What happened was that the elites derived pleasures from it and it became so rampant amongst them. As you could have read, previous Sultans had pena code for homosexual for centuries because it is against islamic Sharia until later sultan who deviated in order to accommodate this fawaish.

Another article stated that this homosexual reform was influenced by french then.


Below is what I gleaned from a website

They(Ottoman) did not legalize it, but the elites and many of the Sultans practiced it widely. Just like the Romans and some Afghans today, leading males of importance and power did not even consider themselves homosexuals if they slept with men. As long as they were the penetrators all was fun and games... On the other hand, Ottoman homosexuality was practiced with young boys, typically slaves or eunuchs. Once aged, the boys were not considered appropriate material for satisfying the masters...

But modern Western Civilization are legalizing homosexual which means we live in dangerous time

Empiree:
I got this now. This actually took place towards the end of Ottoman which kinda proves that when a nation goes beyond boundaries set by God, it is bound to perish. Example of this was the time Lot. Their homosexualism reached pinnacle of self destruction. This is what happened to Ottoman in their late empire.

This was not the time of Sultan Muhammad Fatih (D. 1481). He was still considered pious as some point. In my opinion, their homosexual practices is identical to modern Catholics where priests are pedophiles. But this practice in Catholic Church is not legalized. So the difference is that Ottoman before it's dismantlement did not legalize homosexual practices unlike today. What happened was that the elites derived pleasures from it and it became so rampant amongst them. As you could have read, previous Sultans had pena code for homosexual for centuries because it is against islamic Sharia until later sultan who deviated in order to accommodate this fawaish.

Another article stated that this homosexual reform was influenced by french then.


Below is what I gleaned from a website





But modern Western Civilization are legalizing homosexual which means we live in dangerous time

From what I can remember hearing about homosexuality during the ottoman empire was that they decriminalized homosexuality (have a sexual attraction to the same sex), but Sodomy or homosexual sexual intercourse was still forbidden and prosecutable under the law.

IMAliyu:

From what I can remember hearing about homosexuality during the ottoman empire was that they decriminalized homosexuality (have a sexual attraction to the same sex), but Sodomy or homosexual sexual intercourse was still forbidden and prosecutable under the law.

Yea, same thing we are saying.

true2god:
Ad hominem attack! Teach me a better word I should have used instead of attacking my personality since you have a better understanding of international relations. Mind you, I am not posting on Nairaland to seek your patronage.

Retorting the ad hominen drivel could not even camouflage your usually conflagrant insincerity and shenanigans. You always strike me as a dodgy fella, as far as your Islam section persona is concerned, that is, and your word play a few comments back just killed off the unreserved reservations I might have harboured as regards your honesty on islamic matters.
Empiree might not have raised an eyebrow over your mischievous use of "intervention" in place of invasion just so you could gloss away the insensitivity and cruelty of your all-loving America and her stooges but not everyone is so forgiving. Your loving former President Bush intervened, whatever that nonsense connotes, in the state of affairs of sovereign Iraq but came out to say he was sorry. Ain't it an irony, mate. He should rather have shoved his bloody penitence up his filthy arse.
Though this platform is a faceless forum, but always be in the knowledge that not everyone here is a dodo.

true2god:
I am equally confused. I don't know where 'usermane' stands; for the ummah or for the kafir. 'usemane' was initially sympathetic to Islam going by his old threads but seems to have drifted to the left; maybe more knowledge has taken hold of him but as I said earlier, it is very difficult to judge a man's intention. He is however close to Islamic 'apostasy' if he is not an apostate yet. I might be wrong though, I might have judged him wrongly; no man is perfect.

You have unwittingly helped derail this thread by entertaining the Empyree's logical fallacy of Whataboutism.

Don't you see? Ngasky tried it with the Bible and Empyree's doing the same with US policies. Please, stick to the topic of the thread.

aadoiza:

Retorting the ad hominen drivel could not even camouflage your usually conflagrant insincerity and shenanigans. You always strike me as a dodgy fella, as far as your Islam section persona is concerned, that is, and your word play a few comments back just killed off the unreserved reservations I might have harboured as regards your honesty on islamic matters.
Empiree might not have raised an eyebrow over your mischievous use of "intervention" in place of invasion just so you could gloss away the insensitivity and cruelty of your all-loving America and her stooges but not everyone is so forgiving. Your loving former President Bush intervened, whatever that nonsense connotes, in the state of affairs of sovereign Iraq but came out to say he was sorry. Ain't it an irony, mate. He should rather have shoved his bloody penitence up his filthy arse.
Though this platform is a faceless forum, but always be in the knowledge that not everyone here is a dodo.

You seem to be directing your anger to the wrong person. It would have been better for you to engage the US' defense department, and the CIA, for their crime(s) in/against the developing world instead of 'sniffing' on the choice of word I use on nairaland. What difference does it make whether I use the word 'Intervention' or 'Invasion' in this context? You need take a chill pill and stop chasing shadows. I haven't seen any contribution you make on the topic under discussion except your 'fault-finding' exercise and childish tantrum. Grow up big man!

usermane:


You have unwittingly helped derail this thread by entertaining the Empyree's logical fallacy of Whataboutism.

Don't you see? Ngasky tried it with the Bible and Empyree's doing the same with US policies. Please, stick to the topic of the thread.

Of course if a thread is getting to 2 or 3 pages the tendency for derailment is high; many points would have been infused that might slightly dilute the thread. If, however, you take a proper look at my engagement with 'Empire', we are still on track. The discussion had been on 'free speech' in Islam and the issue of 'child marriage'. You are however right if you say we have deviated from the religious angle to a rather social angle in the discussion. The most important thing for us is to learn new things even while we disagree in some areas.

true2god:
You seem to be directing your anger to the wrong person. It would have been better for you to engage the US' defense department, and the CIA, for their crime(s) in/against the developing world instead of 'sniffing' on the choice of word I use on nairaland. What difference does it make whether I use the word 'Intervention' or 'Invasion' in this context? You need take a chill pill and stop chasing shadows. I haven't seen any contribution you make on the topic under discussion except your 'fault-finding' exercise and childish tantrum. Grow up big man!

Humans of your ilk are the reasons the world is what is. Your botched attempts at trivialising the weight the word "invasion" holds in such context have shown to everyone the deviousness and devilry of your abjectly dark mind. One doesn't have to be a grammar fusspot to know intervention and invasion are not synonymous.
I don't have problems with your polemical comments but your proclivity to dissimulation on islamic subjects. After all, atheists slate Islam all the time and give me a good laugh in doing so.

Even the holy bible says: speak the truth, and the truth shall set you free.

usermane:


You have unwittingly helped derail this thread by entertaining the Empyree's logical fallacy of Whataboutism.

Don't you see? Ngasky tried it with the Bible and Empyree's doing the same with US policies. Please, stick to the topic of the thread.

You should be thanking me for sprouting your thread(s). If not, you always appeared to be talking to yourself if it is your only contribution.

I know you mad because I always battered you This thread makes you look like a fool.

You failed to see the only difference between what you criticized and modern system. The only difference is SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. They still clutch on biblical or their religious system but in deceptive ways. This is your failure. You think you can accuse islamic Sharia and get away with it?. No way.


You don't believe in Hadith. Then leave it alone. To you is your belief. To us is our belief. If you don't believe in something you will always be enemy to that thing. If you truly believed in Islam you would always found reasons or excuses for every Hadith you criticized. Now you have began to question some Ayah of Quran which means you further exposed yourself to what I have long suspected of you.

You don't need to quote me at all. It is not necessary.

aadoiza:

Humans of your ilk are the reasons the world is what is. Your botched attempts at trivialising the weight the word "invasion" holds in such context have shown to everyone the deviousness and devilry of your abjectly dark mind. One doesn't have to be a grammar fusspot to know intervention and invasion are not synonymous.
I don't have problems with your polemical comments but your proclivity to dissimulation on islamic subjects. After all, atheists slate Islam all the time and give me a good laugh in doing so.

Even the holy bible says: speak the truth, and the truth shall set you free.

Ok, you have won. The western powers 'invaded' the developing and Muslim world with impunity. Will you allow me have a breathing space now?

true2god:
Ok, you have won. The western powers 'invaded' the developing and Muslim world with impunity. Will you allow me have a breathing space now?

No one's won nothing. Amend your ways

aadoiza:

No one's won nothing. Amend your ways

This is emotional blackmail; your protest cannot shape my opinion.

Empiree:
Whatever their "sex education" is doesn't really work. I need not to say more. Again, it depends on what they consider "child marriage"



This shows there is still limit to "freedom of speech" contrary to what they want us to believe. You said "as long as it doesn't go against national security". I get that but not only this. If you speak against zionists you will be rebuked. If you speak against or deny holocaust you will be called anti semite and excommunicated. If you speak against Jewish lobby (AIPAC) you will be chastised and called anti semite and if you hold political office you will be pressured to resign for your comments. Are these national security too?.

Take Ilan Omar for example. She's being attacked left and right by both parties. Trump said she should resign from senate for her "anti-semitic view". How about Marc Lamont Hill who was fired by CNN for his commonet of Israeli mistreatment of palestinians. There is nothing like absolute freedom. So why blame islam for something they are similarly guilty of?. This is why i condemned this dude called "usermane".



These are not hate speeches. We would pardon their ignorance first. Clarification and education is what needed. And after teaching them and clarifying doubts but the fellow vehemently continues to drag it which means such fellow as motives like ifeann used to do. In this case it will be determined to be hate speech bcus the person is no longer ignorant. So all or most of these evangelical christians are guilty of hate speech in this sense bcus they simply said these things to create artificial problems and hatred for muslims I need not go back to analysis of these topics anymore. We dealt with this years ago. Another example is recent attacks in Sri Lanka. It is an attempt to create backlash for muslims. Only people with wisdom would not be fooled by them. From the reports we got, they said Sri Lankan security forces were alerted 3 yrs ago about some crazy people. Two weeks to the attack, security forces said they were aware of pending predicament but they did nothing to avert the threat until it actually happened which means they themselves have questions to answer. What is the duty of law enforcement?. Is it not to protect their citizens?. And now Sri Lanka govt published footage of alleged bomber wearing simple T-shirt and Jeans and had backpack on. Although the video doesn't prove he did anything wrong. My point is, bcus of this incident, govt of Sri Lanka said they will ban burqa. Abeg, tell me how burqa relate to a person wearing Western cloth and backpack?. This means their intention was to deliberately create artificial hatred for muslims. Their trademark is boldly written on the wall. They had to kill innocent lives to make Islam and muslims look bad. This is hate bcus there will be people who fell for their trash and this breeds hate speeches and attacks on muslims.



In another word, we need not to say more. If later is not better then there is no need to condemn former. Still brings us back to kettle calling pot black. Is usermane ready to admit this fact?

I am not an advocate for sex education because it is a gradual process of indoctrinating young minds into sexual immorality. Among what children are being taught as part of the 'sex education' is the LGBT right hence presenting a very evil lifestyle to young minds as a norm. As for child marriage, it remains a 'child marriage' irrespective of ones religion, location or the time it is/being practiced. Getting married to a 6 or 9 year old girl is wrong. Let's remove religious sentiment from it.

On freedom of speech, of course there is a limit. If I speak against Zionism, deny the holocaust, speak against AIPAC, etc, I will be rebuked and 'corrected' but I won't be killed or jailed. I can even go to court to defend my right to the First Amendment, if I am in the US. However, in a sharia-compliant Muslim country, if I speak against Islam and her prophet, I will be killed or jailed. This is the difference.

As for the congresswoman Ilan Omar, she is not a private citizen like you and I; she is a politician, a public citizen, who represents a district with a heterogeneous population and beliefs. Her utterances will be held with a high value unlike an ordinary citizen. A politician cannot be making provocative statements and expect people never to react. You need to understand that over 90% of Ilan Omar"s provocative statements were based on her values and religious convictions. In a country like the US, which view Muslims with suspicion, a Muslim politician "s statement will always be scrutinized. You cannot live in a country you hate so much. I have watched Ilan Omar attack the US policies, the Jews and the Christians. Imagine a christian politician in Egypt attacking the Egyptian policies and Islam, what do you think will happen?

You raised another issue of Islam being misunderstood hence some Islamophobes like the evangelical Christians directing hate speeches against Islam. I have watched a video, and many 'evangelical' Christians would have also seen it, where an Imam at the prophet's mosque in Medina was literarily cursing the Jews and the Christians in his prayers while the congregation responded with:' AMIN, AMIN, AMIN...' If the Jews and the Christians can be so much vilified at a mosque that can be regarded as the 'holiest of holies' in the Muslim world, without any consequence, why blame the 'evangelical' Christians for their verbal assaults on Islam? You can't be creating an unhealthy environment and expect people to always give you roses. If you go up Northern Nigeria, it is a very normal thing to vilify the Christians in their mosques and until this technical incitement stops, we might not see the end of religious crisis there.

On the Sri lanca attack, the level of condemnation we all see when 49 people were killed in the New Zealand mosque attack was not the same. Some politicians, especially among DNC, called it the 'Easter Worshippers Attack'. They don't want to call it attack against Christian worshippers because it will not suit their evil political agenda and political narratives. However when the first attack happened in New Zealand, they all went to their tweeter handle to condemn it as 'attack against the Muslim worshippers'. The people i am talking about are Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama. Ilan Omar, Elizabeth Warren, etc. Can you see the double standard? Besides, almost all leaders around the globe condemned the NZ attack against Muslims but I have not seen any notable leader of either Saudi Arabia or Iran condemn the attack like they did when Muslims were killed in NZ.

You made a point that Muslims are being targeted because of the ban of burqa after the attack. This is a very insensitive statement. You seem to be more concerned with how government will react to prevent further attacks than the atrocity itself.

And again you made another point which shocked me the most, that perhaps Sri Lanka was not perpetrated by muslins but was orchestrated by non-muslims to paint Islam bad. You will have to read the news again to in order to know the motives for the terrorist attack. This is also a highly coordinated attack with international network. No one can actually confirm or deny if it not a state- sponsored terror attack. No one is sure.

true2god:
I am not an advocate for sex education because it is a gradual process of indoctrinating young minds into sexual immorality. Among what children are being taught as part of the 'sex education' is the LGBT right hence presenting a very evil lifestyle to young minds as a norm. As for child marriage, it remains a 'child marriage' irrespective of ones religion, location or the time it is/being practiced. Getting married to a 6 or 9 year old girl is wrong. Let's remove religious sentiment from it.

since you already recognize evil of the so called "sex education" vilifying child marriage when it comes to Muslims is irrelevant. Recently in the UK, they enforced teaching children LGBT. Thank God you recognized this to be evil. If I didn't put pressure on you you would be adamant that child marriage only has to do with muslims. But now you digressed.

On freedom of speech, of course there is a limit. If I speak against Zionism, deny the holocaust, speak against AIPAC, etc, I will be rebuked and 'corrected' but I won't be killed or jailed. I can even go to court to defend my right to the First Amendment, if I am in the US. However, in a sharia-compliant Muslim country, if I speak against Islam and her prophet, I will be killed or jailed. This is the difference

oh you missed where I said former cnn lost his job for his political statement on Israel which was deemed "anti-Semitism". Was he corrected?. No. He was rebuked. Was he allowed to defend himself in court below losing his job?. No. He was fired and excommunicated. You are still not getting it out you pretend. I don't want to say much in this but I would advise you to get more info bcuz i can't type here what they do to people who go against them. I'm just gonna direct you to watch recent American citizen who works for Iranian tv. Watch it on YouTube and hear what she had to say after her arrest and release. That's all I can tell you. You can say all you want that they don't kill. Just hope you are not victim.

As for the congresswoman Ilan Omar, she is not a private citizen like you and I; she is a politician, a public citizen, who represents a district with a heterogeneous population and beliefs. Her utterances will be held with a high value unlike an ordinary citizen. A politician cannot be making provocative statements and expect people never to react. You need to understand that over 90% of Ilan Omar"s provocative statements were based on her values and religious convictions. In a country like the US, which view Muslims with suspicion, a Muslim politician "s statement will always be scrutinized. You cannot live in a country you hate so much. I have watched Ilan Omar attack the US policies, the Jews and the Christians. Imagine a christian politician in Egypt attacking the Egyptian policies and Islam, what do you think will happen?

see, you are doing what former fox news lady did that got her fired. You are assuming ilan Omar's view was a result of her religion but you failed to see she's actually defending Constitution. Aipac and lobby are unconstitutional. And bear in mind that this is a woman who was born in a country bombed by USA. Remember Black Hawk black hawk down?. So this should tell you a lot.

You raised another issue of Islam being misunderstood hence some Islamophobes like the evangelical Christians directing hate speeches against Islam. I have watched a video, and many 'evangelical' Christians would have also seen it, where an Imam at the prophet's mosque in Medina was literarily cursing the Jews and the Christians in his prayers while the congregation responded with:' AMIN, AMIN, AMIN...' If the Jews and the Christians can be so much vilified at a mosque that can be regarded as the 'holiest of holies' in the Muslim world, without any consequence, why blame the 'evangelical' Christians for their verbal assaults on Islam? You can't be creating an unhealthy environment and expect people to always give you roses. If you go up Northern Nigeria, it is a very normal thing to vilify the Christians in their mosques and until this technical incitement stops, we might not see the end of religious crisis there.

I don't need to have to verify this. His prayer was in response to Jews and CHRISTIANS support and invasion of muslim lands, especially iraq. And their support for israeli occupation of Palestine. Don't pretend as if you don't know how evangelical Christians supported Bush. Remember Jerry Falwell, may his soul born in hell. He was pro war. He and fellow evangelists used that opportunity to invade Iraq with Bible to preach to Iraqis. He even said on national TV that their (muslims) God is evil. Our(CHRISTIANs) God is the truth. Go back and do research. Lot of Western CHRISTIANs flooded Iraq and distributed Bibles. Celebrated Christmases for yrs. What's the end now?. What did they achieve?. Nothing. Jerry died and his soul is in hell as we speak. He supported killings knowing that Iraq war was a lie about wmd. They specifically said that bush was God sent to preach gospel to Muslims. Yet you guys would say you are peaceful.

On the Sri lanca attack, the level of condemnation we all see when 49 people were killed in the New Zealand mosque attack was not the same. Some politicians, especially among DNC, called it the 'Easter Worshippers Attack'. They don't want to call it attack against Christian worshippers because it will not suit their evil political agenda and political narratives. However when the first attack happened in New Zealand, they all went to their tweeter handle to condemn it as 'attack against the Muslim worshippers'. The people i am talking about are Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama. Ilan Omar, Elizabeth Warren, etc. Can you see the double standard? Besides, almost all leaders around the globe condemned the NZ attack against Muslims but I have not seen any notable leader of either Saudi Arabia or Iran condemn the attack like they did when Muslims were killed in NZ.

I still don't get why you guys have problems with Obama and Hillary's condolence messages. Were only Christians killed?. Muslims were killed too on that fateful day. Didn't you read that Saudi citizens were also victims?. I don't celebrate Easter and I don't condone muslims joining your celebration. So Easter is seen as 'universal' holiday even though it's affiliated with Christianity. So Muslims were killed in recent Sri Lanka terrorist attacks. It very unfortunate that you said Iran and Saudi Arabia didn't condemn or sent condolences. And, bro. In this age of INFORMATION?. Just say you don't know(SEE attached)

You made a point that Muslims are being targeted because of the ban of burqa after the attack. This is a very insensitive statement. You seem to be more concerned with how government will react to prevent further attacks than the atrocity itself

seems you misunderstood or misquoted. I said they banned burqa which has nothing to do with bombing. How is banning burqa prevent further attack?. This makes sense to you, bro?. Matter if fact, a video was uploaded on FB yesterday showing one of the alleged bombers wearing "burqa". Upon unveiled him by police he turned out to be a buddist
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2685260574823577&id=1984023931613915&anchor_composer=false

And again you made another point which shocked me the most, that perhaps Sri Lanka was not perpetrated by muslins but was orchestrated by non-muslims to paint Islam bad. You will have to read the news again to in order to know the motives for the terrorist attack. This is also a highly coordinated attack with international network. No one can actually confirm or deny if it not a state- sponsored terror attack. No one is sure.

news?. Which news?. This anti Islam media?. And why do you think I should believe them?. They have history of fabricating story. They have history of painting their enemies black. Few years ago during Nicholas Sakorzy reign, local Malians decided to take over their own resources in remote side. French quickly deployed army to secure their interest in the area. In order to successfully do that they had to paint the locals as islamic terrorists and media propagated that and that's what masses believed. They said terrorists wanted to take over oil field and govt but that was not the case. They labelled them Islamic terrorists just so they could get international support and get away with resources. Indeed their operation was successful. So these are the media houses you want me to believe?.

Empiree:
since you already recognize evil of the so called "sex education" vilifying child marriage when it comes to Muslims is irrelevant. Recently in the UK, they enforced teaching children LGBT. Thank God you recognized this to be evil. If I didn't put pressure on you you would be adamant that child marriage only has to do with muslims. But now you digressed.






oh you missed where I said former cnn lost his job for his political statement on Israel which was deemed "anti-Semitism". Was he corrected?. No. He was rebuked. Was he allowed to defend himself in court below losing his job?. No. He was fired and excommunicated. You are still not getting it out you pretend. I don't want to say much in this but I would advise you to get more info bcuz i can't type here what they do to people who go against them. I'm just gonna direct you to watch recent American citizen who works for Iranian tv. Watch it on YouTube and hear what she had to say after her arrest and release. That's all I can tell you. You can say all you want that they don't kill. Just hope you are not victim.



see, you are doing what former fox news lady did that got her fired. You are assuming ilan Omar's view was a result of her religion but you failed to see she's actually defending Constitution. Aipac and lobby are unconstitutional. And bear in mind that this is a woman who was born in a country bombed by USA. Remember Black Hawk black hawk down?. So this should tell you a lot.




I don't need to have to verify this. His prayer was in response to Jews and CHRISTIANS support and invasion of muslim lands, especially iraq. And their support for israeli occupation of Palestine. Don't pretend as if you don't know how evangelical Christians supported Bush. Remember Jerry Falwell, may his soul born in hell. He was pro war. He and fellow evangelists used that opportunity to invade Iraq with Bible to preach to Iraqis. He even said on national TV that their (muslims) God is evil. Our(CHRISTIANs) God is the truth. Go back and do research. Lot of Western CHRISTIANs flooded Iraq and distributed Bibles. Celebrated Christmases for yrs. What's the end now?. What did they achieve?. Nothing. Jerry died and his soul is in hell as we speak. He supported killings knowing that Iraq war was a lie about wmd. They specifically said that bush was God sent to preach gospel to Muslims. Yet you guys would say you are peaceful.



I still don't get why you guys have problems with Obama and Hillary's condolence messages. Were only Christians killed?. Muslims were killed too on that fateful day. Didn't you read that Saudi citizens were also victims?. I don't celebrate Easter and I don't condone muslims joining your celebration. So Easter is seen as 'universal' holiday even though it's affiliated with Christianity. So Muslims were killed in recent Sri Lanka terrorist attacks. It very unfortunate that you said Iran and Saudi Arabia didn't condemn or sent condolences. And, bro. In this age of INFORMATION?. Just say you don't know(SEE attached)




seems you misunderstood or misquoted. I said they banned burqa which has nothing to do with bombing. How is banning burqa prevent further attack?. This makes sense to you, bro?. Matter if fact, a video was uploaded on FB yesterday showing one of the alleged bombers wearing "burqa". Upon unveiled him by police he turned out to be a buddist
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2685260574823577&id=1984023931613915&anchor_composer=false



news?. Which news?. This anti Islam media?. And why do you think I should believe them?. They have history of fabricating story. They have history of painting their enemies black. Few years ago during Nicholas Sakorzy reign, local Malians decided to take over their own resources in remote side. French quickly deployed army to secure their interest in the area. In order to successfully do that they had to paint the locals as islamic terrorists and media propagated that and that's what masses believed. They said terrorists wanted to take over oil field and govt but that was not the case. They labelled them Islamic terrorists just so they could get international support and get away with resources. Indeed their operation was successful. So these are the media houses you want me to believe?.

You didn't put any pressure on me to identify the LGBT movement as evil; I never defended it in the first place. One only needs a conscience and commonsense to identify the fact that LGBT is very evil. And I don't think it is reasonable to compare 2 evils (LGBT and child marriage) in order to chose the lesser one out of religious conviction.

On the CNN guy that lost his job last year (or last 2 yes), he didn't lose his job because of his antisemitic rhetoric but because he went to the UN general assembly, in the presence of world leaders, to make his antisemitic remarks. If he had confined it to the CNN studio nothing will happen. I have heard many antisemitic rhetorics from Van Jones and Wolf Blitzer, and many of their so-called political commentators, @CNN without any consequence.

On Judge Jeannie, she was not fired from Fox news but only suspended and many Americans have protested her suspension. What was her offense? She called Ilhan Omar out on her inflammatory remarks against the US and the Jews. What did she say about her? That the US gave Ilham Omar an opportunity which no other nation on earth might give her and instead of her to appreciate that opportunity and thank God for that, she rather attack the same country that gave her fame, shelter, riches, education, power and global influence. She (Omar) had apologized many times for her unreasonable remarks but won't stop dropping new ones. If that's how Islam works then I stand to agree with the evangelicals that believed that mass Muslim migration is a threat to the US and need to be stopped. Just take a look at what's going on in Europe now as a result of large Muslim migration.

On the Saudi Imam cursing the Jews and the Christians at the prophet's mosque in Medina, there is no justification for that. That prayer is an act of incitement for the extremist to act and mind you he included the Shi'a among the people Allah should annihilate, are the Shi'a also invading Muslim lands? Don't patronize bad behavior in order to protect your religion. I am not denying the fact that western policies in the developing world is bad, but justifying a political 'prayer' in the mosque is not good.

When Boko haram crisis was raging, the government of Borno decided to act by banning people form wearing burqa in public places for security reasons. Any responsible government will do anything within her power to protect the lives and properties of her citizens, including banning the burqa if need be, And again why must the government even seek advise from Muslims before doing the right thing (banning the burqa for now)? That's arrogance and insensitivity on the part of the Muslims against the victims and their families.

I applaud the government of Iran and Saudi Arabia for condemning the Sri Lanka attacks. I didn't see the news before now.

true2god:


On Judge Jeannie, she was not fired from Fox news but only suspended and many Americans have protested her suspension. What was her offense? She called Ilhan Omar out on her inflammatory remarks against the US and the Jews. What did she say about her? That the US gave Ilham Omar an opportunity which no other nation on earth might give her and instead of her to appreciate that opportunity and thank God for that, she rather attack the same country that gave her fame, shelter, riches, education, power and global influence. She (Omar) had apologized many times for her unreasonable remarks but won't stop dropping new ones. If that's how Islam works then I stand to agree with the evangelicals that believed that mass Muslim migration is a threat to the US and need to be stopped. Just take a look at what's going on in Europe now as a result of large Muslim migration.

I need to respond this this quickly before I return for the rest because this caught my attention.

Bro, you are misinformed or you deliberately distorted fact behind for her suspension. Yes, suspension not fired.

The reason was not what you said here at all. Jeannie was suspended for her comment on Omar's hijab. You made this up

Ngasky I saw the bullshit you wrote where you copied scriptures you don't understand but I was just laughing at your foolishness.

I am not going to dignify you with a point by point rebuttal, but I would just want you to know this.

Christianity starts from Matthew and ends in Revelation. The death of Jesus on the cross put an end to the law.

The law was given to act as a teacher till Christ comes. We operate under a new covenant today (Grace dispensation) (Hebrew 8:13, Hebrew 7:18; 8:7; 9:10). You won't understand the reason until I start teaching you that and I don't have that time.

The death of Jesus is the end of the law (Roman 10:4, Galatians 3:23-end, Ephesians 2:15, Roman 6:14, Roman 7:4-6; 14-25, Hebrew 7:18)

To put us right with God, He was made to operate under the law to save us from the bondage of that law.
(Galatians 4:4)

Jesus is the fulfillment of the law (Luke 16:16). It ended with him.

Now people are put right with God by believing in Jesus not doing what the law says (Roman 3:22) Jesus is an embodiment of the new law.

The law promised a Messiah. The difference between us and Jews is that we believe Jesus is the promised Messiah while the jews are still hoping for the Messiah.

The only reason we retain the old testament in our scripture is for teaching and reference.

In fact, the bible says once a person has faith, there is no need for the law to act as a teacher again. Galatians 3:24-26

You can't understand Christianity if you don't understand the history of Isreal and genealogy of Jesus and the events leading to his birth. The law's role in our bible is to provide those guide, it never provides any foundation of any of our beliefs.

All are based on the teachings of the New Testament.

The book of Revelation you quoted is nothing but records of revelation given to John. It is not interpreted literarily, the same way you won't interpret your dreams in literal terms.

Empiree:
I need to respond this this quickly before I return for the rest because this caught my attention.

Bro, you are misinformed or you deliberately distorted fact behind for her suspension. Yes, suspension not fired.

The reason was not what you said here at all. Jeannie was suspended for her comment on Omar's hijab. You made this up

CNN sees Ilham Omar as a poster girl in their fight against president Trump while Judge Jeannie is a staunch supporter of Donald Trump. There is no way CNN will present an unbiased view of what led Judge Jeannie to be critical of Ilham Omar. Sean Hannity of Fox news also criticised Omar without an incident. Chelsea Clinton, and most of the DNC members, also criticized her for her constant anti-Jewish rhetorics. Even her fellow Muslims have verbally attacked her for her anti-jewish, anti-american and anti-christian rhetorics.

You can type 'Judge Jeannie Pirro and Ilham Omar' on your YouTube page to get the full and unedited video on his matter. Ilham case is a classical example of 'Biting the fingers that feed you'.

true2god:
CNN sees Ilham Omar as a poster girl in their fight against president Trump while Judge Jeannie is a staunch supporter of Donald Trump. There is no way CNN will present an unbiased view of what led Judge Jeannie to be critical of Ilham Omar. Sean Hannity of Fox news also criticised Omar without an incident. Chelsea Clinton, and most of the DNC members, also criticized her for her constant anti-Jewish rhetorics. Even her fellow Muslims have verbally attacked her for her anti-jewish, anti-american and anti-christian rhetorics.

You can type 'Judge Jeannie Pirro and Ilham Omar' on your YouTube page to get the full and unedited video on his matter. Ilham case is a classical example of 'Biting the fingers that feed you'.

How does this refutes the fact that Jeannie was suspended because of her hijab comment?.

Everything else you said is irrelevant. Ilham Omar was right.

true2god:
You didn't put any pressure on me to identify the LGBT movement as evil; I never defended it in the first place. One only needs a conscience and commonsense to identify the fact that LGBT is very evil. And I don't think it is reasonable to compare 2 evils (LGBT and child marriage) in order to chose the lesser one out of religious conviction.

at least you recognized evil of LGBT unlike a clown, who in the name of modernism claimed Quran doesn't prescribe punishment for homosexual. So?. Quran says it is evil and destructive way of life. Therefore punishment is preserved with Amir of the muslims. Op doesn't understand this.

On the CNN guy that lost his job last year (or last 2 yes), he didn't lose his job because of his antisemitic rhetoric but because he went to the UN general assembly, in the presence of world leaders, to make his antisemitic remarks. If he had confined it to the CNN studio nothing will happen. I have heard many antisemitic rhetorics from Van Jones and Wolf Blitzer, and many of their so-called political commentators, @CNN without any consequence.

Lol, you don't know how to lie. What difference does it make whether his speech was made before UN or CNN?. Isn't UN champion of free speech?. E ma tan ra yin je

On the Saudi Imam cursing the Jews and the Christians at the prophet's mosque in Medina, there is no justification for that. That prayer is an act of incitement for the extremist to act and mind you he included the Shi'a among the people Allah should annihilate, are the Shi'a also invading Muslim lands? Don't patronize bad behavior in order to protect your religion. I am not denying the fact that western policies in the developing world is bad, but justifying a political 'prayer' in the mosque is not good.

sorry bro. The only thing I'm condemning is for cursing Shia. Although I have not watched the footage but from your descriptions I can understand. You Jews and Christians have committed attrocities in the Muslim lands. And I understood from imam context that he's cursing Jews and Christian involved the the act of violence and warmongering. And I cited Jerry Lawler who is burning in hell currently.

Jews and CHRISTIANS who condemned their terrible acts are not included. Simple, isn't?. Example if that are those rabbis who constantly rebuke Jewish state in New York. Another example was Rachel Corry, a young Jewish American killed by Israeli bulldozer in 2003 while helping the Palestinians. Her parents still could not get justice till today.

When Boko haram crisis was raging, the government of Borno decided to act by banning people form wearing burqa in public places for security reasons. Any responsible government will do anything within her power to protect the lives and properties of her citizens, including banning the burqa if need be, And again why must the government even seek advise from Muslims before doing the right thing (banning the burqa for now)? That's arrogance and insensitivity on the part of the Muslims against the victims and their families.

why only burqa?. Why not ban backpacks?

True2god,

See what I'm talking about?.

When Sri Lanka bombing occurred, I tried to convince your fellow CHRISTIANs who insisted it is "islamic terrorists" who carried out the attacked, that it is just a part of larger conspiracy network.... The Islamophobia.

I said that folks behind these killings are common enemies of humanity but our Christian brothers and sisters won't agree. I also said that next shooting would be on mosque or synagogue.

So here we are. It happened in California I think. I didn't pay much attention since i heard about it days ago. This evening on ABCworld news, they revealed identity of the shooter. He's a 19yr old white boy. But the media said he's connected to a mosque

This anchor didn't blink once before he said this. Right away, injured Jewish rabbi said it is "Islamic terrorists"

Now you can understand my stance all the time the very reason I refused to believe media. They are the problem. The White guy who killed 50 people in NZ is CHRISTIAN by background. Why did they not quick to say he's CHRISTIAN terrorist bcus of his CHRISTIAN background?. They even found it difficult to say he's white supremacist.

So if you don't understand at this point that media spreads hatred against Islam and muslims, I don't know what else to tell you.

I am glad they called him terrorist but must they say he's connected to mosque to gain sympathy?. Shooter's name s John Earnest.

CORRECTION CBSNews just corrected it.

They said he's "linked to mosque". That the guy's online manifesto says he confessed that he's responsible for "arson attack on a mosque nearby" a month before last Saturday Synagogue shootings.

He's a Christian by religion. Therefore, he's a Christian terrorist. Read attachments and reference link below.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedailyreporter.com/zz/news/20190428/who-is-john-earnest-suspect-in-poway-synagogue-shooting%3ftemplate=ampart