oyb:

@ davidlyan

please explain- this is your quote


i was referring to the 'book' by the ayatollah, not the protocols of the elders of zion. refer back to the thread

you are one paranoid little boy. sharia is the monster under your bed, oyb is the hater with ' sinister motives' who posts 'malicious falsehoods'.

er. . .sue me!

you are a christian neocon- one needs to look no further than 90% of your posts for the sort of false materials i'm referring to.

Davidlyan, don't post simply because you have a need the 'crucifiction' as a crutch for the hollow in your soul.

Nsukka!!!!!!!!!!

all this over ahmedinajad and ayatollah khomeini

The US founding fathers who crafted the US constitution were christians. But unlike the mullahs in your backward 12th century islamic nations they were smart enough to realise that the foundations of a nation should be built on the concept of separation of church and state while giving everyone the freedom to practice their religion.

Oyb, stop saying things you dont know.

lol perhaps you want to direct the ayatollah reference to Nwando, i dont remember saying anything about that book written by animals for animals.

I sent an email to Parvin Darabi at www.homa.org and i saw a response just now.
I'm posting it here just to stress my point.
And I am satisfied that Ayatollah Khomeini said those.
see my email to her below and her response above my mail.



Re: [C&P] Web Inquiry: Ayatollahs teaching.‏
From: Parvin Darabi (Homa@Homa.org)
You may not know this sender. Mark as safe | Mark as unsafe
Sent: Fri 10/19/07 7:51 PM
To: virginia Odinkemelu (igbo_lady@hotmail.com)

Dear Virginia,

Of course he said that. Many Muslims have stated these stuff before Khomeini. It was the Shia Muslim Imam ( I believe the 7th, Musa-e Kasem) who stated that a girl should marry and have her first menstrual period at her husband's house rather than her father's. He also stated that any man who marries his daughter at such a young age has a place in heaven. Muslim apologists always blame the messenger rather the message. The prophet married a six year old girl when he was in his mid fifties. He had dreams about her. What kind of a man was he? In Islam a man can have sex with animals and has to kill it and sell the meat to the next village and not his own village. In islam a woman's worth is less than a man's left testicle. Muslims deny these


to.ParvinOn Oct 19, 2007, at 4:38 PM, virginia Odinkemelu wrote: > Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation> Date & Time: 10/19/2007 7:38:29 PM> -----------> Name: virginia Odinkemelu> Email: igbo_lady@hotmail.com> Phone:> -----------> Address 1:> Address 2:> City, State Zip: , _Not Available> Country: United States of America> -----------

> Ayatollahs teaching.> ++++>

Did Ayattolah Khomeini really teach those things about sex with > infants and animals. I quoted your site and some people were > doubting me,could you kindly give me a response. Thanks. Virgie>

you have not addressed your contradiction. you seem to be going in circles- you say the constitution is based on the bible, you turn round and say it isn't

if only the ' modern' founding fathers of your adopted nation had actually acted on their constitution, instead of enslaving blacks( we hold these truths to be self evident. . .) for another 100 years or so.

hmm, thomas jeferson - founding father number one.how would you explain sally jennings? or perrhaps TJ was just like you - a hypocrite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#History

18th and 19th centuries

Although not described as a democracy by the founding fathers, the United States has been described as the first liberal democracy on the basis that its founders shared a commitment to the principle of natural freedom and equality.[25] The United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties. However, in the colonial period before 1776, only adult white male property owners could vote; enslaved Africans, free black people and women were not extended the franchise. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality.[26] However the frontier did not produce much democracy in Canada, Australia or Russia. By the 1840s almost all property restrictions were ended and nearly all white adult male citizens could vote; and turnout averaged 60-80% in frequent elections for local, state and national officials. The system gradually evolved, from Jeffersonian Democracy to Jacksonian Democracy and beyond. In Reconstruction after the Civil War (late 1860s) the newly freed slaves became citizens with [b](in the case of men) [/b]the right to vote.

so much for your 'smart' modern democracy. anyway, as you would say, that was only 200+ years ago

so david ,denex,naijaking1,oyb,I man and all who have followed my argument,I need no other proof.

nwando:

I sent an email to Parvin Darabi at www.homa.org and i saw a response just now.
I'm posting it here just to stress my point.
And I am satisfied that Ayatollah Khomeini said those.
see my email to her below and her response above my mail.



Re: [C&P] Web Inquiry: Ayatollahs teaching.
From: Parvin Darabi (Homa@Homa.org)
You may not know this sender. Mark as safe | Mark as unsafe
Sent: Fri 10/19/07 7:51 PM
To: virginia Odinkemelu (igbo_lady@hotmail.com)

Dear Virginia,

Of course he said that. Many Muslims have stated these stuff before Khomeini. It was the Shia Muslim Imam ( I believe the 7th, Musa-e Kasem) [/b]who stated that a girl should marry and have her first menstrual period at her husband's house rather than her father's. He also stated that any man who marries his daughter at such a young age has a place in heaven. Muslim apologists always blame the messenger rather the message. The prophet married a six year old girl when he was in his mid fifties. He had dreams about her. What kind of a man was he? [b]In Islam a man can have sex with animals and has to kill it and sell the meat to the next village and not his own village. [b]In islam a woman's worth is less than a man's left testicle. Muslims deny these


to.ParvinOn Oct 19, 2007, at 4:38 PM, virginia Odinkemelu wrote: > Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation> Date & Time: 10/19/2007 7:38:29 PM> -----------> Name: virginia Odinkemelu> Email: igbo_lady@hotmail.com> Phone:> -----------> Address 1:> Address 2:> City, State Zip: , _Not Available> Country: United States of America> -----------

> Ayatollahs teaching.> ++++>

Did Ayattolah Khomeini really teach those things about sex with > infants and animals. I quoted your site and some people were > doubting me,could you kindly give me a response. Thanks. Virgie>

thank you for proving your friend right.this is a clear example of the christian neocons spreading false propganda. since nwando is an authority on hadith, can she also post hadiths butressing this .

denex has pointed out - Parvan Dhabi cannot be taken as honest or objective . i'm sure her word is enough for you. . if a madman said the same things, you'd accept it.


as to the 7th imam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_al-Kazim.
you'd best get cracking to what you do best-altering acceptable sources of information.

i have googled Musa al-Kazim , and i can find nothing that reflects your friends mail.

do you still believe the woman is a muslim?

i can only hope the rest of the world is not like you, willing to beleiev anything once it butresses their narrow view point,

oyb:

you have not addressed your contradiction. you seem to be going in circles- you say the constitution is based on the bible, you turn round and say it isn't

No, rather you are desperate NOT to see the truth even if it slaps u in the face. The constitution, though based on biblical concepts is not a religious document BUT a secular document affirming the right of everyone including your hypocritical mullahs to build huge mosques in Washington DC.

That the constitution was drafted by men steeped in the christian faith is no longer news. Get your head out of the sinking sands of islam and use your grey cells for once.

oyb:

denex has pointed out - Parvan Dhabi cannot be taken as honest or objective . i'm sure her word is enough for you. . if a madman said the same things, you'd accept it.

lol what a bunch of decietful people these islamists are. Anyone that speaks the truth is suddenly one not to be taken as honest or objective. Did Dhabi right the book and claim the ayatollah wrote it?

Are these not the same people who distribute the Russian fabrication of the protocols of the elders of Zion and promote it as a legitimate document created by Isreal?

oyb:

i can only hope the rest of the world is not like you, willing to beleiev anything once it butresses their narrow view point,

The rest of the world has finally woken up from their PC induced slumber. Islam is no peace but a ragtag bunch of murderers and perverts.

ha ha ha ha ha.
Oyb you are a funny character.

At least denex the menace supports you here so smile.
Now do you know that shittes also beat themselves to a pulp and cut up kids with blood gushing in a religious ceremony.
These teachings may be shia teachings,you are Sunni.

Shittes and Sunnis are not slaughtering each other even in mosques  for no reason.
I have no desire to continue in a baseless argument when I have my proof.

Today in some Islamic countries girls as young as nine are raped inh the name of married by dirty old men.
Mohammed did same to Aisha and some Muslim apologists have gone as far as telling us Aisha was 15,contradicting the hadiths in her own words.
Suit yourself.
In case you don't know vitually anyone can contribute info at Wikipedia (your ultimate source) including you.

All I'm saying on this thread is that our president should not be hanging with people that endorse pedophilic teachings and beastiality.
You may disagree,that is your prerogative.

oyb:

do you still believe the woman is a muslim?

Of course, at this rate nobody is a muslim.

My final evidence to buttress my point is this interview with an angry Muslim woman on Arab TV.You can see the interviewer trying to shut her up in the graphic areas.
Hear with picture evidence that some Muslim sect permit sexual pleasure with children.

Oyb,I need your comments quickly
denex you owe me an apology!

now watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16je0v1M2gM

nwando:

My final evidence to buttress my point is this interview with an angry Muslim woman on Arab TV.You can see the interviewer trying to shut her up in the graphic areas.
Hear with picture evidence that some Muslim sect permit sexual pleasure with children.

Oyb,I need your comments quickly
denex you owe me an apology!

now watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16je0v1M2gM

My Gosh@Nwando , That is a powerful video and a powerful woman. From the Video and what I have read of her she is definitely a muslim. I believe Shiite, if I am not mistaken. Is the debate that she is not muslim cause she speaks against issues as she does?

any chance someone will be here to tell us she is not muslim?

Like that video evidence will stop anyone from cooking up a whole new batch of CONSPIRACY THEORY SOUP on here !!!!

Kobojunkie:


My Gosh@Nwando , That is a powerful video and a powerful woman. From the Video and what I have read of her she is definitely a muslim. I believe Shiite, if I am not mistaken. Is the debate that she is not muslim cause she speaks against issues as she does?

MY dear oyb the great muslim apologist claims no Muslims anywhere teach about sex with infants and animals.
As sick as this sounds,we have it confirmed over and over again.
Let's see what his next argument will be.
_{if shame allows him to return}

people keep accusing us of talking ill of Muslims when all we're doing is pointing out the filth they preach.
The mere fact that a Muslim is fighting so hard to call this a conspiracy is even scary.
What more proof do we need?

Like I said earlier,maybe it's the Shittes only that allow this sick act.
They are Muslims nevertheless if not OYB would not be defending this insanity.
Any Christian would be screaming loud to condemn any acts of some so called Christians that are contrary to the Bible
Muslims on the other hard will call sick acts by Muslims a western conspiracy.
I guess it's Geoge Bush's fault and the fault of Israel that little infants girls have to endure sexual abuse in the hands of dirty men.

_{Still waiting for oyb}

@Nwando

Very interesting video link. The change, if any, in Islamic behaviours will definitely come from within their community. The lady in question is obviously some sort of 'social rebel' in her country, but the fact that this interviews was taped and aired is mark of progress in itself.

Sexual pervasion, pedophilia, beastiality, genital mutilation is not limited to the Muslims, I know the existence of these evil practices just about from any part of the globe as you can mention. However, if it's officially sanctioned and codified by the Islamic holy-book, then it would be unacceptable.

Finally, despite coming from Iran, in spite of belonging to the same religious order as the Khomeni, and given his vocal opposition to Israel and the West, the Iranian President has not been shown to personally participate or even condone these deviant sexual behaviours.

Subsequently, I see no reason why Yar'dua should not be seen in a picture with Ahmadinejad if there are strategic reasons for that meeting.

@ Naijaking, you are being very flippant with the truth here. It doesnt help matters when you attempt to sugar coat facts with conjectures.

naijaking1:

@Nwando

Very interesting video link. The change, if any, in Islamic behaviours will definitely come from within their community. The lady in question is obviously some sort of 'social rebel' in her country, but the fact that this interviews was taped and aired is mark of progress in itself.

I wouldnt bet my last farthing on that. Most of those female "social rebels" you see are safely ensconced in the USA where at least they are protected by the very people their religion condemns as kuffirs.
If that woman was living in Iran she would long since have been hanged in a public square for crimes against chastity. So much for ahmedinejad's love for humanity.

naijaking1:

Sexual pervasion, pedophilia, beastiality, genital mutilation is not limited to the Muslims, I know the existence of these evil practices just about from any part of the globe as you can mention. However, if it's officially sanctioned and codified by the Islamic holy-book, then it would be unacceptable.

They are officially sanctioned by the quran, the woman in the video was not talking about something from the christian bible or the hindu holy book.

naijaking1:

Finally, despite coming from Iran, in spite of belonging to the same religious order as the Khomeni, and given his vocal opposition to Israel and the West, the Iranian President has not been shown to personally participate or even condone these deviant sexual behaviours.

the office of the president or the UN general assembly are not the places to discuss sexual preferences. That Yar Adua has never talked about his preference to polygamy does not mean he is not one.

naijaking1:

Subsequently, I see no reason why Yar'dua should not be seen in a picture with Ahmadinejad if there are strategic reasons for that meeting.

Again my question: of what economic benefit is Yar Adua's frollicking with Ahmedinejad based? this was how one certain Babangid pulled us screaming and kicking into the OIC. We dont want to wake up one day and find ourselves reluctant members of the islamic league of nations!

davidylan:

@ Naijaking, you are being very flippant with the truth here. It doesnt help matters when you attempt to sugar coat facts with conjectures.

I wouldnt bet my last farthing on that. Most of those female "social rebels" you see are safely ensconced in the USA where at least they are protected by the very people their religion condemns as kuffirs.
If that woman was living in Iran she would long since have been hanged in a public square for crimes against chastity. So much for ahmedinejad's love for humanity.

They are officially sanctioned by the quran, the woman in the video was not talking about something from the christian bible or the hindu holy book.

the office of the president or the UN general assembly are not the places to discuss sexual preferences. That Yar Adua has never talked about his preference to polygamy does not mean he is not one.

Again my question: of what economic benefit is Yar Adua's frollicking with Ahmedinejad based? this was how one certain Babangid pulled us screaming and kicking into the OIC. We don't want to wake up one day and find ourselves reluctant members of the islamic league of nations!

What economic benefits do we get from meeting the Iranian president?

What stragtegic interest do we have socializing with Iranians?, Indians? North Koreans?, Cubans? Syrian?, etc.

I would say a lot.

Unless one is a member of the naija diplomatic corp, one would not fully appreciate the importance of good relationship with other countries.

Nigeria cannot fight Iran on behalf of US or any other country, so why block our potential friends. Taking us to OIC was regretable, but the different.

I did not want to focus on sexual deviations, but since you changed it to polygamy, I have to protest, because many of us Christians in the southern part of Nigeria and other parts of Africa were practicing, and still do practice polygamy without any Islamic influence whatsoever.

There are many cultural, economic, and social reasons for polygamy, but let's not change this discuss to polygamy.

SOME OF THE COMMENTS ON  THE VIDEO
=============================


Leto2ndAtreides (2 days ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
this is complete bullshit--- islam forbids mut'ah with kids or anyone else--proven through the most authentic ahadis in the Bukhari and Muslim, Mut'ah is ILLEGAL, iranians and shiites need to understand that and also understand that such idiotic practices that are simple innovations are NOT part of islam and only make the religion look bad


RichardTheThirdd (6 days ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
Top 5 Best Selling Islamic Placards:

1. Behead those who call Islam Violent
2. Annihilate those who mock Islam
3. Massacre those who insult the prophet
4. Butcher those who insult Islam
5. Democracy and Free Speech go to hell (thats right, the very free speech which is allowing us hypocritical muslims to incite violence onto non-muslims).

I FIND THIS ONE PARTICULARLY INTERESTING (below)

[b]chucksahammer (1 week ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
It's all a zionist plot. You just think you saw this video, because the zionists have invaded your brainwaves. Muhammad didn't really exist, either. Nope. Zionist plot to make you all look stupid. Worked, too. [/b] 
cbluver22 (1 week ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
your right anyone who speaks A lie about islam is a jew/liar/zionist or being paid by the west sooooooooo right
SaveAgent (1 week ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
All nationality have good and bad people. Of couse some countries the people more bad. But the rules of Muslims really have wrong things. And some of them the mind crazy.

RichardTheThirdd (1 week ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
Anyone who speaks the truth about islam is a jew/liar/zionist or being paid by the west. Muslims are so fucking pathetic and act like pussy crybabies when the truth about them is revealed

Hollandtourist1 (1 week ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
Talmud: 'A Jew may have sex w/a boy as long as the child is less than nine years old'. (Sanhedrin 54b). 'Jews may lie to non-Jews,' 'Jews may use subterfuges to circumvent a non-Jew' (Baba Kamma 113a). 'Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.' - Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L strange religion is this.

thecamelsback (2 weeks ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
just look at the Muhammedan posters and the crap they invent to protect their vile cult, 

zarghatai (2 weeks ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0     (Reply)   
western women are attacked by boyfriends, fathers, and are treated nicely as long as they are young and beautiful but I believe Muslim girls have problems but not that much like christian and Jewish propaganda


HardcoreHorrorChick (3 weeks ago) Show Hide Marked as spam +1     (Reply)   
EVERYTHING she said is TRUE.
My Sister-in-law is an ex Muzzie,she worken in the medical field and saw it all.
Muslims are forbidden to speak about the abuses,it's considered a "family matter",and swept under the carpet.
Next Pages: 1 2  ,   Oldest

all nwando's information on the ayatollah's book all points back to only one source - homa.org,

in the same way, all information on mutah as (contained in the interview) points back to one source - the televised interview. i have found several resources on mutah, but i can find none that follows this quotes:

Interviewer: Some people say that Ghada Jamshir is a Sunni, and that this is why she is leading the battle against (mut’ah) marriages, which are authorized by religious law among the Shiites.>/p>

Ghada Jamshir: Authorized by religious law?!



Interviewer: Let’s not go into details…

Ghada Jamshir: Let me tell you what “Pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs” means…

Interviewer: Don’t give me the details…

Ghada Jamshir: This is a violation of children’s rights! This constitutes sexual assault of the girl. What does “pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs” mean? It means deriving sexual pleasure from an infant. How old is an infant? One year, a year and a half, a few months?






like i said before - nwando, you are an authority on hadith - please point us to hadiths. it is not enough that a muslim woman in bahrain is saying this, and that one TV interview is your entire source of info. do you know that there is no link to a full transcript of the interview?( I wonder why)


http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Fatwa/PrintFatwa.php?lang=E&Id=82221

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds: and blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

Mut'ah (temporary marriage) is to say to a woman: " I would like to enjoy with you or I marry you for a stipulated period", or to define a known period for the marriage. The four Imams unanimously agreed that it is prohibited. There is no difference between it and the person who commits adultery/fornication with a woman on a fixed charge. Sound Hadith indicates its prohibition. Ali (May Allah be pleased with him) said to Ibn Abbas, may Allah have mercy upon him Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) had forbidden temporary marriage and meat of donkeys at the conquest of KHAIBER. Imam MAZERI said (May Allah be pleased with him): Temporary marriage was legal in the early period of Islam, afterwards it was prohibited. It has been proved from sound Hadith and it has been agreed upon unanimously by all Muslims except Rawafidh. They did not support their viewpoint except with some invalid Hadith. Or the recitation of Ibn Masood, which has not proved, though it is irregular. Imam Qadhi Eyadh (May Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Scholars unanimously agreed that this Mut’aah was an actual marriage for period and without the right of inheritance; after passing the period the man and woman separated without divorce. Afterward the whole Ummah unanimously agreed that Mut’aah is forbidden except Rawafidh, Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) considered it legal at the beginning after that he withdrew his ruling. All the ummah is unanimous on its prohibition. If Mut’aah occurs now it would be considered invalid. It is absolutely wrong to say that Shaikh Qaradawi permitted it. It is a big mistake to say that Umar (May Allah be pleased with him) nullified it. Actually it had been nullified by the Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) as we have previously proved it. We would advise you to read Manhajus-Sunnah book of Ibn-Taymiyah, AL Khutoot Al Areedha of Muhibbuddin AL Khateeb.

Allah knows best.


http://www.islamweb.org/ver2/Fatwa/ShowFatwa.php?lang=E&Id=83457&Option=FatwaId

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the World; and blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

Marrying with the intention of divorcing after a certain period is of two kinds:
1. Stipulating a certain period such as a month, a year, or till the end of the study, etc. at the time of establishing the marriage contract is considered "Mutah" temporary marriage, which is prohibited, in Islamic Shariah.
2. The person does not stipulate a certain period of marriage rather he marries as any normal person does but he intends without expressing it that he will divorce her after a certain period.
The known opinion of the scholars of the Hanbali School is that the latter kind of marriage is also forbidden and it is an invalid contract. The basis of their opinion is the saying of the Prophet who said: "The deeds depend upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended"(Bukhari). From this Hadith they conclude that the intention is also considered as a stipulation. They elaborated on this rule by giving an example of the person who marries a divorced woman with the intention of making her lawful for her former husband who had divorced her thrice and then divorces her, this practice is forbidden and the marriage contract is invalid. So the rule of temporary marriage applies to the one who marries intending a certain period though he does not stipulate it in his marriage contract.
The second opinion is that such marriage, i.e. marrying with the intention of divorcing after a certain period is permissible. So, the marriage of a person who stays in a country for a certain period for instance to complete his study, etc. and marries a woman intending that he will divorce her when he leaves that country, is valid according to the second opinion because he does not stipulate a particular period in his marriage contract. The difference between Mutah marriage (temporary marriage)
and this marriage is that the temporary marriage after passing the stipulated period automatically comes to an end whether the husband likes it or not, while this kind of marriage is not linked to a given period. In this marriage the husband can change his mind and continue his life with his wife. This is one of the two opinions of Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah about this issue. This opinion is correct in such a manner that this marriage is not similar to Mutah marriage. But the person is cheating his wife and cheating is Haram in Islamic Shariah. Therefore, the person who practises so commits a forbidden act.
If the woman were aware that the person is marrying her only for a certain period she would not marry him, and her family also would not approve of this marriage.
Furthermore, if one does not like such to be done to his daughter or sister, then how can he like it be done to others? How can a person do something to others when he does not accept the same thing when it is done to him? The Prophet said: "None of you will have faith till he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself". [Reported by Imams Bukhari and Muslim]
Finally, we conclude that doing so is a kind of cheating and deceiving a woman that could cause many harms. For this reason Imam Malik said: 'This practice does not suit the character of the Muslims at all'. Cheating is not permissible whether it is practised with a Muslim woman or a non-Muslim woman.
Therefore, we support the opinion of the Hanbali scholars who do not permit this kind of marriage too since it contradicts the motives of a marriage.

Allah knows best.


Drinking is forbidden in Islam.However, I know several muslims who say it is drinking to excess that is forbidden. in the same way, anything that is bad for your health is forbidden. that hasn't stopped many muslims from smoking - since it isn't expressly forbidden.

In summary, the men from bahrain have chosen to interpret the Quran and Hadith to suit their desires.

Question- can you kindly provide us with multiple reports on issues? this chasing down of single links is getting tiring.

oyb:

all nwando's information on the ayatollah's book all points back to only one source - homa.org,

in the same way, all information on mutah as (contained in the interview) points back to one source - the televised interview. i have found several resources on mutah, but i can find none that follows this quotes:

Interviewer: Some people say that Ghada Jamshir is a Sunni, and that this is why she is leading the battle against (mut’ah) marriages, which are authorized by religious law among the Shiites. like i said before - nwando, you are an authority on hadith   - please point us to hadiths. it is not enough that  a muslim woman in bahrain is saying this, and that one TV interview is your entire source of info. do you know that there is no link to a full transcript of the interview?( I wonder why)

Feigning ignorance does not make your statement there valid,  check out the very site for the TV station this was recorded for,  http://www.memritv.org/   and also take time to view the other videos right there on the same page on the same subject. Most of the same videos can be obtained from the MEMRI TV site. Unless you are going to claim next that MEMRI is a ZIONIST MOVE TO BRAINWASH PEOPLE,  please spare us the other spewings and please do not come back that those people on there are ZIONISTS AND NEOCONS. I am about sick and tired of the many denials.



http://www.memritv.org/

http://memritv.netstrategies.com/content/en/all_clips/0/0/0/0/79/index.htm

@oyb
Thanks for the additional information: I'm always glad to learn something new. I'm not a Muslim, and will never be one.

I can understand your point about homa.org, but what possible benefits do we have from our President meeting the Iranian President outside a religious contex?

@Kobojunkie
Information on MEMRITV is great, I took time to watch the Alexandria University President talk about wife beating. He really could not explain it rationally, because one of Islam's strenght is codification of every form/incident of life-- good or bad. My religion professor once joked that if the internet had existed earlier, its use might also have been codified by the Quoran.

However, the strenght has turned into weakness, because we are able to point to verses which tend to say that Islam advocates certain evil practices, practices that normally seemed to pervade mankind from north to south, and from east to west of our globe.

If you turn on the TV here, there're many instances of 'good christian' men not only beating their wives, but actually killing them. I'm just saying that before we cast the speck off our brother's eye, we need to remove the log in our own eye. 

Pedophilia, sexual pervasion, long / short term prostitution or marriage occur in our non-Islamic societies too. So, even if the Quoran codified certain despicable actions, what has that got to do with our president meeting whoever he likes?

naijaking1:

@oyb
Thanks for the additional information: I'm always glad to learn something new. I'm not a Muslim, and will never be one.

I can understand your point about homa.org, but what possible benefits do we have from our President meeting the Iranian President outside a religious contex?

@Kobojunkie
Information on MEMRITV is great, I took time to watch the Alexandria University President talk about wife beating. He really could not explain it rationally, because one of Islam's strenght is codification of every form/incident of life-- good or bad. My religion professor once joked that if the internet had existed earlier, its use might also have been codified by the Quoran.

However, the strenght has turned into weakness, because we are able to point to verses which tend to say that Islam advocates certain evil practices, practices that normally seemed to pervade mankind from north to south, and from east to west of our globe.

If you turn on the TV here, there're many instances of 'good christian' men not only beating their wives, but actually killing them. I'm just saying that before we cast the speck off our brother's eye, we need to remove the log in our own eye. 

Pedophilia, sexual pervasion, long / short term prostitution or marriage occur in our non-Islamic societies too. So, even if the Quoran codified certain despicable actions, what has that got to do with our president meeting whoever he likes?

Let me ask that if you really want to focus on the president meeting with the Iranian man, you do so and stay away from the other discussion in here. What that site shows has NOthing to do with what you are going on about. Those are not christians so please do not make the cause of those people, in those videos actually telling you what they had to go through about Christianity vs Islam or something, NULL. That is not what it is. Those women and men in those videos tell of what they have been subjected to in the name of their own religion and not of Christianity. To TRY to write it off by saying since those evil acts exist elsewhere means they should somehow suck it up or it is not credible is ridiculous and basically brings whatever argument you have down to nothing. Those things happen elsewhere, do you see people clapping hands to say HOORAY IT IS OK GOD Forbid!!! Pedophilia, Prostitution have been known as vices in society and trying to crack down on the same in these places by these women is still part of the fight. Please do not try that VICTIM CRAP now. IT Just DESTROYS whatever arguement you may have. I have had to sit here and watch how everyone that says something like that happens is Wicked get called ZIONIST and NEOCON, I did not expect you and anyone else in here to listen to the stories of those women and still come up with some silly EXCUSE or way to condone such. NOTICE,  Nobody has said SCRAP Islam,  if you notice even those women are still Islamists, they are calling for better treatment, is claiming it also happens in the west excuse for you to condone such acts then??

Those women happen to be Muslim Women ,  those women who are in most all those videos are muslim women. Who is pointing to verses but the women who are crying to be recognized. Are you going to claim those are Zionists too Come on!! What has the So CALLED 'good Christian" man who beats his wife to do with this WHAT THE HECK DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THIS!!!


JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Religious divide is very deep, and I doubt if anybody, you or me, could settle that issue on the pages of this thread.

Ignoring it, or pretending that you've won the debate is simply delusional; this arguement has been going on for 2000 years.

That is the main reason we should focus on the title of the thread, not on religion.

@ Kobo, you aint seen nothing yet.

@ naijaking, the problem is not one of religious divide. Muslims have consistently struggled to disguise the problems with islam as a war between islam and christianity. It is not! Christianity has no problems with muslims rather it is muslims who are at war with everyone else.
Do not mistake this as a religious divide issue, it is a purely islamic issue.

Back to topic, no one is arguing that Yar Adua has no rights to meet with Ahmedinejad. But he shld remember that in his capacity as president he is not just representing himself but the interests of 140million people. Do we have anything to gain from Iran? No!

Yar Adua shld wait until he is no longer president, by then none of us will be bothered if he chose to go and live full time with ahmedinejad.

naijaking1:

Religious divide is very deep, and I doubt if anybody, you or me, could settle that issue on the pages of this thread.

Ignoring it, or pretending that you've won the debate is simply delusional; this arguement has been going on for 2000 years.

That is the main reason we should focus on the title of the thread, not on religion.

DUDE,  for the UMPTEENTH TIME,  STOP,  PLEASE,  STOP MAKING THOSE ISSUES discussed on THOSE VIDEOS about RELIGIOUS DIVIDE ,  @NaijakIng ,  I don't think you are making any sense at all when you come in and claim those videos which happen to be about muslims on muslims something that it is NOT. These are WOMEN in ISLAM for ISLAM crying out to be heard IN ISLAM,  What the HECK ,  Again,  WHAT THE HECK has that to do with RELIGIOUS DIVIDE and 2000 years?? mind you, Islam is not even 2000 years old. PLEASE STOP bringing Sango and Hinduism and Christianity and Buddhism and Satanism and atheism and judaism and the rest to the same Plate here and FOCUS ON THE ISSUE AT HAND OR LEAVE IT BE!!!

oyb:

all nwando's information on the ayatollah's book all points back to only one source - homa.org,

in the same way, all information on mutah as (contained in the interview) points back to one source - the televised interview. i have found several resources on mutah, but i can find none that follows this quotes:

Interviewer: Some people say that Ghada Jamshir is a Sunni, and that this is why she is leading the battle against (mut’ah) marriages, which are authorized by religious law among the Shiites.>/p>

Ghada Jamshir: Authorized by religious law?!



Interviewer: Let’s not go into details…

Ghada Jamshir: Let me tell you what “Pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs” means…

Interviewer: Don’t give me the details…

Ghada Jamshir: This is a violation of children’s rights! This constitutes sexual assault of the girl. What does “pleasure from sexual contact with her thighs” mean? It means deriving sexual pleasure from an infant. How old is an infant? One year, a year and a half, a few months?






like i said before - nwando, you are an authority on hadith - please point us to hadiths. it is not enough that a muslim woman in bahrain is saying this, and that one TV interview is your entire source of info. do you know that there is no link to a full transcript of the interview?( I wonder why)


http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Fatwa/PrintFatwa.php?lang=E&Id=82221

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds: and blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

Mut'ah (temporary marriage) is to say to a woman: " I would like to enjoy with you or I marry you for a stipulated period", or to define a known period for the marriage. The four Imams unanimously agreed that it is prohibited. There is no difference between it and the person who commits adultery/fornication with a woman on a fixed charge. Sound Hadith indicates its prohibition. Ali (May Allah be pleased with him) said to Ibn Abbas, may Allah have mercy upon him Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) had forbidden temporary marriage and meat of donkeys at the conquest of KHAIBER. Imam MAZERI said (May Allah be pleased with him): Temporary marriage was legal in the early period of Islam, afterwards it was prohibited. It has been proved from sound Hadith and it has been agreed upon unanimously by all Muslims except Rawafidh. They did not support their viewpoint except with some invalid Hadith. Or the recitation of Ibn Masood, which has not proved, though it is irregular. Imam Qadhi Eyadh (May Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Scholars unanimously agreed that this Mut’aah was an actual marriage for period and without the right of inheritance; after passing the period the man and woman separated without divorce. Afterward the whole Ummah unanimously agreed that Mut’aah is forbidden except Rawafidh, Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) considered it legal at the beginning after that he withdrew his ruling. All the ummah is unanimous on its prohibition. If Mut’aah occurs now it would be considered invalid. It is absolutely wrong to say that Shaikh Qaradawi permitted it. It is a big mistake to say that Umar (May Allah be pleased with him) nullified it. Actually it had been nullified by the Prophet (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) as we have previously proved it. We would advise you to read Manhajus-Sunnah book of Ibn-Taymiyah, AL Khutoot Al Areedha of Muhibbuddin AL Khateeb.

Allah knows best.


http://www.islamweb.org/ver2/Fatwa/ShowFatwa.php?lang=E&Id=83457&Option=FatwaId

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the World; and blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

Marrying with the intention of divorcing after a certain period is of two kinds:
1. Stipulating a certain period such as a month, a year, or till the end of the study, etc. at the time of establishing the marriage contract is considered "Mutah" temporary marriage, which is prohibited, in Islamic Shariah.
2. The person does not stipulate a certain period of marriage rather he marries as any normal person does but he intends without expressing it that he will divorce her after a certain period.
The known opinion of the scholars of the Hanbali School is that the latter kind of marriage is also forbidden and it is an invalid contract. The basis of their opinion is the saying of the Prophet who said: "The deeds depend upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended"(Bukhari). From this Hadith they conclude that the intention is also considered as a stipulation. They elaborated on this rule by giving an example of the person who marries a divorced woman with the intention of making her lawful for her former husband who had divorced her thrice and then divorces her, this practice is forbidden and the marriage contract is invalid. So the rule of temporary marriage applies to the one who marries intending a certain period though he does not stipulate it in his marriage contract.
The second opinion is that such marriage, i.e. marrying with the intention of divorcing after a certain period is permissible. So, the marriage of a person who stays in a country for a certain period for instance to complete his study, etc. and marries a woman intending that he will divorce her when he leaves that country, is valid according to the second opinion because he does not stipulate a particular period in his marriage contract. The difference between Mutah marriage (temporary marriage)
and this marriage is that the temporary marriage after passing the stipulated period automatically comes to an end whether the husband likes it or not, while this kind of marriage is not linked to a given period. In this marriage the husband can change his mind and continue his life with his wife. This is one of the two opinions of Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah about this issue. This opinion is correct in such a manner that this marriage is not similar to Mutah marriage. But the person is cheating his wife and cheating is Haram in Islamic Shariah. Therefore, the person who practises so commits a forbidden act.
If the woman were aware that the person is marrying her only for a certain period she would not marry him, and her family also would not approve of this marriage.
Furthermore, if one does not like such to be done to his daughter or sister, then how can he like it be done to others? How can a person do something to others when he does not accept the same thing when it is done to him? The Prophet said: "None of you will have faith till he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself". [Reported by Imams Bukhari and Muslim]
Finally, we conclude that doing so is a kind of cheating and deceiving a woman that could cause many harms. For this reason Imam Malik said: 'This practice does not suit the character of the Muslims at all'. Cheating is not permissible whether it is practised with a Muslim woman or a non-Muslim woman.
Therefore, we support the opinion of the Hanbali scholars who do not permit this kind of marriage too since it contradicts the motives of a marriage.

Allah knows best.


Drinking is forbidden in Islam.However, I know several muslims who say it is drinking to excess that is forbidden. in the same way, anything that is bad for your health is forbidden. that hasn't stopped many muslims from smoking - since it isn't expressly forbidden.

In summary, the men from bahrain have chosen to interpret the Quran and Hadith to suit their desires.

Question- can you kindly provide us with multiple reports on issues? this chasing down of single links is getting tiring.

You have tried as much as you can to be deceptive again unfortunbately you are not a very smart individual.
I started by saying that the Ayatollah Khomeini who is Ahmadinajads hero supports bestiality and sex with infacts.

I gave you proof from a site by an Iranian,you call it fake.
I posted a response from the same Iranian,you deny it.
I gave you a TV interview from another Muslim,a Bahraini that angrily talks of such sick acts and I feel the same way she does because I am a woman
And if given the chance would pull the plug on any man that sexually violates little girls and babies,you say it's not enough.

Do you want a vivid live show of a Muslim sexually assaulting a baby and shouting allahu akhbar to believe it.

Your Islam is not under trial here at least not on this thread.
I did not claim bestiality and infant sexual abuse were written in the Koran but I made a claim with evidence that Shittes,who are also Muslims and recognised by you as Muslims practice temporary marriage and can gain sexual pleasure from infants. and I have proven it
Any decent person,Muslim or Hindu should be appalled and disgusted by that as evidenced in that video.
Rather than show outrage that a Muslim sect would preach that,you ask me for more proof.
You are indeed pathetic.

watch the video again and show it to female members of your family and if nothing rises up within you in anger and disgust.
You don't have a soul!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16je0v1M2gM

Kobojunkie:

Feigning ignorance does not make your statement there valid, check out the very site for the TV station this was recorded for, http://www.memritv.org/ and also take time to view the other videos right there on the same page on the same subject. Most of the same videos can be obtained from the MEMRI TV site. Unless you are going to claim next that MEMRI is a ZIONIST MOVE TO BRAINWASH PEOPLE, please spare us the other spewings and please do not come back that those people on there are ZIONISTS AND NEOCONS. I am about sick and tired of the many denials.



http://www.memritv.org/

http://memritv.netstrategies.com/content/en/all_clips/0/0/0/0/79/index.htm

There are aspects of Islam that are downright sick.
oyb may be a sunni that abhors this perverted sick acts but that doesn't mean he can tell blatant lies about a practice entrenched in Islamic sharia of the second largest group of Muslims in the world.
That is very scary and it's denial is even scarier

@nwando

please leave this Darabi woman alone. She is confused, delusional and sexually obsessed with Ayatollah Khomeini, so much that she had to attribute an imaginary book to him.

This same woman who goes around proclaiming to be a muslim has actually written a piece titled "WHY I AM NOT A MUSLIM" the woman is generally anti-religion. She quotes that there are "three religions, or three big businesses. One collects money on Fridays, one on Saturdays and one on Sundays.


Parvin Darabi, being so filled with her "Rage Against The Veil", cannot provide us with truthful and rational information.

have you seen the video clip evidence?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16je0v1M2gM

you owe me an apology and it has to be in shekels of silver

Video clip of Ayatollah Khomeini clamouring for sex with babies and domestic animals?

Hmm.
You should become a Muslim.
It comes natural to you.

_{the denials that is}