₦airaland Forum

buenos116:
@moderator

Every user that encourages extremism should be banned. While this may not be one of NL stated rules, freedom of speech and expression, including the right to any religion is a human right.

dederocs:
Penalty for expression?

In this our world, there is freedom of speech, fully supported by the UN charter and Nigerian constitution...freedom of speech, freedom of expression. stop spreading extremism, the world is not about you and everyone is not like you, there are hundreds of religions out there. Nairaland do remove posts that encourages extremism, remember the story of Deborah.

Thank you for your responses. I am fully aware of - and in agreement with - the points made in the above post.

My point was to clarify and engage, hopefully initiating a proper a discussion and shed light. It would be wrong of me to assume anything about the OPs post.

After clarifying whether mockery had a unique punishment, other than making a believer an unbeliever, and ascertaining what the penalty for being an unbeliever was, I wanted to ask about Mr, Johnson.

Yes, Mr. Boris Johnson, the former leader of the UK Conservative party and erstwhile PM of GB. Mr. Johnson, whom, whilst defending a woman's right to wear the burqa\hijab\niqab etc. stated he felt it made them look like bank robbers or "letter boxes". Additionally what the response to the trend of banning of burqas in several European countries meant in terms of any fatwa.

But granted, and appreciated, you took this quite seriously and understandably so. Henceforth, I'll be more considered with my tongue-in-cheek approach.

enemyofprogress:
it is either death by hanging or stoning

Thanks for clarifying.


TV

Amoto94:
Ruling on the one who mocks a Muslim woman wearing the proper Islamic Hijab (veil)

Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta‘

Member Member Committee Deputy Chairman Chairman
`Abdullah ibn Qa`ud `Abdullah ibn Ghudayyan `Abdul-Razzaq `Afify `Abdul-`Aziz ibn `Abdullah ibn Baz

Fatwas > Miscellaneous Fatwas (Safar) > Mocking Hijab / The second question of Fatwa no. 4127

Please, what is the actual sanction or, the punishment for this mockery? It's not entirely clear from the write-up.
It suggests that if a believer does so, they become an unbeliever - is that right?

Is there a specific penalty for this (mocking), or is it the a prescribed penalty for unbelief more generally (what is that by the way)?


Thanks
TV

I occasionally enjoy perusing here - good job.

Please, based on the following, I have a question.

Fula army members pass intel to the Fula terrorists
Fula caliphate leadership at best turn a blind eye and there is cause to suspect their involvement, if not wholesale sponsorship
Fula government leaders - up to the president - and religious leaders pursue "rehabilitation", which is questionable at best, but additionally integration of these terrorists within the Nigerian armed forces. Sound like redeployment to me - no?

To even the most undiscerning, does this not suggest a "longer-term ethnoreligious supremacist agenda for the whole country". Anybody? Almost like the Fula plan to complete the 19th century jihad that was repelled at Oshogbo?

What is the make up of the Nigerian Army (and other armed forces). Leadership and the rank and file - is it Fula heavy?


TV

basilico:
He is a white and most whites are racist.

I'm not sure if blanket statements like this are true or helpful.

Please, I know there is pressure to instinctively denounce WP and deliver a token nod to their "waycism" - so as not to be labelled a cocoon. And as we all know, if you don’t, in their heads, conversation over, they win.

Please, let’s not. Let’s not be intimidated by the weak and, the feeble, the hateful and the self-loathing. Let’s not feed the insecurities and neuroses of those who need the comfort blanket of victimhood to feel any sense self-esteem or worth. But most of all, let’s not hold WP to a higher standard than we hold others. Let’s not be hypocritical.

You left your countries, you abandoned your homelands. You swapped wholesale governmental malfeasance, deep rooted tribal bigotry and wanton sectarian bloodshed, for more ordered, more benevolent societies.

Amongst a host of other pathologies, mass sectarian slaughter is effectively normalised in your country. Do you call them or it out? Do you name names? You even excuse or cheerlead it.

Much dissembling on the UK immigrant thread – not even being able to call it what it is. But calling out bus drivers and powerless fringe players for waycism demonstrates your bona fides as oh so virtuous and brave.

Please take care around road-sweepers, there’s waycism in that there refuse. Oh, and be extra vigilant around supermarket check-out workers, lest they slip a pack of “30% extra free” waycism in your trolleys unseen. And don’t forget to renew your membership of the “we’ll burn it down if we can’t turn it into a s-hole like our country of origin gang”. Afterall, colonialism, because...waycism. How do you live free expressive lives with that mindset?

Ilhan Omar left war-torn Somalia and rocked up to the good ole’ US of A. Not even a generation in and she’s in the house. Likewise Ayaan Hirsi Ali – wound up in the Dutch Parliament. In most European countries there are ethnic and minority lawmakers.

In the UK we have a number of non-native born sitting as MPs, some openly sectarian. And more interested in diverting our resources to far-flung corners of the globe. Please, which non-white or roper country would permit that?

Of course if you can demonstrate how most WP are waycist and, detail that metric against the waycism of any of demographic, I’d be happy to see it. It would be great if we could show the outworking of waycism in quantifiable terms, and, against the outcomes of other bigotries or prejudices.

Yes, I agree, WP are waycist, but so are you. And in fact, palpably more so. And at least WP for the most part are taking practical steps to redress disparities. BP are viewed as little more than vermin by some in China. You hthink Hay-rabs love and cherish Nabils and Abdis?

Here in the UK, Indian shopkeepers would literally drop your change into your outstretched hand – apparently wary of touching the darkie. I didn’t realise until it was pointed out to me.

Inherent suspicion of the other and wariness around outsiders – especially where cultural and societal practices are markedly different or seen as backward, is human – even if base. And that’s not an excuse – especially if you take steps to ameliorate it.

There is no discussion, if it all boils down to is "WP evil, BP good". Take a snapshot of all the oppression against BP in the world today and see where it emanates from. Perhaps don’t, lest you be disabused.

I mean, let’s at least be fair. WP are waycist, but they are not very good at it are they? Welcoming to asylum seekers, illegal immigrants, a catalogue of official visas, pathways to citizenship, social housing, welfare benefits, DEI coming out of every orifice, programs galore - all of which are routinely abused.

Minorities as presidents, presidential candidates, party leaders, home secretary, foreign secretary, justice minister, lawmakers, blue-chip CEOs. Like BP avail themselves of in Saudi right? Or India. Or China.

We clearly need some of those NG bandits, bigots and politicians up in here – show WP how it’s done. How to keep bigotry real, effective and deadly! Please, what do we want from WP, what exactly is the expectation here? Is there anything BP and other minorities are entitled to that WP are withholding? Kindly reply advising and I’ll get straight onto it.

Thanking you for your attention to this matter


Yours
Big Cocoon.

RodgersAkpafu:
You have always been biased when it comes to the topic of Pakistanis in this country and that unfortunately beclouds ur judgement when you speak bout them

Nope, I am not biased against PKs. They are the largest faction of r-op-ers in the UK and are largely responsible for most of the sectarian ills we see. They form close to 70% of the UK ro-per demographic, and as I mentioned in my earlier post, are a good proxy for ro-pe-rs as a whole.

RodgersAkpafu:
Here you are, regurgitating right wing talking points (of racists who will never accept you as one of them) on the post above

Labelling facts RW does not mitigate their truth.

By even the most generous estimates, 1 in 50 Albanian males (some put it at much higher), have been detained at her majesty's pleasure. The most amongst foreign nationals. That's a fact! Not a trope, nor a waycist talking point. The focus on the PKs is because they wish to forcibly impose their backward culture and religion on everything and everyone.

RodgersAkpafu:
FGM has NEVER been mainstream in this country, even by them
Yes it is a shameful practice SOME OF THEM do, esp the ones who came from underexposed parts of the country, but it is NOT mainstream as you are painting

As ever, you seek to deflect. FGM is one of a number of a bundle of VAW ills (honour killings, acid attacks, underage marriage, forced marriage bigamy etc.) that emanate from that cultural milieu. With an estimated 10'000 under 15's affected by FGM (many born in the UK and often transported abroad to be mutilated), not to mention the 10's of thousand older women, it's worth taking seriously due to the trauma. - and, it's a criminal offence.

RodgersAkpafu:
The grooming gangs scandal was a shame, BUT it is STATISTICAL FACT that the biggest groomers and the biggest danger to women in general (esp white women) have been white men BY A MILE

Assertions, claims, clichés, tropes, strawpeople and of course lies! In an absolute sense, as white people still account for over 85% of the population. However, there is no gainsaying that there is systematic, industrial scale grapifficking by PK ro-pers. Which is disproportionate to their approx 4% of the population. And due to the clannish, tribal, sectarian nature, the community covers it up. And, it's generational, with dads, sons, uncles, best friends an co-workers all partaking. It’s effectively a community enterprise. Ask your panny now.

RodgersAkpafu:
Once you begin to give a problem an ethnic face, you have lost the plot and that is exactly what you, and your ilk have done

Says a raging anti-semite . So there is no ethnic face to the wholesale slawter in NG . If we can have events highlighting the supposed contributions of ro-pers to the UK, we can discuss their transgressions. If the data shows a certain demographic are over-represented in certain crimes or social pathologies it should be called out without fear or favour.

RodgersAkpafu:
Your reference to the "Judeo bla bla bla" even gives me more bearing on the mechanics of your thought process....
Its always ye black Evangelical Christians talking some p like this

JuXit built this country. That is what we defend, not race, not ethnicity. We question ill-behaviours and the social outworking of backward social morés. Rop and Ro-pers can't build sheet - they should be resisted. Abi what are they building in NG?

RodgersAkpafu:
[/quote]We have talked about this extensively, what is left is to sit back and watch as things play out
One thing I know FOR SURE is that the community has come to stay 💯 and the earlier the wider community realise that, and adjust to it, the better for everyone

There is a place here for anyone who arrives legally, contributes, and abides respectfully within our common plurality. We shall see if their inclination to forcefully impose their ways bears fruit. I personally think you and those like you are backing the wrong horse. Because, even if they win, you lose. Afterall, I doubt Karachi is on your bucket list.

RodgersAkpafu:
Tommy Robinson is a reprehensible person and a waycist prixk To see black men gleefully defend him and rationalise him is really
...... unfortunate

You narrated a story of how a bus driver sneered at Rishi Sunak, thinking himself better\superior? Let me ask you, how did this persons waycism or bigotry - if we accept your story at face value - affect Rishi or prevent his success. How did the aggregate of all such people, be they bus drivers or bankers prevent any other minorities succeeding? -https://www.nairaland.com/4508641/american-politics-thread-trump-47th/5500#137260751

Yet you prate on about racism, attributing every failing and ascribing all misfortune in minority communities to it. Honing in on individuals who have very little influence over your rise or failure to rise. So, black people are hurting...because, Tommy Robinson, because bus driver. Do you even listen to yourself. How lame, weakling.

So I ask again, what has Tommy Robinson done, what policy has he pursued, what platform does he have that hinders black people or minorities? He knows and has experienced first hand the ro-per menace. His struggle is for this country to maintain its culture and traditions. I'm not going to throw him under the bus. Not because he ran riot as a youth or has a criminal record (don't y'all have a sniffer as a president ).

And yes, I looked up the incident about his misguided retweet. That was wrong, at best a mistake and raises questions. But it is not evidence of him systematically looking to harm black people or minorities.

RodgersAkpafu:
Continue drinking from the kool aid of these fellows that will rather feed their dog than feed u even if u are in dire straits tongue

And here's the rub - your racism. Your arrogant inability to accept that you sought succour from the white-man and hence, the need to turn your internal dissonance outward.

You see, the bus driver didn't necessarily see himself as superior, he saw his society as better. And rightly or wrongly, that's why he was peeved. Why should an Indian take charge of what his people built? You and your people would never accept that would you?

And deep down, you agree, that's why you re-located from your sheet whole and came here to the land of FR waycists. What? to expose and denounce waycism? Oh, you campaigner you, "blacktivist you . Your pathetic attempts to re-position this as debunking a "white not superior to black" trope, is a ruse you sell yourself - if it helps dude!, by all means But not everyone has to swallow it.

You further evidence that by making sly supremacist claims about how the UK is better since mass immigration, how the minorities built the UK. What happened to building back in their native homelands? No bro', you provided mostly cheap, unskilled labour. Not institutions, not law and order, not due process - the real hallmarks of a functioning society. And we can evidence that can't we. Deal with it.

Your whole ish all boils down to “because slavery, because colonialism, because racism. How pathetic, how sorry, spineless and weak. You even go after totally inconsequential, utterly irrelevant bus drivers and fringe characters to prove the point. That ish ain’t building sheeeeeee.

When you are ready to hear why you emanate from, incline too and, can only disseminate sheet-holery, and how to rise above it, tag me for enlightenment.


TV

Yawn...didn't read. ROPers involved, blood must flow. Genocide is a mere side dish!


TV

Warning - Long Read . Feel free to skip if given to clichés, soundbites, assertions or smears

Really? Not to come across as the "OfPost" on NL , but how can you post this with a straight face? You - and it's not just you - have to be able to do better than this. You claim to work in academia Some of your arguments are so poor it's scarce believable.

RodgersAkpafu:
What a load of crap.

You never provide any insight, context or data. The "smear" entry point is typical of you. At least "yab & explain" dude. We are hungry for your insights and weesdom .

RodgersAkpafu:
Britain even before multiculturalism has always had crime, and rot

And so what? Who even claimed otherwise? What was it you ran from ? Because GB has crime just like my kids sometimes make me wonder with wastage, breakage and silly impulsive behaviour, does that mean I entertain every, hoodlum, street urchin or even kids of similarly situated families to add to my worries?

Here's a not exhaustive list of some of the "alien" crimes and deleterious behaviours (social mal-adaptions f you prefer) that are being mainstreamed - FGM, honour killings, acid attacks, cousin marriage, bigamy\polygamy. Violence against mainly girls and women, inter-alia industrial scale grape, rampaging stabbings at dance workshops (one of those little girls had 122 entry points. Another was all but decapitated), explosions and mass casualty events at concerts.

I'll park, prison gangs, forced conversions, forced halal, malfeasance in local government, sectarian politics and the push to divert UK resources elsewhere.

Because NG has skull-miners, should we wholesale import Bandits and terrorists? On the basis of this line of thinking, there are no answers to NG' current wave of pogroms from you then. I am actually ashamed for you .

RodgersAkpafu:
are rhe Kray twins science fiction?

No. And again, so what? Back in the day, Oyenusi had a high profile because crimes of the nature he carried out and criminals of his type were relatively rare and considered quite heinous. Now armed robbery is so rampant - small pikin where terrorism dey - only the worst of the worst will get media traction, and even then, only briefly.

Grooming gangs are so rampant and commonplace, that no one individual, gang or even location get's anything more that a passing mention - exacerbated by the blatant cover-up

RodgersAkpafu:
Charles Dickens may be fiction BUT that was the state of Victorian Britain

How bad can you get? How low can you sink?? The obligatory strawman. Who ever claimed it was all good in Victorian GB?

But GB developed, introduced organised policing, granted universal suffrage, eliminated child labour, welfare reforms and healthcare - till today, free at the point of delivery. GB developed or strengthened institutions, implemented well thought-out policies and key, largely adhered to due process. Something you can't actually grasp as demonstrated by your posts. How're your people doing?

RodgersAkpafu:
This narrative that all was good before these "immigrants" came in is just rubbish talk

Because it's not an argument anyone is making...duh! No be just strawman, a whole strawfamily

RodgersAkpafu:
Even look at that line
"Tommy might be racist".....
You are even downplaying what is very cogent

Show us one waycist thing he has said or done or, one waycist policy he pushes. And for bonus points show how it harms this country, or it wouldn't be considered patriotism anywhere else.

Yes he hates, the rop, but grew up amongst adherents and has lot's of minority friends, including ropiecers. And more widely, minority support for his cause (ekemefune - insert smear here!). In GB, our rights and freedoms allow us to express ourselves freely. What harm has he done or promulgated against minorities or any faith?

Now to the "rot". In a perfectly good, or even decent society (akin to what I described above - institutions, due process, care for the vulnerable etc.), rot only sets in when you deviate and cease to adhere to the underpinnings. When social trust and cohesion are eroded, when a central, dominant unifying moral theme is gradually diminished.

That is exactly what is happening in GB today. With the influx of less civilised cultural morés and practices as noted. PKs and rop adhrents (given numbers can be used as proxies in GB) have a culture moored in clannishness, tribalism and sectarianism. That does not support multiculturalism - something will have to give.

Don't get me wrong, I believe the rot had started and will increase. Even if GB remains 100% ethnically homogenous. That is essentially due to the move away from it's JudeXtian moorings, which formed the wellspring of it's development, towards ungodly imperatives culminating in wholesale wokeness.

The hollowing out of GB' historical traditions and culture will be devastating, especially if not replaced with something similar or better. And, I do not consider what I see agitating for ascendancy, as of equal cultural worth or societal value. Sorry, not sorry - my position.

I skipped your earlier post bigging up what you consider to be the "PAK Advance" - one can only take so much of your effluence - needed some respite . But whilst I'm here.

The PAK aim is not is not a drive for enhanced multiculturism, not a commonwealth ideal (one day if you up your GPA I might school you on how this notion underpins much of what bedevils your native land). It's not to improve things for all. It's to claim it for themselves, to arrogate mastery, to impose their culture and religion on everything and everyone else - tribal, clannish, sectarian.

Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, Africans have all come, prospered, settled in and contributed. And even if it's been in great, small or not so great ways, none has for one second insisted GB change to suit them. And TBH, in a market place of ideas, what the PAK\ROPiecers seek to impose is frankly less civilised and regressive.

See, champion them all you like, but don't for one minute think there is a place of equal esteem for you and your kind if they ever gain the whip hand. They will never be happy with you dating even the least of them, or accept you marrying one of their own - even if you convert.

You are at once cheerleading the decent into shyteholeryof this country and your own second class - strike that, 3rd class - place in it, if a place will be found for you and your likes at all.

Again, I have absolutely no issue with people taking positions, ideological or otherwise, but to blindly parrot, champion and smear in order to defend them, suggests limited cranial capacity, grift or indoctrination.


TV

DeepSight:
You know, I respect you alot.

For that reason and ONLY that reason, I do not wish to argue this point further.

I also thank you for your implied insults.

I do hope you know I have never said black people are not responsible as well.

I will like to end my interaction with you on this issue by simply asking you to watch Richard Attenborough on Climate Change.

Again, thanks for the insults, I am mature enough to deal with them.

Good night.

I'm not buying it. Please back up your assertions with clear cut data - both yourself and budaatum are welcome to do so. Don't attempt to sell an ideological position as truth. Not to say you are not free to take any position you choose.

Against my better judgement - perhaps to afford you due regard - I watched the video. It was effectively a puff-piece. Or at best a retrospective of SDA life and career. Particularly at the BBC and being at the forefront of TV programming\production. Funny how at 18 minutes it narrates a scandal caused by him splicing footage in order to craft a narrative
.
At 24 minutes he finally gets on to his CC narrative. No facts, no data, just assertions. Over time SDA has helped drive a catastrophizers wet dream around CC. Sorry nothing convincing. There was also the now, obligatory dig at Trump and lot's of emoting by a cast of thousands.

SDA is an ideologue. At best he has an activist and a campaigner with an opinion. And, I don’t have to share it. Again, you are free to.

Now, do you have anything to demonstrate an open and shut, 100% waterproof tight, settled science and scientific consensus case for climate change catastrophising .


TV

^{ps - your imagined implied insults are just that. I can be harsh, but I am always fair. Your invective on this thread and in many discussing Israel\Gaza, have been unmitigatedly spiteful. But don't take it to heart, I think quite fondly of most here. Even RodgersAkpafu aka Ekemefune, who is little more than a kashmiri-loving ideolobot}

DeepSight:
Wrong on 2 Counts.

Assert all you will.

DeepSight:
1. The interest of the right wing is simply to sustain industrialization at all costs. If they reduce their emissions by saying fifty percent, this discussion is over. Meanwhile they would want poorer countries to war the burden of reducing further, which at the end of the day will mean they cannot produce and equaliser with advanced economies.

Please present data\evidence that a reduction of emissions by 50% (and I working on the basis that by "they", you mean more fully industrialised, i.e. western nations) will eliminate the negative effects of climate change - if any! I don't give a rats arse about the ideological positioning, show the data.

DeepSight:
Please try not to gaslight me over what I know with 100 percent certainty.

Point in question - no one knows with 100% certainty. What you have\are is committed to a position. There is an absence of critical thought. If the ideological position was the opposite, you would argue accordingly. Please present the evidence

DeepSight:
2. I don't know how you mean I and my co travellers managed to make coonery aspirational. You must have mistaken me for someone else, because my entire argument it is the EXACT OPPOSITE. Coonery is clownish. Anyone who has no self respect and simply believes anything a white man says is simply ridiculous.

Again per the bolded . That is a smear. Just because not every black-skinned person subscribes to the notion that the main or major things that have hindered black development are slavery, colonialism (by white people) and even misfortunate such as a being unfortunately placed on the meridian lines , doesn't make them "coons", or give you the right to smear them.

One can consider and arrive at the conclusion that there are reasons other than white intervention that has led to limited development in black communities\countries. And one can also take a position that black people are majorly responsible for their own backwardness - without recourse to whatever white people say.

DeepSight:
PS: Pls try to read carefully before accusing anyone of exactly what they are against.

I know exactly what you are for - at least in that instance.

DeepSight:
Thank you.

Please, don't thank me. Just do better. Some of the balderdash I have to read when I am chanced to come up in here. Sheesh!


TV

budaatum:
1. Yes, the climate is changing for the worse and at a faster rate than ever before.

2. Human - anthropogenic - activity is a significant contributor to climate change due to the fact that humans tend to impact the environments with their activities and this warms up the climate.

3. Stop dirtying!

4. At a huge cost. You humans have been polluting the earth ever since your first existence so you have a lot of arrears to make up with interest. But if that's too much, pay what you are charged now.

5. Air. The oxygen you breath. Remember water was once free. A time will come when humans will have to ration breathing because of pay and breath. We will fix meter to your mouth and nose and heart to bill and tax you.

1. Evidence please - what was the historical rate of "worsening"? And exactly how fast is it accelerating?
2. How significant? How much is this human activity contributing to "warming"? What are the attributable effects?
3. Life is messy, as is human advancement - deal with it. Not to say we can't act in a manner to treat our environment with care
4. How much arrears do humans have to make up? How long will it take, how long do humans have?
5. Please. Show me that will happen, if it does, because of a man-made shortage

DeepSight:
Simple.

And I expect TV01 to understand this.

That is half your issue - it's not expectations, it's demands. Not that you have the right to make or have either.

budaatum:
I aim to be on their level.

Don't flatter me. You are away with the fairies . Sky high.

RodgersAkpafu:
Very very well said and articulated

Ekemefune the ideological affirmer - how far ?


TV

DeepSight:
Only id/........ oi/ . . . . . ts like you would think Climate Change is not real.

This is not a particularly helpful statement. It's akin to saying he believes "changing weather" is not a thing.

Yes, the climate changes, nobody disputes that. The questions and debates are around,

1. is the climate changing for the worse (especially long-term and relative to historical patterns)
2. is the climate changing for the worse due to human - anthropogenic - activity
3 if so, what should or, can be done about it
4. and at what cost and to what effect

The science is not settled - as ever. There are lots of well qualified people who demur. And carbon which is fingered as the main culprit, is actually a greening gas, as well as the essence of all life forms.

Your statement - which I have seen evident in much of the discourse here - is , is designed to smear and belittle and typically weakens whatever position your are arguing for.

It was quite painful to read in what I'll describe as the "anti-coonery" discussion. In fact, you and your co-travellers managed to make coonery sound aspirational, such was the weakness of your arguments.


TV

AntiChristian:
This is false. Abu Bakr did standardise the Qur'an as the first Caliph! Uthman only published and promoted the Qur'an already commisioned by Abu Bakr.

Whether it was Uthman (as many believe) or Abu Bakr, you are acknowledging a "canonization" event. You are thereby confirming that the koran as often claimed by muslims, is not the eternal & unchanged word of god - inscribed on tablets in heaven.

AntiChristian:
He was a companion of the Prophet so he has the authority to correct what he feels was wrong!

Kindly demonstrate where and how anyone other than the "prophet", received or had the authority to decide, what constituted islamic scripture? Are you confirming either of them or any caliph as being rasuul?

Further, how could there be anything "wrong" with text claimed to be the "eternal & unchanging"? Is the assertion not that the islamic gods words cannot be changed?


TV

Who is overlord in this meeting of muslim co-religionists? The leader of Nigeria or the leader Nigeria's muslims?


TV

Tukey is Europe's washpot - a cheap holiday destination. Arrest warrants for where?

Have Turkey issued an arrest warrant for MBS who is directly responsible for the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi - in Turkey!
Have Turkey accepted responsibility for the Armenian genocide, where an estimated1.5 million Armenians were murdered?

No and no. Somebody please tell Turkey to shut up, clean my room and ensure I have a steady supply of poolside drinks.



TV

Let his supporters rejoice and his constituents take heart. No prizes for seeing the honeymoon on this one will be short-lived. A man who follows a religion that is wholly regressive and, marries that with an ideology that has a 100% failure rate! This is going to be sad to watch and painful to live through A slow-motion train wreck.


TV

honesttalk21:
Do you have any evidence that Uthman ibn Affan was accused of apostasy? Because even in that narration he is quoting the Prophet to prove his innocence, not to justify killing anyone. The rebels who killed him never charged him with disbelief; their grievances were political claims of favoritism, administrative decisions, and wealth disputes, as recorded by al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir. And even then, the hadith he quoted outlines narrow judicial exceptions for state authority, not a license for individuals or mobs to shed blood.

...and anything the prophet of islam says is gospel - forgive the pun - is it not? A not even clever attempt to sell a dummy. Like I said, show me a committed defender of islam...


TV

TV01:
The hadith nko?

Aside the fact that it appears to me to be largely false assertions, fake claims, fabrications, wholesale plagiarism, lies and a rear-guard attempt to build a plausible narrative around an obviously made-up religion\ideology, one of the many issues I have with this faith is the manoeuvrability and hence, the widely variable interpretations of its scripture that are possible.

Do we read the main text with or without the hard teeth? Wait, there is no universal agreement about which hard teeth are authentic – within or between sects? Further, they are graded and, for some reason each believer can pick and choose which ones he or she accepts, if any – which is often done tactically.

It is nigh on impossible to articulate the prevailing practice without reference to the hard teeth, yet the whole notion of “hard teeth science” is itself a misnomer. It is simply impossible to apply the requisite academic rigour or scientific principles. No honest scholar gives them real credence other than on a “matter of faith” basis.

These are writings collected no earlier than 200 years after the demise of the claimant, by people who had no proximity or direct relationship with him. True, some of them may well be authentic, but the wholly contrived “chain of narration” authenticator does not pass muster
In rough numbers only about 1% (approx 6k of 600k) of the hard teeth writings have not been discounted. Many were written to push a certain doctrinal\theological position, or to gain a political edge.

From the main text, we add abrogation to the mix, the meccan vs. medinan postures, the need to rollback parts that either contradict each other or, invalidate the attempt to piggy-back off the torah and injeel (after all, in all honesty, the kindest thing you could say about it, is that it is a Christian heresy). It’s one big mess.

Having said that, to me, the primary case against it, is it’s outworking. The practical effects of the faith in society. To me that is the most damning.

Christianity progressively eliminated societal scourges (slavery, the oppression of women (child marriage, secs slavery, polygyny, child labour etc. Introduced, universal suffrage, agency and welfare and enshrined human rights, civil liberties and personal freedoms. Not to mention laying the foundation for critical thought and rational enquiry that has led to literally all modern-day technological advancement (even in post-Christian times!)

By comparison, the “other” religion still embodies all the evils and practices and none of the good. Add the thirst for instilling terra and the letting of sanguine fluid and you have a veritable blight and scourge on humanity.

No? Ok, explain this small one - https://www.nairaland.com/8349907/notable-women-early-marriages-bible#134323939


TV

honesttalk21:
The Qur’an clearly says no compulsion in religion and nowhere commands killing for disbelief. So the real issue isn’t who is a true Muslim, but whether their actions align with what the book actually teaches and by the Qur’an’s own words, they don’t.

The hadith nko?

20 The Chapters on Legal Punishments
(1)Chapter: It Is Not Lawful To Shed The Blood Of A Muslim Except In Three Cases(1.00)باب لاَ يَحِلُّ دَمُ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ إِلاَّ فِي ثَلاَثٍ
It was narrated from Abu Umamah bin Sahl bin Hunaif that:
`Uthman bin 'Affan looked at them when they spoke of killing. He said: “Are they threatening to kill me? Why would they kill me? I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say:[b] “It is not lawful to shed the blood of a Muslim except in one of three (cases): a man who commits adultery when he is a married person, then he should be stoned; a man who kills a soul not in retaliation for murder; and a man who apostatizes after becoming Muslim.' [/b]By Allah (SWT), I never committed adultery either during Ignorance days nor in Islam, and I have never killed a Muslim soul, and I have not apostatized since I became Muslim.”
حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ عَبْدَةَ، أَنْبَأَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ أَبِي أُمَامَةَ بْنِ سَهْلِ بْنِ حُنَيْفٍ، أَنَّ عُثْمَانَ بْنَ عَفَّانَ، أَشْرَفَ عَلَيْهِمْ فَسَمِعَهُمْ وَهُمْ، يَذْكُرُونَ الْقَتْلَ فَقَالَ إِنَّهُمْ لَيَتَوَاعَدُونِي بِالْقَتْلِ فَلِمَ يَقْتُلُونِي وَقَدْ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ لا يَحِلُّ دَمُ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ إِلاَّ فِي إِحْدَى ثَلاَثٍ رَجُلٌ زَنَى وَهُوَ مُحْصَنٌ فَرُجِمَ أَوْ رَجُلٌ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ رَجُلٌ ارْتَدَّ بَعْدَ إِسْلاَمِهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَوَاللَّهِ مَا زَنَيْتُ فِي جَاهِلِيَّةٍ وَلاَ فِي إِسْلاَمٍ وَلاَ قَتَلْتُ نَفْسًا مُسْلِمَةً وَلاَ ارْتَدَدْتُ مُنْذُ أَسْلَمْتُ ‏.‏
Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)
Reference : Sunan Ibn Majah 2533
In-book reference : Book 20, Hadith 1
English translation : Vol. 3, Book 20, Hadith 2533
2532

From here - https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:2533

And how is it congruent to prescribe kpaiing for leaving and not at once determine the same for not joining?


TV

LordReed:
You cannot separate do that separation honestly without launching into a no true Scotsman fallacy. Are these people Muslims practicing Islam? YES, they are. They believe their holy book commands them to do it, and they are following it to the point they even commit state resources to fulfil it. Your answer barely addresses the reality, you sound kinda idealistic and I wish that was the case, but it isn't.

Show me one committed to the defence of islam or, an ardent apologist, and I will show you a liar. No matter how amenable they sound or courteously they present, there will be lies. But that's allowed - taqiyya is perfectly acceptable and encouraged in islam.


TV

Lukgaf:
Before Halal Becomes Haram

The Tinubu administration signed a partnership agreement with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on how Nigeria can benefit from the global halal economy valued at above 7 trillion dollars. Since that news broke, some persons have written to express their fears and suspicion, some others see it as an islamization( a word many people now bandy about without substantiation)strategy.

Halal means "permissible" in Islam, as against "haram" which means unlawful or bad. Halal is an Islamic principle that governs what Muslims eat, drink, how they are prepared. It has extended to businesses and finances too. Broadly speaking, it is an Islamic ethical principle that guides a range of things.

Let's use meat as example. A meat is halal if it is slaughtered and prepared following specific guidelines. Part of the guidelines says the animal must be cut incisively and decisively such that it's death is instant, the blood must be drained. Any animal subjected to some torture or pain before it's death becomes haram. This is to avoid animal cruelty.

Halal is also about forbidden things like pork, alcohol. Under the halal principle, a Muslim avoids alcoholic drinks and products that contain alcohol. Let's assume that panadol for pain relief has alcohol in it, a Muslim will see it as haram. Yet, Muslims do need pain relievers, so they invest in pharmaceutical companies that make pain relievers without alcohol, and that is regarded as halal. Same goes for food products. Islamic financiers and governments will invest in businesses that produce food commodities that avoid ingredients considered haram.

In financing, Islam forbids playing the usurer, so you have Islamic banks that share profits rather than lend money based on interests, Islamic banks are interest free, all these are part of the halal principle. Now, what I have done so far is to explain what halal means from my own understanding, you can Google and do more research.

The federal government didn't collect loan from Saudi Arabia for halal, the federal government signed a partnership with Saudi Arabia on how to boost halal in Nigeria so that Nigeria can also benefit from it, it is a staggering 7 trillion dollars global economy.

What this means is that if any group of people decide to open a beverage or meat processing factory that uses the halal guidelines, they will receive capacity building, expertise and maybe funding too from Saudi Arabia. Their products will have access to the Saudi market among other things.

Brazil is not just a Christian country, it is almost totally a catholic country until recently when non catholic denominations started making some inroads there. Yet, Brazil is the highest exporter of halal meat in the world. It means that Brazil slaughters cows in a halal way and exports them to Muslims across the world and smile to the bank. That's halal economy and economics.

You don't have to be a Muslim to run a halal business, you also don't have to eat halal products to sell them to those who eat them. It is business or economics and not religious pilgrimage.

Countries register halal businesses. Britain is the global leader in Islamic banking. Australia, the USA and many others recognize halal businesses both on individual levels and corporate levels.

I know that in Nigeria, ordinary animal easily becomes a spiritual or demonic being once we call it 'bush baby' and we are told it will rip your hearts out. A cobweb becomes demonic attack. The human like cries of cats elicit holy ghost fire. In Nigeria, normal and natural things become strange and spiritual.

That's why I'm sharing this with you before your WhatsApp group and social media warriors turn halal into haram. In Jeswish religion, halal is kosher, it started with the jews and as Christians, we share scripture and traditions with the jews.

This is not a defense of a government policy, it is an elucidation of a global phenomenon. Whatever you make of it is yours.

By Rev. Fr. Chinenye John Oluoma

This is only true in part, therefore a lie.

For slaughtered animals to be considered halal, the butcher must be a believing muslim and a prayer to the muslim god is recited. Therefore in a sense, that is a type of islamisation. The Christian scriptures talk about "things sacrificed to demons..."1 Corinthians 18-20. Consumers, especially of other faiths, may not want to consume halal foods if they are aware of this. It is more than a method of slaughter, it is a religious ritual.

As for the finance part, that is also sleight of hand. One can take an equity or a debt stake in a business. There are risks and potential returns with both methods. Both are open to exploitation. As long as they products are fairly structured, understood and entered into with full consent, no problem. Why is the benefit or superiority of islamic finance not evidenced by prosperity in islamic countries, or booming capital markets?


TV

Kukutente23:
Exactly!!
See the one not deleted above

DeepSight:
Ah. I see.

I posted twice - covertly on the second occasion. No avail. Instantly swallowed up .

Tag me if you'd like me to make the post as an addendum to a previous post elsewhere. That may work.


TV

Kaczynski:
good marriages fairytales propagated by society desperate to maintain the illusion of order. look beneath the surface of any successful marriage and you wee find resentment, compromise, and suppressed desires,

Au contraire! Why do you think that over time, marriage (and I refer specifically to Christian covenantal marriage) has become the bedrock of flourishing societies? Let me put it this way; please present any other relationship type that would be the optimal vehicle for raising children, being a wonderful way of sharing mutual love, support and companionship, whilst at the same time engendering community stability and harmony. Understand this, society champions marriage due to the great utility of marriage to society

Marriage cannot be beaten, regardless of the fact that many enter into it lacking understanding, with ill-formed character or bad intentions.
Yes, their may well be resentment (where there is poor communication, a self-serving nature or unwillingness to sacrifice), but that is an opportunity to grow. There may well be compromise, that is an opportunity to mature, develop and think of others first. There may be suppressed desires, again the ability to place the considerations and needs of others above your own is a good thing. One can't be a child forever .

And please evidence that resentment , compromise and suppressed desires are features peculiar to the marriage institution or even marital relationships . Try being 40+ without spousal support or a caring family. Bet your last dime such a one would trade all they have for the most dysfunctional family ever. I have lived it and I see it.

Kaczynski:
marriage is a relic of a bygone era. a transaction between two biological units designed to perpetuate the species. there's no room for love, happiness, or personal fulfillment.

Marriage is not required to perpetuate the species, however there is simply no better way. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise. And, there is plenty of room, for love, for happiness and for personal fullfiment on top.

Indeed, marriage and family can literally satisfy those things on their own. Further, how many endeavours are there that cannot be undertaken due to marriage? Or any not made sweeter by accomplishing them while being married.

Kaczynski:
grace to meet the right person that's just a euphemism for blind luck. marriage is just institution built on unrealistic expectations, societal pressure, and biological imperatives. tbh its a recipe for disaster

Grace is great and indeed I prayed my heart out. But marriage can be undertaken pragmatically, almost project fashion. Understand what the institution is, what its and your requirements are, undertake due diligence, then implement and go live! I believe God loves marriage so much, that He acknowledges and blesses the unions of unbelievers.

Kaczynski:
its time to embrace the freedom and autonomy of singlehood. the only thing that you need to have is yourself, thats why you die the same way you came into this world : alone

Marriage is never a shackle - it's a freely entered into and understood commitment.. With the right partner and vision, one is free to be oneself. Indeed, marriage as a springboard can make you excel beyond your wildest expectations - sometimes just due to the fact that marriage comes with expectations.

I sense youth, hurt or misinformation. But I would urge anyone to Seek God, work on having the character you would like to see in your spouse, then seek with intent and commit wholeheartedly.

My testimony, is this. Marriage is wonderful. A real blessing. It has certainly changed my life. And I am a better, more mature and developed person in a way nothing else could have done.

It helps if you find your spouse incredibly attractive and stay in shape - the sacrosanct and blessed nature of marital intimacy huh . Let me stop here before I am moved to posting pictures like in the old days .

To all you single wannabes out there. Please set you sights high, articulate a clear vision about what a wonderful union looks like, work on yourself and go for it. May The Good Lord be with you.

For the don't wannabees, please get understanding and give it further consideration. The simple fact is that for the vast majority of people the closest intimacy and sense of worth will come from a committed relationship, and the best form of committed relationship is marriage. May The Lord be with you also. Marriage is too important to get wrong - in it, or out of it.

Peace & marital love


TV


^{well done ishilove and all marriage champions}

I was clear on my entry point. The TAST was not the worst slave trade ever. The arab\islamic one was. Period. But please keep mewling and flailing all over the place. Here are a few non-Christian sources.

https://wardheernews.com/the-arab-slave-trade-a-forgotten-chapter-in-african-history/
https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade-sex-trafficking/#:~:text=The%20Trans%2DSaharan%20Caravan%20focused,and%20thirst%20along%20the%20way.

The Christian vs. the Islamic scriptures. No matter what TAST did, no matter who was involved, the Christian scriptures clearly presented do not support slavery and it was Christians who eventually abolished slavery - EOS. Nor is there any Christian chattel slavery today.

Islam however, embeds it and still practices it. Nonsense about "upwardly mobile slaves" is laughable. All your duff comments are waffle - designed to defect and obfuscate. Keep pivoting to race based action and not what your heretical sect demands. Abdi is your generation .

Sterope:
Because Christianity ended up changing the narrative which is still present today...cue the KKK and modern white nationalist movements; does not erase how the Bible and Christian institutions were used to justify the mistreeatmeent of Black people. The so-called "Cvrse of Noah" (the Ham/Noah story: Genesis 9:20–27) was repeatedly invoked to legitimise racciial slavery and the brvtal hierarchies that followed.

Even the Church wasn't left out of the slave trade; in fact it allowed, encouraged, profited from, and directly partook in it from institutions that trace back to the Roman Empire through later Catholic and Protestant bodies (including the Jesuits, the Church of England, and others). That’s historical fact; the apologia that comes later doesn’t change the original complicity.

No need to explain or justify. Just accept your deen for what it is - unrelentingly, unapologetically ,inhumane, regressive, oppressive, brutal and bloodthirsty.


TV

Sterope:
Both systems were horrific — but in very different ways.

Clearly your original post was maliciously intended - you described the transatlantic slave trade as the worst. Simply put, that is not factually grounded. It is untrue. A barefaced lie.

Sterope:
Europeans, mostly good Christian, infliicteed extremei dehvmanissation: Enslaved people were packed like sardines on ships, displayed in “zoo galleries,” violeentlly attacked, and in some cases used for human experimevtss.

Brutal labor left permanent scars; mortality rates were extremely high. Justificationscame biblical interpretations claiming Africans were descendants of Noah’s cursed son. The system aimed for permanent subjugation, erasing identity, language, and culture, while skin color determined status.

Again, this is mostly waffle. The Christian scriptures do not countenance slavery, period. So at best, the perpetuators were not Christians, ill-informed or simply evil - co-opting the scriptures to excuse their wickedness. This is not a reflection on Christianity.

To be clear, the TAST arose from the so called enlightenment which sought to overthrow the faith as the guiding light of society. From this arose notions of evolution\darwinism, which classified humans based on ethnic\racial lines and was the imprimatur for slavery.

Christianity was able to re-assert itself and make the case for abolition. FACT. The UK unilaterally enforced this abolition, at great cost, culminating with the forcible enforcement on the Saudi's as I mentioned on my previous post. FACT.

And another thing, abhorrent as it was, and this in no way ameliorates it, the TAST was a trade - locals were complicit. The arab slave trade by contrast was fuelled mostly by wars and raiding parties. And also included enforced conscription, with slaves trained as soldiers, often beng sent back to raid their birth communities - yep, for more slaves.

There is no equivocation. Yes, slavery is always brutal and dehumanising, but Jesus came to set the captives free! Whereas Mohammed was a trader of slaves. And the arab\islamic slave trade (which has not really ended), has been for longer, was furher reaching and more brutal. Islam views slavery as halal, as long as they are non-muslims.

Sterope:
Take a guess who is repeating similar patterns today in Palestine and Congo… your Judeo-Christian "brothers." Even Netanyahu referenced it by its biblical name: Amalek.

Deperation sets in . Palestine, slavery? As for Congo, along with Sudan, Mozambique and Nigeria et al, it is marauding muslim jihadists, who have never really ceased to employ sex slavery as part of their bloodletting and destruction. Where are those girls again - where they ever brought back?

Amalek refers to the utter destruction of Israels enemies. Hamas served and got a return they couldn't handle. Stop whingeing. Christianity see's men as made in the image of God and all descended from one man and we decry any human being dying a senseless, brutal death. Islam however, views humans as mindless slaves, with no God imprint.

Islam celebrates death and destruction and never results in peace or prosperity. Why the pretence? Your scriptures want the obliteration of Jews and any notion of a Jewish state by any means possible. Keep going if you think you can overcome the Israelis.

Sterope:
On the other end, for Arab slavery, the historical practices diverged from Islamic principles already laid down both in the Qur'an (Qur'an literally has verses on charity to slaves including manumission), and scholars repeatedly condemned it. Empires like the Ottoman tolerated slavery for profit and they knew it was wrong. Even then, manumission was encouraged and existed widely.

Slaves could achieve upward mobility, some held political or administrative roles. Discrimination based on ethnicity was frowned upon; Black Muslims, Persians, Indians, and others could rise in society. Identity, religion, and social integration were often preserved, even amid brutality

You don't need to justify (or deploy takkiya ). We know Islam and see it's outworkings every day. Save that for Bilal, your prophets favourite man-slave .


TV