Page 8 of 10

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:48 pm
by Chief Chingachgook
fudgy wrote:Don't worry Khalil, I'll let you join Cassie in the recycle bin pretty soon. Both of you can even start your own progeny there. I'm just giving you more time to do your comedy act. I am enjoying it very much. :D


It's over!! Mr fudgy has no answer to KhaliL or to Cassie! :coffee: Oooopsss... me off to the bin too!!

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:45 pm
by Balls_of_Titanium_1
charleslemartel wrote:
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
So take revenge, and don't cry when you get the whip.


Ok.


Glad that you accepted my advice. If you are prepared for striking out, be prepared of being struck back without complaints.


Ok. I wonder why you keep repeating your points.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
What Muslim brothers? Those who are killing each other on a daily basis by exploding bombs in each others' mosques?


No. Those who watched in their homes on their TV sets hell brought upon Iraqis - yes, you may remmeber it by the name "shock and awe"!


I remember the scenes of Iraqis dancing with joy at the fall of Saddam. I remember the dismantling of his statue by the Iraqis with the help of ropes.


Of course, you only remember what you want to remember.

Your ignorance doesn't hold you back at all. That DRAMA of Iraqis celebrating Saddam's fall was fully staged by American inflitrators and conspirators and their cohorts. Exiled Iraqis from Jordan who opposed Saddam's regime were made to travel to Iraq to take part in the drama. It was exposed as such by American agencies themselves.

The actual reality of Iraq at that time was that of unimaginable pain and agony. Iraqis were shattered, tens of thousands of them were butchered, hundreds of thousands made homeless, and millions affected in other ways by the terrorism perpetrated by America and Britain under the banner of "shock and awe". There was NOTHING to celebrate at the eve of the brutal Anglo-American occupation. No Iraqi with a grain of self-respect and decency - actually no human being - could find any reason to celebrate the vicious anglo American occupation of Iraq. The drama staged by American and British planers only shows how callous and morally deviod they are.

HUGE revenge is pending on them.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
That is rich coming from a Muslim apologist. Have you read any history of Muhammad and the Caliphs? You are reaping what your uswa hasana has sown.


And 9/11 was your reap. MUCH MORE reap is pending.


One 9/11 was enough to get America in to two Muslim countries and dethrone the tyrants. How many Islamic countries are there in the world you said?


And your cruelties were enough to make Al Queda take out the twin towers. How many attacks of such a scale can you suffer, especially if nuclear weapons are involved?




Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
Read the bloody Muslim history of conquests.


Read the bloody European history of conquest. Oh, closer to your home - read the bloody history conquest of Americas by Europeans.


The conquests by Europeans do not justify Muslim conquests in any way. Muslim history of conquests is much older than that of Europe; you started it, remember?


The conquests of Muslims do not justify the European conquests also. And you are wrong. The European history of conquest goes back to Alexander the great if not more, so no, you started it.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:Also read your hate manual called Quran which teaches nothing but hatred and violence against other humans.


Read your hate manuals called your constitutions, which teach nothing but suppression of other nations.


Our constitutions get better and better as they get modified and upgraded if required. Quran, on the other hand, cannot be modified. I remember you asserting that "crap" can never be modified. LOL.


Your constitutions needs betterment. Qur'an does not. Extremes on both sides invoke parallel scenarios. To rule out modification, either you have to write something totally stupid and unworthy of the paper it is written on, or something oustandingly eloquent and intelligent.

See?


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:Thank your stars that India is ruled by dhimmis. And you have proved that you have zero knowledge of history. It was Muslims who demanded partition and got it. As I said, make Britishers pay as much as you want but don't start crying and whining when Brits kick your butt back.


I am not saying partition was wrong. I am not saying Muslims didn't demand it. I think you misunderstood just like the other poster.

I am saying that Britain authorized unfair partition at the very end. Kashmiri conflict arised due British unfairness. Lord Mount Batten accepted fake accession request from Dogra, the ruler of Kashmir, to India - when even if Dogra's request was geniune should not have been accepted given the overwhelming majority of Kashmiris being Muslims and wanting to ally with Pakistan.

Lord Mount Baten, just like many British men, was corrupt. He had relations with the sister of Nehru. Lord Mount Baten's sister was attracted to Nehru.


Muslims demanded the partition from the British for themselves and got it.


That was ok. But Britishes BETRAYED Muslims by not conducting fair partition. The regions that were promised to Pakistan was letter secretely given to India.

You should be thankful to them for giving you separate land.



Britishes had no business in India. Before the British came, we ruled over entire India. So what nonsense are you paddling?

We can surely CURSE Britishes for sowing in conflicts like Kashmir.

Dishonestly and hypocritically, your people stayed back in India even after they had been given their share of land.


The Muslims in India live on their own land. They have full right to live there. Partition was done for Muslim majority areas.

Lately, there is news that Muslim population of India is increasing faster than Hindu population. I welcome this developement.

You have no right to remain in India now as you got your share of land.


Indian Muslims have full right to their land in India.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote: Just as Muhammad attacked the nations which did not believe in Islam, we have the right to remove any Islamic government we choose.


Just as you have the right to remove any government, Muhammad had the right to attack non-Islamic nations.


That we learned from Muhammad, not the other way round; so don't complain.


When did you became students of Muhammad? If you were really good students of Muhammad, you would accept Islam and leave your evil ways. Have you done so? So why claim to be more loyal to him than Muslims themselves?

If we emulate Muhammad fully in dealing with enemies, You surely won't have any problems with that, will you?


No, if you emulate him all the way.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote: In doing so, we will be only following the footsteps of your uswa hasana. You have any objections to that?


Muhammad did what you want to do and are doing. What problem you have with him?


The problem is that he taught the wrong things and set criminal examples. Muslims wish to emulate him to the letter and hypocritically whine when they are dished out the same medicine.


Now what? Are you not saying you are very good student of Muhammad? Now you are saying he is setting criminal examples?


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
The words of an imaginary Allah carry no weight; he contradicted himself many times, spoke of silly beliefs of 7th century which Muslims foolishly try to project as scientific miracles.


Words in Qur'an do not matter? Then why does it matter to you when you say Qur'an advocates hate? Are you not the one who is contradicting himself? You should leave this site as you haven no problem with what is said in the Qur'an, right?


Yes, words in Quran do not matter at all.


Then why are you on this site?

Who would have bothered what crap it taught if you did not take it seriously and disturbed the peace of the world.


This amounts to you saying "It bothers me, no it doesn't bothers me, no it does, oh it doesn't". Why are you flipflopping? Are you nervous?

As Wafa Sultan famously said, "You can believe in any stone as long as you do not throw that stone on us".


Wafa throws stones at Muslims.

Quran and the life of Muhammad is being dissected all over because of what Muslim brutes and terrorists do deriving inspiration from the book.


Muslims only committed terrorism in response to your terrorism.

It is your behaviour which is the problem.


No, it is YOURS which is.


We mock Quran and Muhammad in order to make you understand that Islam is nothing but poison which is not letting you live in peace which in turn destroys our peace.


And we can clearly see if we have not lost our minds that it is YOU who are full of pison who wants to forward anti-Islamic views to justify American and Western leeching and takevoer of Muslim lands.


Also, the verse you quoted is abrogated.


Allah words are eternal, man.

Bring some verse from Sura 9 one of the final chapters in Quran, which was revealed when Muhammad had gained much power, and we shall see how peaceful your book is.


They do not contradict my verse - they were for war times, my verse was for peaceful times.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
Just like you did by fanning out of the Arabian desert to loot and murder the world? Remember, it was Muslims who attacked the other countries, and not the other way round.


Remember, the Europeans colonized the world, not the other countries.


Who started the mayhem, Europeans or Muslims?


Europeans.

Have you ever read any history? Muslims ultimately failed to colonize and Islamize the world because they couldn't even after massacring billions of people.


And what about Europeans masscaring trillions of people?

You know why? Because they relied on Allah's army of angels, whereas the Europeans developed kuffar science.


Science that was developed on the ideas of Muslim scientists. Yet Islam keeps on increasing.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
Muslims too are attacked when they are aggressive and plan terror attacks.


Who was planing terror attacks against Britian which led to Britain attack Iraq?

Well, since America is planing attack on Iran, does Iran has the right to attack America in advance, by your logic?


The Britishers got the word that Saddam was planning terror attacks, so it invaded Iraq.


So Iran ought to attack America because there is no doubt that America wants to attack Iran by yoru logic, right?

Britain was only following the example of Muhammad who used to conduct pre-emptive attacks on the basis of hearsay.


But then Iran has the same right to attack America and Israel! What kind of attack do you recommend?

So don't come asking for proof for what I have said about Britain.


Who said what about proof?


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote: Planning attacks is a big enough crime which justifies a military attack and killings; remember your uswa hasana.


Remember your countries' attitude.


That attitude only party follows Muhammad. Thank your stars that we still do not like to follow Muhammad totally.


I long for the day when you will follow Muhammad totally.

You will be civilized.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:Heck, Muslims are always aggressive as they plan to hoist the flag of Islam all over the world; that is an act of aggression and Muslims have no rights to complain.


It is you wish to hoist the flag of non-Islam on Muslim countries. YOu have no right to complain.


You argue childishly by rehashing and repeating others' arguments.


You argue childlishly by putting up stupid arguments on worth the bandwidth. Sorry, but that is true.

And obviously you are wrong. No western country has the aim of converting Muslim countries to Christians defined in their constitution.


But western countries are creepy. They say one thing and do another. They invade and pillage Muslim countries - latest example Iraq.

We believe that actions speak louder than words.

On the other hand, your Quran and Hadith have enough commandments for Muslims to attempt to do so.


Like "Be kind and just to those who do not fight you"?

So I have evidence, and you are just making baseless assertions.


I have strong evidence on the ground. I will win in any court case on the basis of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead bodies, compared to your misinterpreted texts in the Qur'an.

You surely can see that, can't you?


Of course, I can, can you?


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
So why do Muslims hanker for living in the filth ridden societies? Hypocrisy, thy name is Muslim. :lol:


Yes, they go to live in western societies, to enjoy the riches, to get easy employement, to enjoy easy women - for corrupt Muslims - but they DO NOT INTEGRATE INTO YOUR SOCIETIES. Don't you complain about that repeatedly? They do not want their children to be brought up in your culture. Therefore, they effectively make separate "enclaves" to save their culture.


You mean you Muslims enjoy the filth? Are you pigs or what? Can you see your hypocrisy?


What do you mean? Enjoying riches is not filth (if wealth is attained legtimately and enjoyment is contained within Islamic guidelines). Getting easy employment is not filthy at all. Yes, enjoying easy women is filth, however, I did say that this is done by "corrupt Muslims". So those Muslims might be pigs, but I am afraid my point has again missed you from a mile.


Since you consider western society filth ridden, you should do you best to persuade your fellow brothers to move back to Islamic heavens.


Or to do the cleaning.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
It isn't any worse than a nine year old getting deflowered by a 56 year old uswa hasana. It isn't any worse than raping a woman the same night you have killed her husband. It isn't any worse than killing the men, capturing the widows and then raping, enslaving and selling them off. Don't come talking to us about morality. Morality and Muhammad have nothing in common apart from the letter "M".


Now you are getting angry. Truth hurts, right?

All the above doesn't change the situation your poor girls are in.


LOL. No, I am not getting angry. And you did not say if what is happening in the west is any worse than what happens in lands ruled by Islam; it was a poor attempt on your part to avoid responding to my statements.


Nope, it was a poor attempt on your part to evade discussion about the situation of your young girls and problems like AIDS, STDs and teen pregnancies inflicting your societies.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:
Here I agree with you. Not only you should do that, but you should persuade every Muslim in the western world to move to the Islamic paradises.


I can do one better. I can tell them that even if they live in western societies, they should at least make every attempt to not let the influence of western culture shape their lives or the lives of their children; to protect Islamic culture and ethos wherever they go. Hey, Muhammad's (p) exmaple shows that migration is a noble deed. It's not that I have a big problem with migration itself (personally I have, but that's not the issue), but the main thing is that even if you migrate to a kufar country, where immorality is rampant, you should not integrate into the society.

Not all things in the west are bad. If they have good finiancial system (which is crumbling any way) then you can avail that. If they have good educational system, you can avail that. You can avail goodness wherever you may find it, but you must refrain from evil even if iti s in your home - you must throw it out.

That's what Islam teaches.


You would be advising them to live in the gutter and to try avoiding the stench.


Don't make yourself out to so bad. I said not all things in the west are bad. So Muslims may avail the good, while shun the bad. At the same time, we don't consider a group of people as a whole as some kind of "filth" or "gutter". Humans are redeemable, and there is no reason why western societies can't improve and move back towards religious morality. Muslims should help the west achieve this. There are many European converts to Islam, who belie your opinion that west as a whole is gutter and that Muslims must only stay away from it. Muslims can live within the west and contribute to postive change.

The sight of Muslims in your society makes you see the evil in your present ways. That's why you want Muslims disappear from the west. But this can't happen.


Such attempts are bound to fail; the stench is bound to stick. Follow my advice and advise your brethren to move out of the countries you think are filth ridden.


See my above response. Don't make yourself out to be too bad.


And you seem to be accepting the corruption of great Islamic morals for a few pieces of silver and the useless modern education.


No, for the ultimate spread of the true faith.

After all, all the knowledge worth knowing is already presented to you by Allah in Quran.


In Qur'an there are guidelines, and there are certain pieces of information. However, by no means Qur'an is a substitute for a science book (Qur'an is so high that such a comparison is stupid to make, however just to advance the idea I did so) , nor it was intended to. The information in a science text might be of infiniltely lower value than the Qur'an, but it has uses in its own way and we Muslims are recommended to seek it and to explore the world.

So your attempt at teaching me Islam in a maliging way is bound to fail, as I know my Islam better.

The education in the west contradicts Quran; it is amazing that you consider it good, LOL


No part of established, verfied science contradicts any single piece of information in the Qur'an. However, "theories" like evolution are another matter.

Living in the west is bound to corrupt the morality of your women, daughters, sisters and sons, and it is already doing that;


The bond of Islam is infinitely superior to the corrupting influence of the west. We believe in this firmly. That's why I will never tell Muslims to not go to the west or not to live there. But only to be careful.

there is plenty of evidence in the growing numbers of apostates in the west.


That number exist only in your mind. [b]It is the form of propaganda employed by Hitler - tell a lie repeatedly and it will sink in with the population at some stage. So you say this lie repeatedly so as to make Muslims insecure about their faith.

Hey, for knowledgeable Muslims, all these tactics of yours makes them puke and only expose for the evil that you are.

The number of apostates would be moot compared to the thousands of converts to Islam in the west every year.

You should really think about my suggestion a bit harder and start a movement to bring back your brethren to the lands of sublime morality.


I want to bring sublime morality to YOUR countries. Isn't that good for you?

Why do you want me to feel insecure about my faith? I don't, I just don't.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote:]Even if you are able to persuade one or two other Muslims, I would be greatly grateful to you. There will be one more benefit to you; you will find it difficult to get a 53 year old groom for your 6 years old daughter in the filth ridden western societies. That kind of moral living is possible only in Dar Ul Islam.


You know that you are speaking nonsense.


No, I am very serious. At least in this matter, you will find it extremely difficult to emulate your uswa hasana in the west. You do need to move to some Dar Ul Islam.


More nonsense.


Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
charleslemartel wrote: So when are you moving?


I am in Pakistan.


Please stay back and try to stop your brethren from moving to the west too. What are a few pieces of silver compared to the hereafter?


Spreading of faith earns great rewards in the hereafter, did you not know that?

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:58 pm
by KhaliL
____________________________
Charleselemartel seems to be offline so, I will answer to BOT1:

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Of course, you only remember what you want to remember.

Your ignorance doesn't hold you back at all. That DRAMA of Iraqis celebrating Saddam's fall was fully staged by American inflitrators and conspirators and their cohorts.


You mean Iraqis loved Saddam..? Hey man.., you only remember what you want to remember. You do not remember the time Saddam Gassed Kurds, you do not remember Saddam crushed Shiite revolt and massacred them. You do not remember how Saddam dealt his son-in-law. All you remember is what?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Exiled Iraqis from Jordan who opposed Saddam's regime were made to travel to Iraq to take part in the drama. It was exposed as such by American agencies themselves.


What drama you mean? I talked with many Iraqis here in Middle East where I worked for a good part of my life. I talked to them when Saddam had been caught from a rat hole. I did never get a word that went in favour of Saddam. And you want us to believe Saddam who turned Iraq into a real carnage ever before US came into the picture was revered there by Iraqis as an angel? And they would not have celebrated his fall?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: The actual reality of Iraq at that time was that of unimaginable pain and agony. Iraqis were shattered, tens of thousands of them were butchered, hundreds of thousands made homeless, and millions affected in other ways by the terrorism perpetrated by America and Britain under the banner of "shock and awe".


America and Britain came way later dear friend. It was Saddam who butchered people in Halabja and we did not hear a word from Muslim world then. All of a sudden when US determined to topple a dictator, there were outcries, cries for Jihad… can you count the heads of those Saddam killed and compare them to the casualties of war? Can you count how many Muslims have been killed and being killed by your fellow Muslims in Iraq on a daily basis? Who are doing these suicide bombings? You mean America? Israel?

When it matters killing, Muslims do not need an America or Israel. They killed and killed and killed all through their history. 1400 years of bloody history. I challenge you to show me a juncture in this history where you Muslims stopped killing each other. Twenty thousand faithful did slay and slain in Camel war where on one side it was Ummahatul Muemineen while it was Caliph Ali on the other side. It was way long before Columbus discovered a continent called America.
And you do not like to remember this fact. Do you? Would you kind answer this question?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: There was NOTHING to celebrate at the eve of the brutal Anglo-American occupation. No Iraqi with a grain of self-respect and decency - actually no human being - could find any reason to celebrate the vicious anglo American occupation of Iraq. The drama staged by American and British planers only shows how callous and morally deviod they are.


No Iraqi with a grain of self-respect and decency would have remained under Saddam. That is why I have connections with them here in Middle East who always mentioned Saddam as bathroom slipper. Still few were left there helpless because they could not emigrate to either Oil Rich or United States. They celebrated and for you a Muslim who has been fooled by Noam Chomsky, Robert FisK, and Ian Murphy blabbering that would look like a drama. But ask any Iraqi how happy he was under Saddam. And what kind of an angel Saddam had been.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: HUGE revenge is pending on them.


Who are you trying to fool out man? Your holy man thought the world is going to end when sun eclipsed. [The sun eclipsed and the Prophet got up, being afraid that it might be the Hour. Sahih Bukhari: 18:167] you follow this paranoid man and the ideology he brought up. Your promise of huge revenge, volcano of revenge all belong the above category. Got it?

Will you guys trigger a heat death? I am afraid because from the assessment of your performance so far, we have all reasons to expect so. When US were knocking at his door, what was that Comical Abdulla Sahaf doing?
Do not threaten us Muslim.., we are very much overawed because you guys are always been excellent in revenging. A volcano of revenge had been promised to Israel by HammASS when that decrepit wheel chair ridden man was pinpointed by Israelis. Again when Israel pinpointed Rantissi, the promise got renewed but third one had no name for a long period. And it is you guys threatening the West with HUUUUUUGe Revenge…, does revenge mean licking others boot for you Jihadi Muslims?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: And your cruelties were enough to make Al Queda take out the twin towers. How many attacks of such a scale can you suffer, especially if nuclear weapons are involved?


US can suffer even if the whole US is nuked because they have second and third strike power. So goes the matter with NATO. But ask a question honestly to yourself. How many strikes are necessary to wipe your Islam out of this planet? A threat from US had Pakistan open its soil for US to do whatever US wanted to do in Afghanistan. And do not forget that threat remains and applies to all Muslim nations.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:The conquests of Muslims do not justify the European conquests also. And you are wrong. The European history of conquest goes back to Alexander the great if not more, so no, you started it.


Ooh… stretching back to BC because you could not help the bloody history of Islam..!! What about starting from a point that you know the history well? Consider your seventh century. Muhammad started it. He started invading surrounding nations. Pre-Islamic Arabs never invaded any nations but all their blood feuds limited to the orb of Arabia in the north. They never killed war captives but Muhammad did. They did not rape war captives but Muhammad did.

Got any clue on it?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Your constitutions needs betterment. Qur'an does not. Extremes on both sides invoke parallel scenarios. To rule out modification, either you have to write something totally stupid and unworthy of the paper it is written on, or something oustandingly eloquent and intelligent.


The answer is there in your post. You admitted Quran can not be rewritten. And you shamelessly ran away from a debate concerning to this. I opened the second line too in Exclusive Rooms to debate you on the Quranic hatred towards unbelievers, but you will never ever dare to touch them. Because; you know of the demolition that follows. You Jihadi Muslims are such a coward bunch who will not even have a chance in hell against an infidel like me. You guys can not have intellectual discourses because logic is not your forte. You are affected by a seventh century hate manual. When I repeatedly challenged you to produce a single verse from Quran which speaks of universal brotherhood, basic human rights you had to retreat shamelessly from the debate. And for your information, I am still there waiting for you.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Britishes had no business in India. Before the British came, we ruled over entire India. So what nonsense are you paddling?


And who were ruling India before you guys crossed Hindukush?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: We can surely CURSE Britishes for sowing in conflicts like Kashmir.


As I said earlier, you guys are very good in cursing. Your god was very good in cursing people to turn them into apes and pigs. But in real world we do not give a damn to them. Understand?

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: The Muslims in India live on their own land. They have full right to live there. Partition was done for Muslim majority areas.


Muslims all over India were given a chance to migrate when Pakistan was born. Fact # 1.

India remained secular because Nehru the atheist Hindu opted for a secular state rather than a Hindu nation. Fact # 2.

Pakistan declared an Islamic nation so, Muslims should have preferred Pakistan over infidel secular India. But they DID NOT because they felt safer under secular laws than your goddamn Sharia laws. Fact # 3.

And for the very reason, Nahru Government did not deport all Muslims to Pakistan though a nation was born in the name of Islam as Allama Iqbal the darned fanatic pseudo intellect proposed. It was the secular ideas Nehru held that helped Muslims of India to stay in there without getting deported to Pakistan. When a nation was given to them as they asked, no Muslim had right to stay in India then. They all should had transferred their residence, but the values of secularism that dominated then politicians like Nehru, Patel gave them options to either migrate or stay in India. That is why Muslims could remain in India. Not because they had rights there, but because the secular Indian government did not force them.

Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Lately, there is news that Muslim population of India is increasing faster than Hindu population. I welcome this developement.


There are more news from India that fanatic organizations like Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena are growing alarmingly and becoming more fanatic. For each bomb blasts in India at least a million Hindus turn literally militant and to fight against Islam they join the above mentioned organizations. And Mumbai is already under Shiv Sena, Gujrat is turning towards more violent Hindutwa and you should welcome all this. :lol: Yea…, this is how a Muslim's touch with reality goes..,

Man…, if a tiny minority of Hindus ever turn violent, there can be no Muslim in India who can have a peaceful dinner with his family. You guys are trying to disturb this atmosphere while secularists, patriotic Muslims in India are working hard and hard to sort the things out.

You Jihadi Muslims can only dream of blood, because you are brainwashed. You can never think of a parallel situation. What the hell you could do to Narendra Modi who literally had an ethnic cleanse in the state of Gujarat of India? Do you think it is not possible for any Indian state to have another Modi and replicate the scenario over there too?

It is secular minded Hindus and organizations that hold back fanatics, but the day they fail none can even predict what will happen to Muslims in India. That is why the sensible Muslims of India refused to bury the corpses of those dirty Jihadis who stormed and rampaged in Mumbai. Majority of Indian Muslims know the consequences and are trying very hard to get the things back to normal. But your Kinds of Jihadis will spoil everything to turn all into carnage. But..Glad, there is not much people like your kind in the subcontinent.

I would have loved to comment to all of your Jihadi blabbering but they were not even worth addressing. All that you write worth nothing but I just addressed some of them with a purpose in my mind. Now, it depends how you respond to this. I say it once again: I want a Jihadi mind exposed. I do all this to incite the Jihadi inside you and to show the world how an average Jihadi Muslim thinks. You are just one of the many and there are more online and anybody who visits Ummah.com can get it. But not all in here visit that damned website so I need a Jihdi prototype here to expose. And I do this for the same purpose. To incite and get the core of your thought processes so that world will become aware of the dangers of Islam.

If you have any sense of pride, come on to the thread in Exclusive Rooms from where you ran away like a coward. I am ready to even reconsider of the rules,

Come on Muslim, you must have guts or else you are not a real Muslim. An infidel is challenging you. You can not turn away, because according to Muhammad it is one of the greatest sins.

KF

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:28 am
by Ram
This Muslim with an obscene and suggestive name is the real face of Islam. This narrow minded ignorant Muslim is following in the footsteps of his Paedophile Prophet Muhammad by giving himself a sexually suggestive name.

Muslims in India live under same laws like any other citizen of the country. It was leaders like Nehru and Gandhi that India is a secular democracy but because of Muslims like Balls_of_Titanium that many Hindus feel that Indian leaders made a very big mistake. Outfits like Bajrang Dal and RSS thrive in India has very much to do with hatred Muslims spew against Hindus.

Muslim countries are backward due to narrowmindedness of Muslims. Free societies thrive because they treat every citizen with equality, where everyone is free to pursue their dream, whatever religion one follows. This is not the case in any Muslim countries. Muslims are so full of hate that Muslims hate Muslims. This is the curse of Islam.

Instead of rejoicing the fact that Muslims in India are equal citizens of the country, where they are free to practice their religion, are allowed to live under Sharia Family Law, many Muslims like Azim Premji are very successful, this ungrateful hate spewing yellow belly moronic Muslim vomits bile in every post. He is so full of hate that he fails to see that Pakistan, the failing state is sinking deeper into hell hole with each passing day. He is so blind not to see that Pakistan is sliding into non-existence. Muslims slaugher Muslims everyday in Pakistan. But when Muslims do the killings, that's fine for this Muslim.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:12 am
by fudgy
KhaliL FarieL wrote:Okay, if it is what you meant. But the age of marriage differing from state to state in America does not make prepubescent marriage endorsed. Let the states vary, let the world vary, I think we must have our own judgment in this matter.

Right, now do you get it that marriage age is not a constant? No it does not, but the law of marriageable age was as low as 10 before. Therefore, if you married a 10 or 12 year old girl you would not be violating the law at that period of time. And still today in some states there is no minimum stipulating age for marriage and would allow underage guys and gals to get married with parental and/or judicial consent.

I'm gonna refer to you as a Joker from now on, ok?

The Joker wrote:"It" means the eligibility of marriage?
If it is so, that is not defined as the age of “sound judgment” in Surah Nisa verse: 6.
There isn’t either a numerical or any definition otherwise.

Only if that “sound judgment” is put as a stipulation for engaging in marriage. That is not the case in verse 4:6. But even this "sound judgment" is not making much of sense because it only refers to psychological growth not physical growth. What if a sound person has not yet menstruated or not yet had an emission?

Bingo… what an acrobatic.

There are many problems for your analysis dear Fudgy.

First of all Surah 4:6 is not meant to dictate age limit for marriage. It just talks about orphans and when the custodian’s wealth should be released to them, if you read the verse in context that would be clear:

Give not unto the foolish (what is in) your (keeping of their) wealth, which Allah hath given you to maintain; but feed and clothe them from it, and speak kindly unto them.[Quran 4:5]

Then it goes on when to when to release property to orphans under one’s care. “Balagha Al-Nikah” reaching the stage of Nikah PLUS having a sound mind is required for orphans to get their wealth released. Or it is when the guardian has to release their property, but remember two prerequisites are mentioned separately in Quran. First it talks of reaching the stage of marriage, (not mentioning any age), then another requirement is “having a sound mentality”. If an orphan has acquired this both, then his/her property can be given to him/her.

What makes Quran mention reaching the stage of Nikah and then again say “If you find them in sound judgment”? That means reaching the stage of marriage does not mean reaching the stage of having “sound judgment”. Is it clear for you now?

One more thing: “Reaching the stage of marriage” stated as in the verses is just an idiomatic expression. It does not necessarily mean there is an age to have marriage because the verse does not speak about marriage at all. It is of how and when an orphan is entitled his share of wealth. Not his/her spouse.

Alternatively, we have evidences from the same Quran (65:4) there is Iddah (waiting period stipulated for divorced women) stipulated for immature girls too who has not menstruated.
Read your book in context dear friend.

If it gave a numerical number say like 15 or 16 you would bitch and moan about it too, because this is what jokers like you do in their life. You want to go to a class room and make your own rules. See what I mean? Even "sound judgment and responsibilities" is not good enough for a joker atheist like you. Sound judgment comes with age and experience. I am not talking about how smart/shewed/keen someone is.

You don't need 4:5 to understand 4:6. I know 4:6 is about dealing with orphans, and at the same time gives us insight into marriage. Scroll up 3 verses earlier(4:3) and see how/in what context marriage up to four wives was stipulated. What this verse is saying is that at marriageable age you are supposed to have sound judgment and responsibilities, which in essence is the reason for releasing the property. The "If... then part" means that just because they have reached marriageable age it doesn't necessarily mean they have sound judgment and responsibility. And you are supposed to check for that, which is why earlier I've said that you could be a 30 year old retard. And in that case properties should not be released nor should you marry. Very simple stuff. If this is too complicated for you just think of it in another way. If you can not even release property to someone then how can you to expect to marry someone? And if you still don't get this please don't waste my time on it.

The Joker wrote:Quran verse 65:4 is carefully analyzed in this forum many times and conclusion has always been “those females who never had menstruation” too are bound with Iddah (waiting period for divorced women). You should not go back to any medical term, do not burn your fuel for nothing because the obvious and interpreted meaning of the phrase in the verse is “those who are not menstruated”. You can not have this group as “menstruated once in lifetime and stopped”. Sorry, the phrase “Wallaee Lam Yahidhna” as found is not having such a connotation at all. It strictly means “those who did not menstruate”. End of story..?

Look pal as I've said my main focus is on 4:6 for now. I don't know much of the medical terms myself. If it had said something like "those who have not reached the age of menstruation" then you can say it is talking about children--no doubt. But if you think that only little children who does not menstruate then you should go bury yourself in the Saharan dessert. It's all about women and does not sanction child marriage. We need a consent from a women to get married and we have to make sure children does not see nudity;they are our angels. If marriage was supposed to be of when we have sound judgment and responsibilities, and that we need consent from he women and we can't allow little children to see nudity then how can we fudge them? The Joker is out of his mind. And last I checked it was hell bounded kafir like yourself who are leading in teen pregnancy. My parents have been married for over 40 years and my grand parents about 80(they lived for 100+). I do not need any marriage counseling from a joker like yourself.


Dark Knight's Next Joker wrote:Quran alone does not give you the name of Muhammad’s father or mother. At the same time, it tells you Muhammad is not the father of any believer. There are many things missing in Quran so trash not what you do not find in your Quran. It is too ambiguous a text as the author himself confirms.

Who told you that he is? If Aisha was really that important she could have been easily referred as "9 year old wife" or something in line with that. Quran is not meant to give you everything in the world. Quran's main objective is about proclaim of One God, his Angels, and his Prophets,etc.

Dark Knight's Next Joker wrote:Just like you can say whatever you want on Quran…, isn’t it dear fudgy? BTW, I do not usually quote modern day scholars but I am with most authentic scholars of Islam as your prophet himself said they are the best after him and his followers.

Arguing in this line will not help you since I can argue Muhammad too was a human and he was prone to error (He often went terribly off-track too as Quran and Sahih sources testify). You have this Quran through Muhammad who should be considered as a fallible human being. How much this line helps your position?

I am the Muslim dear not you. That's difference ,we do not consider Hadith to be heavenly inspired as the Quran is. Simply put belief in the Quran is what it is: a belief, which is what God wants you to do-- to believe. If God wants to prove to you that he exist he can easily do so, but he wants you to believe. And both Bukhari and you can take a hike, Haik. What a convenient name for you in your signature.

Orignally, I thought that I would let him in the bin with Cassie. But now I have realized that he would be a waste there. Since I have discovered his immense talent as a Joker, I think he is better off taking the Next Joker part in Dark Knight II.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:17 am
by fudgy
KhaliL FarieL wrote:_____________________________

Fundy… shh… Fudgy.. (Darn… both ways it is slang… why did you choose such a goddamn nick?)

I am sure your exam will go on and on and you will NEVER find time to respond me when you have enough time for all posts after to that of mine.., So, I decided to answer on Aksel’s behalf here:

fudgy wrote: Firstly, you must realize that Muslims are warned to take their scholars way too seriously, which was one the reason Jews and Christians went astray .


NO. The fact Quran says the other way around. See:

O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith." [Quran: 5:101-102]

Previous nations asked more questions means they questioned their prophets, scholars and lost their faith.
To be clearer: Blind belief is what Islam asks you for. You should blindly believe in what the next mosque Mulla whispers in your ears.

fudgy wrote: I personally do not believe in much of the Hadith. .


I personally believe in much of the hadith. Does it matter? Fudgy…,do you know that your personal preferences do not matter when it comes to Islam? You can not just say you do not believe, you can not ask more questions, all you can do in your religion is blindly believe. If I happened to be your local Mulla, you should believe me. If you don’t believe and ask questions, you will lose your faith. Heck… Quran is above right above your temple now.

fudgy wrote: So, why use such material? I mean, who the hell is Bukhari? .


Darn… you are not listening.., BTW, I think if you just try a bit more, you will come up with who the hell is Muhammad??? Wouldn't you? Of course; and you take it from me, because I started like this. (Don’t tell anyone. This is top secret)


fudgy wrote: Did the Prophets wives went up to him and told him about their sexual life? .


Again, a little bit more. You will come up “Did those wives go up to him up in heavens and said him we have some problems?” How did Allah know Muhammad’s wives have problems to reveal verses? I mean Surah Tahrim in Quran?

fudgy wrote: And what message are the Prophets wives trying to convey by telling their sex life in public. Such nonsense should be recycled and emptied right away. .

That is why I did it much earlier and stay happy go lucky now. What goddamn message is that Quran giving you by saying “Feehinna Qasiratu alTarfi….” “Therein are virgins neither djinns nor men touched before?” It should be flushed right away.

fudgy wrote: At any rate, to be honest I see this as nothing but a desperate attempt to prove Muhammad as pedophile..


At any rate, to be extremely honest, I see you do nothing to defend your case. Muhammad remains a pedophile after your all acrobatics. Desperate is not the word, you are frustrated;

fudgy wrote: There are many thing wrong with this notion in order to justify that he was pedophile. First, you need to prove what age Aisha was when he supposedly said that..


Aisha was the most favourite wife of Muhammad; it never was a secret. Even Gabriel brought Aisha to Muhammad in a dream when Aisha was 4 or 5. How old was Muhammad then? May be 50? Or above it?

fudgy wrote: Second, look at the context in which he is speaking about "superiority." "Superiority" in Islam is about how someone submits to Allah; not how good looking or hot someone is..


Ooh.. now I understand what does it mean “Female Superior position” in Islam. Darn…, You further defame your Allah here,

Muhammad gave virgins superior position by allocating seven nights to them but only three nights to matrons. This is the superiority we are talking about. Not the superior position your Allah prefers.

fudgy wrote: See how he is talking about Mary and the Pharoh's wife? Now, with that being said there is a mention of Pharoh's wife being of extreme quality character. She denounced her jerk husband and all the wealth that came with it. And she saved Moses from the Pharaoh and accepted his call to One True God. And there is a whole chapter on Mary. ..


So what? What the above has to do with Muhammad’s pedophilic affair with Aisha?

fudgy wrote: But where exactly is Aisha in the Quran? ..


Where exactly is Amina the mother of Muhammad in Quran? Where exactly Khadija plus nine other wives plus Maria plus Raihanna plus …….. in Quran?

You know why Cassie does not give you any damn? You do not deserve her time. But I am too fond of you because you are very funny indeed. I liked you from the very first.

fudgy wrote: And did Allah told her to preach about how she had sex with the prophet? In the end, there is no way to verify whether these so called Sahih Bukhari was sahih after all and was a pedophile himself. Therefore he should be sent to recycle bin as well.Thnx for the wish. I need it .


:lol: :lol:

You crack me up finally. Perhaps you are the first one in this forum to accuse Imam Bukhari of paedophilia because Bukhari made all the mess of a pedophile out of Muhammad with his Sahih Hadiths.

Your fury is very much justified. That goddamn paedophile Bukhari… how dare he???

Thanks for the laughs dear. Much needed laughter and I wish you stay with us always. I really mean it. :)
KF

Who asked you to respond for other people? Are you seriously that desperate? You do realize that you don't have to be the last person to respond? What a clown of a joker this guy is. Aksel might be busy with something, that doesn't mean you have to respond for him unless you are his servant or something.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:06 am
by Maersk
So much said. To keep it simple for Muslims, the intepretation of the above must means that to '****' a Muslim girl when she reaches puberty is once in a life time experience for everybody. Correct me if I am wrong. If she reaches puberty she is ready to receive any grandfather that proposition her. Is something useful for Non-Muslims to know. :worthy:

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:13 am
by Cassie
According to Muslims like fudgy, Muslims fudging little girls is not pedophilia.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:17 pm
by KhaliL
______________________________________

fudgy wrote:
KhaliL FarieL wrote:Okay, if it is what you meant. But the age of marriage differing from state to state in America does not make prepubescent marriage endorsed. Let the states vary, let the world vary, I think we must have our own judgment in this matter.

Right, now do you get it that marriage age is not a constant? No it does not, but the law of marriageable age was as low as 10 before. Therefore, if you married a 10 or 12 year old girl you would not be violating the law at that period of time. And still today in some states there is no minimum stipulating age for marriage and would allow underage guys and gals to get married with parental and/or judicial consent.


That means you have a comprehension problem. (I attack you in person because you did it so many times in this post. I believe in give the devil its due)

Read what I wrote. That is why I left my quote there for you. Age of consent might have varied in the past and present but that does not make marrying and having sex with a pre-pubescent girl morally right. It is highly reprehensible, be it in US, or in any remote part of Mauritania. I said, let the whole world vary but you and I must have our own judgment in this matter. I find it very disgusting to my morals to get sexually aroused at the sight of a nine, ten, eleven…. year old girls. They are kids you man; when are you going to learn?

fudgy wrote: I'm gonna refer to you as a Joker from now on, ok?


You can call me anything or everything, it depends on your personal level of decency. But when quoting me, use my nick, otherwise readers are not going to get whom you answer.

What makes Quran mention reaching the stage of Nikah and then again say “If you find them in sound judgment”? That means reaching the stage of marriage does not mean reaching the stage of having “sound judgment”. Is it clear for you now?

fudgy wrote: If it gave a numerical number say like 15 or 16 you would bitch and moan about it too, because this is what jokers like you do in their life. You want to go to a class room and make your own rules.


Where did you get that from my post? I don’t give a damn to your holy book, and I would care least whether it dictated any age limit or not because it does not affect me at all. Simply for the reason, it is not a book that I pay attention to for how should I live my life. If your almighty Allah failed to know what the marriageable age is for persons, he could have stayed mute and let his subjects decide based on their intuitions. When and where did I demand Quran should have stipulated an age limit?
I can sense the sarcasm and insult at the same time since I am multi-talented. I can answer you and piss you off at the same time for the very reason. Giving a little respect to the person you are addressing will not quake the earth under your foot.

fudgy wrote: See what I mean? Even "sound judgment and responsibilities" is not good enough for a joker atheist like you. Sound judgment comes with age and experience. I am not talking about how smart/shewed/keen someone is.


I got what you meant and my previous post is there for you to refer in case. What I meant is reaching the stage of having sound judgment is not made as a stipulation for marriage in the verses you brought. And even that sound judgment thing has flaws because I have seen many talented teens with sound psychological make up. That does not make them fit for marriage. Physical and psychological growth, both these are to be achieved to enter an enterprise like marriage since it is meant to raise a family. A girl of nine years who is still playing with her dolls is not fit for marriage for the same reason. Did you get me this time or?

fudgy wrote: You don't need 4:5 to understand 4:6.


What is the big problem in quoting your book in context?

fudgy wrote: I know 4:6 is about dealing with orphans, and at the same time gives us insight into marriage.


NO. It does not. I made it clear in my earlier post.

fudgy wrote:Scroll up 3 verses earlier(4:3) and see how/in what context marriage up to four wives was stipulated. What this verse is saying is that at marriageable age you are supposed to have sound judgment and responsibilities, which in essence is the reason for releasing the property.


You try to draw out things from your book which is not there. The verse before or after 4:6 does not give any of such notions. It is what you impose upon it, not what actually your book says.


fudgy wrote:The "If... then part" means that just because they have reached marriageable age it doesn't necessarily mean they have sound judgment and responsibility.


Yea…, shoot on your foot. I know Muslims often do this because I have experience debating all weird kinds of Muslims. Most often it is only a matter of time before they shoot on their own foot.
You make my assertion strengthened “having sound judgment does not mean the person is at a marriageable stage’. So, Quran is still short of perfection in this matter. If your god can not make it clear, why on the hell he tries to?


fudgy wrote:And you are supposed to check for that, which is why earlier I've said that you could be a 30 year old retard. And in that case properties should not be released nor should you marry. Very simple stuff.


Simple..? in what sense? Releasing property is what your Quran chapter Nisa verse 6 mentions not marriage. You try to connect them and I would say a very pathetic attempt which is not going to work when you have an Ex-Muslim on the other side who was a Hafidh in his past life.

fudgy wrote:If this is too complicated for you just think of it in another way. If you can not even release property to someone then how can you to expect to marry someone?


Ask this question to yourself. Quran or your authentic sources do not say one can not marry someone just because she is not fit enough to have her properties released. Where in the hell Quran or your Sahih sources mention it? Leave my personal opinions aside; you are not supposed to act upon them. So, do not personalize matters. Your book is faulty for allowing pre-pubescent marriage. Personally you might detest such a notion, but as long as your god did not have this detest, you are not supposed to personalize matters and form theories based on it. You as a Muslim should act upon what your god dictated in his book. Not what your inner-self tells you.

fudgy wrote: And if you still don't get this please don't waste my time on it.


First of all, I was not begging you for your time. Then stop this nonsensical wasting time” kind of blabbering. Make your case solid; then everybody will get it. Otherwise, you can do whatever you want. Your exit is just a mouse click away if you want to, but do not trivialize others in this forum if you are looking for a serious dialogue. I read your other post too and that is why I am being in this offensive tone.

fudgy wrote: Look pal as I've said my main focus is on 4:6 for now.


But you failed to make your case out of it. I made a case with the verse 65:4 handsomely. And that was the reason I brought the verse in my post.

fudgy wrote: I don't know much of the medical terms myself. If it had said something like "those who have not reached the age of menstruation" then you can say it is talking about children--no doubt.


Yes…, it is what the phrase means. Quran did not make it clear but your authentic Mufassirs have made it crystal clear. It is not a modern apologetic Mufassir but I can bring you at least a dozen authentic Mufassirs who are “Tabioon” in your Islam. All have defined the term “Wallaee Lam yahidhna” denotes those who have not reached the age of menstruation. Or what the hell of a meaning you are going to construe from a phrase that literally means = “Those who have not menstruated”?

fudgy wrote:But if you think that only little children who does not menstruate then you should go bury yourself in the Saharan dessert.


I don’t want to but you can flush your book because it is what gives green signal to paedophilia. I won’t recommend sending it to Saharan dessert because it will be recovered by any enthusiastic traveler again sometimes in the future.

fudgy wrote:It's all about women and does not sanction child marriage.


Verse 65:4? It is not about women if you want to know. It is talking about Iddah (waiting period after divorce or death of husband) of females. And we see this Iddah is stipulated to those girls who are not menstruated too. What the hell that means? Can you think of it and make it clear for all here?

fudgy wrote: We need a consent from a women to get married and we have to make sure children does not see nudity;they are our angels.


Sources? I can show you exact opposite to what you claim. Aisha not only saw the nudity of Muhammad but had been exploited for sex at a very tender age. I would say teach morals to your holy man and not us in FFI. He was the one who molested a minor for more than seven years.

fudgy wrote: If marriage was supposed to be of when we have sound judgment and responsibilities, and that we need consent from he women and we can't allow little children to see nudity then how can we fudge them?


Prove it here marriage is only allowed in Islam when one has reached the age of sound judgment. You are yet to do it and weaving theories from a refuted, false premise. No deduction will stand if it is deduced from a faulty premise.

fudgy wrote: The Joker is out of his mind. And last I checked it was hell bounded kafir like yourself who are leading in teen pregnancy. My parents have been married for over 40 years and my grand parents about 80(they lived for 100+). I do not need any marriage counseling from a joker like yourself.


I don’t answer this. Your decency is oozing out of it and you try to trash me as paedophile when you got no clue on who and what I am. Kid.., I can be of your father’s age.

fudgy wrote:
Dark Knight's Next Joker wrote: Quran alone does not give you the name of Muhammad’s father or mother. At the same time, it tells you Muhammad is not the father of any believer. There are many things missing in Quran so trash not what you do not find in your Quran. It is too ambiguous a text as the author himself confirms.

Who told you that he is? If Aisha was really that important she could have been easily referred as "9 year old wife" or something in line with that. Quran is not meant to give you everything in the world. Quran's main objective is about proclaim of One God, his Angels, and his Prophets,etc.


Your god did not find anything important with Muhammad too as I stated above. Does that mean Muhammad is an ignorable figure for you?
Just because you don’t see an Aisha in your book does not make Aisha’s position in Islam weak or negligible. After all, the service she did for your Ummah can not overlooked. She cause a huge rift in your Ummah to end up twenty thousand Muslims lives..!! (this kinds of historical information can not be found in Quran, but that does not mean they are to be ignored. )

Quran’s objective as we understand from the very second chapter is to shackle one’s thought processes. It is very authoritative and arbitrary to say “there should be no doubt in this book”. And moreover we see talking ants and hoopoes in the book in which there is no room for doubt as your god commanded. If Quran’s objective is to talk about god, we have to consider your god is a self flatterer. And he did not understand what he is talking about as he slipped into speaking on many things that are utterly nonsensical. What good message you get from stars chasing djinns? Is it also meant to proclaim god’s oneness?

fudgy wrote: I am the Muslim dear not you. That's difference ,


Where did I claim to be one? I know I differ to Muslims because I do not believe in a god or gods. I don’t believe in anything if they can not be verified. But you do and there is difference. I admit this, but your reason to state this now?

fudgy wrote: we do not consider Hadith to be heavenly inspired as the Quran is.


I did not question your freedom of believing in anything you want. But when you try to impose your beliefs on others, we will have to intervene. When you try to defend something on false pretexts, then too we will have to intervene. Otherwise, we do not care a person who believes a seventh century hate manual is god’s words. More bizarre beliefs are still in existence but we care them less because there is not an attempt to impose those beliefs on others.

fudgy wrote: Simply put belief in the Quran is what it is: a belief, which is what God wants you to do-- to believe. If God wants to prove to you that he exist he can easily do so, but he wants you to believe.


You are wrong in saying god wants me to believe and that is all (if that is what you meant by above). Your god is very much in need of my worship too or else he threatens me to roast me in his hell where he seems to be staying most of his time to keep the temperature steady. He is not going to let me off the hook as he asks for many things from me from obedience to a lot of nonsensical rituals like bumming up three or five times a day, running like a fanatic between two mountains…,
I don’t simply waste my time to believe such a disturbed personality is the one who created this universe or universes and things in it. Your god is a highly disturbed person as we see he is cursing his own creations like a frantic. Just go through your book chapter 111 and tell us who is this guy cursing a Abu Lahab and his wife. An all powerful god cursing two of his creatures..!!! It is what your Allah as we understand from your book. A man of very short temper. No wonder why you Muslims can not keep cool because your god could not then how on hell the devotees can..??

fudgy wrote: And both Bukhari and you can take a hike, Haik. What a convenient name for you in your signature.
Orignally, I thought that I would let him in the bin with Cassie. But now I have realized that he would be a waste there. Since I have discovered his immense talent as a Joker, I think he is better off taking the Next Joker part in Dark Knight II.


Poor attempt, and it didn’t even make me chuckle. What a disappointing end..!!

Regards
KF

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:26 pm
by KhaliL
fudgy wrote:Who asked you to respond for other people? Are you seriously that desperate? You do realize that you don't have to be the last person to respond? What a clown of a joker this guy is. Aksel might be busy with something, that doesn't mean you have to respond for him unless you are his servant or something.



Take a deep breath and relax..., This is a public forum. Anybody can answer your posts and you can not dictate limits here on others. Are you this pathetic to not even know where you are?

KF

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:30 pm
by ronyvo
Yohan wrote:Sounds like Hindus begging mercy from Muslims. Shameless behavior!!

It seems to me that Hindus have no idea about Islam.

Fatwa against jihad, what does that mean?
How and to whom this fatwa would be issued and directed?

Islam declared war (dar el harb) against ALL non-Muslims, from the time of its inception. Its agenda is to islamize the entire globe. This is their prophet instructions. Islam started as spritual idea, now it is political power.

The only way, in my opinion, to fight Islam is to ban it, BAN ISLAM. The West has to take the lead considering it a national security issue based on their CODE OF VIOLENCE the Koran.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:14 am
by Ex_muslimah
But it seems to be the other way round over here!

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:15 am
by Balls_of_Titanium_1
Ram wrote:This Muslim with an obscene and suggestive name is the real face of Islam. This narrow minded ignorant Muslim is following in the footsteps of his Paedophile Prophet Muhammad by giving himself a sexually suggestive name.


You dread my "suggestive" ID (which is just an alteration of a famous English phrase to refer to strong men) but you call your women in your movies shaking their butts and breats to the tune, "modernism". Well, that is suggestive to us.

You have progressively undressed your women in an attempt to follow western culture. Muslims dressed you up remember. Before Muslim rule, you didn't know civilization. You roamed around naked. Still your pandits in yearly festivals run around naked while families, children and women are watching. YUCK! But now, since the Muslims have lost control of you, you have started adopting all sorts of suggestive immoralities.

Muslims in India live under same laws like any other citizen of the country. It was leaders like Nehru and Gandhi that India is a secular democracy but because of Muslims like Balls_of_Titanium that many Hindus feel that Indian leaders made a very big mistake. Outfits like Bajrang Dal and RSS thrive in India has very much to do with hatred Muslims spew against Hindus.


Terrorist organizations like RSS and Bajrang Dal are in India only because Hindus like you fear Islam. Muslims are increasing fast in India. Their birth rate is greater than Hindu birth rate. It is predicted that they will become majority in India at the end of the century. Muslims lead India in all sectors. That's what makes you fear, not any hatred. Islam is bound to grow, and you are bound to shrink. You have to start feeling the heat at some point, and if not deciding to accept the facts and switching to the right side of history, you will have to be desparate and hateful to the rising wave of truth.

Muslim countries are backward due to narrowmindedness of Muslims. Free societies thrive because they treat every citizen with equality, where everyone is free to pursue their dream, whatever religion one follows. This is not the case in any Muslim countries. Muslims are so full of hate that Muslims hate Muslims. This is the curse of Islam.


The only curse there is is on you. You can't sleep well at night, you always keep thinking about Muslims and Islam, right? No day passes in which you don't preasure your mind to channelize your hatred of Islam and Muslims. This is the curse, my dear.


Instead of rejoicing the fact that Muslims in India are equal citizens of the country, where they are free to practice their religion, are allowed to live under Sharia Family Law, many Muslims like Azim Premji are very successful, this ungrateful hate spewing yellow belly moronic Muslim vomits bile in every post.


Yes, because I remember the echoes coming out of Gujarat of pain and agony, of women getting ganged raped in front of their families, of men sliced into pieces by rampaging mobs, of the leader of the riot movement getting re-elected again and again, by the oh so peaceful yoga loving Hindus, of the silence in not taking a measure against such a damented soul, of the destruction of mosques and places of woship of minorities repeatedly carried out by terrorist organizations in India, or of the ear tearing - in the above context - phrases about India being a land of mysticism and yoga. All this makes me more determined to put the situation in your country in its right context.

He is so full of hate that he fails to see that Pakistan, the failing state is sinking deeper into hell hole with each passing day.


Pakistan will always exist, to your heart crushing pain.

He is so blind not to see that Pakistan is sliding into non-existence. Muslims slaugher Muslims everyday in Pakistan. But when Muslims do the killings, that's fine for this Muslim.


There are dozens upon dozens of militant organizations in India carrying out hundreds of killings. In 2008, the people that died in India due to terrorism were more than people in Pakistan. This is the reality of your country, which is falsely presented to the world as mystic East.

A British young female tourist was gang raped in Goa - this is the reality of your country. Rpae is rising, Aids is rising.

Heck, if such an incident had occured in Pakistan with a British tourist, you would be up in arms talking about oh so beastly Pakistanis.

Your truth is clear to us. We completely understand the Qur'an and marvel on its truthful words about you, when we see your actions on the ground. You wonder why Muslims after living in the west become more closer to Islam, that's because they actually see you from a close distant.

The more we know you, the more we appreciate the Qur'an and its words about you. But not all are like you.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:01 am
by expozIslam
you stupid mullah with pea sized brain, if your allah wanted your women to be dressed all the time, why were they not born with clothes on? and why the hell should you not be wearing a hijab as well just in case some muslim women gets sexual feelings seeing you runnning around ?

Pakistan is failing and failing faster..
as for muslims, like nazism, islam will die. 20th century ended in death of nazism. 21st will see the end of terror cult called islam..
you may not be alive to see it because you might blow :blowup: up yourself for 72 houris long before that..

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:55 am
by Intelligent lad
Muslims dressed you up remember.

You mean purdah?
Before Muslim rule, you didn't know civilization.

:roflmao: You mean your ancesters were 'civilized' by the gang rapist criminal bastard Muhammed bin Quasim? They did not give you civilization, they gave you Islam (opposite to everything civilized)

You roamed around naked.

India was always the textile capital of the world. See what your great grand fathers achived.!!
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090217/ ... 7945a.html




Terrorist organizations like RSS and Bajrang Dal are in India only because Hindus like you fear Islam.

Yes ,We are afraid of Islam. Not only Hindus all Kaffir Indians are afraid of Islam.We are afraid of Muslims just like humans are afraid of wild beasts.
Muslims are increasing fast in India. Their birth rate is greater than Hindu birth rate.

Does Muslims have 'rat gene' ? You are not going to overtake India with reproduction.

It is predicted that they will become majority in India at the end of the century.

India will be completely Kuffer by that time.
:drool:
Muslims lead India in all sectors.

Not in all sectors,but in some sectors like treason,drug sumggling ,murder,underworld,pedophilea,rapes...etc...Muslims you find in good things are mostly half-Muslims or Muslims by name only.
You have to start feeling the heat at some point, and if not deciding to accept the facts and switching to the right side of history, you will have to be desparate and hateful to the rising wave of truth.

We are feeling the heat. we know that we have fever and we will treat it.




Yes, because I remember the echoes coming out of Gujarat of pain and agony, of women getting ganged raped in front of their families, of men sliced into pieces by rampaging mobs,

Do you hear echos from Banu Qurazia?
of the leader of the riot movement getting re-elected again and again,

What about worshipping 'Mahamood' as god?
by the oh so peaceful yoga loving Hindus,

So you know the truth about Hindus.
India being a land of mysticism and yoga.

We are.....
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 167939.cms


Pakistan will always exist, to your heart crushing pain.

No Pakistan will cease to exits. It's a lie like Islam. The day Islam dies , Pakistan will rejoin INDIA.


There are dozens upon dozens of militant organizations in India carrying out hundreds of killings. In 2008, the people that died in India due to terrorism were more than people in Pakistan.

All this done by Muslims only.
This is the reality of your country, which is falsely presented to the world as mystic East.

Unlike Porkistan the world looks upon us favourably
A British young female tourist was gang raped in Goa - this is the reality of your country. Rpae is rising, Aids is rising.

Rape..? There is no such this in Islam. It was coitus interruptus . Fully halal. :D

Heck, if such an incident had occured in Pakistan with a British tourist, you would be up in arms talking about oh so beastly Pakistanis.

The truth!!!

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:00 pm
by Balls_of_Titanium_1
expozIslam wrote:you stupid mullah with pea sized brain, if your allah wanted your women to be dressed all the time, why were they not born with clothes on?


This is a stupid question. He can very well create us the way he did and demand that we dress properly. You don't put restrictions or conditions on God.

and why the hell should you not be wearing a hijab as well just in case some muslim women gets sexual feelings seeing you runnning around ?


Muslim men also have a hijab. Hijab means a specific dress code. For men the minimum is from navel to the knees, while for women it is the covering of all the body. Different bodies, different psychology, different rules. However, the essence is the same.

Pakistan is failing and failing faster..


Pakistan will always stand.

as for muslims, like nazism, islam will die. 20th century ended in death of nazism. 21st will see the end of terror cult called islam..


For 14th hundred years madmen like you have been saying that and erroneously comparing Islam to other ideologies, but Islam keeps on growing. The 20th century saw the death of Naizism, the 21st century will witness the downfall of anti-Islamism.

you may not be alive to see it because you might blow :blowup: up yourself for 72 houris long before that..


It will be you blowing yourself up in rage.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:28 pm
by Balls_of_Titanium_1
Intelligent lad wrote:
Muslims dressed you up remember.

You mean purdah?
Before Muslim rule, you didn't know civilization.

:roflmao: You mean your ancesters were 'civilized' by the gang rapist criminal bastard Muhammed bin Quasim? They did not give you civilization, they gave you Islam (opposite to everything civilized)


First of all, my ancestors came from Central Asia.

Secondly, if you are talking about most Pakistanis, then know that your ancestors dravidians were raped and gang raped by Brahamins who imposed casteism on them and treated them like dogs. You ancestors were called Shudras. They were considered fit only to clean gutters. Muslims liberated them from such tyranny.

You roamed around naked.

India was always the textile capital of the world. See what your great grand fathers achived.!!
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090217/ ... 7945a.html


Yes, taxtile imported to the world, while the Hindu pandits roamed around naked - and still do - during "worship". They don't even shave any part of their body. Put in prespective to Indians' natural dark colour, the sight is appaling. YUCK!



Terrorist organizations like RSS and Bajrang Dal are in India only because Hindus like you fear Islam.

Yes ,We are afraid of Islam. Not only Hindus all Kaffir Indians are afraid of Islam.We are afraid of Muslims just like humans are afraid of wild beasts.


Humans are not afraid of wild beast. They are pretty much under our control - certainly under normal circumstances.

We don't create sites to "demonize" lepords or Hyenas, to show how "evil" they are.

What you have for Muslims is dread - terminal fear.

Muslims are increasing fast in India. Their birth rate is greater than Hindu birth rate.

Does Muslims have 'rat gene' ? You are not going to overtake India with reproduction.


Muslims will certainly do so one way or the other. This is the reason why Hindu extremists are feeling the heat.

Islam is bound to spread, and you are bound to shrink. Actually we got rat pison, with which we kill the rats and implement Islam.

It is predicted that they will become majority in India at the end of the century.

India will be completely Kuffer by that time.
:drool:


You could drool on the above.

Muslims lead India in all sectors.

Not in all sectors,but in some sectors like treason,drug sumggling ,murder,underworld,pedophilea,rapes...etc...Muslims you find in good things are mostly half-Muslims or Muslims by name only.


That was nonsense. Muslims rule India in every sector. Muslims ruled India for hundred of years while Hindus remained loyal servents. Wise Hindus understood that Muslim rule is best for them.

Anyway, as of today, Muslim rule India's scientific field - the maker of Atomic bomb is Muslim in India. Muslims lead India's film industry. Shah Rukh Khan, on whom every India girl drools, is a Muslim! How does it feel knowing this?

You have to start feeling the heat at some point, and if not deciding to accept the facts and switching to the right side of history, you will have to be desparate and hateful to the rising wave of truth.

We are feeling the heat. we know that we have fever and we will treat it.


No, if you thought so, your behavoiur would be very different from what you are showing here.

What aches you is the deep feeling inside that what you face is the truth that you can never overcome. Thus the frustrations and anger and hate, being on the wrong side of history.





Yes, because I remember the echoes coming out of Gujarat of pain and agony, of women getting ganged raped in front of their families, of men sliced into pieces by rampaging mobs,

Do you hear echos from Banu Qurazia?


Do you hear echoes of your ancestors, dravidians, whom genitals were chopped so that they could be used as servents within Brahamin households?

of the leader of the riot movement getting re-elected again and again,

What about worshipping 'Mahamood' as god?


What about it? This is shirk in Islam.

by the oh so peaceful yoga loving Hindus,

So you know the truth about Hindus.


I know the truth about you as well.

India being a land of mysticism and yoga.

We are.....


You are the land of mosque demolition, church burning, nun raping, rioting against minorities, drugs, rapes, aids, stds, underworld, corruption, nepotism, and a whole host of other evils!

Yoga and mysticism you say?

The westerns use you for a purpose. They overblow your hurt egos - being living under foreign rule of thousands of years, you have great inferior complex - by praising you falsely, so that you may serve their interests in the region like a good dog. That's what you are to them.

Don't think that the early morning yoga programs on western tv channels or interesting documentaries about India on Nat Geo are anything but part of the game.




You are a kid or what.

The gymnatics of yoga do not overshadow the cries of raped women in Gujarat, burnt Churches and demolished Mosques.



Pakistan will always exist, to your heart crushing pain.

No Pakistan will cease to exits. It's a lie like Islam. The day Islam dies , Pakistan will rejoin INDIA.


We ruled you for hundred of years, and you have been proving that you are unfit to rule yourself ever after you got independence. Pakistan will continue to exists, Islam will continue to spread, and ultimately, India will be joined to Pakistan to create an Islamic state in the sub-continent called Islamistan.



There are dozens upon dozens of militant organizations in India carrying out hundreds of killings. In 2008, the people that died in India due to terrorism were more than people in Pakistan.

All this done by Muslims only.


Nonsense. Most terrorist organizations in India are non-Muslims. There are dozens of separatist struggles going on in India involing non-Muslims.

No one with a sense of pride in his local culture wants to live in association with Hindu dominated state of India, whose yearly worship festivals involve pandits runing around naked. Sikhs were and are ashamed to join India. Sikhs started their independent strugge in the 80s. That strugge was brutally crushed by the Indian thugs in uniform, however, the sentiment still lives in most proud Sikhs. The same goes for dozens of Indian states in Eastern part of India. No one with an indepedent culture wants to associate himself with obscene Hindu culture by living within Indian union. India is bound to split into many small pieces, and that would be Pakistan's chance to come forward as the regional power.


This is the reality of your country, which is falsely presented to the world as mystic East.

Unlike Porkistan the world looks upon us favourably


Only because they want to extract benefits from you just like master wants from his dog. The "favourably" looking world once errected boards like "No Indian but dog". Rings some bell?

Also one reason for the above is that you are Hindu. The west has always hated Islam, so in this way you are seen favourably compared to Pakistan.

But your ugly reality is too ugly to be ignored, and thus I will continue to expose it.

A British young female tourist was gang raped in Goa - this is the reality of your country. Rpae is rising, Aids is rising.

Rape..? There is no such this in Islam. It was coitus interruptus . Fully halal. :D


Don't indulge in nonsense trying to hide the ugly realities in your dark country.

Heck, if such an incident had occured in Pakistan with a British tourist, you would be up in arms talking about oh so beastly Pakistanis.

The truth!!!


You turned out to be more moronic than I thought you were.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:40 pm
by Nosuperstition
Hello balls,now that you have repeatedly emphasised in this thread about Western and Hindu immorality in sexual matters and importing muslims into Europe as panecea,I opine that you consider chastity as being civilised.Fa-Hien/Hieun Tsang when he visited India wrote that in a particular area called Aryavarta / Madhya Desa no woman was unchaste and no man has ever lied,upper castes kill no living creature and stay away from intoxicating liquor.So parts if not whole of India were already civilised prior to the arrival of Muslims.It is not necessary to be veiled to be considered moral.It would just not be possible for India to have massive population unless the people are civilised and well-behaved.India had always been populated well in recorded history.Otherwise India would have been just like N.America before European colonisation where native population would not have been significant.

Also sexual morality is but only one of different aspects of morality.It is not the only one to be considered while branding people uncivilised.You are a polygamist,Hindus are monogamists and therefore to capitulate to Islam would been going back in sexual matters.It is a step backward not forward.

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:11 pm
by yeezevee
You sound very ANGRY in the above posts dear BALLS _T., I know that YOU ARE NOT THAT RELIGIOUS but "the product of the follower angry God is an angry man" dear Balls of T.., a different version of that Thomas Paine

with best regards
yeezevee

Re: Hindu leaders for 'fatwa' against 'jihad' in India

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:45 pm
by expozIslam
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:
expozIslam wrote:you stupid mullah with pea sized brain, if your allah wanted your women to be dressed all the time, why were they not born with clothes on?


This is a stupid question. He can very well create us the way he did and demand that we dress properly. You don't put restrictions or conditions on God.

and why the hell should you not be wearing a hijab as well just in case some muslim women gets sexual feelings seeing you runnning around ?


Muslim men also have a hijab. Hijab means a specific dress code. For men the minimum is from navel to the knees, while for women it is the covering of all the body. Different bodies, different psychology, different rules. However, the essence is the same.

Has it ever occured to you why your allah the pimp would be so foolish and ignorant as to create beings who cannot control their libido and thereofore had to send a murderer, a rapist to tell them how and what dresses they should wear... since allah the pimp is all knowing, should he not have known that the men will not be able to control their libido and therefore dressed muslims girls since birth?.

Pakistan is failing and failing faster..


Pakistan will always stand.

Is that why it is going around begging for dollars to imf, china and usa... with just a months worth of forex, isn't pakistan going down fast? by the way, i suppose you have forgotten the humiliating defeats at the hands of indians time and again as well as ceding parts of territory to china ...
you are no more than an ugly bitch to china and america.. be careful there might be an american drone attack on your house very soon... and you can do nothing about that..
In swat, paki govt has become a bitch to taliban.. and yet pakistan is not failing.. who are you kidding??? i am sure it is yourself..
as for muslims, like nazism, islam will die. 20th century ended in death of nazism. 21st will see the end of terror cult called islam..


For 14th hundred years madmen like you have been saying that and erroneously comparing Islam to other ideologies, but Islam keeps on growing. The 20th century saw the death of Naizism, the 21st century will witness the downfall of anti-Islamism.

you may not be alive to see it because you might blow :blowup: up yourself for 72 houris long before that..


For 1400 years, people did not know the real message in islam and people were fooled by muslims. Not any more. Internet has changed the game and changed it in favor of kufr... earlier whosover tried to leave islam was beheaded, now you don't even know how many actually follow islam...they may call themselves muslims to avoid punishment but in thier hearts, they ridicule the allah the pimp and pity you the slaves of the pimp..
It will be you blowing yourself up in rage.

i will let time be the judge but before you blow yourself up watch out.. there might be an american missle up your ass..