muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post Reply
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:42 am

muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post by mottom » ... ide_id=143" onclick=";return false;

klick the link and comment on it.

i hear that many times its not the religion its the culture. or is this just another attempt of not wanting to see the reality of the quran.


Posts: 6561
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post by sum »

Hello mottom

A very warm welcome to FFI.

It is clear that Mike Ghouse is either a muslim or a muslim supporter. He has not read the Koran or if he has he has knowingly ignored all the intolerant verses.

Koran 60:4
There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides God: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever, - unless ye believe in God and Him alone": But not when Abraham said to his father: "I will pray for forgiveness for thee, though I have no power (to get) aught on thy behalf from God." (They prayed): "Our Lord! In Thee do we trust, and to Thee do we turn in repentance: to Thee is (our) Final Goal

Koran 60:4 sets out the Islamic position of hatred and enmity towards those who do not accept Allah and Muhammad.

Koran 5:33
The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land.

`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief in the land refers to various types of evil.

Does Mike Ghouse support the "recompense" of those who oppose the theology of Islam?

Would he like to explain just these two verses out of the many that he would need to either support or reject?


Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post by farishta »

mr. goose says ( in the qouted website)
Let one Jew criticize Israel, they all will pounce on him and eat him alive, where as Muslims does to the backbiting just as the Christians and Hindus will sue each other. The bottom line is all are like that. He is duping again to those gullible followers of his

This mendacious nonsense. This idiot has never heard of Noam Chomsky or I.F. Stone. Besides these two there are hundreds of Jews who unsparingly criticise Israel and no Jew has ever pounced on them or make a meal out of them.

On the other hand muslims have killed hundreds if not thousands down the ages who have expressed anything idea at variance with the dogma of islam. This idiot should learn about Mahmoud Taha , the Gandhi of Sudan.


Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post by yeezevee »

This mendacious nonsense. This idiot has never heard of Noam Chomsky or I.F. Stone." onclick=";return false; ... Khan-1.htm" onclick=";return false;

Well some people in west knowing well behave like "IDIOTS"

Posts: 1867
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: muslim debate response of mike Ghouse to wilders

Post by Idesigner »

43:15 (Asad) AND YET, [12] they attribute to Him offspring from among some of the beings created by Him! [13] Verily, most obviously bereft of all gratitude is man!
Idesigner:This Koranic verse does not preach equality of men and woman. This idiot is taking it out of context.

Here this verse means man (human being not male) has no gratitude for Allah as he attributes offsprings to Allah ( from some of his creation) selectively from whole creation. Here Mo was referring to Christ whom Christians called Son of God.

At the most this verse preach worship of one and only SOB that is Allah and he is impotent. :D No offsprings!!

Grouse himself admits that its his own rendering and hence preferable. He should refer Madudi and other scholars for context and interpretation.
[12] I.e., despite the fact that most people readily admit that God has created all that exists (verse 9 above), some of them tend to forget His uniqueness [13] a more general meaning, namely, "they attribute a part of His divinity to some of the beings created by Him". However, in view of the sequence, which clearly refers to the blasphemous attribution of "offspring" to God, my rendering seems to be preferable.

43:16 (Asad) Or [do you think], perchance, that out of all His creation He has chosen for Himself daughters, and favored you with sons? [14] –

Idesigner:This is well known Satanic sura ( of Rushdie) or Gharanic ( as referred by Arabic scholars) . First Mohemmed advocated worship of Al Usha, Al Laat, Al Manat. Their intercession was required.This concession was made when he wanted to attract Meccan Arabs to his new cult. It back fired. His close companions or Saibas got upset. They took his monotheism very seriously. Many stopped worshiping their ancestral/ tribal goddesses.

When he became powerful he back tracked the verse. Now his pimp or puppet Allah uses sarcasm and taunts Arabs who worship female deities( them three whores of Mecca) but pray for sons. :D :D :D

This man has his own interpretation. The vese can hardly be interpreted as Allah preaching equal rights for men and women. Allah hates worship of female goddesses, as he is impotent and cant have daughters or cant even scew most beautiful Muslimmah :rock: .
Some one who knows Koran should assist Wielder in replying muslims. Wielder did not take it out of context but this Grouse did it.

Post Reply