Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 39

Thread: Koran Riots 2012

  1. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicStar View Post
    What do you mean by "Islamist"? We've gone over this before, there's a difference between a "Muslim" and an "Islamist".



    The article is kind of old, but, you get the point?
    It's not a valid point.



    Yeah, God Almighty Says that in the Holy Qur'an,

    "You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah. If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient."
    (The Holy Quran, Surah Ale 'Imran 3:110)[/QUOTE]

    Here you see one of the reasons for the engendered hatreds islamists have for non-islamists.

    Historically, there was (is) a religious-based class system with Muslims at the apex, dhimmis ("protected people of the book--i.e. Jews and Christians) below, and the rest of humanity the least. It's really no different than the methodology used by Hitlerian Germany and fascist Italy in the 1930's.

    Dhimmis were "protected" peoples living under Islamic conquest. Initially they outnummbered their Muslim rulers, and therefore were not people one would wish to permit arms or horses or trust with military service. They were also, for a time, necessary for the continued economic survival of the conquered countries. They were required to acknowledge their lower position in Muslim society, and submit to it or lose their "protection." The constant abuses (humiliation to mass murder http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...nds_(gen).html under such a system remains an appropriate concern particularly for Western nations today who have adopted (if not yet fully followed throughout all aspects of society) that all men are to be treated equal regardless of their race, gender, or religion.

    Principles of equality are simply non-existent in islamist majority nations.

  2. #17
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Resigned View Post
    It's not a valid point.
    That's not playing fair!

    Are you being honest? It was a carefully researched, well-thought-out, well-written article!

    Here you see one of the reasons for the engendered hatreds islamists have for non-islamists.

    Historically, there was (is) a religious-based class system with Muslims at the apex, dhimmis ("protected people of the book--i.e. Jews and Christians) below, and the rest of humanity the least. It's really no different than the methodology used by Hitlerian Germany and fascist Italy in the 1930's.

    Dhimmis were "protected" peoples living under Islamic conquest. Initially they outnummbered their Muslim rulers, and therefore were not people one would wish to permit arms or horses or trust with military service. They were also, for a time, necessary for the continued economic survival of the conquered countries. They were required to acknowledge their lower position in Muslim society, and submit to it or lose their "protection." The constant abuses (humiliation to mass murder http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...nds_(gen).html under such a system remains an appropriate concern particularly for Western nations today who have adopted (if not yet fully followed throughout all aspects of society) that all men are to be treated equal regardless of their race, gender, or religion.

    Principles of equality are simply non-existent in islamist majority nations.
    So, finally, I did read some (other) stuff on dhimmitude. And, now, I know what it exactly is! (and, BTW, thanks for the link.....if one reads such stuff, you'd obviously get "Islamophobic" )

    Okay, we're (at least I am) only concerned with what Prophet Muhammad said on this and how his behavior was (cuz that's what TRULY represents Islam)...

    First off, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'aala Says,

    "And if you judge, judge with justice between them. Verily, Allah loves those who act justly."
    (The Holy Quran, Surah al-Maida 5:42)

    And, here you see a few hadiths on dhimmis...

    The Prophet (saw) said: "Call them to Islam, and if they agree accept from them and refrain from fighting against them, then call them to move from their land to the land of the Muhajireen (the emigrants), and tell them if they do so, then they will have the rights which the Muhajireen enjoy and they will have duties like the duties upon the Muhajireen."
    (Narrated by Sulayman Bin Buraida, Sahih Muslim, Hadith no. 4294)

    Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr: The Prophet said, "Whoever killed a Mu'ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling)."
    (Sahih al-Bukhari, Book #83, Hadith #49)

    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who harms a person under the covenant (a dhimmi), or charged him more than he can, I will argue against him on the Day of Judgement."
    (Narrated by Yahya b. Adam in the book of Al-Kharaaj)

    "Narrated 'Amr bin Maimun Al-Audi: "......I recommend him to abide by the rules and regulations concerning the dhimmis (protectees) of Allah and His Apostle, to fulfill their contracts completely and fight for them and not to tax (overburden) them beyond their capabilities.""
    (Sahih al-Bukhari, Book #23, Hadith #475)

    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah.
    (Reported by al-Tabarani in Al-awsat on good authority)

    Narrated from Amru bin Shuaib from his father from his grandfather, the Prophet (saw) said, The diyyah (blood money) of the Jews and Christians is like the Muslim’s diyyah.


    So far, so good, eh?


    Now, from some historians...

    The treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Ottoman State attracted Jews from all over Western Europe. The land of Islam became the land of opportunity. Jewish physicians from the school of Salanca were employed in the service of the Sultan and the Viziers (ministers). In many places glass making and metalworking were Jewish monopolies, and with their knowledge of foreign languages, they were the greatest competitors of the Venetian traders.
    - Cecil Roth, 'The House of Nasi: Dona Gracia'

    The toleration extended towards the Christian Arabs by the victorious Muslims of the first century of the Hijrah and continued by succeeding generations, we may surely infer that those Christian tribes that did embrace Islam, did so of their own choice and free will.
    - Thomas W. Arnold, ‘The Preaching of Islam,’ p. 47

    The toleration of the Muhammadan government towards its Christian subjects in Spain and the freedom of intercourse between the adherents of the two religions brought about a certain amount of assimilation in the two communities. Inter-marriages became frequent; Isidore of Beja, who fiercely inveighs against the Muslim conquerors, records the marriage of ‘Abd al-Aziz, the son of Musa, with the widow of King Roderic, without a word of blame. Many of the Christians adopted Arab names, and in outward observances imitated to some extent their Muhammadan neighbours, e.g. many were circumcised, and in matters of food and drink followed the practice of the "unbaptized pagans".
    - Thomas W. Arnold, ‘The Preaching of Islam,’ p. 128



    And, finally, this.

  3. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicStar View Post
    That's not playing fair!

    Are you being honest? It was a carefully researched, well-thought-out, well-written article!


    So, finally, I did read some (other) stuff on dhimmitude. And, now, I know what it exactly is! (and, BTW, thanks for the link.....if one reads such stuff, you'd obviously get "Islamophobic" )

    Okay, we're (at least I am) only concerned with what Prophet Muhammad said on this and how his behavior was (cuz that's what TRULY represents Islam)...
    Let's do that. Let's discover why islamists are so Jewophobic, Christianophobic, etc.

    http://www.dhimmitude.org/d_history_dhimmitude.html

    Rules of dhimmitude

    The vanquished non-Muslims peoples are granted security for their life and possessions, as well as a relative self-autonomous administration and limited religious rights according to the modalities of the conquest. These rights are subject to two conditions: the payment of a poll tax (the jizya) and submission to the provisions of Islamic law.

    The concept of toleration is linked to a number of discriminatory obligations in the economic, religious and social fields, imposed by the shari'a on the dhimmis. The transgression by the dhimmis of some of these obligations, abolished their protection, and threaten them with death or slavery. Dhimmis suffered many legal disabilities intended to reduce them to a condition of humiliation, segregation and discrimination. These rules, established from the eight to nine centuries by the founders of the four schools of Islamic law, set the pattern of the Muslim's community's social behavior toward dhimmis.

    Jews and Christians are referred to as the People of the Book, they share the same legal status, while other religious group - like the Zoroastrians for instance - were more despised and treated harsher.

    Dhimmitude covers more than a millennium of Christian and Jewish history, as well as of other groups. It is a comprehensive civilization encompassing customs, legislation, social behavior. Numerous laws were enacted over the centuries by the Muslim authorities, to implement its principles. It was abolished during the 19th -20th centuries under European pressure and colonization of Arab countries.

    Today the resurgence of traditional Islam revitalizes the spirit of jihad against the dar al-harb and of dhimmitude for the non-Muslim minorities.
    So far, so good, eh?

    http://zoreled.org/historyzorislamiciran.aspx
    HISTORY OF ZOROASTRIANS IN IRAN UNDER THE CALIPHS (642 CE To the 10th Century).

    The Arab invasion of Iran was quite different from that of Alexander, the Greek many centuries before. The purpose of the Arabs was not only to conquer but to spread Islam. Unlike the Greeks, the Arabs set out to destroy Zoroastrianism in Iran. This was accomplished not by killing Zoroastrians but by making laws and rules which made life difficult for Zoroastrians.

    All non-Moslems were made to pay an extra tax called the Jizya. The penalty for not paying, was death, enslavement or imprisonment. Even when the Zoroastrians paid the tax, they were subjected to insults by the tax-collectors. Zoroastrian temples were systematically destroyed and mosques built in their place. Zoroastrians who were captured as slaves in wars were given their freedom if they converted to Islam. Because of these many difficulties Zoroastrians started to convert to Islam. Many who converted just for the convenience were unable to return to their faith, even if they wanted to, because the penalty for re-conversion was death. Once a Zoroastrian family converted to Islam, the children had to go to Moslem religion school and learn Arabic and the teachings of the Quran. These children lost their Zoroastrian identity.
    In addition to the references of islamists jurists previously posted in this thread, I'll suggest a good book by A.S. Tritton entitled "The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects" This book discusses many of the consequences of such a discriminatory system of religious and social apartheid.

    http://www.archive.org/stream/caliph...90mbp_djvu.txt

    "...[C]aliphs destroyed churches to obtain materials for their buildings, and the mob was always ready to pillage churches and monasteries...dhimmis...always lived on sufferance, exposed to the caprices of the ruler and the passions of the mob...in later times..[t]hey were much more liable to suffer from the violence of the crowd, and the popular fanaticism was accompanied by an increasing strictness among the educated. The spiritual isolation of Islam was accomplished. The world was divided into two classes, Muslims and others, and only Islam counted...Indeed the general feeling was that the leavings of the Muslims were good enough for the dhimmis.}"
    You appear to be grossly uninformed, (or grossly negligent in terms of treating people honestly), about the islamist proscription of dhimmitude so I'm happy to lend an assist. A classical description of the poll tax or jizya was formulated by jurist al-Mawardi (d. 1058). In his seminal work The Laws of Islamic Governance, al-Mawardi detailed the regulations concerning the lands of the infidel which were subjugated by islam's jihad. As we learn, the foundation of the oppressive system of jihad-imposed dhimmitude was the jizya.

    Islam's wars of colonialism resulted in this system of dhimmitude. The conquered infidel "dhimmi" (where "dhimmi" is derived from among other terms: "pact") was required to relinquish ownership of their lands to the Islamic conquerors, accept payment of the poll tax (jizya, and submit to Islamic law which included a host of discriminatory practices. The jizya tax was paid in lieu of being slain-based on Koran 9:29.

    So far, so good, eh? It gets better.


    009.029
    YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
    PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
    SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

    Al- Mawardi writes:
    "The enemy makes a payment in return for peace and reconciliation... Reconciliation and security last as long as the pavment is made. If the payment ceases, then the jihad resumes."

    Dhimmitude carried with it a host of restrictions on those conquered to include, first and primarily, inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims. Non muslims held the status of second class with regard to the muslim conquerors. The dhimmi faced restrictions in connection with public displays of their religious traditions and practices including the building or restoration of their places of worship. The refusal of Muslim courts to accept the testimony of the dhimmi or, that testimony of the dhimmi was by default, of less worth than the testimony of a muslim.

    Most of the world defines such a system of discrimination with the term: Fascism. Muslims describe such a system as "doing muhammud's work."

    So far, so good, eh? It gets better.

    Let's understand what Islamic doctrine entails — the striving in the way of Allah's religion, incorporating an armed and violent conflict against the infidel so as to establish Allah's religion everywhere, as well as a spiritual conflict, within ones self—is a holy, central and an obligatory duty in Islamic doctrine. The core precept of Islamic dogma is to make Allah's religion reign supreme over all men, and the fact is, that just won't happen peacefully. The manifestation of this doctrine is exhibited in the Muslim revulsion of the infidel and the apostate. It's why we see the blatant double standards that so define Islam; the demands for exclusive rights and privileges with the attendant refusal to extend the same rights and privileges to the hated infidel. It's why we see playwrights killed in the streets of their homeland, Churches burned, Dhimmi's subjected to limited rights and the other atrocities that are endured by the non-Muslim in Muslim Lands™.

    The unbelievers are the universal "enemies of God," who are reviled, and who are definitely not considered innocent. The dhimmis (Jews and Christians allowed to live as second class citizens in Muslim lands) are held in great contempt, and belittled at all times.


    YUSUFALI: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.
    PICKTHAL: Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful who will not believe.
    SHAKIR: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe.

    Lovely!

    Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them). And prepare against them with all armed force you can, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah, your enemies...
    When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads... That is because they opposed Allah and His messenger. Whoever opposes Allah and His messenger, Allah is severe in punishing.
    And we await for you that Allah will punish you at our hands. So wait; For we are waiting for you.

    At no time in Islamic history has dhimmitude meant "protection". There has never been equality for non-Muslims in a Muslim sharia state and there have been too often times of mass murder and persecution, forced conversion, forced exile, and oppression, even as far back as the time of Mohammed. The restrictions on Dhimmis in the freedom to practice their faith, maintain houses of worship, engaging in permissible trades, in humiliating dress and restrictions on travel, etc. are part of Muslim history and law. Let's not pretend that dhimmitude is an offering of protection at all.

    Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. —Qur'an, 9.29

    Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
    Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah." —Sahih Bukhari, V1B2N24

    He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion, however much the unbelievers hate it. —Qur'an, 9.33

    “The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.” -Tabari VIII:130

    The Prophet on his death-bed, gave orders saying, "Expel the unbelievers from the Arabian Peninsula." -Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 288

  4. #19
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Resigned View Post
    http://www.dhimmitude.org/d_history_dhimmitude.html

    Rules of dhimmitude

    So far, so good, eh?
    No. Because, you simply ignored the verse and the hadiths that I quoted, which clearly forbid discrimination and recognize the legitimacy of different religious communities under the covenant of dhimma and promote peaceful coexistence.

    In addition to the references of islamists jurists previously posted in this thread,
    Where?

    Apart from the links in your last post, you just gave one other link of a Jewish website.

    I'll suggest a good book by A.S. Tritton entitled "The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects" This book discusses many of the consequences of such a discriminatory system of religious and social apartheid.

    http://www.archive.org/stream/caliph...90mbp_djvu.txt

    "...[C]aliphs destroyed churches to obtain materials for their buildings, and the mob was always ready to pillage churches and monasteries...dhimmis...always lived on sufferance, exposed to the caprices of the ruler and the passions of the mob...in later times..[t]hey were much more liable to suffer from the violence of the crowd, and the popular fanaticism was accompanied by an increasing strictness among the educated. The spiritual isolation of Islam was accomplished. The world was divided into two classes, Muslims and others, and only Islam counted...Indeed the general feeling was that the leavings of the Muslims were good enough for the dhimmis.}"
    There did exist injustice in the Muslim world at some point in history (which cannot be denied to have existed under Muslim rule any more than any other empire), but it was at the hands of evil rulers who, in fact, were very far from Islam. You cannot blame their actions on the theology of Islam. The Holy Quran and the hadiths are crystal clear in matter of upholding justice and peace. And, plus, under these evil rulers both Muslims and non-Muslims suffered alike. Nowhere in Islamic history were the non-Muslims singled out for persecution. The links that you cite simply voice your ideas and misconceptions. In the same way, I could provide you with a plethora of websites and books written on this subject supporting my view. But, what matters is what the Holy Qur'an says in this regard and what prophet Muhammad (pbuh) preached and his behavior (which is clearly illustrated in the hadiths that I quoted in my previous post).

    You appear to be grossly uninformed, (or grossly negligent in terms of treating people honestly), about the islamist proscription of dhimmitude so I'm happy to lend an assist.
    Much obliged.

    *rolls eyes*

    A classical description of the poll tax or jizya was formulated by jurist al-Mawardi (d. 1058). In his seminal work The Laws of Islamic Governance, al-Mawardi detailed the regulations concerning the lands of the infidel which were subjugated by islam's jihad. As we learn, the foundation of the oppressive system of jihad-imposed dhimmitude was the jizya.

    Islam's wars of colonialism resulted in this system of dhimmitude. The conquered infidel "dhimmi" (where "dhimmi" is derived from among other terms: "pact") was required to relinquish ownership of their lands to the Islamic conquerors, accept payment of the poll tax (jizya, and submit to Islamic law which included a host of discriminatory practices. The jizya tax was paid in lieu of being slain-based on Koran 9:29.
    Firstly, you need to understand what the term itself means.

    When non Muslim citizens live under Islamic sovereignty, they enjoy a special status and are known along with other minorities as ahl adh dhimma or dhimmis. Dhimma is an Arabic word, which means safety, security, and contract. Hence, they are called dhimmis because they have agreed to a contract by Allah, His Messenger, and the Islamic community, which grants them security. This security granted to dhimmis is like the citizenship granted by a government to an alien who abides by the constitution, thereby earning all the rights of a natural citizen. Thus, upon the preceding basis, a dhimmi is a citizen of the Islamic state, as described by Muslim jurists or a bearer of Islamic nationality, as described by contemporary writers.

    Ref. Commentary on As-Sarakhi's As-Siyar Al-Kabir, Volume 1, p. 140; Al-Kasani's Al-Bada'i', Volume 5, p. 281 and Ibn Qudamah's Al-Mughni, Volume 5, p. 516 and 'Awda, 'Abdul Qadir, Islamic Criminal Legislation, Volume 1, p. 307; Zaydan, 'Abdul Karim, "Ahkam Adh-Dhimmiyyin Wa Al-Musta'minin Fi Dar Al-Islam," pp. 49-51 and 63-66
    SO, you see, the term "dhimmi" basically implies "protection".

    Al- Mawardi writes:
    "The enemy makes a payment in return for peace and reconciliation... Reconciliation and security last as long as the pavment is made. If the payment ceases, then the jihad resumes."
    Yeah so? It's a part of the covenant.

    Dhimmitude carried with it a host of restrictions on those conquered to include, first and primarily, inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims. Non muslims held the status of second class with regard to the muslim conquerors. The dhimmi faced restrictions in connection with public displays of their religious traditions and practices including the building or restoration of their places of worship. The refusal of Muslim courts to accept the testimony of the dhimmi or, that testimony of the dhimmi was by default, of less worth than the testimony of a muslim.

    Most of the world defines such a system of discrimination with the term: Fascism. Muslims describe such a system as "doing muhammud's work."
    *cough cough* "doing Muhammad's work" right !

    Whoever this dude is, what's his name again?...ah, al Mawarid, he should first make an attempt at understanding explicit statements made by the Prophet (pbuh), instead of jibber-jabbering about diddly-squat.

    As an example, "they will have the rights which the Muhajireen enjoy and they will have duties like the duties upon the Muhajireen."

    Can it get any simpler? for me, catching this was cake.

    Let's understand what Islamic doctrine entails — the striving in the way of Allah's religion, incorporating an armed and violent conflict against the infidel so as to establish Allah's religion everywhere, as well as a spiritual conflict, within ones self—is a holy, central and an obligatory duty in Islamic doctrine. The core precept of Islamic dogma is to make Allah's religion reign supreme over all men, and the fact is, that just won't happen peacefully.
    There is not even a single verse in the Holy Quran that condones fighting an "infidel" on the sole ground that he/she is a non-Muslim. It's true that Islam is the only true religion in the sight of God Almighty, but, yet again, it is EXPLICITLY mentioned in the Holy Quran that "there is no compulsion in religion". So, the myth that "Islam has been spread by the sword" is simply a myth. In fact, Islam even allows interfaith marriages.

    "There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. "
    (Al-Quran, Surah al-Baqarah, 2:256)

    "....And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you..."
    (Al-Quran, Surah al-Maidah, 5:5)

    To understand this better one needs to believe in an Afterlife.

    The manifestation of this doctrine is exhibited in the Muslim revulsion of the infidel and the apostate. It's why we see the blatant double standards that so define Islam; the demands for exclusive rights and privileges with the attendant refusal to extend the same rights and privileges to the hated infidel. It's why we see playwrights killed in the streets of their homeland, Churches burned, Dhimmi's subjected to limited rights and the other atrocities that are endured by the non-Muslim in Muslim Lands™.
    If this is truly the case with Islam, then how do you think religious minorities not only survived through 1400 years of Islamic history but also thrived under Muslim rule?

    The unbelievers are the universal "enemies of God," who are reviled, and who are definitely not considered innocent.
    huh? reviled? where?

    The dhimmis (Jews and Christians allowed to live as second class citizens in Muslim lands) are held in great contempt, and belittled at all times.
    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who harms a person under the covenant (a dhimmi), or charged him more than he can, I will argue against him on the Day of Judgement."

    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah."

    YUSUFALI: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.
    PICKTHAL: Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful who will not believe.
    SHAKIR: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe.

    Lovely!
    If this is what you're referring to, then this isn't "reviling". These are the words of God Almighty and He has all the rights to call his creation whatever He wishes. In fact, everything happens because of His Will.

    And, isn't it normal for a person in authority to use any kind of tone while communicating with those under him/her? Um, like, people do get scolded by their boss or professors at university. Negative feedbacks are not necessarily to degrade a person but as a warning or an encouragement to improve/change.

    Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them). And prepare against them with all armed force you can, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah, your enemies...
    When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads... That is because they opposed Allah and His messenger. Whoever opposes Allah and His messenger, Allah is severe in punishing.
    And we await for you that Allah will punish you at our hands. So wait; For we are waiting for you.
    Your reading verses out of context. These verses are specific addressing particular incidents at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

    At no time in Islamic history has dhimmitude meant "protection". There has never been equality for non-Muslims in a Muslim sharia state and there have been too often times of mass murder and persecution, forced conversion, forced exile, and oppression, even as far back as the time of Mohammed. The restrictions on Dhimmis in the freedom to practice their faith, maintain houses of worship, engaging in permissible trades, in humiliating dress and restrictions on travel, etc. are part of Muslim history and law. Let's not pretend that dhimmitude is an offering of protection at all.
    Let's not ignore the FACTS.

    Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. —Qur'an, 9.29
    Verses should be read in their proper contexts.

    In light of the historical context of this verse, it becomes very clear that the verse was revealed in connection with agression initiated against Muslims. As Dr. Jamal Badawi very accurately concludes with regard to verse 9:29 and similar verses:

    All of these verses, without exception, if studied carefully, address aggression and oppression committed against Muslims at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), whether by idolatrous Arabs, some of the Jewish tribes in Madinah, or by some Christians. (SOURCE)

    Therefore, the command to fight in verse 9:29 relates to those non-muslims who commit agression and not those who are committed to live in peace. The verse is subject to certain conditions that were apparent when it was implemented in the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, as Shaykh Sayyid Sabiq writes:

    What we have stated makes it clear that Islam did not allow the initiating of hostilities, except to: 1. repel aggression; 2. protect Islamic propagation; 3. deter Fitnah and oppression and ensure freedom of religion. In such cases, fighting becomes a necessity of the religion and one of its sacred ordainments. It is then called, ‘Jihad’. (Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqhu as-Sunnah, Vol. 3, p. 81)
    Here's the entire commentary on this verse. (9:29)

    Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
    Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah." —Sahih Bukhari, V1B2N24
    The term "people" here is not referring to all humanity. Ibn Taymiyah says: "It refers to fighting those who are waging war, whom Allah has permitted us to fight. It does not refer to those who have a covenant with us with whom Allah commands us to fulfill our covenant." [Majmű` al-Fatâwâ (19/20)]

    He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion, however much the unbelievers hate it. —Qur'an, 9.33
    Perfect.

  5. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    [quote[No. Because, you simply ignored the verse and the hadiths that I quoted, which clearly forbid discrimination and recognize the legitimacy of different religious communities under the covenant of dhimma and promote peaceful coexistence.[/quote]
    I didn’t ignore the verses you posted. You seem to feel that posting verses culled from selected sources somehow mitigates the history of fascism that islamism has subjected the dhimmi to.

    Islam exaggerates the psychological concept of in-group/out-group bias to an amazing extent. The out-group (non-Muslims) is not only marginalized in the Islamist mind, but is actually seen as an inferior category of subhumans who should be killed if they refuse to convert to Islam or to acknowledge its superiority. It's a hyperxenophobia. We all exercise the mental dichotomy of us/them, but most of us here in the democratic West have come to accept that just because people don't conform exactly to our belief systems, does not mean that they should be exempted from our compassion, empathy, and consideration. Here in America, through much struggling over time, we have built a solid, free society out of a vast, eclectic plurality. The fascistic, intolerant dogma of Islam leaves room only for the second-class citizenship of dhimmitude when it comes to kuffar (non-Muslims/infidels). That's what the book says, and the book is not to be questioned.



    Where?

    Apart from the links in your last post, you just gave one other link of a Jewish website.
    Did you read what I posted In this thread?



    There did exist injustice in the Muslim world at some point in history (which cannot be denied to have existed under Muslim rule any more than any other empire), but it was at the hands of evil rulers who, in fact, were very far from Islam. You cannot blame their actions on the theology of Islam. The Holy Quran and the hadiths are crystal clear in matter of upholding justice and peace. And, plus, under these evil rulers both Muslims and non-Muslims suffered alike. Nowhere in Islamic history were the non-Muslims singled out for persecution. The links that you cite simply voice your ideas and misconceptions. In the same way, I could provide you with a plethora of websites and books written on this subject supporting my view. But, what matters is what the Holy Qur'an says in this regard and what prophet Muhammad (pbuh) preached and his behavior (which is clearly illustrated in the hadiths that I quoted in my previous post).
    There didexist? Therre still exists injustice. It’s enshrined in the koran.

    This is not to say that all of Islam should be scrapped. Like any religion, it has much of value to offer its adherents and mankind in general. But that's only if it's severed from its central tenets of hateful intolerance, brutal repression and totalitarianism, irrational arrogance, and obsession with killing and dying in God's name. That's not going to happen until Islam undergoes a drastic, fundamental reformation. To achieve that, Muslims will have to abandon the idea that the Qur'an is the infallible word of God, which would be to contravene the very foundation of Islam. And I don't think that's going to happen. As much as I'd like to be proven wrong, I really don't see much reason to hope.

    So, in the meantime, we are locked in bitter enmity with people who have as their spiritual inspiration, (literally interpreted) verses like this:
    • Of the believers are men who are true to that which they covenanted with Allah. Some of them have paid their vow by death (in battle), and some of them still are waiting; and they have not altered in the least. -Qur'an 33:22
    • Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you [infidels] worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master." -Bukhari Vol 4, Bk 53, No 386
    • Allah has purchased of the believers their lives and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme. -Qur'an 9:111
    • I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "The example of a Mujahid in Allah's Cause-- and Allah knows better who really strives in His Cause----is like a person who fasts and prays continuously. Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty." -Bukhari Vol 4, Bk 52, No 46
    • Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward. -Qur'an 4:74
    • ...the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Nobody who enters Paradise will (ever like to) return to this world even if he were offered everything on the surface of the earth (as an inducement) except the martyr who will desire to return to this world and be killed ten times for the sake of the great honour that has been bestowed upon him. -Muslim Bk 20, No 4636


    Much obliged.

    *rolls eyes*
    Always glad to help.


    Firstly, you need to understand what the term itself means.
    SO, you see, the term "dhimmi" basically implies "protection"
    Most importantly, you need to understand that equating fascism with “protection” is dishonest. As well as being completely invasive in its doctrine regarding personal matters, Islam is also an extremely public and political religion--moreso than any other faith in existence. For it not to be as such is for it to cease being Islam. It is an elaborate, comprehensive way of life with the obligation for all men to follow God's law--as dictated in the koran and the hadith--in their governance. And like other forms of totalitarianism, it is not open to criticism, revision, or reform. Through a literal interpretation of the Qur'an and hadith, Islamic jurists have foisted upon Muslims the most rigid and brutal means of political rule ever devised: the shari'ah (sacred law). And what makes it so powerful is that it has the imprimatur of God. If you think that it's not easy to beat city hall, try Allah. This is like theocratic fascism.

    Islam is the opposite of those definitive qualities of equality under the law that Westerners are accustomed to. It is an exhaustively complete and thorough way of life, covering everything from personal hygiene, sexual relations, to public legalities, sociality, a penal code, political matters, religious worship, and warfare. In a manner that one would not be amiss in describing as borderline obsessive-complusive disorder, Islam has a prescription or proscription for anything that may happen in a person's life. And all with the weight of God's command. Politics, religion, personal relations, society, and war are all interwoven into the monolithic tapestry of Islam. It is the ultimate authoritarianism, with God as the supreme leader, and his people as the elite on Earth. There are provisions for monotheists (with a book, i.e., the Bible) to live under Islamic "protection" as second-class citizens called dhimmis, but it is a matter of subjugation, humiliation, privation, and sometimes elimination.


    Yeah so? It's a part of the covenant.
    You confuse with extortion and threats with some weird notion of a holy mandate.



    *cough cough* "doing Muhammad's work" right !

    Whoever this dude is, what's his name again?...ah, al Mawarid, he should first make an attempt at understanding explicit statements made by the Prophet (pbuh), instead of jibber-jabbering about diddly-squat.

    As an example, "they will have the rights which the Muhajireen enjoy and they will have duties like the duties upon the Muhajireen."

    Can it get any simpler? for me, catching this was cake.
    If you knew anything about islamism, you would know that “explicit statements” with reference to what is alleged to be the words of islam’s inventor are hearsay and subject to great divides of interpretation.

    Of course we do have the explicit statements of some of islam’s fascist superstars
    "…the object of this religion is all humanity and its sphere of action is the whole earth."

    --Sayyid Qutb, Paving the Way


    • Therefore, stand firm in your devotion to the true Faith, the upright Faith which God created for mankind to embrace. God's Creation cannot be changed. This is surely the right faith, although most men may not know it. —Qur'an 30:30

    • This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed My Favour to You. I have chosen Islām to be your faith. —Qur'an 5:3

    • We have revealed the Book which manifests the truth about all things...—Qur'an 16:89

    • We have left out nothing in the Book. —Qur'an 56:38

    • The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "I have not left anything which Allah ordered you except that I have ordered you with it, nor anything that Allah forbade you except that I forbade you from it." —Sahih al-Baihaqi 7:76

    • Al-'Irbaad ibn Saariyah, radiallaahu'anhu, reports that the Prophet said, "...I have left you upon clear guidance. Its night is like its day. No one deviates from it after me except that he is destroyed."—Ahmad 4.126

    • "...and whoever obeys Muhammad, obeys Allah; and whoever disobeys Muhammad, disobeys Allah." —Sahih Bukhari 9.92.385

    • The Prophet said, [The Prophet said –ed.]"Leave me as I leave you, for the people who were before you were ruined because of their questions and their differences over their prophets. So, if I forbid you to do something, then keep away from it. And if I order you to do something, then do of it as much as you can."—Sahih Bukhari 9.92.392

    • The Prophet said, [The Prophet said –ed.]"He who turns away from my Sunnah is not from me." —Sahih Bukhari & Muslim

    • A man said: Apostle of Allah! It seems as if it were a farewell exhortation, so what injunction do you give us?

    He then said: I enjoin you to fear Allah, and to hear and obey even if it be an Abyssinian slave, for those of you who live after me will see great disagreement. You must then follow my sunnah and that of the rightly-guided caliphs. Hold to it and stick fast to it. Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error. —Sunan Abu Dawud, 40.4590

    • "So he who does not follow my tradition in religion, is not from me." —Sahih Bukhari 7.62.2

    • ''What moved me to do what I did was purely my faith. ... I was motivated by the law that commands me to cut off the head of anyone who insults Allah and his prophet.''

    - Mohammed Bouyeri


    No divergent intrepretations, no allegory, no reform. Furthermore, in the case of the koran, we are speaking of what Muslims view to be the perfect, uncreated word of God.

    As to the idolization of muhammud, I see nothing in the life of muhammud that would allow me to respect him either as a man or a god.



    There is not even a single verse in the Holy Quran that condones fighting an "infidel" on the sole ground that he/she is a non-Muslim. It's true that Islam is the only true religion in the sight of God Almighty, but, yet again, it is EXPLICITLY mentioned in the Holy Quran that "there is no compulsion in religion". So, the myth that "Islam has been spread by the sword" is simply a myth. In fact, Islam even allows interfaith marriages.
    You obviously have no knowledge of islamist history.


    "There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. "
    (Al-Quran, Surah al-Baqarah, 2:256)

    "....And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you..."
    (Al-Quran, Surah al-Maidah, 5:5)

    To understand this better one needs to believe in an Afterlife.
    You are the best of peoples to have been raised up for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and you believe in Allah [and muhammed… don't forget who has brought to you the "Religion of Peace" –ed].. If only the people of the Book [Jews and Christians —ed.] believed, it would be better for them. Some of them are believers, but most are perverted evildoers.

    3.110

    Perverted visions of virgins in thre afterlife is a prescription for a maladjusted personality.



    If this is truly the case with Islam, then how do you think religious minorities not only survived through 1400 years of Islamic history but also thrived under Muslim rule?
    Religious minorities did not thrive under islamist rule. Why do you think minority populations are almost non-existent in the islamist Middle East?
    huh? reviled? where?
    In the koran and sunna. Have you ever read any of it?



    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who harms a person under the covenant (a dhimmi), or charged him more than he can, I will argue against him on the Day of Judgement."

    The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah."
    YUSUFALI: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.
    PICKTHAL: Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful who will not believe.
    SHAKIR: Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe.

    What do think the above means?



    If this is what you're referring to, then this isn't "reviling". These are the words of God Almighty and He has all the rights to call his creation whatever He wishes. In fact, everything happens because of His Will.

    And, isn't it normal for a person in authority to use any kind of tone while communicating with those under him/her? Um, like, people do get scolded by their boss or professors at university. Negative feedbacks are not necessarily to degrade a person but as a warning or an encouragement to improve/change.
    Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State

    o11.11 When a subject's agreement with the state has been violated, the caliph chooses between the four alternatives mentioned above in connection with prisoners of war (o9.14). —'Umdat al-Salik, Justice

    These four alternatives are: ransom, enslavement, release, or execution (often by cutting the throat, as we are now familiar with).

    There are several rules of subjugation in shari'ah law which reduce the dhimmi to the status of a second-class citizen. Transgression of these unfair and dehumanizing rules nullifies the contract of "protection" of the Muslim ruler.

    Islam is inherently intolerant to non-Muslims. And if they are unfortunate enough to live under Islamic law, they are subjected to oppressive and humiliating circumstances, and their killing can be religiously justified under the flimsiest of pretexts.

    *Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it. But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a thing although it is bad for you. God knows, but you know not. —Koran 2:216
    God has purchased from the faithful their lives and worldly goods, and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight for the cause of God, they will slay, and be slain. —Koran 9:111



    Your reading verses out of context. These verses are specific addressing particular incidents at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
    I’m afraid you are uncormfortable with the verses in context.



    Verses should be read in their proper contexts.
    Why do you then refuse to do that?


    The term "people" here is not referring to all humanity. Ibn Taymiyah says: "It refers to fighting those who are waging war, whom Allah has permitted us to fight. It does not refer to those who have a covenant with us with whom Allah commands us to fulfill our covenant." [Majmű` al-Fatâwâ (19/20)]
    I’m afraid you are once again cutting and pasting verses out of context.



    Perfect.
    Perfectly compulsive. It’s the perfect excuse to kill and maim in furtherance of forcing religion on others.

  6. #21
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    So, IN YOUR VIEW, Islam is fascist, discriminatory, hateful, intolerant, brutally repressive, most rigid, destructive, violent and all the Muslims are savages, literalistic, hyperxenopbobic, terrorists, murderous, abominable, insane, fanatics, obsessed with killing, subjugating, humiliating, depriving, eliminating, executing and possess maladjusted personalities, get high with perverted visions of virgins and go on killing sprees often by means of cutting off the throats of the infidels who are considered sumbags, inferior, second-class citizens, slaves, are subjected to marginalization, denigration, enslavement, subjugation, constant abuse, humiliation, mass murder etc, cuz it's enshrined in the Book which is not to be questioned, and every bit of which is literally interpreted by the Islamist jurists a.k.a. Islam's fascists superstars who've devised the Shari'ah, the most rigid and brutal means of political rule to have ever existed, and have triumphantly managed to ram it down the throats of the Muslims. I'm right on the money, eh? or is there anymore of garbage that'd you'd like to add? Feel free.


    Okay, so basically, um, I feel a tad weird, um, I mean, like, what exactly am I getting out of my exchanges with you?.....to be frank, a splitting headache!

    I'm being very honest (but I intend no offence), you've been going on and on with your endless rants and you've been constantly ignoring the verses and the ahadith that I've posted and even authentic commentaries that I've provided you with, for instance, verse 9:29, I gave you a link to a professional commentary by qualified scholars, and you tell me, "I'm afraid you are uncormfortable with the verses in context" and "you are once again cutting and pasting verses out of context." ...I mean, this is just ridiculously obnoxious. Who are you playing with? You know what, this is no way gonna solve anything at all. See, either you engage justly, as in, if you expect people to listen to you, you yourself should be willing to do the same in return. Or else, if you continue in this manner, you'd spend one or two years on this forum frenziedly ranting, eventually getting ignored by other members, then you'd move on to another forum and then another, and yet another. Do you feel that you're gaining anything out of this? Wow, pretending to be you, I just cannot think of anything possibly profitable through such kinda conversations. Please, I'm curious, what's your purpose?






    DISCLAIMER:
    The views expressed here, in an attempt to sum up the posts of a member named Resigned for ease of reference and understanding, have been unintentionally exaggerated (only a teeny-weeny part! to be precise, regarding the "Islamists")
    Last edited by ChicStar; 8th March 2012 at 06:02. Reason: added disclaimer :P

  7. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    So, IN YOUR VIEW, Islam is fascist, discriminatory, hateful, intolerant, brutally repressive, most rigid, destructive, violent...
    In view of Islam's history of war and conquest and the treatment of the conquered people, one could make the case that you have made.

    Your lack of knowledge regarding islamist history puts you at a disadvantage because you are attempting to defend a politico-religious ideology you know only through cliches' and slogans.

    You might try supporting your claims by identifying for us a single time in islamist history when the infidels were treated as equals or when islamists promoted equality, fairness in matters of personal rights and privileges to all citizens.

    Lastly, I never characterized all islamists as you did.

    I'm being very honest (but I intend no offence), you've been going on and on with your endless rants and you've been constantly ignoring the verses and the ahadith that I've posted and even authentic commentaries that I've provided you with, for instance, verse 9:29, I gave you a link to a professional commentary by qualified scholars, and you tell me, "I'm afraid you are uncormfortable with the verses in context" and "you are once again cutting and pasting verses out of context." ...I mean, this is just ridiculously obnoxious.
    I think your primary irritation is being met with countering arguments that you cannot refute. Your anger and frustration is of your own manufacture. I've countered your verses with verses from similarly qualified scholars. I'm not responsible for your religion being subject to competing, conflicting theology. Your argument is with a confused, tangled and contradictory assembly of unsupported claims, confused testimony and sloppy recording of history.

    If your tirade has intended to calm an emotional requirement that your opinions are beyond critique, you may wish to reconsider your participation in a public discussion environment.

  8. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    ChicStar, you are wasting your time.

  9. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Polog View Post
    ChicStar, you are wasting your time.
    It's probably best that neither of you participate.

  10. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Participate in what?

  11. #26
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Resigned View Post
    In view of Islam's history of war and conquest and the treatment of the conquered people, one could make the case that you have made.

    Your lack of knowledge regarding islamist history puts you at a disadvantage because you are attempting to defend a politico-religious ideology you know only through cliches' and slogans.

    You might try supporting your claims by identifying for us a single time in islamist history when the infidels were treated as equals or when islamists promoted equality, fairness in matters of personal rights and privileges to all citizens.

    Lastly, I never characterized all islamists as you did.


    I think your primary irritation is being met with countering arguments that you cannot refute. Your anger and frustration is of your own manufacture. I've countered your verses with verses from similarly qualified scholars. I'm not responsible for your religion being subject to competing, conflicting theology. Your argument is with a confused, tangled and contradictory assembly of unsupported claims, confused testimony and sloppy recording of history.

    If your tirade has intended to calm an emotional requirement that your opinions are beyond critique, you may wish to reconsider your participation in a public discussion environment.
    LOL!! you're right, I read my post again and realized that it does sound like a "tirade", haha. "emotional requirement", OMG! LOL!! This is hilarious! nah, nothing of that sort !!

    Lastly, I never characterized all islamists as you did.
    Oh, I'm sorry. I'll add a disclaimer, right away.

    You might try supporting your claims by identifying for us a single time in islamist history when the infidels were treated as equals or when islamists promoted equality, fairness in matters of personal rights and privileges to all citizens.
    Right, then get a load of this.

    During his final sermon, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) called on Muslims in the following terms:

    “There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab and for a non-Arab over an Arab; or for white over the black or for the black over the white except in piety. Verily the noblest among you is he who is the most pious.”

    The agreement that was made with the Christians of Najran in the south of the Arabian Peninsula was another fine example of the justice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). One of the articles in the agreement reads,

    The lives of the people of Najran and its surrounding area, their religion, their land, property, cattle, and those of them who are present or absent, their messengers and their places of worship are under the protection of Allah and guardianship of His Prophet.


    The Compact of Madinah, signed by the Muslim immigrants from Makkah, the indigenous Muslims of Madinah, and the Jews of Madinah is another important example of justice. As a result of this constitution, which established justice between communities with differing beliefs and ensured the protection of their various interests, long years of enmity were brought to an end. One of the most outstanding features of the treaty is the freedom of belief it established. The relevant article reads

    The Jews of Banu `Awf are one nation with the Muslims; the Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs.

    Article 16 of the treaty reads,

    The Jew who follows us is surely entitled to our support and the same equal rights as any one of us. He shall not be wronged nor his enemy be assisted.

    The Prophet’s Companions remained true to that article in the treaty, even after his death, and they even practiced it with regard to Berbers, Buddhists, Brahmans, and people of other beliefs.

    One of the main reasons why the golden age of Islam was one of peace and security was the Prophet’s just attitude, itself a reflection of Qur’anic morality.
    The justice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also awoke feelings of confidence in non-Muslims, and many, including polytheists, asked to be taken under his protection. Allah revealed the following request from the polytheists in the Qur’an, and also told the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) of the attitude he should adopt towards such people.

    And, no offence, but I just wanna know what your purpose is? cuz, if you actually read Islamic history from proper authentic sources then, you'll realize that it was way better than any kind of rule, in fact it was a boon for Muslims and non-Muslims alike. (I'm referring to Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) caliphate, and that of his four rightly guided caliphs). So, there's no question of "not being able to refute", or just *emotional satisfaction* (haha) that, "the opinions are beyond critique", cuz as a matter of fact the opinions are beyond critique, if not, at least cannot be falsified.

    It depends on your choice and the level of honesty and sincerity....um, I mean, see, for instance, from this and this, which one would you choose, and why? both talk about the Dhimmi. (Please answer this, I wanna know)

  12. #27
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Polog View Post
    ChicStar, you are wasting your time.
    Haha, um, I dunno. Anyway, thanks bro.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polog View Post
    Participate in what?
    LOL!! but, *cough* I think, um....I don't know...can't come to a conclusion, but I don't want to jump to conclusions either...haha, but guess you're right. (no offence, Resigned.)

  13. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    672

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Right, then how about this.
    "In ancient times, Medina was known as Yathrib. In the early Christian centuries it was a centre for Arab Jews. Nothing but their religion distinguished them from the tribes around them.

    Jews may have settled in the Hijaz after the sack of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and it is probable that they came in successive colonies, e.g., after Pompey's attack upon Judea (64 B.C.), after Titus' conquest of Jerusalem (70 C.E.), and again after Hadrian's persecution of the Jews (in 136 C.E).

    The Jews had a very rich and flourishing settlement at Yathrib and built strongholds in the city and vicinity. The principal families were the Banu ainua', the Banu uraia, and the Banu al-Nair. The latter two were known as the "Al-Kahinan," because they traced their descent from Aaron. In the fourth century Arab tribes from Yemen began to encroach upon the Jews in Medina. They were divided into two clans, the Banu Aus andthe Banu Khazraj. By calling in outside assistance and treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews, these Arab clans finally gained the upper hand at Medina toward the end of the fifth century (for date see "J. Q. R." vii. 175, note). From this time the Jews retired into the background for about a century.

    It is probable that the presence of Jews in Medina did much to prepare the way for Mohammed's teaching. When the prophet first went to Medina he was inclined to be friendly toward the Jews. They were included in the treaty between him and the inhabitants of Medina. He also made certain concessions to them on the ground of religion, and adopted their iblah —Jerusalem—in the hope of winning them to his cause. They, however, ridiculed him, and delighted in drawing him into arguments to expose his ignorance; so that his conciliatory attitude was soon changed to enmity. A few Jews were converted to Islam, among them Abdallah ibn Salam, whom Mohammed called the "servant of God," and of whose conversion the prophet made much.

    Finally Mohammed began to use actual violence toward the Medina Jews. After the battle of Bedr a woman called Asma, said by some to be a Jewess, wrote satirical verses, and was killed in her sleep, probably with Mohammed's consent. Not long before, Abu 'Afak of the Banu Amr, who had been converted to Judaism, had been assassinated for having displeased Mohammed by writing verses ridiculing the new religion. Mohammed then seems to have decided to get rid of the Jews in a body, since they were a constant menace to his cause. He began with the Banu ainua', who were goldsmiths, and lived by themselves in a fortified suburb. He first summoned them to accept his religion, and they refused. Soon a pretext was found for an open attack. A Muslim girl was insulted by a Jew of the Banu ainua'; the Jew was killed by a Muslim, and the latter in turn was killed by the brothers of the murdered Jew. Mohammed immediately marched against the Banu ainua' and besieged them in their stronghold. After a siege of fifteen days they surrendered, and their lives were spared only at the urgent request of Abdallah ibn Ubai, the influential leader of the Arab opposition, whose pleading Mohammed dared not ignore. Being allowed to leave the country, they emigrated toward the north. Their departure weakened the Jews, who if they had been united might have withstood Mohammed's attacks.

    Another Jewish poet was assassinated about this time at Mohammed's desire. This was Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf of the Banu Nair, who had been stirring up the uraish at Mecca by his verses after the battle of Bedr. Ibn Sanina, a Jewish merchant, was killed on the day after Ka'b; and the Jews now began to fear to leave their houses. In the summer of 625 Mohammed attacked and besieged the Banu al-Nair. There appears to have been no satisfactory pretext for the attack. Mohammed claimed that he had received a revelation telling him of the treachery of the Jews. After a siege of fifteen or twenty days Abdallah ibn Ubai prevailed on the Nair to surrender. They were exiled, being allowed to take their goods with them, and emigrated toward the north, settling in Khaibar and in Syria.

    There were now left only the Banu uraia, and Mohammed soon found a pretext to attack them. Some of the Jewish exiles, chief among them being the above-mentioned uyayy, had stirred up the uraish and other Arab tribes against Mohammed, and they persuaded the Banu uraia to join them in their plans. Mohammed, however, succeeded in making the Jews and their Arab allies suspicious of each other; and the allies, who had been besieging Medina, suddenly departed in the midst of a storm, thus leaving the uraia unsupported. Mohammed marched against them, claiming to have received a special revelation to that effect, and laid siege to their fortress, which was a few miles to the southeast of the city. They surrendered after a month's siege, without having risked a fight. Their fate was left to the decision of Sa'd ibn Mu'adh of the tribe of Aus, who, in spite of the pleading of his own tribe, condemned the men to death and the women and children to slavery. The sentence was executed; and 750 Jews were killed in cold blood. uyayy was the last to die, with his last breath denouncing Mohammed as an impostor. The prophet wished to make a beautiful woman of the tribe, by the name of Rianah, his wife, but, tradition says, she preferred to be his slave instead. Thus the last of the powerful Jewish tribes in Medina was destroyed. Neither Mohammed, however, nor his successor drove all the Jews out of the country. That extreme measure was taken by Omar, who claimed to have heard the prophet say that all Jews should be exiled. Medina is one of the Muslim cities that neither Jews nor Christians may enter."

    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10545-medina


    Unfortunately, your selective cutting and pasting does nothing to help you understand islamist history.

    To claim that Islam's history of revulsion for non-islamists and the imposition of fascist ideals is the "best kind of rule" is quite a remarkable claim.

    As history is showing us, islamist totalitarian fear societies are crumbling. I would suggest that you study history to acquaint yourself with what islamism has wrought. Only the American colonists developed a nation protecting the independence of the individual. As recent trials and executions of opposition leaders across the islamist Middle East demonstrates, islamist fear societies are simply tyrannical states and, worse, they justify their tyranny as the will of Allah.

    Is it just a coincidence that many, if not most of the jihadi "freedom fighters" and non-governmental militia in the islamist middle east have religious sur-names for their murderous boys clubs? Hezbollah, Fatah Al Islam, Muslim Brotherhood, etc., are just a few of these armed militias. It's actually comically tragic that these groups are actually more adept at mass murdering their co-religionists than gaining "freedom" from anyone or anything. In fact, these groups are only adept at installing totalitarianism that replaces the totalitarianism they carelessly blame others for maintaining. Doesn't that seem a bit strange to name your fighting forces to coincide with your religious beliefs when those beliefs do nothing more than enslave and oppress?

    My concern regarding those who propose that fascism is the "best kind of rule" is that they invariably have neither the intellectual means nor methods with which to offer any valid proposal to replace functioning secular democracies. Their islamist utopias are the result of vivid imaginations. Lets entertain the notion that islamism actually could replace secular democracies. What would you do with it? Would you eventually hope to convert these democracies into islamist cesspools of ethnic and religious hatreds? Why do you believe your imagined islamist utopias would be any different than what political Islamism has already done to the islamist Middle East? These are rhetorical questions all because the answer is obvious. Look at the islamist Middle East today. It's a festering wound of religious, tribal and ethnic hatreds, which have kept an entire portion of the globe shackled to poverty, early death and ignorance.

    “I have been made victorious through terror”. Bukhari 4:52.220 ...

  14. #29
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,607

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Chicstar

    I'm interested in your response to Resigned detailed post above.

    What do you say to the way Mohammad shifted in his view/acceptance of the Jews? How has that carried through to today?

    This has been my point all along, re the theology of Islam and the actual behaviour of Mohammad and his leadership. I contend that aactions speak louder than words...or, as the bible so accurately puts it, 'by their fruit you shall know them.' Indeed.

  15. #30
    Alhamdullilah..
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: Koran Riots 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Resigned View Post
    "In ancient times, Medina was known as Yathrib. In the early Christian centuries it was a centre for Arab Jews. Nothing but their religion distinguished them from the tribes around them.

    Jews may have settled in the Hijaz after the sack of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and it is probable that they came in successive colonies, e.g., after Pompey's attack upon Judea (64 B.C.), after Titus' conquest of Jerusalem (70 C.E.), and again after Hadrian's persecution of the Jews (in 136 C.E).

    The Jews had a very rich and flourishing settlement at Yathrib and built strongholds in the city and vicinity. The principal families were the Banu ainua', the Banu uraia, and the Banu al-Nair. The latter two were known as the "Al-Kahinan," because they traced their descent from Aaron. In the fourth century Arab tribes from Yemen began to encroach upon the Jews in Medina. They were divided into two clans, the Banu Aus andthe Banu Khazraj. By calling in outside assistance and treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews, these Arab clans finally gained the upper hand at Medina toward the end of the fifth century (for date see "J. Q. R." vii. 175, note). From this time the Jews retired into the background for about a century.

    It is probable that the presence of Jews in Medina did much to prepare the way for Mohammed's teaching. When the prophet first went to Medina he was inclined to be friendly toward the Jews. They were included in the treaty between him and the inhabitants of Medina. He also made certain concessions to them on the ground of religion, and adopted their iblah —Jerusalem—in the hope of winning them to his cause. They, however, ridiculed him, and delighted in drawing him into arguments to expose his ignorance; so that his conciliatory attitude was soon changed to enmity. A few Jews were converted to Islam, among them Abdallah ibn Salam, whom Mohammed called the "servant of God," and of whose conversion the prophet made much.

    Finally Mohammed began to use actual violence toward the Medina Jews. After the battle of Bedr a woman called Asma, said by some to be a Jewess, wrote satirical verses, and was killed in her sleep, probably with Mohammed's consent. Not long before, Abu 'Afak of the Banu Amr, who had been converted to Judaism, had been assassinated for having displeased Mohammed by writing verses ridiculing the new religion. Mohammed then seems to have decided to get rid of the Jews in a body, since they were a constant menace to his cause. He began with the Banu ainua', who were goldsmiths, and lived by themselves in a fortified suburb. He first summoned them to accept his religion, and they refused. Soon a pretext was found for an open attack. A Muslim girl was insulted by a Jew of the Banu ainua'; the Jew was killed by a Muslim, and the latter in turn was killed by the brothers of the murdered Jew. Mohammed immediately marched against the Banu ainua' and besieged them in their stronghold. After a siege of fifteen days they surrendered, and their lives were spared only at the urgent request of Abdallah ibn Ubai, the influential leader of the Arab opposition, whose pleading Mohammed dared not ignore. Being allowed to leave the country, they emigrated toward the north. Their departure weakened the Jews, who if they had been united might have withstood Mohammed's attacks.

    Another Jewish poet was assassinated about this time at Mohammed's desire. This was Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf of the Banu Nair, who had been stirring up the uraish at Mecca by his verses after the battle of Bedr. Ibn Sanina, a Jewish merchant, was killed on the day after Ka'b; and the Jews now began to fear to leave their houses. In the summer of 625 Mohammed attacked and besieged the Banu al-Nair. There appears to have been no satisfactory pretext for the attack. Mohammed claimed that he had received a revelation telling him of the treachery of the Jews. After a siege of fifteen or twenty days Abdallah ibn Ubai prevailed on the Nair to surrender. They were exiled, being allowed to take their goods with them, and emigrated toward the north, settling in Khaibar and in Syria.

    There were now left only the Banu uraia, and Mohammed soon found a pretext to attack them. Some of the Jewish exiles, chief among them being the above-mentioned uyayy, had stirred up the uraish and other Arab tribes against Mohammed, and they persuaded the Banu uraia to join them in their plans. Mohammed, however, succeeded in making the Jews and their Arab allies suspicious of each other; and the allies, who had been besieging Medina, suddenly departed in the midst of a storm, thus leaving the uraia unsupported. Mohammed marched against them, claiming to have received a special revelation to that effect, and laid siege to their fortress, which was a few miles to the southeast of the city. They surrendered after a month's siege, without having risked a fight. Their fate was left to the decision of Sa'd ibn Mu'adh of the tribe of Aus, who, in spite of the pleading of his own tribe, condemned the men to death and the women and children to slavery. The sentence was executed; and 750 Jews were killed in cold blood. uyayy was the last to die, with his last breath denouncing Mohammed as an impostor. The prophet wished to make a beautiful woman of the tribe, by the name of Rianah, his wife, but, tradition says, she preferred to be his slave instead. Thus the last of the powerful Jewish tribes in Medina was destroyed. Neither Mohammed, however, nor his successor drove all the Jews out of the country. That extreme measure was taken by Omar, who claimed to have heard the prophet say that all Jews should be exiled. Medina is one of the Muslim cities that neither Jews nor Christians may enter."

    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10545-medina


    Unfortunately, your selective cutting and pasting does nothing to help you understand islamist history.

    To claim that Islam's history of revulsion for non-islamists and the imposition of fascist ideals is the "best kind of rule" is quite a remarkable claim.

    As history is showing us, islamist totalitarian fear societies are crumbling. I would suggest that you study history to acquaint yourself with what islamism has wrought. Only the American colonists developed a nation protecting the independence of the individual. As recent trials and executions of opposition leaders across the islamist Middle East demonstrates, islamist fear societies are simply tyrannical states and, worse, they justify their tyranny as the will of Allah.

    Is it just a coincidence that many, if not most of the jihadi "freedom fighters" and non-governmental militia in the islamist middle east have religious sur-names for their murderous boys clubs? Hezbollah, Fatah Al Islam, Muslim Brotherhood, etc., are just a few of these armed militias. It's actually comically tragic that these groups are actually more adept at mass murdering their co-religionists than gaining "freedom" from anyone or anything. In fact, these groups are only adept at installing totalitarianism that replaces the totalitarianism they carelessly blame others for maintaining. Doesn't that seem a bit strange to name your fighting forces to coincide with your religious beliefs when those beliefs do nothing more than enslave and oppress?

    My concern regarding those who propose that fascism is the "best kind of rule" is that they invariably have neither the intellectual means nor methods with which to offer any valid proposal to replace functioning secular democracies. Their islamist utopias are the result of vivid imaginations. Lets entertain the notion that islamism actually could replace secular democracies. What would you do with it? Would you eventually hope to convert these democracies into islamist cesspools of ethnic and religious hatreds? Why do you believe your imagined islamist utopias would be any different than what political Islamism has already done to the islamist Middle East? These are rhetorical questions all because the answer is obvious. Look at the islamist Middle East today. It's a festering wound of religious, tribal and ethnic hatreds, which have kept an entire portion of the globe shackled to poverty, early death and ignorance.

    “I have been made victorious through terror”. Bukhari 4:52.220 ...
    Kudos for your "detailed" post, Resigned.

    Just to remind you, you haven't answered my questions yet. Well, totally your wish. But, then I won't reply to yours either. (Anyway, you have already stated that it's best if I don't participate)

Similar Threads

  1. London violent Riots
    By Kabeer in forum Our Planet
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 15th August 2011, 18:32
  2. 2012: End of the World
    By Wrex in forum Science and Religion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 5th July 2011, 04:59
  3. French Riots Subside As Chirac Converts To Islam.
    By Naughty Funny SMS in forum Just for Jokes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12th March 2011, 20:13
  4. 2012-movie on the end of the world
    By DocW in forum General Conversations
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 15th December 2009, 10:13
  5. French Riots Subside As Chirac Converts To Islam
    By The_Other_Admin in forum Just for Jokes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11th December 2005, 11:06

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •