Jihad Watch, engine of dawah!

One has to wonder if it's the unemployed Dhabah "Debbie does Da'wa" Almontaser sending you those from Brooklyn.

You know, just doing her job.

I thought nothing could surprise me any more. But this is really the summit of moronism. This woman needs a shrink. She is obviously insane. I can't believe it.

Brooklyn lied. She is already a muslim.Sura 3:54 allah is the greatest liar.

Why do I smell taquiyya?

Interesting that JW calls this Brooklyn woman a hate mailer, though there is no hate exhibited in the posted writing of hers. Perhaps this is an error you can start with? As for JW selectivity, spin, and distortion, you can go back to my posted points during the Svend White matter, which nobody seems to be able to refute.
While I have no plans to convert to Islam, I must concede that what I have seen on this site has, to some degree, increased my sympathy for Muslims.
Epistemology: you'd better buckle in because there's more where that came from. I was at Al Azhar last week and witnessed several American and Belgian women recite the Shahadah, and become official converts to Islam.
And in sunny Yemen, where I now write this post, a local Islamic Dawa group showed me records of some recent European converts to Islam.
M'asselema

Maybe when she asked around about mahoundianism, she was handed a copy of a biography of Buddha, but with the name "Mahound" on the cover. That would be one possible explanation to her decision to recite the shahada, "if there is a god, it sure ain't allah, for it (not he) is mahound's alter-ego" in inbred bedouin savage gibberish. Self-hatred and the desire to be regarded as a non-penis-possessing, jihadist-breeding half-male mobile tent would be another.

By the way, speaking of Buddha, as a side note on how the leftarded intelligentsia refuses to condemn mahound-worshipping, Fred Phelps is like Buddha if one compares him to mahound. And while we know what the lefties' near-unanimous opinion of that despicable hate-monger is, they certainly would never display that unanimity in using the standards they hold Phelps to in speaking of the intolerant mass-murderer and pedophile to which (not whom) mahoundianism's creation is attributed; for speaking ill of mahound, just as discussing 1400+ years of mahoundian slavery and racism against blacks, goes against their narrative hatred of the West, democracy and human rights.

"...but I must thank you because if it hadn't been for your site, I would never have been led to the beautiful and peaceful religion of Islam. Now five of my friends, including my dear husband, have converted to Islam and will spread the message of peace."

I can smell those obvious lies from across the country. Brooklyn, you were already Mohammedan, ditto your husband and friends, if they even exist. What do you think? We're stupid? Your underestimating of the brilliant and perspicacious folks at JW is amusing. lol, nice try!

"Message of peace"! That's hilarious! The "message" of Islam as as "peaceful" as the messages of Fascism and Nazism. Islam is all about Hate. The capacity in humans for brainwashing is simply astounding. Mohamet knew this and took full advantage of it (along with his Beheading Sword). Astounding, simply astounding.

Hey, fairzufan

If what you read here makes you feel sorry for moslems then YOU must be one weird guy.

Everything I read here makes me feel SORRY FOR THEIR MILLIONS of VICTIMS!!!

"I must concede that what I have seen on this site has, to some degree, increased my sympathy for Muslims." - fairuzfan

Yes, the many articles about Muslims killing Christians and Buddhists, and the ones about Honor Killings, really tug at my sympathy chip, too.

Fairuzfan

There are a lot more coming the other way. You might catch a few vulnerable souls looking for something to fill a hole in their lives (a pointer to the fact that prison Da'wa is particularly successful); but what rational, clear-thinking human being would convert to the Religion of Ultraviolence?

"Now five of my friends, including my dear husband, have converted to Islam and will spread the message of peace."

Spoken like a true Muslim woman, to the chains and slavery born.

Un:dhimi "There are a lot more coming the other way."

Which is absolutely amazing since they face death for apostasy.

Robert on the Rush Limbaugh radio talk those calls that are like your email, he refers to them as "seminar calls". That is
people who want to put their own spin to make you look like liar and or deceiver. Rush and other conservative talk show hosts get these calls and it follows patterns like the email you receive from these islamists appologists. good to know you on are onto them.

Robert:
Another interesting feature is how these 'converts' never seem to spell out or be very clear as to what exactly attracted them to Islam. It's all touchy feely fuzzy warmth emotions but nothing concrete nor specific.

At least with the Moslem converts to Christanity make it clear that love and the figure of Jesus are the 2 principal attractions for conversion.

xavier

I wonder if there's anyone out there from her previous religion (or lack thereof) that has called for her death because of the conversion?

"I must concede that what I have seen on this site has, to some degree, increased my sympathy for Muslims." - fairuzfan

They need your sympathy, they won't get any from me...

Robert,

I pointed out a glaring falsehood and a critical failure in your understanding of a ry basic Sharia ruling...even Muslim children undrstand the subject far better than you...

Yes, most of the time you are hiding behind a plethora of dissemination in which you avoid responsibility for the volume of falsehood your site projects...

But you got nailed by me clearly in the wrong and your actions in attempting to quietly edit out your lies were even highlighted by me...so you squirmed and attempted to avoid responsibility, but you got nailed lying in print.

Darura, remember?

I have never heard of anyone claiming knowledge to have been that wrong about a major issue of Fiqh tha is so basic and so simple...you simply did not know, that or you lied on purpose...which was it? Each are equally damning for a person like you who allows others to laud him as a "scholar" of anything "Islamic."

But yes, your site has its uses as the person noted in the article pointed out... you raise issues by dissemination of falsehood you attribute directly to the religion and people are invited to look into it... then they see how much of a "liar" you are, albeit not directly responsible for the "les" you publish...yeah, yeah, I know, "I didn't say it...this ( insert lying source ) said it."

You are a thinly veiled conduit for the lies that you sell...any person of even limited knowledge can easily see through you.

All the same, have a great day...in the end you'll have your account settled with God, and that is enough for me.

Peace
Abdullah

She could have much more easily sold me the Brooklyn Bridge than to believe such an email.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Myths-of-Islam.htm#peace

"Islam is the truth" she lied.

"but what rational, clear-thinking human being would convert to the Religion of Ultraviolence?" asks Un:dhimmi

Both Good and Evil people can be rational and clear-thinking. The RoP, being a cult of perpetual violence and hatred against other human beings, is a haven for evil. It promotes cheating, robbing, lying, pillaging and killing of non-cult members, as a matter of obligation for its devout adherents. This authoritarian tribal cult has a powerful sway over the minds of its followers, right from early childhood. Its simple tribal mission - domination over others, if they are useful, else their annihilation - is easily internalised and provides a powerful incentive to the greedy and rapacious. This mission has allowed it to build empires, in early, unsuspecting times, when the going was easy as the cult mission was incomprehensible to the innocents of those times. The simplicity of its mission, coupled with its violently authoritarian structure, has had an appeal not only to the simple minded, but also to the devious and the power hungry, indeed, to those of a criminal bent of mind, throughout its history.

For the modern, educated follower, its irrationality and claims of superiority over other human beings,help them cope with their own unacceptable but undeniable inferiority and inadequacy vis-a-vis the indisputable superiority of the modern, civilised world. If they were really good, in either sense, they would become a part of the new world and embrace its liberal, tolerant mindset unhesitatingly and unequivocally.

I see this type of taqiyya spin very often on all the sites that expose the awful truth about Islam. "Reading your site has made me a better Muslim, strengthened my belief, blah, blah"

My standard response to this rubbish is to then say, "I am so glad to hear that. Now please request all the Islamic countries to stop blocking this site so that many more Muslims can benefit from it too."

Needless to say, I never hear from them again.

"...in the end you'll have your account settled with God, and that is enough for me." -- AM to Spencer

You see, that smug, self-righteous, and malicious comment right there really shows the black heart of Islam. And of brainwashed "believers," such as Abdullah Mik.

Allah is not God. Mik's god, the Islamic moon god, "allah," doesn't exist, and so won't be "settling any accounts." In the end, Mik, you'll be learning that your entire belief system is a hoax made up by your Warlord for personal power and material gain. Poor, brainwashed, Mik. Already brain-dead, if not physically so.

On the other hand, RS will be doing just fine, as well as every other member of JW. You're so lost, Mik, I truly pity you. A lost soul, taken in by a 7th century AD flim-flam man and his prop, a pagan idol. I can't think of anything more pathetic.

"... if it hadn't been for your site, I would never have been led to the beautiful and peaceful religion of Islam."

If she really has found a "beautiful and peaceful" Islam, it must be some fringe sect that the orthodox would find heretical; a version of Islam that would never get her being allowed into Mecca, and one that, if she tried to practice it in most Moslem countries, would lead to her being persecuted and possible killed.

Thanks, Robert. As always, Abie Mikie was vague on details. Probably the devil is in them or something like that.

Wine! This wonderful invention! During the time of Mohammed - mankind drank wine since water was routinely contaminated. Wine was preferred since it WAS potable. I have a feeling (it's not provable Mikie, so relax) that through out history, Muslims have consumed wine since water was hazardous to their health. Nowadays, the Saudis recover a lot of water from desalination plants. Cold Turkey in the Desert! Sounds like great movie title!

"I . . . witnessed several American and Belgian women recite the Shahadah, and become official converts to Islam."

That must have been a very moving moment for you. Meanwhile, back in Europe, Moslems are leaving Islam at the rate of 2,000 per day. And in China, Chinese are joining Christianity at the rate of 10,000 per day.

darcy, so good to see your name again.
Isabella, you ARE a Crusader for the True Cross!

A.Mikey is just a schmuck. I never believe a word that comes from a mahound.

fairuzfan wrote:

"Interesting that JW calls this Brooklyn woman a hate mailer, though there is no hate exhibited in the posted writing of hers."

fairuzfan may have a point. Perhaps some subcategories of mail could be developed. The one featured here could be under the category "Hopelessly Benighted Seemingly Pleasant Fool Mail". However, a case can still be made for the rubric "Hate Mail" for any mail that sounds nice but is fundamentally pro-Islam in a context of being anti-JW without presenting any arguments substantiating in a mature and intelligent manner that anti-JW stance: and that case is that such a mailer is de facto defending the hatred reflected in his or her Islam, since to be anti-JW without any substantiating argument is to be against the criticisms which JW levels against Islam, while not properly showing why they are incorrect, and given the nature of taqiyya in Islamic culture, one must reasonably then assume such a Muslim is either an imbecile or actually partakes of those elements that JW is critiquing/condemning, since such a Muslim is only being defensive of being offended by such critiques/condemnations, not actually and properly and intelligent defending a supposedly wrongly critiqued/condemned Islam.

fairuzfan goes on to write:

"As for JW selectivity, spin, and distortion, you can go back to my posted points during the Svend White matter, which nobody seems to be able to refute."

Notice his words. He does not, likely because he cannot, come out and actually accuse Spencer of what Spencer specifically requested -- that someone show any one of his claims to be false. Instead, fairuzfan uses the slipperier, weasellier terminology of "selectivity, spin, and distortion". And then he invites the reader to "go back to my posted points during the Svend White matter". Unfortunately, a Google search yields nothing. One wonders why fairuzfan cannot simply reproduce them here. The likely answer is that what fairuzfan attempted to argue "during the Svend White matter" consisted of elaborate and complex tap-dancing -- elaborate and complex, that is, in its avoidance of actually proving anything but successful only in weaving the ravelled fabric of the appearance of something objectionable in JW.

"While I have no plans to convert to Islam, I must concede that what I have seen on this site has, to some degree, increased my sympathy for Muslims."

Unremarkably unsurprising.

"Epistemology: you'd better buckle in because there's more where that came from. I was at Al Azhar last week and witnessed several American and Belgian women recite the Shahadah, and become official converts to Islam." "

Interesting that a supposedly non-Muslim secularist not only has no objections to the spectacle of a University being the official location of conversion to religion, but actually trumpets it as a ... what, "sympathetic" fact...? Imagine what fairuzfan would think if a major American university held official born again conversions on its grounds. His critical faculties, nowhere to be found with regard to Islam, would suddenly spring into action, no doubt.

Hi CGW! Hope you're doing great. Oh, your "schmuck" observation about A Mik? Hoo boy is that right. He actually believes his own propaganda. It's a disturbing thing to see a "programmed" mind, isn't it: "We are not men, we are Devo" - i.e Throwbacks.

"...but I must thank you because if it hadn't been for your site, I would never have been led to the beautiful and peaceful religion of Islam.
..................

Oh, no, Robert! Then you'd better shut down the site! sarc/off

Tanstaafl wrote:

Why do I smell taquiyya?
..................

Hmmm--why indeed? Here's more to ponder, from "fairuzfan":

While I have no plans to convert to Islam, I must concede that what I have seen on this site has, to some degree, increased my sympathy for Muslims.
...................

Here's someone who spends time in "sunny Yemen" and at *Al Azhar*, keeping tally of the number of clueless Westerners reciting the Shahada.

Does anyone believe that "fairuzfan" *isn't Muslim*? Most Westerners in the Middle East are engineers or aid workers--and likely spend little time following the progress of Da'wa. I suppose it's possible that "fairuzfan" is an academic of some sort--but, if so, then the state of higher education is even more troubled than I had presumed.

Robert writes about Abdullah Mikail's comment:

"...the only point he ever disputes specifically is this one [the Darura point], which is trivial at best."

And even at its trivial best, it remains unargued by Abdullah. Abdullah has not yet presented an actual argument defending his claim against Spencer. He has presented clumsy attempts at an argument which he continues in obtusely stubborn and jingoistic persistence to claim are cogent -- but no actual argument. Abdullah either doesn't know what an actual argument is and cannot construct one, or he does know but since he cannot construct one, he opts instead to present obfuscations in the context of trumpeting victory. In Islamic culture, perhaps, one can beat one's chest and claim victory in a debate without ever having presented an actual argument; but not in Western culture.

Spencer also wrote about Abdullah:

"He thus implies that what I say about all the mainstream sects and schools of Islam teaching warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers, as well as about apostasy law, the subjugation of women in Islam, and all the rest of it, is entirely true."

This is an excellent point. Abdullah intends the opposite, of course: he intends to convey that because Spencer allegedly fails on the Darura point, then all the other claims Spencer makes must also be false. This reflects an elementary logical fallacy. Just because a person may be incorrect about X, this is not sufficient proof by itself that he is incorrect about Y and Z. Abdullah, however, has failed to properly demonstrate even X in this regard (meanwhile his many attempts at demonstrating that Y and Z are incorrect -- viz., all the mainstream sects and schools of Islam teaching warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers, as well as about apostasy law, the subjugation of women in Islam, and all the rest of it -- have fallen short even more pathetically, but no less energetically tap-dancing-wise, than his attempts with regard to the Darura point).

One-trick, three-legged pony Abby continues to demonstrate his useful idiocy here at JW. Spencer provided more substance to support his claim in this thread alone than Abdullah has in totality in his darura obsession over time since past.

Presenting effective arguments, suported by truthful facts, has never been Abby's strong suit. His Pavlovian-like servitude to Islam, as demonstrated by his routinely aggresssive yet baseless responses to Robert, has essentially robbed him of all rational cognizance.

Tis a pity.

Perhaps its was all the news stories of muslim violence against khufars that led her to the religion of peace.

i wonder how well she'll spread the message of peace when she is ordered to bed with her dear husband's guest after dinner, even in Brooklyn.

Notice that Brainwashed-in-Brooklyn doesn't even bother to include any of her supposed RESEARCH to back-up her claim that false information is being spread about Islam on JW.

Of course we know that she doesn't have any hard data and that she's simply lying. But who can blame her, because Islam was founded ON and is supported BY nothing but lies, lies, and more lies; beginning, but not ending with, Muhammad himself.

Apparently, some Women just want to be dominated by Men without having to wear Leather.

AbsoluteMoron: "...in the end you'll have your account settled with God, and that is enough for me." ...this coming from someone completely removed from the Truth of God ...ironically, this enlightened statement clearly reveals that it doesn't look too good for those that embrace & follow Islam.

Robert Spencer

Let us give you a refresher on the absolute LIE you were caught publishing. Here is an excerpt from e-mails you and I exchanged on the subject:

*************************************
On Oct 8, 2008, at 3:39 PM, Abdullah Mikail wrote:

Dear Robert,

Apparently all the words confused you, so we'll simplify it:

You published:

“Yet in reality, Islam forbids drinking alcohol, but it doesn’t command one to shun those who do, or not to be anywhere near them.”

That is a proven lie, and you retracted it.

I have blissful true peace right now,

Truthfully
Abdullah Mikail
*************************************
If you recall on FPM I posted the fiqh and multiple Hadith references that proved you lied. Period.

Now have the courage to address the one lie above, okay?

Now on to the "darura" spin you attempted after that:

Casual readers in passing, had you noted the initial exchange with Robert on FPM and the daleel, the proofs, from Islamic Law that were laid out concerning darura and it’s application, the Hadith references in respect to the overall meaning of Robert’s points would clearly see as I and the scholars I referred to in the issue saw, that Robert in fact had only two legs to stand on: One – He lied on purpose to mislead, Two- He was ignorant of the absolute prohibition on alcohol, it’s transport, it’s sale, a muslim sitting in the presence of it, a person who pours it, the implements used to make it etc.

Robert’s attempt at avoiding his ignorance of the fiqh surrounding alcohol and two fold his ignorance about the application of darura, which was proven to him and others by me, still stands.

He will hide behind his weasel words and vague references to a third party opinion without clear reference to core legal text, which I produced for him…

And as far as pointing out your dissemination of lies, I have done it hundreds of times…yet, coward like, you are able to hide behind the fact that you are only publishing the lies from the useful idiots targeted in your articles…yes, Robert avoids lies himself, other than the one noted above, and one other major one where he stated JW and He Himself don’t smear all Muslims, when in fact Hugh, noted as the only other official speaker for JW, has done is many times, so there you have it, the second big lie.

People with far more knowledge of Sharia have agreed with my take on the how poorly Robert missed understanding the fiqh of alcohol prohibition and alcohol transport in respect to Muslims under those rules. The concept of Darura can not and never will apply in the instance Robert was trying to make it apply…there is only the avoidance of immediate physical harm, clear and present danger of loss of life or serious injury that would allow dispensation of a Muslim to transport alcohol and not be held accountable for sin by God…yes, at the point of a gun you could claim darura in that instance.

No, Robert, you either lied on purpose about your imagining the concept of "darura" allowing Muslims to tranbsport alcohol or you were ignorant…a simple confession to either would do, and then I would not ever bring this up again.

And my opinion over all of the JW "Mission" and the “good and noble intentions” you supposedly have...your claim to defend the “West” from “Islamofascism” etc. it just does not add up when one who knows better and one sees the onslaught from your yellow journalism projecting these many evil incidences that have no foundation in Islam onto the majority of we Muslims (who know better) all for the purpose of selling copy.

You are simply a gold digger with plausible deniability.

What copy, if any, did you ever sell before you jumped on the Jihad Bandwagon?

Not one book, is my guess…

And your CV? I see nothing that would allow you or anyone else to claim that you were a “scholar” of anything “Islamic.” Oh, you took a course once? What was it on? How to forward lies with impunity and be shielded from personal responsibility in their telling?

: )

Robert, all things aside, I do hope you have a great day.

Peace
Abdullah

Hesprerado,

Lengthy proofs only confuse you, so here is a short synopsis:

"Spencer specifically requested -- that someone show any one of his claims to be false."

Robert Published on FPM that day:

“Yet in reality, Islam forbids drinking alcohol, but it doesn’t command one to shun those who do, or not to be anywhere near them.”

Right on his heels I posted the proof he just lied.

And suddenly 'poof' he edited his article and tried to claim darura was what he was thinking of.

I immediately posted the fiqh and hadiths surrounding the issue and proved darura would never apply in the way he was weasling around and trying to say that was what he was thinking.

No. Robert got caught in a published lie and he had it proven to him. He swept up after himself and hid behind is "reputation" among his fans.

Peace
Abdullah

Robert, after crucifying A. Mikey yet again, will you please finally ban him? He's WAAAAAAY outlived his illustrative usefulness. Now he's just boring and irritating, like a mosquito or a house-fly.

"Now five of my friends, including my dear husband, have converted to Islam and will spread the message of peace."

Spoken like a true Muslim woman, to the chains and slavery born.

Robert (audible sigh)

Adding more lies to your record?

Robert you wrote "Funny how there is only one email in that exchange."

Do you remember these three exchanges, in reverse chronology, Robert?

“Gee, thanks Robert, you are such a sweet heart, but I am brutally honest, not dishonest.”

Tuesday, November 4, 2008 3:33 PM

From:
"Abdullah Mikail"
View contact details

To:
"Robert Spencer"
Robert you wrote, “So you're saying that most Muslims in the U.S. are not observant, as the alcohol controversy has not come up except in one place only. So far.” And this, “that's fine too. But they're out there. Once again, I seem to misunderstand Islam in just the same way so many Muslims do.”

Robert, this is the epiphany I had hoped you would experience. Yes, the majority of the Muslims in the US are not observant…only something like 10% actually attend the Masjids and pray regularly.

What I had hoped to communicate to you has gotten through, the fact that there is a base line that is minimum requirement in Islam that the majority of Muslims do not abide by and thus the majority of non-Muslims are confused about what Islam dictates.

I tell you the plain truth, I understand it, I verify it, properly reference it, and I practice it. I do have a bit of a heavy hand in correcting sometimes and I apologize for that, as I noted above, you misunderstood darura and it was wrong for me to label you as a liar in that sense.

There is utility in our exchanges, as you have noted in error “if you can forgive the excesses in my past exchanges I can easily forgive as well.

“But why then do Islamic groups in the U.S. allow this?”

On a certain level this is the ultimate expression of “no compulsion”…we are not held responsible for what others do…we are only to inform them of the truth, whether they believe and take heed is not up to us. In a clearer understanding of the issue you raised, the “Islamic groups” that condone this are not Islamic at all.

Robert you wrote, “That's fine too. But they're out there. Once again, I seem to misunderstand Islam in just the same way so many Muslims do.”

Yes, Robert, and I agree with you, and this is what I have been saying many times. But how do we address this misunderstanding? All I am able to do for you and them is inform of the truth and practice it myself.

You can not “re-hinge” the “un-hinged”…so any of us trying to “talk down” a violent person who thinks they have a God given right to commit violence on anyone is not going to work.
The best hope we have for ending the ignorance and the resultant politically motivated violence is the raise the next generation of Muslims and non-Muslims to have a better understanding of Islam…at least that is my understanding of a solution.

Freedom of speech is what we mutually champion, and thus I knew you would never ban me…conflicting opinions are what drive a democracy and there is even an Islamic science for how to disagree properly, believe it or not, a Sharia guided way to argue among Muslims to arrive at the best decision on a subject and not let it descend into argument.

Furthermore you have mischaracterized me with your comment “who would defend the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.” I have never agreed with your concept of a global jihad conspiracy, it doesn’t exist, and I could never be a supporter of something that doesn’t exist…that’s a manufactured concept…and “Islamic supremacism” is just another moniker in the Islamophobe tool kit along side, “Jihadist”, “Islamo-Fascist”, etc.

There are demographic changes taking place that are natural, and only fear mongers make it out to be some grand scheme…or is it a “Mexican Jihad” we saw take over the Southwest United States starting with Los Angeles?

Robert you wrote, “I don't want to ban Abdullah just because he is obnoxious, dishonest, and coyly thuggish.”

Gee, thanks Robert, you are such a sweet heart, but I am brutally honest, not dishonest.
Prove I lied to you and I will publish an sincere apology.

And in the future if I notice one of your “oversights” “mistakess” “error in clarifications” “concept not quite thoroughly explained” I can simply ask your opinion on it rather than pointing fingers and labeling you a liar…I mean, after all, you are watching 90% of Muslims and taking your cue from what you see then filtering it back through the books you are reading trying to understand it and explain it…not entirely your fault if you get a lot of it grossly incorrect.

Cordially and with Peace
Abdullah Mikail
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at November 4, 2008 4:28 PM

and this second:

“So Robert is indeed a liar and it was proven.”
Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:10 PM
From: "Abdullah Mikail"

To: "Robert Spencer"
awake,

Really? I failed to prove Robert was a liar?

To prove you and him wrong (again) I offer this:

Robert wrote "Yet in reality, Islam forbids drinking alcohol, but it doesn’t command one to shun those who do, or not to be anywhere near them. "

after a comment from an informed blogger it was changed to :

Robert edited "Yet in reality, Islam forbids drinking alcohol, but Muhammad’s curse on those who transport (or sell) it has been largely ignored in the West – until now. "
Robert knows it, I know it, and he tried to hide behind what he said was his thoughts on the subject of "darura". ( b.s. I say.)

Let us define "darura" for those who don't understand it(including Robert.)

Islamic Law: By Mu'il Yusuf Izz al-Din, Mūʼil Yūsuf ʻIzz al-Dīn Mawil Izzi Dien
Darura, necessity

“A discussion of the sources from which legal injunctions can be deduced would not be complete without the expoloration of the principle of ‘necessity’, ehich represents a further ‘key turner’ that plays a central role in Islamic law by filling I the gapss left by the legal sources and by addressing the imollications of nexessity caused by unexpected conditions. In Arabic, necessituy is termed darura. This word is derived from the lexical root darar that signifies ‘harm’ or ‘damage’. According to Ibn Manzur, darar denotes the dire state of hardship. In the loose legal context, darura designates bot the state of necessity and its cause, sabab, which justifies altering legal injunction on the ground, of avoiding imminent harm.”

END OF EXCERPT

So in truth the darura is a concept only applicable when attempting to avoid imminent physical harm.

For instance, a starving Muslim may eat pork and not be considered sin because he must do so to save his life, or a person under threat of death my verbally apostatize to avoid death both cases are documented cases in hadith literature with an approval by the Prophet.

Darura is not an applicable dispensation for Islamic law and the order which does “…command one to shun those who do (drink, hold, pour, carry, transport, buy, sell, eat its price etc – alcohol), or not to be anywhere near them.”

So Robert is indeed a liar and it was proven.

What he says about me is just an insult that he is unable to prove.

I on the other hand prove Robert is a liar above.

What are your thoughts on that?

Truth
Abdullah

Abdullah Mikail

and the (three strikes your out...) third:

Re: One does wonder how many "mistakes" it takes to get disbarred from the FPM "Islamic Scholars" association.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008 4:52 PM

From: "Robert Spencer"

To: "Abdullah Mikail"

Actually, no. Those statements aren't lies at all. You continue to assume that I intend to deceive. Of course your religion tells you that that's what I intend to do, but nonetheless you are wrong there. In any case, the statement isn't even mistaken, given the principle of darura. It is just incomplete and can be misleading, so I replaced it. That's all.

My conscience before God is clear, although I know your religion does not allow that possibility to a kuffar, nonetheless, that's the way it is.

May you find true peace
Robert

On Oct 8, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Abdullah Mikail wrote:

Dear Mr. Spencer,


Just for you:

lie 2 (l )
n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
v. lied, ly•ing (l ng), lies
v.intr.
1. To present false information with the intention of deceiving.
2. To convey a false image or impression: Appearances often lie.
v.tr.
To cause to be in a specific condition or affect in a specific way by telling falsehoods: You have lied yourself into trouble.

END OF EXCERPT

Thank you. That clearly defines what you did.

You said, "but it doesn’t command one to shun those who do, or not to be anywhere near them"

These two comments are lies. It clearly commands the opposite to both of these comments, and you retracted the statement, further evidence tha you knew you were a proven liar...granted, the retraction is your saving grace...at least you are not an insistant liar.

Some day hopefully you will come out of this insanity that grips you on this issue of publishing false information as if it were true then finding out it is not true retracting it and saying, "Woops! I wasn't lying."

Were you just "mistaken"? Or willfully ignorant and passing yourself off as a "Scholar of Islam?"

Be truthful before God.

Abdullah Mikail

--- On Wed, 10/8/08, Robert Spencer wrote:
From: Robert Spencer
Subject: Re: On another subject...
To: "Abdullah Mikail"
Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008, 4:12 PM
Dear Abdullah Mikail,

I do hope that one day you will get around to looking up the word "lie," and studying its meaning. You keep misusing it.

In hopes that you find true peace one day
Robert

On Oct 8, 2008, at 3:39 PM, Abdullah Mikail wrote:

Dear Robert,

Apparently all the words confused you, so we'll simplify it:

You published: “Yet in reality, Islam forbids drinking alcohol, but it doesn’t command one to shun those who do, or not to be anywhere near them.”

That is a proven lie, and you retracted it.

I have blissful true peace right now,

Truthfully
Abdullah Mikail

***********************

#3 “Gee, thanks Robert, you are such a sweet heart, but I am brutally honest, not dishonest.” Tuesday, November 4, 2008 3:33 PM

#2 “So Robert is indeed a liar and it was proven.”
Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:10 PM

#1 On Wed, 10/8/08, Robert Spencer wrote:
From: Robert Spencer
Subject: Re: On another subject...

Are you going to now try and spin your way out of this latest lie? Or were you just mistaken?

: )

Peace
Abdullah

AM is drunk on taquiyya and stoned on Islam! ...he's so busy trying to dig up a speck of dirt on Robert, but yet he pretends not to see the mountain of lies within Islam and within himself. Own a mirror, AM? O, the BS is endless with this clown -- and it's amusing to watch him jump for joy and perspire like a teenage boy on a first date because he thinks that hes trapped Robert in some lie. Go take a cold shower, AM.

Abdullah Mike,

Your arrogance and covert hostility are showing again, sweetie. Blissful true peace? Not. You show your true colors by your vindictive insincerity. That thorn in your paw must be really hurting right now.

War,

Isabella

How to give Allah a bad name...The movie...
Get rid of the bandwidth thief...He has no usefulness, he just steals bandwidth, attacks Robert and others and drags threads off topic...He is probably gets paid for being disruptive...He has never converted anyone on JW to his Allaholic way of thinking...He's mildly entertaining, but otherwise useless...Now he threatens Spencer with God (Allah in his case), the last refuge of a scoundrel...

Hesperado,

"...Abdullah has not yet presented an actual argument defending his claim against Spencer."

Read above center of my post: AbdullahMikail | September 17, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply

I await your retraction.

Peace
Abdullah

Abby wrote (to Spencer)

"And as far as pointing out your dissemination of lies, I have done it hundreds of times..."

Hundreds now it is, Abby?

Anyway, this is all irrelevant. Not only does Abdullah not ever address the fact that the chronic misunderstanders of Islam always seem to be his co-religionist brethren and past historical Islamic scholars, he routinely chastizes Spencer for simply revealing these embarrasing and troubling truths about Islam, according to Muslims themselves.

THE POINT, is simply this. Abdullah languishes around here, sneering at us all, while in reality, where he should be spending his time, publicly denouncing those who spread this supposed disinformation about Islam.

Curiously, he has NEVER alluded to another internet source of him correcting anyone within in his own religious community. logically, he should be attemptuing to cut off this dissemination at the head where it originates, at mosques and on Muslim sites in an effort to stunt Spencer's work.

He certainly doesn't maintain that the jihadists fall prey to the misunderstanding of Islam because of Spencer's words, does he?

Abdullah Mike,

Your arrogance and covert hostility are showing again, sweetie. Blissful true peace? Not. You show your true colors by your vindictive insincerity. That thorn in your paw must be really hurting right now.

War,

Isabella

You are a thinly veiled conduit for the lies that you sell...

If I'm not mistaken, Spencer has made a career out of basing all his assertions on Islamic scriptures, sacralized histories, and the various Sharia codes -- all written by Moslems.

*** 8:39 ***

It's so ironic when Moslems flash the word peace about, much like a pedophile opening his dirty trench coat and exposing himself to a little girl in a park. Here's a thing to expose:

Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.

Awake,

Funny how you totally ignore the proof I posted backing up my claim that Robert got caught lying.

And as far as your lie “co-religionist brethren”… many times I have told you the useful idiots Robert trumpets about are not my co-anything… they are mostly people who lack any real understanding of Islam, because if they did they wouldn’t be fueling Robert’s blog, would they?

And the “hundreds” of times? Yes, I point out that the subject of Robert’s articles is false premise, the useful idiots Robert targets in his smear campaign are almost never quoted as saying “Islam commanded it. Here’s my proof.” It is always Robert with his weasel words and out of context quotes who labels their actions and paints them for them… “Oh, it must have been (insert erroneous out of context quote, then hadith reference snippet…) that they were thinking of.”

As far as spending time outside of here? There are many facets to the solution and I work on all of them. This medium is ineffective at “fixing” misunderstanding…I am only here to oppose the lies and dissemination of misleading information. My activity outside of here is concrete, lasting, and in harmony with permanent solutions to the problems Robert capitalizes on, those whose criminal behavior lends themselves to Robert’s agenda… he is not interested in solving anything, only creating a negative public image in order to smear all Muslim while capitalizing on little screamers he regularly publishes.

$18.95 a pop, Robert will sell you all about it.

Peace
Abdullah

Alarmed Pig Farmer,

I really don't blame you...you are reading an English only snippet and trying to attach meaning to it that isn't there.

A simile?

Pull out a sentence from any Supreme Court ruling and ask one of the judges to explain it.

Their answer would be pages long, not a blurb. Why? Because there is a volume of information outside of their ruling that deals with the one sentence you point to. Lacking that information you will never be able to understand what they meant in that one sentence as it stands alone.

Peace
Abdullah

Mikey - you wrote -

"For instance, a starving Muslim may eat pork and not be considered sin because he must do so to save his life, or a person under threat of death m(a)y verbally apostatize to avoid death both cases are documented cases in hadith literature with an approval by the Prophet."

You are correct, a muslim may deny Islam if he(she) feels their life is in danger. The practice is referred to as "kittman". Now, can you inform us ignorant kuffars about the practice of "taquiyya"?

tanstaafl,

An oversimplification of one aspect?

taquiyya - a universal standard military practice defined in Islam as deception in time of war...we in the US Military have always done it, every military that has ever existed has done it...it is a strategy of war.

Any other aspect of it you want to discuss?

Peace
Abdullah

Hesperado,

Yooohooo? You still there? Read above again...

"AbdullahMikail | September 17, 2009 10:43 AM | Reply "

I called you out to admit you are wrong, perhaps you have a valid excuse for not immediately admitting you were wrong and that I did prove my case against Robert's lies...maybe you stepped out to lunch?

Please produce your retraction, or why you insist on not being honest.

Peace
Abdullah

I would never have been led to the beautiful and peaceful religion of Islam. Now five of my friends, including my dear husband, have converted to Islam and will spread the message of peace.

You are obviously a fake.
You are not a recent convert nor are you a woman.

If Islam is so beautiful and peaceful why not tell us about the peace & beauty rather than just calling Robert a liar?

"There are many facets to the solution and I work on all of them."

Assertion without a shred of presented, tangible evidence besides your own admission.

"My activity outside of here is concrete, lasting, and in harmony with permanent solutions to the problems Robert capitalizes on, those whose criminal behavior lends themselves to Robert’s agenda…"

Concrete, lasting and in harmony? Assertion without a shred of presented, tangible evidence besides your own admission.

Just like I said.

Anyway, your assetion that you try provide solutions "...to the problems Robert capitalizes on, those whose criminal behavior lends themselves to Robert’s agenda…", is essentially an admission of sorts to the validity of Spencer's work. It belies the acknowledgment that these "misunderstanders" are using Islamic doctrine, which Spencer reports on. You simply diasgree with his conclusion on the impetus behind this "criminal behavior" consistently and commonly enacted by Muslims distinctly above all other religious groups, being due to Islam rather than in spite of it.

It is your opinion, however disingenuous and illogical it seems to me, and you are certainly entitled to it, but I must ask you again... Where is the same substantiated effort to positively affect the "criminal" problem inherent in your Muslim community that would render Robert Spencer obsolete, that you show here? A single example?

In the absence on that supporting evidence, your words here ring shrill and hollow.

Given that Muslims view countries that are not governed by Islamic law as Dar al-Harb (House of War), there isn't a time when taquiyya cannot be employed as a "military practice" by Muslims. This has obviously been the experience of the FBI when dealing with CAIR.

Abdullah, why don't you start here. Funny, I must've missed your castigating comments on that site.

http://revolution.ansar1.net/?p=1425

awake,

And still no response form you to my proof that Robert lied? You dissapoint me...

Anyway,

"There are many facets to the solution and I work on all of them. Assertion without a shred of presented, tangible evidence besides your own admission."

I have helped build and establish many Masjids in which the truth is taught, many Islamic schools, and even one charter school, and I have mentioned before that educating the next generation of Muslims is one facet of ensuring they are able to point out “misunderstanders” and properly follow and teach the religion.

Do I need to lead you by the nose and point at each one? No, I don’t…it would be no favor to them for me to call them to your attention or others that frequent this site…you are for the most part violent hateful people…I wouldn’t want to endanger the innocent.

“…is essentially an admission of sorts to the validity of Spencer's work. It belies the acknowledgment that these "misunderstanders" are using Islamic doctrine, which Spencer reports on.”

No, just an admission that Robert points to criminal idiots and then Robert himself assigns their means, motives, and showcases their opportunity for committing their crimes…Robert is the one who assigns blame to the religion, and he’s wrong in that, and so are those he features, most often. Some do have a valid reason to defend themselves, and those are a case by case basis.

Once again, you start from the false premise with your question:

“Where is the same substantiated effort to positively affect the "criminal" PROBLEM INHERENT IN YOUR MUSLIM community that would render Robert Spencer obsolete, that you show here? A single example?”

Talk about your projections embedded in a “question”… there is no “inherent problem” and the people Robert showcases are not “in your (my) Muslim community.”

My community has no inherent problems any moreso than any other normal community does…we have criminals just like the other faith communities at large, period. Only with us there is a commercial incentive for people like Robert to paint it as if it were part of the "religion" and thus we have his little screamers rolling off the dime store novel racks.

There is no inherent problem with my community, and your question is based on a false premise.

Peace
Abdullah

awake,

Take it off line and we'll discuss it some time you can re-post whatever I e-mail to you......

challengingreddyneck@yahoo.com

I have 249.5 million reasons I have to go now...capitalism rocks, but boy does it take a lot of work.

Peace
Abdullah

abie mikie - Taquiyya on taquiyya. Clever. Since you admit that the practice of taquiyya exists, why should kuffars believe anything a Muslim says?

Abdullah:

"As you well know, that exchange took place after I made the change, not before, and you have edited it heavily. Caveat emptor."

Robert,

Caveat Empetor? You mean "liar beware" more lies... you don't quit do you? I did not edit one line of it...Robert you are a liar.

I dind't change one word...and I can prove it... something you are unable to do when calling me a liar.

Anyone here wants me to forward the original exchanges so you can verify drop me a line... challengingreddyneck@yahoo.com.

Peace
Abdullah

Robert,

Cute...yeah, send me a bill. : )

You advertise your books for sale here, right?

Chaching! $18.95 a pop you'll sell me all about it, right?

Peace
Abdullah

About the use of alcohol and the opinion of ask-imam.com

http://www.islam.tc/cgi-bin/askimam/ask.pl?q=2511&act=view

According to Imaam Abu Hanifa, alcohol from grapes or dates extract is absolutely prohibited. However, drinks extracted from wheat, barley, sugar cane, etc. is permissible to the extent that they do not intoxicate.

Abdullah

There are far more lucrative (and safer) activities than riding the 'Jihad bandwagon' as you so colourfully put it.....just ask John Esposito

Abdullah,

Like Mad Mohammed, you are a coward.
You won't answer any of my questions.

I find it interesting that AM has gone from arguments and creepy threats towards our grandchildren to attacking Robert. I noticed it a short time ago. This is a full out attempt to smear and defame Robert. His sin?. He is a writer. His ultimate sin? He has to earn a living. This is AMs' constant whine. Like a snotty boy in the schoolyard who can find no better way to insult someone than to call him *4 eyes* so AM keeps repeating the insult. It isn't going to work because JW posters are not going to fall for the mud slinging.
You have used up an enormous amount of this thread. I wonder if someone pays you by the word? Perhaps Robert should charge you by the word. Fairs fair.

"sunny Yemen?"

Well, perhaps the weather is nice but, you mean the backward, retrograde, uber-misogynist islamic cesspool in which females are forced to wear all Black Hefty Tents, and if they don't, acid is thrown on them by the backward, retrograde, uber-misogynist, islamic males? Oh, right, THAT Yemen. A paradise for islamic females!

Wonder why backward, retrograde, Abdullah Mik doesn't live there? Guess he's too busy enjoying the freedom and wonders of Judeo-Christian civilization in the United States. Figures - a Hypocrite. An islamic Hypocrite. Isn't it funny how the Mohammedans all come to live in the West??!!! LOL!

Yawn...Thanks to Abdullah this is one of the most boring threads of all time...I simply don't give a rats azz what he says...Why is he still here?

"I simply don't give a rats azz what he says...Why is he still here?"

A Mik is here because he feels so insecure about his belief system, the "Religion" of War and Hate and Mass-Murder, that he has to come to an "Infidel" site and lay on the "al-taqiyya" with a shovel! But, we're so on to the "War is deceit" deal it's not funny. Hey Mik - how's that merciless, compassionless, non-existent, pagan moon idol working out for you? LOL

Abdullah

Now that you are armed with the knowledge that water when drunk in sufficient quantities becomes intoxicating would you concede that it should be forbidden?

Abby:
"I have helped build and establish....?"

And yet you won't identify a single one. We are supposed to take your words on face value alone?

Abby:
"...you are for the most part violent hateful people…I wouldn’t want to endanger the innocent."

Talk about basing an argument on a false premise. You have not produced a single charge, let alone any proof of violence commited by a single memeber of the JW commenting community. This is nothing more than an ad hominem attack on the entire community. We are violent as assetrted by you, so therefore you can't divul;ge any information to protect the "innocent". Laughable.

Abby:
No, just an admission that Robert points to criminal idiots and then Robert himself assigns their means, motives, and showcases their opportunity for committing their crimes.

Not true. Spencer documents their means and motives more often than not, based on their own words and actions. All Spencer does is provide some doctrinal context on how all these "misunderstanders" keep misunderstanding in unison the same basic principles of Islam over and over again.

Abby:
"Some do have a valid reason to defend themselves, and those are a case by case basis."

I don't know what you were implying except that "defensive" jihad is permissible on a case-by-case basis. And who determines this legitimacy on a case-by-case basis. you? Unwittingly, you just acknowledged Islamic justification for defensive warfare, yet cannot provide a single authority to declare its legitimacy or regulate it, hence leaving the individual or individuals to decide.

The underlying principle, defensive Jihad is wholly Islamic. The misapplication of it is what you are trying to deem as "criminal".

Who decides on a case-by-case basis? That is why we seem to have all these "misunderstanders".

Abby:
"...there is no “inherent problem” and the people Robert showcases are not “in your (my) Muslim community.”

There isn't? Are they not Muslims the characters that Robert reveals in article after article? They declare themselves as Muslims, and why shouldn't we believe them? Who are you to decide who is a Muslim or not? Do you declare takfir on them?

Abby:
"There is no inherent problem with my community, and your question is based on a false premise."

Also not a true statement. There are "misunderstanders" of Islam according to you, criminals and non Muslims (a bold position I might add.)

The same cannot be said for chronic "misunderstanders" of Chritianity or any other religion that produces such consistent, violent results.

Weak.

Who cares if "Intoxicants" are forbidden? MASS-MURDER-OF-INFIDELS should be forbidden! Man, you people are totally screwed-up, just like your Beheading Warlord false (lol) "prophet."

Alarmed Pig Farmer, I really don't blame you...you are reading an English only snippet and trying to attach meaning to it that isn't there.

Actually, I've read the Koran in its entirity, and more than once. It's tough sledding, but the commented versions especially help clarify what Mohammed meant with his belief system Islam. Reading the Hadiths only reinforces old Mo's intent with even more clarity.

*** Tabari 2:99 ***

Where I do get mixed up by Mohammedism is trying to decide which word to use: obfuscation or confusion. Both maybe.

And at this point I wouldn't trust a Supreme Court justice to park my car. They're theives and they're stealing our Constitution one brick at a time.

Mik, you need to have a nice glass of Merlot and ponder on why your moon god and warlord HATE non-moslems so much! Such as this:

"When judgment day arrives, Allah will give every Muslim a Jew or Christian to kill so that the Muslim will not enter into hell fire." -- Mohammed (Mishkat Al-Messabih, vol. 2, no. 5552.)

Isn't that handy how Mo "speaks" for Allah? That's because there is NO ALLAH - Do you still have any neurons firing, Mik? After all that brainwashing???

Awake,

And still no response to the darura proofs I provided?
Come on, step up… you were practically syrupy with affection for your hero Robert when you invited me to come comment here and post at JW…remember when I was at FPM? Yeah, that’s where the slap down took place, and it did, and I proved it here again.

Robert’s weak defense of his latest lie about the e-mail exchanges, “..heavily edited.” He lied again…I can prove it..only, you don’t have the stones to e-mail me direct…at least Robert has the spine to do that. “Weak.” Yes, you are.

“Not true. Spencer documents their means and motives more often than not, based on their own words and actions. All Spencer does is provide some doctrinal context on how all these "misunderstanders" keep misunderstanding in unison the same basic principles of Islam over and over again.”

Vast majority of his articles don’t have quotes attributed to the perps…it is almost always his and Hugh’s spin that get’s attributed as motive. That’s a fact…I’ve been looking for the quote from the perps…almost never there.

Peace
Abdullah

Qur'an 9:111: "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in his cause, and slay and are slain."

What a sick belief system. Nothing whatsoever to do with "peace." Nothing.

Oh, and btw, Mik, - there ain't no "paradise" with the virgins and pearly boys and wine rivers - Mo MADE IT ALL UP so he could get brainwashed minions to fight for him. Sort of like...you.

Muslims believe that they have a divine responsibility to wage war (Jihad) against those who do not share their creed, impose institutional inequality upon women and disbelievers, and extinguish freedom of speech about Islam/Mohamet/Qur'an.

Concerning all of the above? I really do despise islam, just as much as I despise Fascism and Nazism.

Mo MADE IT ALL UP so he could get brainwashed minions to fight for him.

Don't forget all the sex that it brought Mohammed's way, Darcy. And give him credit for delivering the same to Moslem Men even to this day. Those twenty-somethings in that Mass Wedding for 450 Child Brides in Gaza video were all smiles. There is fun in Islam... if you're a ped.

*** 33:51 ***

And don't forget all the money. Mo and his gang showed up in Yathrib broke and hungry, the Jews there were kind of enough to show them charity, only to be robbed and murdered for thanks.

Abdullah

and yet the article is titled "water intoxication". Indeed water poisoning results in symptoms similar to those associated with alcohol intoxication. Perhaps you could produce the islamic ruling that states that the state of intoxication produced by excessive water consumption is not the same as that produced by excessive alcohol consumption

"450 Child Brides in Gaza video" -- Alarmed Pig Farmer

Good God, I missed that. Centipedes are more civilized. And, of course, this Islamic abomination - legalized child-rape - along with backward and retrograde Polygamy, is why there are so many, so many, so many, Mohammedans. Oh, it's a Pedophile's Paradise, Islam. Islam says, "Demographic Jihad? C'est moi."

Abdullah Mikhail -

Where are all the books you have written? Where is your web site?

What is there in your CV that would persuade anyone to listen to you, and not someone else, such as M. Zuhdi Jasser? http://www.aifdemocracy.org/about/members.php

Dr. Jasser is a "moderate Muslim", something you only pretend to be.

How do your beliefs differ from those of CAIR? You have in the past endorsed sharia law, Tariq Ramadan, and CAIR's interference with the FBI.

Let's face it abdullah, if you are not an agent of CAIR you are missing a paycheck.

And while we are on the subject of lieing - I'd like to ask you again why you threatened to sabotage Jihad Watch?
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/10/a-veiled-threat-from-a-moderate-muslim.html

The last time I asked you this I may have caught you in the midst of, shall we say "unwinding"?

I know coherence, and lucidity are not things you do well, but this responce from you sounded very confused.

"...stupid comment...I mentioned to RS that there were some legal issues he was not aware of in association with JW...I thought that paperwork would move off that govt. desk faster than it has...still sitting there at the red light, though. I was just giving him a coy warning of what may still be coming for him down the road. I would hate to foot that bill for what they might send him...
"http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/09/somalia-more-amputations-for-theft-this-time-in-mogadishu.html#comments

What was that about "legal issues"?

"there are no "John 3:16" get out of jail free covers it all verses" None."

That's because you Mohammedans are imprisoned for all time in a rotten, evil, Godless belief system. Yep, you're in "solitary" for all time, death - no eternal life. Only the disemboweled Con Man Warlord for company - here he is:

Mo is depicted in many drawings and paintings as a "Sower of Discord" with his torso split open and entrails falling out, down in hell. Here you go, Mik - thought you'd like to check out a few:

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/dantes_inferno/

Abdullah

so water could only be considered haram if it were consumed in the quantities necessary to induce a state of intoxication with prior knowledge of the likely effects of such an action?

Sorry, Mik, but brainwashed people are the most pathetic of all, esp. those brainwashed by a Jim Jones/David Koresh- style 7th century AD Warlord. Pitiful, pitiful, pitiful.

Everyone knows that Islam is FILLED with "Child Brides" - so, what's your point???

What a weak campaign you are running against Robert Spencer. You find one thing Robert has written, out of his hundreds of articles, 9 books, and endless correspondence, that you think is "a lie" and use this in an attempt to discredit him completely. Sorry, it won't work. Robert didn't lie, he wrote something and then clarified it. Are you a writer? Have you ever cited a source and then realized that the article you cited was not completely accurate?

Think about your own "Holy" Qur'an. Look at the litany of f*** ups by Mohammad. "Wait, this won't work, let's abrogate that scripture to better suit my current needs."

This is really a funny thread.

Hi Hesp, you made my day "Hopelessly Benighted Seemingly Pleasant Fool Mail". That's really hilarious. But kindly accept my advice, please. When arguing with Micky you have to get down your gear. He obviously doesn't understand your sophisticated style of writing. Please take the confines of his intelligence into account.

Isabella, I have to disagree with you this time, Micky is neither arrogant nor is he hostile, he's simply a moron. Whatever he says about Islam stems from the fact that his IQ is under 30. And we can't blame him for that. He's just an innocent moron.

"Think about your own "Holy" Qur'an. Look at the litany of f*** ups by Mohammad. "Wait, this won't work, let's abrogate that scripture to better suit my current needs." -- Allahu Snackbar.

Exactly, Snack. Hey Mik, I wonder just who is being "led around by the nose ring," lol!

"Water is not normally intoxicating to human beings"

Well haven't we already established that that depends entirely on the quantities in which it is consumed? Alcohol doesn't have an intoxicating effect until a certain amount is consumed so how is that threshold defined? Or if it is merely the act of consuming something which has the potential to become intoxicating that is forbidden then why is alcohol haram while water is permitted? I'm not playing, just trying to understand the whimsical nature of the rules surrounding alcohol and intoxicants in islam considering you seem to place so much importance in them.

Muslims just don't think. They are impaired in logic...but they know that lying for islam is is a good thing...Only islam can one lie to defend their so called religion.

Keeping up with this site is not going to convert you to islam...that's a fact.

You think a Muslim is going to be honest here? lol

A muslim that does't believe, might...of course he/she is not really a muslim...but an apostate. Loads of them around.

Isn't it ironic that Abdullah is trying SO hard to win an argument with somebody who is much, much smarter than him, yet he believes the retarded story of some Arab guy going into a cave and emerging with a book full of bullsh**?

The story of wine consumption goes far way back the mohammedan times. Essentially civilized people used wine consumption above water drinking because of the danger of water being contaminated (something tourists in islamist countries become aware of when they catch dysenteria). Wine in itself is sterile because the presence of alcohol prohibits the developement of bacteria and is not intoxicant if taken in reasonable amounts (like water). The drastic islamic point of view is therefore inhuman and hostile to the whole human race.

K.M.

$18.95, Abbie? YoYou paid full price? You've been had.

Capitalism may "rock", but you clearly haven't gotten the hang of it yet.

Abby:

You glossed over your own admission of justified defensive jihad in current historical context on a "case-by-case basis." I know you now know you screwed up, by slipping and actually telling the truth for a change.

What recent historical grounds and under what authority do you deem an example as a justified call to defensive jihad to be?

We're waiting.

tick...tick...tick.

I wonder if it was the beheadings, bombings, or honor killings that beguiled her? Also, I wonder what beautiful and peaceful things she was referring to? Finally, I rather doubt the veracity of the post. It is like the old so called "Jew" blasting Israel, etc. It is pretty lousy dawah.

What I want to know is how AbdullahMikail justifies the fact that all the schools of Islamic law call for the death penalty for those who leave Islam. I want to know how he justifies that Muhammad said, "If someone changes his Islamic religion, then kill him."

That fact that he said that, or that Muslims at least believe he said it, and that it is operative in all the schools of Islamic law, should be all any sane person needs to know about Islam in order to reject it. There are other prodigies of evil in Islamic doctrine, but that is more than enough.

On alcoholic and Islam. It's simple. Mohammed prohibited alcohol because of two reasons:

1) he saw how his fellow Arabs liked to get drunk and then become virtually useless to any enterprise

2) he had a very serious enterprise in mind -- military conquest of the world, and couldn't abide any drunks in his Military Religion.

And since Muslims simply do, and don't do, what Mohammed said to do, and not to do, that's why they are against alcohol (with the exceptions noted by Spencer, himself simply citing other Muslim scholars, who since time immemorial have been wiggling and wriggling in and among -- but never free of -- the knots and nooses Mohammed in his post-coital epileptic fantasies ravelled together into the twisted straitjacket fabric of the Laws of the Voices in his Head).

Abby?

tick...tick..tick.

Abby,

Your comments about the proper applicability of defensive jihad (inherent in Islam), do you remember?

Response?

Tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...tick...................!

AbdullahMikail | September 17, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply

"Some do have a valid reason to defend themselves, and those are a case by case basis."

Name one...just one, you coward!

Your own words are your ultimate destruction, Abby, trapped in the middle of your vengeful god(prophet) and the reality of sane, peaceful, sentient human society.

Too bad for you.

"This website made me very curious about Islam and led me to conduct my own research. I have found a lot of your claims to be outright false about the religion,"--from the Fatuous Mail Bag.

Ah, the old "I've got evidence that you're wrong but I'm not going to present it" argument.

"[...]but I must thank you because if it hadn't been for your site, I would never have been led to the beautiful and peaceful religion of Islam. Now five of my friends, including my dear husband, have converted to Islam and will spread the message of peace."

Needless to say, that doesn't sound credible. In any case, assuming it's true, the husband's conversion to Islam was required because Islam does not permit a Muslim woman to be married to a non-Muslim man. If they were to insist on remaining married as Muslim wife and non-Muslim husband, the sharia penalty on them would be death (as it is, for example, in Iran and Saudi Arabia).

Beware of Muslims who claim to offer "peace" to non-Muslims:

43:89 "Then bear with them (O Muhammad) and say: Peace. But they will come to know."

AM, Jesus turned water into wine, so Cheers!

AbdullahMikhail,

At best you're like playing cards with sister's kids.
Islam drinking rules and all this haughty talk about lying.
Come on.. every day jihad and your precious sharia produce staggering horrors.
If you're right it's a big misunderstanding. But I don't think so.. Islam started out bad, got worse, and will probably end poorly.
My community has a jewish elementary school behind concrete blocks (for 10 years now) A guy from a local mosque was killed fighting the Russians in Chechnya. There was a big terrorist arrest and conviction nearby. Al Qaeda named our city as a target. Those are some of my concerns.
I wouldn't put money on peace.
over and out

One continues to find anti-Christological substance in Islam: Yet another I just realized: The eucharist: wine becomes the blood of Christ, to be drunk for participation in his passion, a crucial part of being Christian.

While there have been certain Christian strands who have balked at using alcoholic wine (usually of the overly sincere Protestant branch, perhaps showing signs of residual obsessions with "purity" distantly echoing Islamic fanaticism), the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic churches have traditionally used wine.

And let us not forget all those pious Christian monks who for centuries during the Middle Ages not only drank wines and liqueurs and sold them, but pioneered in the refinement & distillation of them.

Abdullah Mikhail,

Who is your plastic surgeon? Sex change takes more then a few operations and healing time is measured in months!

P.S.
Isn't it your turn to stand on mt. Arafat these days?

Bull. This is pure bull, I don't buy it at all. Anyone with a working brain who learns about Islam avoids it like the plague that it is. That e-mail is FICTION, and not even good fiction.

One can only wonder why, Hesperado, you feel you have some divine right to engage in such disrespectful and unethical conduct toward others. You apparently don´t have the slightest hestiation to make all sorts of moronic comments about me, without knowing much of anything.

Non-Mulsim secularist? Since when? Yet again, you think you know my religious views and intentions better than I do?

This of course goes along with other garbage such as my being supposedly anti-Western, though you can´'t produce a single statement to that effect, and there can be little doubt I am more Western than you will probably ever be.

Most of my Svend White points were left unaddressed by you, though, in fairness, you are in good company there as nobody wanted to tackle them. Your engagement on Jihad did not produce any refutation of what I stated, which was clearly based on specific authors, works, and observable fact on JW itself.

fairuzfan, using the same tactic as "dave", the other Islam apologist who haunts JW, seizes on the least important part of my comments about him and expends 63 words on it right out of the starting box:

"One can only wonder why, Hesperado, you feel you have some divine right to engage in such disrespectful and unethical conduct toward others. You apparently don´t have the slightest hestiation to make all sorts of moronic comments about me, without knowing much of anything.

"Non-Mulsim secularist? Since when? Yet again, you think you know my religious views and intentions better than I do?"

Followed by a similar focus on a similarly tangential part of my comment:

"This of course goes along with other garbage such as my being supposedly anti-Western, though you can´'t produce a single statement to that effect, and there can be little doubt I am more Western than you will probably ever be.

Finally, he gets around to the substance, though still shying away from the center and mostly picking away at the outer periphery with his ineffectual fork:

"Most of my Svend White points were left unaddressed by you, though, in fairness, you are in good company there as nobody wanted to tackle them."

My comment specifically, though indirectly, had challenged fairuzfan to reproduce these "Svend White points" that supposedly so clearly show how he successfully undermined JW logic and how we JW defenders failed. Yet again, he fails to adduce them, not even a link, while only vaguely referring to that alleged evidence, as though that somehow carries any legitimate rhetorical weight at all.

"Your engagement on Jihad did not produce any refutation of what I stated, which was clearly based on specific authors, works, and observable fact on JW itself."

Ditto, cf. supra.

"A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes merry" says Ecclesiastes 10:19

Does the Bible permit drinking wine or alcohol? ...I found this link to be informative:

http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/does-bible-permit-drinking-wine-alcohol.html

Thanks champ -- excellent link. The author goes into the "unfermented grape juice" argument I have come across a few times (namely that Biblical mentions of wine are really referring to non-fermented grape juice), and he presents a good counter-argument.

Just as I thought. Abdullah has chosen to vanish -- for the 1000th time -- rather than meet a challenge he cannot face: namely, the challenge of "mikeymike" above.