At the bottom of the story it states:

"A cemetery employee said there is no problem if others want to place a flat memorial there but it would be removed if the family were to demand that."

In other words...the family will remove it. If there was ever proof this was an honor killing this is it.

"774"

Remember that number...

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 10, 2008 3:48 PM

Where can I send in my donation to give this true martyr and anti-jihad warrior a proper tomb?

Her family should have nothing to do with this. They are the breathing dead-souled Islamic bigots who helped kill her. Her family in death are non-Muslims who thank her for standing up to Islamic hate when so many are will to appease Muslim butchers.

Posted by: Max Publius at December 10, 2008 4:01 PM

Just read all. I'm sending my donation shortly. I hope this is more than a headstone. It should be a cathedral, and hey, how about a Canadian government building in her name instead of the unworthy political vermin usually so honored?

Posted by: Max Publius at December 10, 2008 4:07 PM

"17/774. No More!"

Perhaps a t-shirt with proceeds going to organizations that fight against jihad and/or go to help Muslim women escape.

Posted by: give me doughnuts at December 10, 2008 4:18 PM

"If not for a couple of her girlfriends, who put some flowers there, there would be nothing," said a disgusted Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress and author of Chasing a Mirage, The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State. "It's disgraceful."

"That girl was not a number," adds Imam Syed Soharwardy, of the Al-Mamadinah Islamic Centre in Calgary and national president of Islamic Supreme Council of Canada. "She had a name and a life. It makes me sick."

Based on these comments, it'd be even better if Tarek and Imam Syed led the way for this headstone campaign instead of non-Muslims. That would be the honorable thing to do for Aqsa....not just for restoring Aqsa's honor, but the Canadian ummah's as well.

Posted by: yadayada at December 10, 2008 4:42 PM

There is nothing nefarous about not marking a grave with a memorial, this is that we are required to leave at the grave of a Muslim, just a marker.

This is simple basic Islam...why am I not shocked that Robert doesn't know this?

Just further proof that he is not a scholar of anything "Islamic".

Robert, some day you should try to study for the purpose of actually learning rather than to just dig up inflammatory garbage for shock value and self promotion.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 10, 2008 4:44 PM

What kind of people could treat their own child like that? What kind of monstrous ideology creates people who are that far removed from the human affection and attachment that any normal parent would have for their child?

It is indeed disgraceful. And in so many different ways.

Posted by: Mo at December 10, 2008 4:51 PM

Abdullah, Spencer & most here do not support the dishonor of honor killing or dishonor of the victim as Islam does, that's all. Get the picture?

Posted by: Sounder at December 10, 2008 4:52 PM

Abdullah Mikail -

Take your insults and accusations elsewhere.

The point is that this young woman shouldn't be dead to begin with.

If not for Islamic ideology and traditions, she would be enjoying her life and looking forward to a long and bright future - the same way any 16 year old girl should be allowed to do.

Posted by: Mo at December 10, 2008 4:56 PM

Mo,

Her death is tragic and her murderers will pay for it.

But there is no such thing as honor killing in Islam...this is the ignorance infecting third world chauvanistic cultures.

The Quran itself forbids this action, this concept...there is no such thing as "murder to preserve honor."

And it is no insult to point out what Robert can easily research and prove to himself, as I know he can read both English and Arabic.

Right, Robert?

Sounder,

"Abdullah, ... Get the picture?"

Kind of a stupid thing for somoen to say, but I can easily forgive ignorance...now, persistant ignorance? Insistance upon remaining ignorant? No, I have no patience for that.

There is no such thing as "honor killing" in Islam.

Peace
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 10, 2008 5:16 PM

"If not for a couple of her girlfriends, who put some flowers there, there would be nothing."

If not for infidels and the quasi-apostate Muslims Against Sharia nobody would care about this girl. Why is it that Muslims are so shameless in their lack of respect for women who dare to be human? Just human. That was all she wanted. To not live her life as an undead corpse, sex-slave baby factory. What was always expected of me, what any decent human being is entitled to was all she ever wanted and it cost her her life. This is why I can't sympathize with Muslims. Because people who do things like this and who then have the gall to handle it the way they do are just not quite human to me. Humans don't kill their children. You should see the way feral cats deal with their children (my mom has a feral colony, all fixed these days). They would never abandon their babies for a minute, let alone kill them.

Posted by: jdamn at December 10, 2008 5:19 PM

You need to talk to Mufti Ebrahim Desai for he says it is ok to put the name and date on the marker…

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=11613

In story above Imam Syed Soharwardy, Al-Mamadinah Islamic Centre in Calgary, the same Islamist who went after Ezra Levant said…

“Soharwardy knows of "100 graves of women" killed because their families felt their actions brought disrespect upon them and their extreme version of Islam. And anybody "telling you" it is Islamic tradition to bury a person in an unnamed grave, says Soharwardy, is out-and-out "wrong."”

So is he wrong? Come on Abdullah Mikail, why are you correcting us, and not going on a “jihad” to correct people like Soharwardy? Are you telling me you apologist can’t get your stories straight?

I say you should march up there now, and correct this poor misguided brother, and explain to him the true burying practices of Muslims!

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 10, 2008 5:24 PM

Abdullah Mikail

Read the post above? How are you going to handle this? Are you going to keep correcting us, or are you going to correct your fellow muslims?

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 10, 2008 5:26 PM

"According to the UN’s Special Rapporteur “honour killings had been reported in Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey and Yemen”. Egypt is 90 percent Muslim, Iran 98 percent, Jordan 92 percent, Lebanon 60 percent, Morocco 99 percent, Pakistan 97 percent, the Syrian Arab Republic 90 percent and Turkey 99 percent. Of the 192 member-states of the United Nations almost all honour killings take place in nine overwhelmingly Muslim countries. Denial is not an option."

Farrukh Saleem, Pakistan Daily Times http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\12\19\story_19-12-2007_pg3_4

Posted by: Sounder at December 10, 2008 5:36 PM

Where can I send in my donation to give this true martyr and anti-jihad warrior a proper tomb?
Posted by: Max Publius

Pamela has started an Aqsa Parvez Headstone Memorial Fund. As I write this she has posted donations totaling $216. The article states that it takes $580 for a simple headstone. I imagine her father could have it removed even if he expressed his wishes from death row, convicted of her murder. Disgusting.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/12/canada-no-heads.html#comments

*TypePad Alert: 3rd try*

Posted by: Richard at December 10, 2008 5:36 PM

greatcometof1577

My fellow Muslims don't get it wrong, but you seem to do with monotonous regularity.

And those Muslim who get it wrong do not make a concerted effort to blast all over the media what is a known fallacy in support of an insidious agenda...so, guess where I will be posting?

Peace
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 10, 2008 5:41 PM

Abdullah Mikail

Question…

You say Mr. Spencer does not have the training to understand Islam, yet this Imam disputes what you are saying, and an Imam has more experience and training than you do? Correct?

More on Imam Syed B. Soharwardy…

http://www.m-a-t.org/syed.htm

Tell me why he is wrong? Give us evidence from the Quran or ahadith?

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 10, 2008 5:53 PM

"But there is no such thing as honor killing in Islam...this is the ignorance infecting third world chauvanistic cultures."

Even if this was true - why does Islam do nothing to change it?

It's the same with FGM - why does Islam do nothing to change this practice?

It's the same with dressing women in giant hefty bags - of that's right - that's halal. Islam is to blame for that crime against women. I'm sure if you work at it you can find someway to blame it on somebody else.

Posted by: tanstaafl at December 10, 2008 6:11 PM

Her grave is privately owned by someone, most likely her parents. If you put anything on her grave without the owners' permission, they can have it removed (probably at your expense).

Perhaps a memorial plaque could be put somewhere else in her honour; say, at her high school? A more public location might have more widespread influence on other young Muslims who attend her school and might let them know the rest of the world cares about their freedom and their lives.

Of course, that wouldn't address the indignity of lying in an unmarked grave. But I think it is the responsibility of the local Muslim community to shame the family into buying her a headstone or to raise the money amongst themselves and then get the family to agree to have it placed on her grave.

Posted by: Josephine at December 10, 2008 6:23 PM

But I think it is the responsibility of the local Muslim community to shame the family into buying her a headstone or to raise the money amongst themselves and then get the family to agree to have it placed on her grave.
from comment above

That isn't going to happen. I've already chipped in and I think what Pamela intends is wonderful, but I think she should change her plan. The suggestion of a memorial at her school is a very good one. I believe Aqsa's family and the Muslim community will not permit her grave to be marked.

Posted by: Richard at December 10, 2008 6:34 PM

There is no such thing as "honor killing" in Islam.

Peace
Abdullah Mikail
Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 10, 2008 5:16 PM

More double speak, FullOfAdbullah probably is trying to say she had no honor.

So it was a "no honor killing".

Posted by: revparadigm at December 10, 2008 6:48 PM

Abdullah Mikail

Another Question (slightly off topic)…considering you are the expert on Islam, right? Plus it might give us some insight on your view of the murder of Aqsa Parvez…

In response to an article by Eboo Patel, you state that the punishment for the girl who was raped in Saudi Arabia is just, not because she was raped, but because she was in the company of another man.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2007/12/ayaan_hirsi_ali_and_muslim_dir.html

You state:

“On the subject of Sharia law and prescribed punishments, nothing is brutal about the deterrent when compared to the ultimate punishment for committing the crime despite the deterrent with no regret or remorse - in arrogance, and what follows that is the punishment from God. The punishment in this life is easier by far.”

“The obfuscation of the young woman’s case is a deplorable twist of the media taking focus away from what she was guilty of and making it seem as though she were being punished for being raped. No, that is not the case. She is being punished for violating the law which came to light when her case was revealed…she was given a lighter sentence for having been within the private company of a non family member male, then despite her guilt she fought the courts judgment and lost again and was handed a more severe punishment. The other crime she is not being penalized for as it is her attackers that were tried and convicted for that.”

You go on to explain your view of Hirsi Ali, and why Muslims need not answer to any non-Muslim. Now, based on your comments, it is clear you have no issues with this punishment. In other words, you would support (based on the statement above), if in America we adopted such laws, punishing (whipping, or beating) a woman for being within the private company of a non family member male. Am I wrong?

Should Aqsa Parvez have been punished for not being a good Muslim? Second, would you support laws in Canada, or the USA, that would have punished her in line with Sharia, like in the case you seem to support in Saudi Arabia?

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 10, 2008 7:01 PM

From post above: But there is no such thing as honor killing in Islam...this is the ignorance infecting third world chauvanistic cultures.

'Maybe'(??) there is no honor killing in Islam, but there seems to be a lot of it among Muslims just the same.

Maybe you, Abdullah, should open a clinic and diagnostic center for 'honor killing' prone muslims...Preventive medicine...Then you would be doing something...

Abdullah showing up with his bull on this thread is disrespectful to Aqsa Parvez...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 10, 2008 7:12 PM

greatcometof157...Those are good questions...I bet he wont answer, and if he does it will be with a string of obfuscations...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 10, 2008 7:20 PM

MIKHAIL: "But there is no such thing as honor killing in Islam...this is the ignorance infecting third world chauvanistic cultures."

So, the pre-Islamic ignorance persists inside Darul Islam 1400 years after the Prophet Muhammad. And how about that folks, third world cultures are "chauvanistic"! Mikhail, that could be construed as a racist comment.

Meanwhile, is there ANYTHING ANYWHERE in the Islamic tradition that exempts parents from punishment for killing their children?

We await your response Mikhail.

Posted by: Cornelius at December 10, 2008 8:34 PM

Canadian jihadwatchers might consider clubbing together and donating, to the library of the school Aqsa used to attend, and perhaps also to the nearest municipal library, an 'In Memoriam Aqsa Parvez' information pack.

A dvd of 'Submission'. Nonie Darwish - 'Now They Call Me Infidel'. Ayaan Hirsi Ali - 'Infidel'. Betty Mahmoody - 'Not Without My Daughter'. Phyllis Chesler - 'My Afghan Captivity'. "Cassandra" - '33 Secrets Arab Men Never Tell American Women', and 'Escape from an Arab Marriage'. Rosemary Sookhdeo, wife of Canon Patrick Sookhdeo - 'Stepping Into the Shadows' - an account, drawn from her pastoral observations as wife of an ex-Muslim-turned-Anglican-priest, of what happens to western women in the UK who convert to Islam, usually because they fell for a Muslim man.

And Miriam Ali's "Without Mercy", pub. by Warner Books, 1995; she married a Yemeni Muslim man in the UK, and the book tells the story of her daughters being abducted by their father - when they were in their early teens - and sold as wives in Yemen.

One could probably add Marjane Satrapi's 'Persepolis' and Geraldine Brook's 'Nine Parts of Desire'; I don't think either of these, though neither sees the full extent of what Islam does to women, nor explains how completely Muslim abuse of women is rooted in core Muslim theology and religious texts and law, would leave schoolgirl readers in any doubt of how awful it is, generally speaking, to be a Muslim woman in a Muslim country. It is Brooks, after all, who includes in her book the fact that a British police study discovered that women in the UK with Muslim husbands were eight times more likely to be murdered by their husbands, than women with husbands of any other faith or no faith.

Canadian Christians could add, to their parish library, all of the above, plus - particularly for the benefit of the teenage girls - Bilquis Sheikh, 'I Dared to Call Him Father', and Sister Gulshan Esther's 'The Torn Veil'. Both (one the story of a wealthy Pakistani Muslim divorcee, one the story of a crippled, unmarriageable Pakistani Muslim teenage girl from a wealthy well-educated family) tell what happens to a woman, even if she comes from a supposedly 'moderate' and 'westernised' Muslim family, if she converts to Christianity. I read those books in the early 1990s; indeed, I think it was in those books that I learnt, straight from the horse's mouth, one of the central elements of sharia: the rule that if someone is a Muslim, and then leaves Islam, they must be killed.

Aqsa Parvez may have been killed at least in part because her father feared she might be going to apostasize, due to her increasing adoption of un-Islamic behaviour and un-Islamic dress.

If the school library or municipal library won't take the information pack, Aqsa's non-Muslim friends could be encouraged to form a rebel book club and read and discuss them, themselves.

If they know the full ugliness of the religio-political matrix that their Muslim female schoolmates are trapped inside, they will be in a position to recognise the mortal risk run by girls who, like Aqsa, are showing signs of wanting to break free from the prison that is Islam; and they may be better able to help such potential defectors.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at December 10, 2008 9:02 PM

But there is no such thing as honor killing in Islam...this is the ignorance infecting third world chauvanistic cultures.

Abdullah,

Forgive me, but I can't help noticing you haven't posted anything since you derailed the Why Resist the Jihad? thread a week ago. Why did you choose this thread to break your fast? Couldn't stand the sympathy for Ms. Parvez? Had to bust it up? Couldn't even muster an Islamic prayer for her?

By the way, when you're ready, but not on this thread, please don't forget that we have some outstanding issues:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023582.php#c602646
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023455.php#c599325

Again, not this thread. This is holy ground.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 10, 2008 10:28 PM

Abdullah....... Are you saying honour killings are not allowed or are you saying this practice does not happen. Since it happens so often I would say it is allowed by Muslims even if it is not allowed in the Quran.

Posted by: blownaway at December 11, 2008 2:06 AM

Mohammad's great accomplishment was to stop the practice of burying girls like Aqsa alive. Instead, he dictated that they be quickly murdered, like a goat, then thrown in a hole before sunset.

Abdullah--you unreconstructed Muslim bigots do indeed disallow tombs. That's why when the Wahhabis arrived in Bosnia, they went around smashing Muslim tombs they described as un-Islamic influences from Christianity.

Posted by: Max Publius at December 11, 2008 7:45 AM

I do think it's a lovely gesture, both generous and kind.

A friend of my family was murdered when she was 17 (24 years ago and it's still unsolved but it wasn't an "honour" killing).

I wouldn't be surprised if her grave was still unmarked, due to family poverty. I have always wished I could put a plaque on her grave. Maybe someday I will be able to afford it.

Posted by: Josephine at December 11, 2008 8:46 AM

"Abdullah....... Are you saying honour killings are not allowed"

Posted by: blownaway at December 11, 2008 2:06 AM

Yes, blownaway, I am saying that it is not allowed.

Yes, I am aware that peeople commit this crime, as they do many others...what I am saying is it is forbidden, it is not allowed, it is against Islam to do as such.

You will also find a plethora of "Muslims" that own gas stations that sell both cigarrettes and alcohol...both of these substances are haram.

Same problem...ignorance or arrogance and insistence upon doing what they know is wrong and then them trying to pull the masque of "religion" over it by making excuses and "shopping for hadiths" to support their crimes.

A wiser insight has not been made here by any other JW blogger...yes, blownaway, you understand what I am saying.

Peace
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 9:47 AM

AM is just taking yet another opportunity to attempt to hijack a thread, take swipes at Robert, and insult the rest of us, for how "ignorant" we are.

Abdullah,

Is it "haram" for this child to have a marker with her name on it, rather than her Borg designation?

Are there no headstones in Islam?

Posted by: Stormwarning at December 11, 2008 10:32 AM

"There is nothing nefarous[sic] about not marking a grave with a memorial, this is that we are required to leave at the grave of a Muslim, just a marker."
-Abdullah Mikail

“Soharwardy knows of "100 graves of women" killed because their families felt their actions brought disrespect upon them and their extreme version of Islam. And anybody "telling you" it is Islamic tradition to bury a person in an unnamed grave, says Soharwardy, is out-and-out "wrong."”
-From the article.

Once again, Abdullah seems to be arguing with the wrong people.

Posted by: Abu Allah at December 11, 2008 10:34 AM

I see that people have been eating Abby's lunch again.

Anyway, when Muhammad invented the Qur'an , "revealing" verses over time to suit his historical needs, along with some gratuitous lifting from other doctrines, he could not know that his book would not answer all things for all time, but in hindsight, it is painfully obvious that it doesn't.

Suicide for example, which is prohibited in the Qur'an, which has been worked-around by Islamic scholars. In modern times, with modern weaponry, explosives and what not, the suicide bomber has been revered as a martyr by the likes of Qaradawi and others. The intent of killing enemies of Allah is the prime mlotivational force, the inevitable suicide of the act secondary, and thus permissible and forgiven. It ceases to be suicide. Muhammad could not legislate on what did not exist and the concept of the suicide scimitar-wielder is absurd on its own face.

Obfuscators of Islam like Abdullah try, fail, and yet try again to have us believe that Islam is a perfect system with unambiguous, iron-clad rules and mores. It is utter poppycock. One Muslim's heresy is another's piety, and with the deficiencies of, and ambiguities contained within the Qur'an, coupled with a lack of a centralized authority, each Muslim's interpretation of Islam is correct and nearly all actions by all Muslims will find support from some faction of the global Muslim community.

That hypothesis was proven here in this thread regarding grave markings. It is also proven on a daily basis by the words and actions of Muslims themselves. "Terrorism", as we know it today, is disproportionately representative solely in the Muslim community currently, as are "honor killings". In light of this incontravertible evidence, who should care whether or not they are true or permissible in Islam?

Any infidel killed by a Muslim, or even Muslims killed by their own, whether it be deemed by Jihad or by Hiraba, or honor killings as opposed to outright murder, are they any less dead?

Posted by: awake at December 11, 2008 11:12 AM

Let's be clear, the right to "honor killing", at least as far as the right of parents to kill their children or their children's children, is explicitly affirmed in Islamic law which may be why this "tradition" is considered Islamic. The punishments for adultery and apostasy are equally lethal.

Jordan King Abdallah presented a bill outlining
stiff penalties for honor killings, but parliament rejected it, stating, "it [punishing honor killings]would encourage adultery and create new Lsocial problems." Four years later, honor killings
accounted for one-third of all violent deaths in Jordan (in 2005) where perpetrators received
as little as six months in prison under the penal code. Early last year, a Jordanian man who
murdered his sister because he thought she had a lover was given a three-month sentence, which was suspended for time served, allowing him to walk free.

Iraq offers no punishment. A 17-year-old named Rand Abdel-Qader was killed by her father because she had a crush on a British soldier. The arresting Iraqi sergeant stated that "not much can be done when we have an ‘honor killing' case. You are in a Muslim society and women should live under religious laws." So honor killing is Islamic or not? The father also killed his wife, who left him after the murder of their daughter. He will not be prosecuted for either murder in Iraq. Why not?

'Umdat al salik the classic Shafi'i manual of law certified by Al Azhar
0.1.0pp582 Who is subject to retaliation for injurious crimes?
Retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right. The following are not subject to retaliation:
--a Muslim killing a non-Muslim
--a Jewish or Christians subject of the Islamic State for killing an apostate from Islam
(O: killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences)
--a father or mother (or their fathers and mothers) for killing their offspring, or their offspring's offspring.

No retaliation, no punishment, for killing a non-Muslim, for killing a Muslim who leaves Islam or parents for killing their offspring.

Posted by: Nick Danger at December 11, 2008 11:51 AM

Abdullah,

Yours seems to be a convenient, succinct answer, but it does not fit the reality.

It sure seems that only Muslims do this with any regularity for the last 14 centuries. It seems it is a situationally reflexive expression of logically derived Qur'anic principles by an Islamically hypertrophied male ego thoroughly inculcated in Islamic misogyny, Islamic false piety, and Islamic vigilanteeism. It seems to be a predictable result of the imbibition of Islamic tenets.

http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1699
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina50128.htm

The Risala : A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh
Chapter 37. Judgements on Homicide and Hadd-Punishments

37.3b. The tariff for wilful [sic] killing

The blood money for murder, if accepted, in camels is 25 four year old she-camels, 25 five year old she-camels, 25 three year old she camels and 25 two year old she-camels The blood money for accidental homicide is 20 of each type and 20 male three year old camels.

[ If blood money is accepted or retaliation impossible due to the disparity, then the camels consist of these four types: 25 which are hiqqa, 25 which are jadha'a, 25 which are bint labûn, and 25 which are bint makhâd. In the case of the accidental killing, there are twenty of each of the four categories, as well as twenty three-year old male camels (ibn labûn). The blood money for intentional killing has less categories than the accidental killing, even thought the number is the same.

[Male camels are less valuable than female ones.]

37.3c. When a father kills his son

The blood money is made more exacting in the case a father who kills his son by throwing a piece of iron at him and killing him. He is not put to death for his death, but he must pay 30 five year old she-camels, 30 four year old she-camels and 40 khalifas, which are pregnant camels. It is said that the 'aqila [the tribe] pay that and it is also said that it comes from his own property.

[ This includes anything which he does without the intention to kill him. He is not executed because of the respect for fatherhood. If circumstances indicate the he actually intended to kill him, then he is killed for him in the well-known position.

[Ashhab takes the position of Abu Hanifa and ash-Shafi'i that the father is not killed for his son because he was the reason for his existence. Included in this judgement are mothers and grandparents.]
There is disagreement about who pays the blood money. The well-known position is that the killer, father or anyone else, pays it immediately and it is not delayed. If he has property at that time, it is taken from him. Otherwise it awaits his wealth. It is said that this heavier blood money is owed by the 'aqila (tribe). Ibn al-'Arabi says that it is the tribe which pays the blood money. It is said that it comes out of his own property if he has property. If he does not, then the tribe pays it.]

37.4. The tariff for other than Muslim men

37.4a. Half the tariff

The blood money of a woman is half that of a man. The same applies to the blood money of Kitabis, and their women is half of that of their men.

[The blood money of a free Muslim woman is half that of a free Muslim man. So her blood money is fifty camels, in fourths or fifths according to whether the killing is accidental or deliberate. The more severe form [if the victim is a daughter] is 2/3rds of 16 and a third of camels from every type. In money, it is 500 gold dinars and 6000 silver dirhams.

The same is true for the Jews and Christians. It is half that of the Muslims based on what an-Nasa'i reports that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "The blood wit of the people of the dhimma is half that of the Muslims. There is half of that blood money for Kitabi women.]
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ABewley/RisAhkam.html

Obviously, a father's life is worth more than half his daughter's, so he cannot be put to death.

My questions to you, Abdullah: If this practice is so un-Islamic, then why were the conclusions of the ulema in 'Umdat al Salik near identical to those who produced the Maliki Risala? Why is it so frequent, and treated so leniently in Islamic countries? If Mr. Parvez was your brother, how would you have reacted to Aqsa's murder? What would you expect to be his penalty assuming the published facts are true? Would you respect the death penalty?

And, more personally still, do you mourn her death in any way, or do you merely resent the public inspection of Islam her death has brought? And, what have you done to try to prevent this being accepted and God forbid recurring in your local Islamic community?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 11, 2008 11:56 AM

“Even if this was true” “It's the same with FGM”
Posted by: tanstaafl at December 10, 2008 6:11 PM

Your questions are asked on the erroneous assumption that nothing is being done.

There is legislation in Islam that forbids both, the problem is with the human being not applying them.

Islam is a set of rules that a person must apply…if that person fails to apply the rules, how is it the fault of the rule?

There is no “crime against women” for rules about modest dress…I have my rules as well and I follow them.

No one is allowed to force anyone to abide by these rules, that is coercion, and yes it does happen in Saudi…but also, kingship is forbidden in Islam, and that also happens in Saudi, doesn’t it?

So Saudi is not the shining example of Islam people try to make it.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 12:41 PM

“Why did you choose this thread to break your fast?”

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 10, 2008 10:28 PM

If you follow up on many recent JW older articles you will see I responded to a few when I could get to them.

This particular article is posted on FPM as well as here and there was a serious misunderstanding about marking graves.

People should not project negative bias into something they don’t understand. A simple basic marker is all that is required and it is very common…people tried to spin this into an “adding insult to injury” sort of thing and make the simple marker into something it wasn’t.

Take issue with something real, don’t make up something that isn’t real and then take issue with it…her demise is tragic and very sad enough and a major problem in and of itself as well as being coupled with the misperception that “honor killing” is allowed in Islam when it is actually condemned, these two are the major issues and the major problem we should focus on…we shouldn’t be playing spin doctor and twisting non-issues into further problems and clouding the real issue.
That’s basically it.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 12:49 PM

"Again, not this thread. This is holy ground."

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 10, 2008 10:28 PM

All ground is sacred:

“I guess I'll have to take your rain check on the original "Bunche Report".”

The Bunche Report can be independently verified evidenced from when I posted the confessions to the initial assassination, by Stern Gang members, of Count Folke Bernadotte.

The opening comment of the report was thus verified:

“The UN Report Prepared in 1948 for Ralphe Bunche, New UN Commissioner to Palestine.

Foreword: In view of the tragic assassination of Count Folke Bernadotte by identified Jewish terrorists on September 17 of this year, the following report has been prepared for the use of Dr. Bunche, Count Bernadotte's immediate replacement. “

Having this being proven true and valid, I have no doubt with time every article cited in the report can be independantly proven. I rest this case and will spend no further time chasing it down.

“How much different, and less fearful of and less isolated from posterity is Christianity:”

Anas ibn Maalik, hadith sahih “Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim.’”

Primary meaning is the knowledge that is most beneficial, Islam, but included is knowledge of the truth, all knowledge.

We are challenged to look at the world around us and study reality and reflect upon the truth…not to studying a previous revelation that has fallen into edit and change by men..this is not something we are encouraged to do.

“(I was actually proud of you above where you admitted there was a Jewish Temple, though)”

What is there to have been proud of?

Baitul Maqdis (Masjid Al Aqsa) was built by Abraham forty years after Masjid Al Haram. The fact that somewhere in time there existed a Jewish temple in the same area should not confuse people about what existed first. It is just a fact, and the Romans razed the Jewish temple to the ground. End of story. Turn to a new chapter.

“to confirm his "bonafides"”

Every messenger came with credentials, Mohammad came with the Quran and miracles that supported him. Jesus came with similar…it is the mark of a messenger bearing a book that they were all supported by miracles.

"My understanding of Islamic soteriology is that, yes, your works are weighed..."

Once again you miss the core of faith.

Tawheed is where it all must start.

And with sincerity in one’s faith in Tawheed you are going to get in to Heaven. What happens in between is the grading you are talking about.

The critical error in your thinking is the absence of true faith in the absolute Sovereignty and Oneness of God.

To oversimplify it for you, the only unforgiveable sin that God has notified man of that will prevent one from entering heaven is Shirk, the association of partners with God.

The one thing that will ensure entry into Heaven is Tawheed, pure faith in One and only One God, Sovereign above and separate entirely from His creation, in absolute control of all things, period, and the rest you mentioned is what human beings will be “graded on”, obedience to God…this determines what state you exist in prior to entering Heaven and what state in Heaven you exist in for eternity some are better than others.

All those who have passed away before with pure Tawheed shall have no fear that God will ever reduce their reward (i.e. prevent them from entering Heaven.)

God mentions this three times directly in the Quran:

Surat Al Baqara 2:62

“Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

Surat Al Hajj 22:17

“Those who b:elieve (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- Allah will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for Allah is witness of all things.”

Surat Al Maeda 5:69

Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

With this knowledge, there is no need desire or impulse to study anything that has passed before. That message was for the people of that time. This message, the Quran, is for the people of all time.

“Question number 2: What is it exactly about spending eternity with houris that honors and glorifies God and enables you to appreciate HIS majesty and holiness; that is, what is theocentric about it?”

This is simply the existent state of mankind, from the start with Adam and Hawa (Eve). We are created with a companion, and if you study the topic of houris you will find that this is the believing husband and the believing wife in Heaven. It is an existence of similitude yet perfect and unlike anything in life we have experienced…some small portions of it are described and it goes way beyond the things people here harp on…way beyond. You should study what Islam teached about the nature of heaven beyond just digging for “the 72” (ad nauseum...) .

And lastly on the ecumenical moment, you commented “That is Christianity” and I close with “That is (modern interpretations) of Chrsitianity” and not what Jesus actually taught people.

Peace
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 1:28 PM

First things first: screw abby for hijacking this thread.

On Topic: I just bopped over to Atlas and the total is now up to $1163. I see Andrew Bostom has made a contribution. Also a very generous donation from a Bjorn Larsen. I don't know who Mr. Larsen is but I'm impressed. Pamela writes that she and Robert have been in contact with the cemetary and are moving forward. I would like to see some assurance that a proper headstone would not be removed from this girls grave. But lacking such assurance - place it anyway! If these donations keep coming in, and I think they will, it will be possible to both provide the headstone and to create a memorial that cannot be removed at the will of poor, murdered Aqsa's family. Her school has been suggested as a appropriate location for such a memorial. Any other suggestions for a proper location? It should be a place where it would be difficult (if not impossible) to deface it.

I think it would be fitting to list on such a memorial the location of her grave: Section 17, plot number 774, in the Meadowvale Cemetery in Brampton. That way if (and when) her family has the headstone removed the bastiges will know that they have failed to erase her identity in death.

Three employees where I work died on 9/11. They were on board the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. The company sponsored a memorial in that is placed in a park near our workplace. See it here:
http://shared.bss.boeing.com/bnn/2005/2005-09/2005-09-19/2005-09-19_eleven.html

Now that is a fine memorial. Since I'm not sure the above link will work outside of my work intranet you can also read about these fellows who lost their lives here:
http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2002/september/mainfeature1.html

The story today however is Aqsa's. I mention my coworkers to show how many people have been affected by jihad and to show how powerful a fitting memorial can be.

Posted by: Richard at December 11, 2008 2:43 PM

Posted by: Richard at December 11, 2008 2:43 PM

Real champion of civility there...right to the emotional core of the issue, and yet failing universally to address the real problem.

Seems some people are always erecting monuments to remind them, yet they fail to build institutions...they always harp about the bitter past and yet do not work towards a better future.

Aqsa has gone on to the comfort and the reward of God and there are those of us here who will remember her in the best way and do our best to see that life improves for those around us.

Unlike some who want to use her misfortune as a segue to cause more misfortune to others.

Aqsa does not need your monument...you need it.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 3:04 PM

Abdullah Mikail may your next life on earth be that of a Hindu women taken slave by a muslim and become what the koran teaches about slave women. that would be karmic justice.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at December 11, 2008 4:18 PM

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at December 11, 2008 4:18 PM

Oh, pushaw!

You and your twisted fantasies, Zena!

: )
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 11, 2008 4:28 PM

Abdullah Mikail

I think is safe to assume Abdullah Mikail agrees with corporal punishment for women who are alone with a male who is not a family member. I assume this because he has not refuted his own comments from my comment above directed to him, and he has ignored the questions I set for him. Silence speaks volumes on such a charge, and his own words should condemn him to the outer reaches of civilized men.

With this fact now established, We can also assume that Abdullah Mikail does not agree with equal protection under law for women and men. Thus he believes that women are inferior, at least on this earth. Of course all this is in line with Islamic Law, so it should not surprise any of us.

So in conclusion, Abdullah Mikail is a sexist and a segregationist. A bigot of the highest order, and he should be treated the same way a Klu Klux Klan member would be, which is shunned by civilized men and women. It is righteous to fight against such oppressors, like Abdullah Mikail, who would see women flogged for being in the company of men, no matter how innocent. The restrictions he would be in favor of would reduce 50% of this population to servitude. It should not matter if he wishes to do this “divine work” in a peaceful manner, or in a violent manner.

His goals and values are abhorrent, and thus must be defeated. It once again proves that Islam is not compatible with a modern civilized state, or with the American Constitution. Like the abolitionist movement of the 19th century, who crushed the accursed slavery of the bodies of man, thus so to must we work to defeat this slavery of the minds of man to a book conjured up by a dead Arabian warlord and bigot.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 11, 2008 4:33 PM

Mikhail,

You have deliberately avoided responding to the specific rulings in Islamic jurisprudence offered by Nick Danger December 11, 2008 11:51 AM:

'Umdat al salik the classic Shafi'i manual of law certified by Al Azhar
0.1.0pp582 Who is subject to retaliation for injurious crimes?
Retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right. The following are not subject to retaliation:
--a Muslim killing a non-Muslim
--a Jewish or Christians subject of the Islamic State for killing an apostate from Islam
(O: killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences)
--a father or mother (or their fathers and mothers) for killing their offspring, or their offspring's offspring.

We're all waiting.

Posted by: Cornelius at December 11, 2008 4:43 PM

This sick mind certainly has said the truth: Aqsa has no need of a monument, you do.

Yes, you idiot, that is the point of memorials. The dead know why they're dead, if you believe in that kind of thing. The living erect monuments (first-grade time, and this is an insult to first-graders) to help remember the loveliness and value of that person, and to remind others of any object moral (gosh, there's that word again) lessons to be taken away and used to build a better society.

Guess what I hope the living take away from that memorial? "Huh, I wonder why this is the only grave with a monument? Who was this Aqsa? Why did she die so young? To what or whom can we attribute her death? How can I keep the women in my community from being its next victims?"

But, again, coming from an ummah whose goals are destruction and death, you wouldn't know that. I don't expect you to. Muslims will never understand the foundations of Western thinking, and the emphasis on the Golden Rule, or the unconditional love of their God.

You will keep it under your little hat, and no young people will question Islam's fascist and totalitarian barbarianism because you choose to put your hands over your eyes and say "Nothing to see here...move along!"

And for pete's sake. Answer the questions posed to you. You're maddening.

Posted by: winoceros at December 11, 2008 4:52 PM

You will keep it under your little hat...

Wino, I think you pegged Texan Muslims perfectly: big boots and little hats.

*3rd attempt to post*

Posted by: Richard at December 11, 2008 5:26 PM

Greatcomet, good point now that you mention it. "Abdullah's" support of such punishment is rather hypocritical to say the least. His wife, Dr. Nia MacKay is a microbiologist, and I have no doubt that her career prevents her from always having the accompaniment of a male relative when leaving the house.

Posted by: Abu Allah at December 11, 2008 6:33 PM

Abdullah,

No respect for the dead, eh?

I won't respond at length, but your apologetics are certainly in decline. You should read Athanasius, On the Incarnation, before you so haughtily dismiss Christian monotheism. You clearly know nothing about it. Bunche Report: you "rest your case", well then you failed. All of the incidents may be true. Anyone could produce a list of much more egregious "palestian" atrocities, and pretend it had international governance sanction. And the Islamic knowledge quest: sad attempt. You are a closed mind in a closed minded religion. That's how you protect your "faith"; you avoid challenging it. Islam has no pre-Mohametan history, and you know it. It's ALL Jewish and Christian history. Nothing to support Mohammad's lineage, no explanation for God's (and please start using the term "Allah"; it is not "God") abandonment of Ishmael, the loss of his legacy and the lack of historical continuity with Mohammad. No vorlages of Mohammad's warped narrative or contradictary teachings, no artifacts documenting his fables. Nada.

Aqsa was a Western martyr. She died on the alter of Western worship of the idol of multiculturalism. Her blood stains every one of us who have passively allowed this vicious set of political doctrines to take root and masquerade as "religion". She is the victim of every police officer who agrees not to report domestic abuse, every paramedic who agrees not to report FGM, and every citizen who reads about such stories and continues his life unchanged, eats a halal meal, or buys a Shariah compliant share.

Pretending this is not an Islamic problem will not cut it, Abdullah. Work towards fixing it, or you remain part of the problem, and may find the extrinsic solution not to your liking. Spend some part of today preaching against honor killing on an Islamic website. Come back and tell us how you fared (with a link). Otherwise you have NO legitimacy here.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 8:20 AM

"Otherwise you have NO legitimacy here."

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 8:20 AM

How deluded are you to that that I need validation from you?

You are the one seeking validation, not I.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 12, 2008 10:43 AM

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 11, 2008 4:33 PM

Assume whatever you like...spell it first.

ASS U ME.

Don't be an Ass.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 12, 2008 10:46 AM

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 11, 2008 4:33 PM

Assume whatever you like you will any way...but first, spell it:

ASS-U-ME

When one makes an assumption he makes and ass out of himself and others.

Don't be an ass.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 12, 2008 10:47 AM

How deluded are you to that [sic] that I need validation from you? You are the one seeking validation, not I.

You not only need it, you crave it. That's why you come here, because your coreligionists won't pretend your musings about a "peaceful" Shariah-inflicting Islam are tenable, so you try to soak us in it. You are completely out of steam here with your taqiyya.

All I sought was to open your mind about the vacancy of your ahistorical malevolent "religion".

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 11:30 AM

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 11:30 AM

"All I sought was to open your mind about the vacancy of your ahistorical malevolent "religion".

A final admission that there was no altruism in you? That is very telling...

"That's why you come here" another projection bias?

Tell me, then, what was my motivation in logging on here, since you seem to read minds now?

What purpose was it that made me come here and put up with you and half a dozen other obnoxious bloggers?

I learned a lot from you in our exchanges.

No, I am sorry for you, but you were fake from "hello."

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 12, 2008 5:01 PM

Abdullah,

A final admission that there was no altruism in you?

The least common denominator of "altruism" is that you don't intentionally leave someone in their error, even if it is painful. If you were happy in your marriage, but I knew your wife was having an affair, I would tell you, even though I knew it would ruin your life. If you had cancer, but assumed you just were having a bug, I would tell you even though it would devastate you.

What purpose was it that made me come here and put up with you and half a dozen other obnoxious bloggers?

It is this. You have embraced Islam, and you know there is no turning back. You are committed in your marriage, and you've produced a child, whom you love. these things are admirable. You have a nice life, it has structure and meaning. But deep inside, you find faults with your new faith. You resolve this by projecting onto others, by becoming the "super-Muslim" capable of resolving all of the difficulties into a palatable, though distorted confection. Faithful Muslims practicing traditional Islam offend you, so you label them murtadd or errant. But preaching your self-modified Islam to your co-religionists would be to dangerous to your pleasant fictitious microcosm, so you attack others that who represent the dissonance in your own mind. That is why you ONLY come to sites like these. We present your doubts, and you fight against them/us. The cognitive dissonance is subliminally intense, and you wish conquer it, so you invite the criticism to provoke more conflicts. You even develop tentative positive relationships with those who are helping you fight your internal conflicts by addressing new areas of which you were unaware or did not fully anticipate.

You've redefined your new faith.
You've redefined yourself.
You've redefined others.

But you're slowly being absorbed into the only soluble of all the parameter, the same as all before you, the only paradigm that can hold your universe together:

Good for Islam, is good. Bad for Islam, is bad.

Not too easy on the conscience vis a vis veracity, however, so you redefine this as well, even signing your momentos with the closing, "Truth". But it's really just another perspective of the paradigm:

Good for Islam, is truth. Bad for Islam, is false.

We told you that you had cancer, but just like a classic Kubler-Ross reaction, you got angry and went into denial. I wish it did not cause you pain, but I couldn't be a human being that cares about you without trying to show you, that you've been living a lie, a pleasant lie. It's fiction, Abdullah, demonstrable fiction. It is ahistorical, contradictory, cruel dogma, dressed up in some window dressings adapted from Judaism and Christianity.

There is good in Islam; unfortunately, it's just the part that was stolen from the religions that preceded it. "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached," Manuel II Paleologos. It's not like anything has changed. There's no way to sugar-coat that.

You may not see this as "altruism", but I do care about your well-being and enlightenment, and I will continue to pray for you. But, please, do spend some of your efforts elsewhere, amongst your own people. Lives are at stake. One Aqsa is too many.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 6:47 PM

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 12, 2008 6:47 PM

You have not told me anything about yourself I did not already suspect.

First, the reason you are so very far off on your understanding of what Islam is and what it teaches.

Second, you are unable to discuss what the Quran really states in clarity about an issue because you are hampered by the lack of context and your lack of understanding the revelation. The translation of meaning misses a lot, and you do yourself no service in your jumping to conclusions by reading it.

CC you wrote “It's fiction, Abdullah, demonstrable fiction."

You are unable to read Arabic and verify for yourself a single scientifically irrefutable fact…how then can the simple things be understood by you, much less accepted by you, if all you can read is the translation of the meaning and lose all the context and the truth therein?

Surat Al Baqrah 2:145 -

“Even if thou wert to bring to the people of the Book all the signs (together), they would not follow Thy Qibla; nor art thou going to follow their Qibla; nor indeed will they follow each other's Qibla. If thou after the knowledge hath reached thee, Wert to follow their (vain) desires,-then wert thou Indeed (clearly) in the wrong.”

“The people of the Book know this as they know their own sons; but some of them conceal the truth which they themselves know.”

“The Truth is from thy Lord; so be not at all in doubt.”

“To each is a goal to which Allah turns him; then strive together (as in a race) towards all that is good. Wheresoever ye are, Allah will bring you together. For Allah hath power over all things.”

“From whencesoever thou startest forth, turn thy face in the direction of the sacred Mosque; that is indeed the truth from the Lord. And Allah is not unmindful of what ye do.”

“So from whencesoever thou startest forth, turn thy face in the direction of the sacred Mosque; and wheresoever ye are, turn your face thither: that there be no ground of dispute against you among the people, except those of them that are bent on wickedness; so fear them not, but fear Me; and that I may complete My favours on you, and ye may (consent to) be guided;”

“A similar (favour have ye already received) in that We have sent among you an Messenger of your own, rehearsing to you Our Signs, and sanctifying you, and instructing you in scripture and wisdom, and in new knowledge.”

“Then do ye remember Me; I will remember you. Be grateful to Me, and reject not Faith.”

CC,

You are resolute that you are on the right path. Fine, stay on it.

I am resolute that I am on the right path. I will stay on it.

In the very end we will both remember this discussion.

Peace
And
Truth

Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 15, 2008 12:53 PM

Abdullah,

I guess I must have been on target in my analysis. Knee jerk "Super Muslim" response with Qur'an quoting spree.

You are unable to read Arabic ...blah, blah...all you can read is the translation of the meaning and lose all the context and the truth therein?

This has been refuted here so many times it is laughable. The only un-translatable language, muttered rote by over 800 million Muslims who also can't read or understand a word of it.

It's not about a backprojected and tortured eisogesis. It's about evidence. There is no pre-Mohametan evidence of any proto-Islam to back up any of Mohammad's claims of lineage, prophetic continuity, or textual and narrative fidelity. It's a bankrupt faith. I understand why you don't leave it though. It would devastate and endanger your family life (from your coreligionists). I understand why you value that more than Truth. It's your decision.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 1:13 PM

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 1:13 PM

“It's about evidence.”

Since you are unable to understand any of the proofs you hold in your hand you seek to ask for proof from historical record to validate…I don’t need it, you do…I have current science that is verified by a 1,400+ year old document. What else do I need?

Science CC, learn something.

Don’t pride yourself on ignorance.

The educated, the knowledgeable among us will be the first to believe, and they are.

It did not benefit Pharaoh one bit, Moses showing him magnificent proofs of his Prophet hood…you are the same as he was…nothing I prove to you, nothing I produce for you of evidence, even if it is exactly what you ask, it will not benefit you.
“But what about…” spin, that’s all you will ever do.

“proto-Islam”

Abraham wasn’t a Jew, he wasn’t a Christian, well then what was he?

Abraham was a believer in pure Tawheed = Muslim.

Peace
Truth

Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 15, 2008 2:30 PM

Abdullah,

Don’t pride yourself on ignorance.

The smeller is the feller on this on.

The educated, the knowledgeable among us will be the first to believe, and they are.

I'm sorry, shall we count Nobel prizes to adjudicate this one? Or perhaps technological achievements? Christians are far in the lead on this. Muslims accomplishments? Generally related to oppressing populations and exploiting accidents of geology discovered by...Christians.

I don’t need it, you do…

Sure you do. It's what makes Islam as naked as the Emperor in his New Clothes.

AHISTORICITY.

Renaming pre-existing figures doesn't not count. Find me some pre-Mohametan documents using the name "Ibrahim" instead of Abraham. Then we can talk. Regarding your false dichotomy, Abraham IS a Jew.

P.S. Theological corrective: It wasn't the point to do Pharoah "one bit of good". The point was to demonstrate God's judgments and justice and deliverance. That's the thing the "prophet" without prophecy didn't get, either. He had a problem maintaining theocentricity and consistency in his utterances, too. If you read the original, the Tanakh, you will come to the phrase, "Pharoah hardened his heart". The part that should send chills down your spine is when it changes to "God hardened Pharoah's heart."

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 3:24 PM

P.S.

I have current science that is verified by a 1,400+ year old document. What else do I need? Science CC, learn something.

Science doesn't need the Qur'an to verify it. It has the "scientific method". Heard of it? No? Well, learn something.

I suppose where science contradicts Islam means you have to revert back to

Good for Islam, is truth. Bad for Islam, is false.

Or

Islam verifies science, science is true, Islam at odd with science, science is false.

I can hardly wait to watch the sun set in the pond tonight. How does it get to the other side without making any steam, anyway?

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 3:32 PM

http://www.islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1243&Itemid=73

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 3:45 PM

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 3:32 PM

“The smeller is the feller on this on.”

What do you know, he's a poet and didn’t know it…

“Nobel prizes..”

So now it’s the childish game of one-ups-manship?

The list is huge what Muslims contributed while at the same time your religious forbears were so ignorant and so superstitious they were afraid to bathe because they though the water would harm them.

Peee-uuu! Pass the powder…)

Jews did not appear until the descendants of the tribes of Israel…these are the Jews, the descendants of Israel, the twelve tribes.

CC ( BTW I can’t believe you wrote this) "I can hardly wait to watch the sun set in the pond tonight.”

Like I said, don’t be proud of your ignorance.

I say to China man, “You’re pulling my leg!”

He looks at me as if I were nuts and responds, “I no touchy you reg! What you mean?”

“Oh, I am sorry, it was a phrase not to be taken literally…oh, silly me…imagine how stupid I would look if I did not know the difference...imagine how embarrassed we’d be if I’d have used a simile? Like, say, “as if it set in murky water”…pushaw, he’d probably laugh like an idiot!”

Do we really need to drag this out?

Like I said, ignorance. If you don’t understand what is meant, don’t assume…spell it.

ASS U ME.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 15, 2008 4:20 PM

CC

The Quran is not a science book, a medical book, not at all…but there are proofs within it that scientists and doctors can easily see.

What do we search for when we want to seek life outside of planet Earth?

Water.

Surat Al Anbia 21, 30-33:

“Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?”

(Quick, please, jump on the word “We” a real bold snappy comment would be best…)

"And We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake with them, and We have placed therein ravines as roads that haply they may find their way."

"And we have made the sky a roof withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents."

"And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit."

Wow, 1,400+ years ago and an "orbit" of the planets was described by an illiterate desert Arab who told us the source of the message from God, the same one who told us all life rose from water, same source, God.

Go figure.

Truth
Abdullah Mikail

Posted by: Abdullah Mikail at December 15, 2008 4:45 PM

Ab,

You're a riot. The world is flat, the sun and planets rotate around it, the sun sits in a pond at night, but you torture some word in some other verse to "prove" the Qur'an is divine. Yuk, yuk. You're just kiddin', right? Did you look at the link above. Studied and revered Islamic scholars know best.

BTW, I knew you were anti-Semitic, didn't know you were bigoted against Asians as well.

The list is huge what Muslims contributed while at the same time your religious forbears were so ignorant and so superstitious they were afraid to bathe because they though the water would harm them.

Sorry, Jews were Jews long before Mo, and they did ablutions long ago. Your religious forbears were the same as mine, unless you have forgotten. Your adoptive "forbears" did a lot of horrific things, which despite your pretense of calling them "tribal customs", continue.

Your Islamic accomplishment "list" is paltry, always requiring whitewashes intended to make Islamic countries not feel slighted and forgotten by history, with grandiose, contrived false claims. What they accomplished, they did so on the shoulders civilizations they managed to subjugate throught what we now call "terrorism". You will lose the "childish" game of one-ups-manship.

Quick, please, jump on the word “We” a real bold snappy comment would be best

Jesus and God subsist in the same substance in perfect harmony. Bold and snappy enough for you, vis a vis plurality withing the Godhead?

WHERE'S YOUR ARCHAEOLOGY????? HmmmMM?? Maybe that's what you like about Islam. Kind of like your Indian forbears, Islam is the only religion that walked through millenia and left no footprints before 610AD.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at December 15, 2008 5:41 PM