Understanding the Death Fatwa on Taslima Nasreen

Re: # 302

hp,


why are you tormenting poor kisan ?....... if i read him correctly, al-khatmi is mentioned in Ibn Ishaq`s Sira which is an authentic source - much more than the koran, whose author is unknown, and Bukhari who wrote all this stuff down almist two hundred years later ........... i think kisan is doing us all a service by pointing out the flaws in the character of the prophet

HP wrote:

Basically it is an unauthenticated story....Making a never heard of story the basis of the whole article is ridiculeous. The auth Mr. Kisan should have given some explanation to this effect. He did not even bother to quote the reference.
What about the Al-Khatmi guy? Abu Afak is a fake too never heard that anywhere else.
Second, Any one can enter anything on Wiki. It is not a 100% accurate references in such cases.
Thanks for you effrots.

See post number 9 for the link to hyperlinks for references.

None of the refs are wik but rather sahih hadiths and as mentioned these are also there in Ibn Ishaq.

Should expect such type of smear job from HP which is characteristic of his style who I recall saying after bombings in Delhi that Indians have it all coming for Kashmir and it was logical and rational (and justified) to bomb people in trains and markets.

It is those like HP who are the justifiers and supporters of terrorism and I personally find more obnoxious than straight out mullahs.

Those who know their Islam like Urstruly wouldn`t deny the sources quoted but this is type of response to be expected from likes of HP.

References are all there and this is nothing new as HP pretends so disingeneously.

Sattar bhai

You want me to discuss Ahmedism. Bhai, I have no interest in Ahmedism, just like I have no interest in a lot of other stuff of that nature, like rat worship, dipping in the ganges, belief in ET, and so on so forth.

#296 by Tehsinabbasi,

Yep. Hamidm saheb ka jawaab nahin ... :)

#295 by sattar2,

Any references, or is this just hot air?

Just hot air :) These things are not written in books. Besides, even if I quote some books, you will challenge their bias. So, it`s no use.

Now can you answer #293 please? Also if you could reflect upon the question that could any ahmedi defeat the United States of America and Britain combined?

Regards.

#275 by zeemax

”If that is so, you have a few more things to learn. Forty years is nothing.”

Zeemax I agree with you. Hamid has never said any thing nice about me on chowk or in the 40 years that he claims that he has known me. A part of me is suspicious of his motives, but I also wonder if he is getting mushy – this is cause for alarm.

zeemax (#290, 291),

You are starting to sound pathetic. Bystanders … children, women, men who are not attacking you … are innocent. Is this really that difficult to grasp? No wonder ummah is going to the dogs.

+++

And if you want to get specific, start with your claims that Ahmadis are British agents and are working against interests of Pakistan; that Ahmadis do not believe in jihad.

Where did you get all this? Any references, or is this just hot air?

Kaal,

Ponder over this, especially the last verse.

#292 by sattar2,

Sattar, a prominent congressman has remarked that the Iraq war is `lost`. Do you think it is by killing innocent people?

kaal (#288),

Yes, you are putting words in my mouth. Read on, little genius …

In #287 I had commented to zeemax about ``his Islam`` … and not about ``Islam``. Note this critical distinction.

I firmly believe in Islam, so you can cut it out. Merely jerking around the net will not get you anywhere …

And my post #289 should have referred to your post #286 … sorry about any confusion.

[zeeamax now seems to be suggesting that killing innocent bystanders is fair game. Do you see where his Islam is going?]

Sattar Bhai,

#287 by sattar2,

Sattar Bhai, which innocent lives are they taking? Collateral damage notwithstanding. Please be specific. Thanks.

kaal MiaN (#288),

Earlier you were giving opinions; now you are merely rambling like a fool.

You were supposed to explain your angst against Ahamdis. I also challenged your claim that sattar is making up words/meanings. This philosophical soliloquy may sound good to masadi … but isn’t it off the topic? Have you completely lost it??

Re: # 289

satttar mian,

....... kaal is giving you chakar - he is too intelligent to actually believe that there is any redeeming quality in ticking time bums like zeemax ......... he is simply playing kali`s advocate and yanking your chain - these banias have a long history of messing with the minds of simple muslims like you and i .........

...... but i do think kaal is right when he suggests that islam ``reduces people to a half-crazed animal state in which Muslims are driven to kill innocent people for no rhyme or reason`` ........ luckily it doesn`t drive all of them to blow themselves up but, by and large, it does make them stupid if not totally homicidal or suicidal ........... i have yet to meet a `real` muslim who still has all his marbles - by `real` i mean the kind that prays five times a day, reads the book over and over again and shaves under his arms ...... ...........

Zee, Sattar sahib has problems not with suicide bombing, but with Islam itself. :)

In #287 he says (sattar sahib, please correct if I am putting words in your mouth) that Islam reduces people to a half-crazed animal state in which Muslims are driven to kill innocent people for no rhyme or reason. Probably he has a new, updated version that will turn Muslims into a combination of Buddhists and Christians.

yaar zee sahib (#285),

Problem is not that they are blowing themselves up, but that they are taking innocent lives.

With hellfires, they would continue to kill innocent people. And that’s not good. But suicide bombing kills at least one right person (grin). So no! No hellfire for you ... get back to packing your belt.

Your Islam has reduced ummah to violent fanaticism. And you have a problem with Ahmadi-Muslims. No wonder ummah is going to the dogs …