Prominent scholars declare ISIS caliphate 'null and void'

[HalloIsBack]

Prominent scholars declare ISIS caliphate 'null and void'

Saturday, 05 July 2014 14:09

1916 757
6 2690

Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

The International Union of Muslim Scholars, led by influential Sunni cleric Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, released a statement on Friday concerning the recent declaration of a "caliphate" by the Islamic State in Iraq and Levant (ISIS). The union said that the caliphate declaration is "null and void" and "lacks any realistic or legitimate standards." It warned of serious consequences of the declaration on both Sunni Muslims in Iraq and the revolution in Syria. The union defined the concept of a caliphate linguistically and religiously. The leader of the Muslim Ummah (nation) should be "a representative" of the nation, based on the people's choice of that leader, or their representatives. "The mere announcement is not enough to establish a caliphate," the statement added.
The scholars refuted ISIS arguments regarding its so-called "Islamic State", pointing out that, "All the affairs of the state and religious political practice should be based on Shura (consultation)." They cited evidence from the text of the Qur'an and Sunnah (example of Prophet Muhammad) to emphasise the concept of Shura, rather than coercion, in Islam. The union statement also referred to early Muslim caliphs, pointing out that they were selected by Shura, not self-appointed.
It warned that ISIS's announcement "serves the enemies of the Syrian and Iraqi revolutions" which advocate legitimate demands for their peoples. Furthermore, the union accused ISIS of "hijacking the Iraqi revolution", in which Sunnis of all stripes are taking part, adding that delegitimising all Islamic movements in the world by the caliphate announcement is "unacceptable".
"Linking the concept of caliphate to an organisation known to be extremist does not serve Islam," the scholars' said. They concluded by stressing that the concept of the caliphate is of "extreme importance" for all Muslims but requires "consensus among Muslims worldwide regarding its form and content."

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/12567-prominent-scholars-declare-isis-caliphate-null-and-void

[Badlun]

This is ridiculous to say that the concept of the caliphate is of "extreme importance" for all Muslims. The times of caliphate is gone. This is the time of Nation states and there are about 58 Muslim states in the world. No way to combine these 58 states into one caliphate.

This is the problem that some Muslims still live in 7th century and are ignorant of the fact that now we are in 21st century.

And religious scholars should take care of mosques not of political institutions.

[25tajik75pashtun]

The IS is not null and void - rather, it is the obligation of all muslims do to one of three things
1. go and live in the IS/fight for them
2. give financial aid to them
3. be well informed of their actions (of which all are pious and in line with what the quran and the hadiths teach) to be able to defend against kafirs as well as muslims who do not know true islam (salafism)

The scholars are honestly trying to save face for the international muslim community - it is literally promised in the quran and the hadiths that the world will one day be entirely muslim, following shariah law and not the false manmade laws as found in virtually every country today aside from the newly formed Islamic State.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

This is ridiculous to say that the concept of the caliphate is of "extreme importance" for all Muslims. The times of caliphate is gone. This is the time of Nation states and there are about 58 Muslim states in the world. No way to combine these 58 states into one caliphate.

This is the problem that some Muslims still live in 7th century and are ignorant of the fact that now we are in 21st century.

And religious scholars should take care of mosques not of political institutions.

There is a portion of this that I slightly agree with. In the West there is fear mongering that has been going on for a decade and a half now about the "Caliphate" a concept that is historically complex and a role that evolved across centuries.

When a historian like Gibbons discusses the Caliphate he has no fear of the concept and understands these shades of complexity. Gibbons would also understand that even in the early Islamic tradition, Abdullah ibn Zubayr and Mawiyah offered differing perspectives on obeying a Caliph.

This evolution of the executive is really no different than for instance, the evolution of the American executive. Andrew Bacevich, a man I respect greatly writes in detail about the Imperial Presidency. In the modern era, great writers like Justin Raimando demand that Congress invoke the War Powers act to reign in an executive that they view as gone rogue.

Steven Emerson and others have been trying for two to three decades to lump 1/5 of the world's population with diversity of thought into a homogenous body of automatons waiting to be triggered at a moment's notice should a caliphate arise. In their simplistic propaganda, a Caliphate equivalent is created and then the Caliph gives an order and the whole 1/5 of the world's population starts acting in unison.

Now with ISIS we see that their theory is shattered. A few international recruits are but a small portion of the general population that has not acted on Baghdadi's ordinances and proclamations. Despite the military successes of ISIS, even local groups that are considered salafi have rejected their Caliphate.

One can argue about particulars of whether it accords or does not accord to the letter of the body of shariat, but my point is that in discussions Muslims should have no qualms pointing out that the Caliphate argument used to scare, cajole, and threaten Muslims into not having an amicable and evidence based discussion has been shattered utterly. The usage of this argument was to resurrect visions and nightmares of the third reich and to make it seem as if a war machine equivalent to Nazi Germany would arise the moment a viable Caliphate Proto-State arises. Instead, we see a diversity of thought within the Muslim world on this subject.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The IS is not null and void - rather, it is the obligation of all muslims do to one of three things
1. go and live in the IS/fight for them
2. give financial aid to them
3. be well informed of their actions (of which all are pious and in line with what the quran and the hadiths teach) to be able to defend against kafirs as well as muslims who do not know true islam (salafism)

The scholars are honestly trying to save face for the international muslim community - it is literally promised in the quran and the hadiths that the world will one day be entirely muslim, following shariah law and not the false manmade laws as found in virtually every country today aside from the newly formed Islamic State.

Don't be an idiot like you consistently are by taking a complex issue and rendering it as simple and mongoloid as you are.

It takes merely an empirical review of Muslim occupied regions from the early period (Egypt, parts of Iraq) to see that Jurists and historians of that era might take serious issue with what some would call the lack of hikmah exercised by IS in certain regard.

For instance, the early empire did not go and make it an effort to sack, destroy and pillage the treasures of the Pyramids, they did not destroy the Yazidi sacred tombs and structures, they did not go after the tombs of the saints etc.

Literalists will point to the cleansing of Makkah without also emphasizing the importance of Makkah and the Arabian Peninsula in being the most holy site in all of Islamdom.

There are certain instances from the life of the Prophet in which he tells his wife Aisha that he had enough wisdom to understand the superstitious nature of his own kinsmen to not even do construction jobs on the Kabah. He also never sought out the graves of the various progenitors of the Quraish tribe, or his own mother and father's graves to level them. Ibn Majah provided sound narrated hadith that even spoke about non ornate graver markers being used to demarcate graves indicating that instances of grave leveling were unique circumstances.

Additionally, execution without trial (stopping random men on the road on video and asking them questions to find out if they are sunni or not) is not anywhere cited in juristic tradition as permissible.

Moronic contributions like yours take away from the real conflagration that is eating up the lives of Iraqis on a daily basis, which is the fact that an uninvited intervention destabilized a state that was already created with a predilection toward instability. A country that was somewhat prosperous under the last dictator and had the best progress of all the middle east countries was decimated with three successive interventions and rendered a failed state. This experiment resulted in regional power vacuums that have created vicious conditions between groups that have at least functioned somewhat reasonably side by side for hundreds of years with sporadic but limited violence. This same brand of interventionalism in Syria all but guaranteed that ISIS would have a backward operating base (the key to any successful insurgency) and exposed a schizophrenic policy that has endangered the lives of those denizens of those two states.

An example of the execution of even the most rigorous Islamic jurisprudence in the strictest sense shows that there is a wide room for debate. When Omar was told about the discovery of the grave of the Prophet Daniel in Iraq, he did not go and make a leveling show or destroy it, or dig it up but instead he asked for the news to not be broadcast and had the plaque describing Daniel's battle hymns reburied and not destroyed with a sledge hammer etc.

Additionally, what one can trust about the news regarding the IS is also a problem in that multiple UN reports (e.g. vaginal mutilation, the report of 40,000 Yazidis on the mountain, the report of IS being trained in Langely, the false report of Snowden saying ISIS was trained in Langley) + ISIS own obvious distaste for embedded reporters have rendered the area an information vacuum.

[25tajik75pashtun]

Don't be an idiot like you consistently are by taking a complex issue and rendering it as simple and mongoloid as you are.

It takes merely an empirical review of Muslim occupied regions from the early period (Egypt, parts of Iraq) to see that Jurists and historians of that era might take serious issue with what some would call the lack of hikmah exercised by IS in certain regard.

For instance, the early empire did not go and make it an effort to sack, destroy and pillage the treasures of the Pyramids, they did not destroy the Yazidi sacred tombs and structures, they did not go after the tombs of the saints etc.

Literalists will point to the cleansing of Makkah without also emphasizing the importance of Makkah and the Arabian Peninsula in being the most holy site in all of Islamdom.

There are certain instances from the life of the Prophet in which he tells his wife Aisha that he had enough wisdom to understand the superstitious nature of his own kinsmen to not even do construction jobs on the Kabah. He also never sought out the graves of the various progenitors of the Quraish tribe, or his own mother and father's graves to level them. Ibn Majah provided sound narrated hadith that even spoke about non ornate graver markers being used to demarcate graves indicating that instances of grave leveling were unique circumstances.

Additionally, execution without trial (stopping random men on the road on video and asking them questions to find out if they are sunni or not) is not anywhere cited in juristic tradition as permissible.

Moronic contributions like yours take away from the real conflagration that is eating up the lives of Iraqis on a daily basis, which is the fact that an uninvited intervention destabilized a state that was already created with a predilection toward instability. A country that was somewhat prosperous under the last dictator and had the best progress of all the middle east countries was decimated with three successive interventions and rendered a failed state. This experiment resulted in regional power vacuums that have created vicious conditions between groups that have at least functioned somewhat reasonably side by side for hundreds of years with sporadic but limited violence. This same brand of interventionalism in Syria all but guaranteed that ISIS would have a backward operating base (the key to any successful insurgency) and exposed a schizophrenic policy that has endangered the lives of those denizens of those two states.

An example of the execution of even the most rigorous Islamic jurisprudence in the strictest sense shows that there is a wide room for debate. When Omar was told about the discovery of the grave of the Prophet Daniel in Iraq, he did not go and make a leveling show or destroy it, or dig it up but instead he asked for the news to not be broadcast and had the plaque describing Daniel's battle hymns reburied and not destroyed with a sledge hammer etc.

Additionally, what one can trust about the news regarding the IS is also a problem in that multiple UN reports (e.g. vaginal mutilation, the report of 40,000 Yazidis on the mountain, the report of IS being trained in Langely, the false report of Snowden saying ISIS was trained in Langley) + ISIS own obvious distaste for embedded reporters have rendered the area an information vacuum.

Great job on getting that thread deleted, you might have been drunk or high from playing bacha baazi or something when you spewed whatever filth you spewed - talking about ****ing someone's mother and grandmother, especially when they're very devout muslims isn't something a civilized muslim (not that there are many) does - and especially not self respecting pashtuns.

The early caliphates did not go out of their way to destroy many of the remnants of the civilizations before them because the natives would have been enraged - when the arabs tried to destroy the tomb of cyrus the great they were met with the wrath of the iranians - TRUE islam calls for the destruction of any idols or places of worship that are not to allah, things like the pyramids, churches so on and so forth have no place in an islamic state and therefore must be destroyed.

In fact, some of the early caliphates like the abassids could hardly have been called muslims in the first place.

Stop trying to liberalize islam into something it's not, I know that you can bend it to your will so you can continue ****ing the little boys like most pashtuns of your mental caliber love doing but normally that's not how things are supposed to be done.

And speaking of mongoloids, why are you talking in a manner as to imply mongoloids are in any way inferior? Those mongoloids (of which consitute the natives of east, central and south east asia) have all contributed a million times more to humanity than pashtuns ever have, or ever will. You are the inferior one, not them.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Great job on getting that thread deleted, you might have been drunk or high from playing bacha baazi or something when you spewed whatever filth you spewed - talking about ****ing someone's mother and grandmother, especially when they're very devout muslims isn't something a civilized muslim (not that there are many) does - and especially not self respecting pashtuns.

The only Bacha Baazi I orchestrated was when I made your daddy dance for your boyfriend Atta.

The harf of Ubay ibn Kaab occurred the words "wa huwa ab lahum" ---> "and he (the Prophet) is as a father unto them" when the mothers of the believers were discussed. You spewed filth accusing the Prophet of fornicating etc when the whole issue has been thoroughly dealt with here when I dispatched your secular militant buddy Badlun:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthread.php?t=44407&highlight=moral+relativist+Prophet+excuse+reject+woman

You criticized the Prophet's war maneuvers without initiating any complex discussion. Since time immemorial, powers have destroyed the purported "propaganda arm" of their adversary. In fact, it happens even today:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2001/nov/17/warinafghanistan2001.afghanistan

Keep your s-hit stained mouth shut when telling me about your grand mother and mother. If they were resurrected and read what you said about the Prophet they would slap the h-ell out of you as well and tell you deserved everything you got for flapping those donkey gums of yours.


The early caliphates did not go out of their way to destroy many of the remnants of the civilizations before them because the natives would have been enraged -

Bull-sh-it, they had the power to do so in multiple places and we provided solid references for instances in which they did not destroy or level or reconstruct grave sites or edifices. This means that the debate is wide open and that there is evidence amongst the jurists to at least have a vibrant debate.

when the arabs tried to destroy the tomb of cyrus the great they were met with the wrath of the iranians - TRUE islam calls for the destruction of any idols or places of worship that are not to allah, things like the pyramids, churches so on and so forth have no place in an islamic state and therefore must be destroyed.

Really dum-bas-s? I searched for the source regarding that statement and landed with the reference to Iran a freaking travel guide by Burke who deadends this reference by simply alluding to "local historians" and providing nothing else to buttress this

http://books.google.com/books?id=gEca_4iSNCUC&pg=PA432&lpg=PA432&dq=burke+elliott+iran+lonely+planet&source=bl&ots=9pASNeF3SJ&sig=hCleJix31QCqyJYs5cuEqGTsLWk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=MKz7U-O-OcXaoASitoCoCw&ved=0CFsQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=burke%20elliott%20iran%20lonely%20planet&f=false

James Justinian Moirier, a real academic, writes in his A Journey Through Persia and Asia Minor that on page 145 the reason for it being called the "tomb of Soloman's mother" was based on local lore regarding the cure for rabies being present in drinking off the local fountains. He goes on to reference the fact that the locals confused Shah Soleiman the descendant of Ali with the Prophetic Solomen.

http://books.google.com/books?id=pHRdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA145&lpg=PA145&dq=cyrus+persian+tomb+arabs+solomons+mother&source=bl&ots=c9B2yGwqgf&sig=t2UirShRFh9jgot6BOOIfO4C5Tk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=86z7U9ueOIzboAS0zoLwCA&ved=0CF0Q6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=cyrus%20persian%20tomb%20arabs%20solomons%20mother&f=false

See how mentally retarded your that 1/4 of your brain is? Relying on your fascist persiocentric propaganda? See how easily your claims are debunked and investigated?


In fact, some of the early caliphates like the abassids could hardly have been called muslims in the first place.

Says a sur kapir like you? Yea, the authority on male on male love (i.e. you) has no place to comment on Abbassids being Muslim or not.

Stop trying to liberalize islam into something it's not, I know that you can bend it to your will so you can continue ****ing the little boys like most pashtuns of your mental caliber love doing but normally that's not how things are supposed to be done.

Tssk Tssk Tssk silly hermaphrodite, quit confusing your own standards with my own and your own proclivities with mine, lol. I told you the story of your conception, so I hardly think I need to take refuge in the arms of a teenage boy based on that.

And speaking of mongoloids, why are you talking in a manner as to imply mongoloids are in any way inferior? Those mongoloids (of which consitute the natives of east, central and south east asia) have all contributed a million times more to humanity than pashtuns ever have, or ever will.

Now your true face and nature and roots are distinguished. There is a difference between mongoloid and a true Mongol... the former is what you are and is an apt descriptor.

You are the inferior one, not them.

Oh contraire! Your own senseless garbage is proof positive of your peoples' innate inferiority and aptitude for slavery. Keep at it since each tid bit you offer up gives us more and more information on just how inept you are and the low impact factor garbage you generate. I am thoroughly enjoying showing these folks how one deals with a sub-human when he dares to talk about the Prophet and when his 1/4 canine nature barks how to mentally taze him back into his place.

x

[25tajik75pashtun]

x

haha oh wow I cannot even begin to comprehend just have mentally defunct you are to believe moohamhead didn't have several wives (more than 4 at once becuase he's the prophet after all) as well as several slaves he kept as concubines.

I suggest you take a look at this article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

as I said, those mongoloids have contributed more to humanity than pashtuns ever have or ever will - hell, even tajiks contributed a lot more to humanity than pashtuns have or ever will

go on believing in a prophet who had sex with a 9 year old - it is an obligation for muslims to live just as muhammad did, so next time you're outside in europe or wherever, go and rape some little girls (you already rape boys I'm assuming), capture some of them and keep them as sex slaves will ya?

[HalloIsBack]

i'm getting ban just for using the word **** and ****

but some special user not
well now we all know what kind of attitude admins have got

[HalloIsBack]

haha oh wow I cannot even begin to comprehend just have mentally defunct you are to believe moohamhead didn't have several wives (more than 4 at once becuase he's the prophet after all) as well as several slaves he kept as concubines.

I suggest you take a look at this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

as I said, those mongoloids have contributed more to humanity than pashtuns ever have or ever will - hell, even tajiks contributed a lot more to humanity than pashtuns have or ever will

go on believing in a prophet who had sex with a 9 year old - it is an obligation for muslims to live just as muhammad did, so next time you're outside in europe or wherever, go and rape some little girls (you already rape boys I'm assuming), capture some of them and keep them as sex slaves will ya?

oh hell nooooooooo
we have enough so called pop-muslims who rape women and girls

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Great job on getting that thread deleted, you might have been drunk or high from playing bacha baazi or something when you spewed whatever filth you spewed - talking about ****ing someone's mother and grandmother, especially when they're very devout muslims isn't something a civilized muslim (not that there are many) does - and especially not self respecting pashtuns.

The early caliphates did not go out of their way to destroy many of the remnants of the civilizations before them because the natives would have been enraged - when the arabs tried to destroy the tomb of cyrus the great they were met with the wrath of the iranians - TRUE islam calls for the destruction of any idols or places of worship that are not to allah, things like the pyramids, churches so on and so forth have no place in an islamic state and therefore must be destroyed.

In fact, some of the early caliphates like the abassids could hardly have been called muslims in the first place.

Stop trying to liberalize islam into something it's not, I know that you can bend it to your will so you can continue ****ing the little boys like most pashtuns of your mental caliber love doing but normally that's not how things are supposed to be done.

And speaking of mongoloids, why are you talking in a manner as to imply mongoloids are in any way inferior? Those mongoloids (of which consitute the natives of east, central and south east asia) have all contributed a million times more to humanity than pashtuns ever have, or ever will. You are the inferior one, not them.

LOL. Thinking about it, even a cursory examination of your idiotic commentary above, lionizing the Persians, comes under the assault of simple logic. On the one hand, you claimed the wrath of the Iranians held them back... yet the sources that describe the Arabs holding back from potential destruction (that all titrate down to a travel guide btw, lol) allude to fib the priests told to protect the temple by calling it the tomb of Solomon the Prophet's mother (the Queen of Sheba).... Moirer provided the true circumstances of the "local historians" in his text we cited above and he predated your idiotic ethnocentric retarded pseudo mastery Persian narrative by at least two centuries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Justinian_Morier

Even then, if we were take the other references seriously and somehow suspend the need for proof in mid air, we would find the logic as retarded as your own existence:

Your argument is ---> ISIS destroys tombs because true Islam uniformly and juristically mandates it without any semblance of a debate ---> To provide proof that the early Muslims and Caliphates actually attempted to adhere to this you made up the "fear of the Iranians paradigm" sort of running at odds with the rest of your utterly retarded manufactured history which commonly presents as the Persians as all put upon by the 7th century equivalent of Arab Nazis ---> A cursory investigation finds that the source of the threatened Arab destruction of the tomb is often accompanied by the claim that the Arabs were then stopped under the ruse of "no wait this is Solomon's mothers gravesite"---> LOOOOOL, yet even that falls flat on its face since if they were as avid to destroy any and all graves why would they spare the ornate "tomb of Solomon's mother?"

Listen canine, its best you mentally walk on four legs instead of trying to resemble humans by walking on two. Your inherent mental design mandates this, otherwise all your arguments come off as screwy and devoid of sense as these sets of arguments you manufactured in the last 24 hours. Please change your sn to 25%mental flatus 75% pseudohuman to accommodate your level.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

haha oh wow I cannot even begin to comprehend just have mentally defunct you are to believe moohamhead didn't have several wives (more than 4 at once becuase he's the prophet after all) as well as several slaves he kept as concubines.

I contested his polygamy when? LOL. Grabbing at straws aren't you canine? Once again, read William Muir's commentary and even the orientalist narrative and one will find much to admire about the Prophet's egalitarian marriages. We understand this is hard for a piece of trash like you to comprehend, but since you are imitating humans as it is, the least we can do is ask politely.

I suggest you take a look at this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

as I said, those mongoloids have contributed more to humanity than pashtuns ever have or ever will - hell, even tajiks contributed a lot more to humanity than pashtuns have or ever will

Nice try with the semi Freudian slips Mongoloid. Them contributing to your DNA undoes just about any "contribution" emphasis on the quotes.

go on believing in a prophet who had sex with a 9 year old - it is an obligation for muslims to live just as muhammad did, so next time you're outside in europe or wherever, go and rape some little girls (you already rape boys I'm assuming), capture some of them and keep them as sex slaves will ya?

LOL, how many times do I have to reiterate that I learned my lesson when I spawned you with the being you call "mother."? Having to retrain and reschool you and pick you apart just to let you think you are building yourself up again, only to tear apart your arguments again is a responsibility that I don't want to have all over again. On a side note, please stop offering me your European "cousins" as brides, its really embarrassing.

x

[25tajik75pashtun]

LOL. Thinking about it, even a cursory examination of your idiotic commentary above, lionizing the Persians, comes under the assault of simple logic. On the one hand, you claimed the wrath of the Iranians held them back... yet the sources that describe the Arabs holding back from potential destruction (that all titrate down to a travel guide btw, lol) allude to fib the priests told to protect the temple by calling it the tomb of Solomon the Prophet's mother (the Queen of Sheba).... Moirer provided the true circumstances of the "local historians" in his text we cited above and he predated your idiotic ethnocentric retarded pseudo mastery Persian narrative by at least two centuries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Justinian_Morier

Even then, if we were take the other references seriously and somehow suspend the need for proof in mid air, we would find the logic as retarded as your own existence:

Your argument is ---> ISIS destroys tombs because true Islam uniformly and juristically mandates it without any semblance of a debate ---> To provide proof that the early Muslims and Caliphates actually attempted to adhere to this you made up the "fear of the Iranians paradigm" sort of running at odds with the rest of your utterly retarded manufactured history which commonly presents as the Persians as all put upon by the 7th century equivalent of Arab Nazis ---> A cursory investigation finds that the source of the threatened Arab destruction of the tomb is often accompanied by the claim that the Arabs were then stopped under the ruse of "no wait this is Solomon's mothers gravesite"---> LOOOOOL, yet even that falls flat on its face since if they were as avid to destroy any and all graves why would they spare the ornate "tomb of Solomon's mother?"

Listen canine, its best you mentally walk on four legs instead of trying to resemble humans by walking on two. Your inherent mental design mandates this, otherwise all your arguments come off as screwy and devoid of sense as these sets of arguments you manufactured in the last 24 hours. Please change your sn to 25%mental flatus 75% pseudohuman to accommodate your level.

stay mad, my boy-****ing, arab pedophile worshipping friend

[BarakzaiAbdali]

haha oh wow I cannot even begin to comprehend just have mentally defunct you are to believe moohamhead didn't have several wives (more than 4 at once becuase he's the prophet after all) as well as several slaves he kept as concubines.

I suggest you take a look at this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

as I said, those mongoloids have contributed more to humanity than pashtuns ever have or ever will - hell, even tajiks contributed a lot more to humanity than pashtuns have or ever will

go on believing in a prophet who had sex with a 9 year old - it is an obligation for muslims to live just as muhammad did, so next time you're outside in europe or wherever, go and rape some little girls (you already rape boys I'm assuming), capture some of them and keep them as sex slaves will ya?

Im going out for a drive, that gives you a few hours to generate a meaningful response that might actually be challenging and save the face of your mongoloid and flat head ancestors since you are pretty slow on the uptake. Remember son, take a breath, read, analyze, synthesize, and then vomit your garbage.

[25tajik75pashtun]

x

You didn't contest his polygamy - you instead got really mad and insulted my mother and grandmother when I said that moohamhead (pbuh) did the following three things

1. had several wives and sex slaves (concubines)
2. ordered several beheadings and killing ****tons of people
3. **** a 9 year old

you took this to be offensive and insulted my relatives showing your ghairat and worth as a man - now why would you be so offended when I stated these facts?