• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Is Fear of Muslims Rational?

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
The mainstream Christians view the Bible differently from the way the mudslimes view the Qur'an and Hadiths. If the Christians followed the way the mudslimes do, Ang mor lands will not be in the mess that it is.

I can't know for sure how Christians nor Muslims view their religious texts because I am neither one and I have not asked around enough, but as for Ang Moh lands being in a mess, I'm afraid that if they do the same, they will be in a mess, just only a different mess. Somewhere in this forum, you posted some interviews with people demanding sharia law. That should not be allowed to pass. There should just be one and that should be the incumbent law. But I feel to extend that into what some Muslim majority countries do in persecuting minorities would not result in less of a mess, but more.

In my opinion, the current problem with the political climate in Ang Moh land is libtardness. I feel that is what you are driving at. This means when the minorities ask for all sorts of ridiculous religious exemptions, they get them. This presents an opportunity for favouritism and preferential treatment. There should be none.

Correct me if I'am making wrong assumptions, but you are upset about religious bullying? That is Muslims get to do whatever they want and non-Muslims get to pay the price? A double standard?
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
I can't know for sure how Christians nor Muslims view their religious texts because I am neither one and I have not asked around enough, but as for Ang Moh lands being in a mess, I'm afraid that if they do the same, they will be in a mess, just only a different mess. Somewhere in this forum, you posted some interviews with people demanding sharia law. That should not be allowed to pass. There should just be one and that should be the incumbent law. But I feel to extend that into what some Muslim majority countries do in persecuting minorities would not result in less of a mess, but more.

In my opinion, the current problem with the political climate in Ang Moh land is libtardness. I feel that is what you are driving at. This means when the minorities ask for all sorts of ridiculous religious exemptions, they get them. This presents an opportunity for favouritism and preferential treatment. There should be none.

Correct me if I'am making wrong assumptions, but you are upset about religious bullying? That is Muslims get to do whatever they want and non-Muslims get to pay the price? A double standard?
I am just stating the double standards mudslimes adhere to. Case in point the resident mudslime whore. If Europe is in a mess without mudslimes it's their mess. Not mess committed by mudslimes
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
The mainstream Christians view the Bible differently from the way the mudslimes view the Qur'an and Hadiths. If the Christians followed the way the mudslimes do, Ang mor lands will not be in the mess that it is.

If xtian angmo stop intervening and invading Muslim countries there wont be IS and Al Queda. But wait isnt those two created by US herself? See how cunning and evil US, BE and their allies! Good in spinning lies and deceits in order to justify their evil deed
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I see. Double standards are never acceptable.

Stict around more often bro. U will see the double standard of JT and The Hypocrite. Even Halal issue in sillypored they put the blame on Muslims/Islam. They are saying we Muslims putting a knife on the retailer neck to force them to have halal food.:rolleyes:
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
If xtian angmo stop intervening and invading Muslim countries there wont be IS and Al Queda. But wait isnt those two created by US herself? See how cunning and evil US, BE and their allies! Good in spinning lies and deceits in order to justify their evil deed
Oh yes blame the west for all of mudslimes problems...and yet mudslimes willingly migrate too ang more countries. Why go to ang mor countries? They should go to fellow mudslime countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar etc. Why go to ang mor countries and say they want freedom and opportunity if ang mor lands soo bad?
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Stict around more often bro. U will see the double standard of JT and The Hypocrite.

Well I am new, but this is an interesting place...

I however fear that the double standard thing that I find not acceptable is unfortunately a part of a lot of us. It's very common and I see it daily. I find that almost everyone I meet has double standards.

The problem is that it's part of our biological psychology. If we live in a kampung surrounded by nature and wild animals, it's perfect. However in big societies like countries, it becomes unacceptable because it represents unfairness. I think as the world becomes more densely populated, either one of two things happens. 1 is that we all learn how to live together and we progress from there. 2 is that we don't learn how to live together and because of population pressures, we will bomb each other back to the stone age.

I will not judge either to be better, but I do see them as two likely outcomes given the pressures of overpopulation.
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
You will find others who wish to obtain security from you and [to] obtain security from their people. Every time they are returned to [the influence of] disbelief, they fall back into it. So if they do not withdraw from you or offer you peace or restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And those - We have made for you against them a clear authorization

Quran 4.91

Aiyoh. Why u xtian always like to cherry pick and quote out of context. Why can u quote the whole passage, story or history behind the Quranic verse. I can only gather u know the answers but deliberate ignore it so as to potray Islam as a violent religion. Issnt it The Hypocrite? Q4:91 is all about the hypocrites. Last time i will entertain such post. Dont be lazy. Read up the whole text before asking me. Wasting my time.

Q4:91 Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

This passage deals with the problem of those hypocritical Muslims who had accepted Islam in Makkah and other parts of Arabia but had not emigrated, to Madinah. They lived as before with their people, and took more or less a practical part in all their hostile activities against Islam and the Muslims. They had become a very difficult problem for the Muslims who did not know how to deal with them. Some Muslims were of the opinion that they were after all "Muslim" because they recited the kalimah (the article of the Muslims' Faith), offered the Salat, observed the Fast and recited the Qur'an. Then how could they be dealt with like the disbelievers? Allah in this passage has removed that difference of opinion from among the Muslims and told them how to deal with them. At this place one should clearly understand why those Muslims who did not emigrate to Madinah were declared to be hypocrites; otherwise one might not be able to interpret correctly this passage and the like passages of the Qur'an. The fact of the matter is that when the Holy Prophet migrated to Madinah and conditions were created there for the fulfillment of the requirements of Islam, a general order was given that all those Muslims who were oppressed in any place and in any tribe or clan and could not freely carry out their Islamic obligations, should migrate to Madinah, "the Abode of Islam." As a result, all those who could emigrate but did not do so because they loved their homes, their relatives and their interests more than Islam, were declared to be hypocrites. Only such of those as were really being prevented by impediments were declared to be helpless in verse 97 of this Surah. It is obvious that the Muslims living in the "abode of unbelief" may be declared hypocrites for not migrating only if a general invitation is extended to them by the people living in "the Abode of Islam", or at least the doors of" the Abode of Islam" are kept open for them. In such a case all those Muslims who may be doing nothing to change "the abode of unbelief" into "the Abode of Islam", nor emigrate to "the Abode of Islam", even if they could, would be declared hypocrites. Allah turned the hypocrites back to their former unbelief because they followed a double-faced policy and were time-servers. As they preferred the life of this world to that of the Hereafter, they had entered the fold of Islam with some mental reservations. They were not prepared to sacrifice those interests which came into conflict with the requirements of the Faith and they did not have that firm belief in the Hereafter which makes one sacrifice with perfect peace of mind this world for the sake of the Next World: It has thus become obvious that the line of demarcation was so clearcut that there ought not to have been two opinions about hypocrisy. Here the Muslims have been asked to catch hold of those hypocrites who belonged to the belligerent disbelievers and were actually engaged in hostile activities against the Islamic State. The exception is only concerning the first part of the Command. Though the blood of such a hypocrite is lawful, he is not to be pursued and killed, if he has sought asylum in the territory of a non-Muslim State, which is an ally to the Islamic State. This is not because of the sanctity of the blood of the hypocrite but because of the sanctity of the treaty.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Why go to ang mor countries and say they want freedom and opportunity if ang mor lands soo bad?

That is a good question and one I really want to know the answer to as well, however I don't think any of the regulars here is equipped to answer because none of them are in ang mor lands.

maybe someone from ang mor lands cares to answer?
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
That is a good question and one I really want to know the answer to as well, however I don't think any of the regulars here is equipped to answer because none of them are in ang mor lands.

maybe someone from ang mor lands cares to answer?

I dont say all. But most refugees were from where...if is not fm ME. U invade a country...cause misery...cause refugees. Whose fault?
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
Aiyoh. Why u xtian always like to cherry and quote out of context. Why can u quote the whole passage, story or history behind the Quranic verse. I can only gather u know the answers but deliberate ignore it so as to potray Islam as a violent religion. Issnt it The Hypocrite? Q4:91 is all about the hypocrites. Last time i will entertain such post. Dont be lazy. Read up the whole text before asking me. Wasting my time.

Q4:91 Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

This passage deals with the problem of those hypocritical Muslims who had accepted Islam in Makkah and other parts of Arabia but had not emigrated, to Madinah. They lived as before with their people, and took more or less a practical part in all their hostile activities against Islam and the Muslims. They had become a very difficult problem for the Muslims who did not know how to deal with them. Some Muslims were of the opinion that they were after all "Muslim" because they recited the kalimah (the article of the Muslims' Faith), offered the Salat, observed the Fast and recited the Qur'an. Then how could they be dealt with like the disbelievers? Allah in this passage has removed that difference of opinion from among the Muslims and told them how to deal with them. At this place one should clearly understand why those Muslims who did not emigrate to Madinah were declared to be hypocrites; otherwise one might not be able to interpret correctly this passage and the like passages of the Qur'an. The fact of the matter is that when the Holy Prophet migrated to Madinah and conditions were created there for the fulfillment of the requirements of Islam, a general order was given that all those Muslims who were oppressed in any place and in any tribe or clan and could not freely carry out their Islamic obligations, should migrate to Madinah, "the Abode of Islam." As a result, all those who could emigrate but did not do so because they loved their homes, their relatives and their interests more than Islam, were declared to be hypocrites. Only such of those as were really being prevented by impediments were declared to be helpless in verse 97 of this Surah. It is obvious that the Muslims living in the "abode of unbelief" may be declared hypocrites for not migrating only if a general invitation is extended to them by the people living in "the Abode of Islam", or at least the doors of" the Abode of Islam" are kept open for them. In such a case all those Muslims who may be doing nothing to change "the abode of unbelief" into "the Abode of Islam", nor emigrate to "the Abode of Islam", even if they could, would be declared hypocrites. Allah turned the hypocrites back to their former unbelief because they followed a double-faced policy and were time-servers. As they preferred the life of this world to that of the Hereafter, they had entered the fold of Islam with some mental reservations. They were not prepared to sacrifice those interests which came into conflict with the requirements of the Faith and they did not have that firm belief in the Hereafter which makes one sacrifice with perfect peace of mind this world for the sake of the Next World: It has thus become obvious that the line of demarcation was so clearcut that there ought not to have been two opinions about hypocrisy. Here the Muslims have been asked to catch hold of those hypocrites who belonged to the belligerent disbelievers and were actually engaged in hostile activities against the Islamic State. The exception is only concerning the first part of the Command. Though the blood of such a hypocrite is lawful, he is not to be pursued and killed, if he has sought asylum in the territory of a non-Muslim State, which is an ally to the Islamic State. This is not because of the sanctity of the blood of the hypocrite but because of the sanctity of the treaty.
If tat is the case, all mudslimes should migrate to Saudi Arabia and not to ang mor lands. All the mudslimes in Singkieland should also F off to Medina
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Aiyoh. Why u xtian always like to cherry and quote out of context. Why can u quote the whole passage, story or history behind the Quranic verse. I can only gather u know the answers but deliberate ignore it so as to potray Islam as a violent religion. Issnt it The Hypocrite? Q4:91 is all about the hypocrites. Last time i will entertain such post. Dont be lazy. Read up the whole text before asking me. Wasting my time.

Q4:91 Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

This passage deals with the problem of those hypocritical Muslims who had accepted Islam in Makkah and other parts of Arabia but had not emigrated, to Madinah. They lived as before with their people, and took more or less a practical part in all their hostile activities against Islam and the Muslims. They had become a very difficult problem for the Muslims who did not know how to deal with them. Some Muslims were of the opinion that they were after all "Muslim" because they recited the kalimah (the article of the Muslims' Faith), offered the Salat, observed the Fast and recited the Qur'an. Then how could they be dealt with like the disbelievers? Allah in this passage has removed that difference of opinion from among the Muslims and told them how to deal with them. At this place one should clearly understand why those Muslims who did not emigrate to Madinah were declared to be hypocrites; otherwise one might not be able to interpret correctly this passage and the like passages of the Qur'an. The fact of the matter is that when the Holy Prophet migrated to Madinah and conditions were created there for the fulfillment of the requirements of Islam, a general order was given that all those Muslims who were oppressed in any place and in any tribe or clan and could not freely carry out their Islamic obligations, should migrate to Madinah, "the Abode of Islam." As a result, all those who could emigrate but did not do so because they loved their homes, their relatives and their interests more than Islam, were declared to be hypocrites. Only such of those as were really being prevented by impediments were declared to be helpless in verse 97 of this Surah. It is obvious that the Muslims living in the "abode of unbelief" may be declared hypocrites for not migrating only if a general invitation is extended to them by the people living in "the Abode of Islam", or at least the doors of" the Abode of Islam" are kept open for them. In such a case all those Muslims who may be doing nothing to change "the abode of unbelief" into "the Abode of Islam", nor emigrate to "the Abode of Islam", even if they could, would be declared hypocrites. Allah turned the hypocrites back to their former unbelief because they followed a double-faced policy and were time-servers. As they preferred the life of this world to that of the Hereafter, they had entered the fold of Islam with some mental reservations. They were not prepared to sacrifice those interests which came into conflict with the requirements of the Faith and they did not have that firm belief in the Hereafter which makes one sacrifice with perfect peace of mind this world for the sake of the Next World: It has thus become obvious that the line of demarcation was so clearcut that there ought not to have been two opinions about hypocrisy. Here the Muslims have been asked to catch hold of those hypocrites who belonged to the belligerent disbelievers and were actually engaged in hostile activities against the Islamic State. The exception is only concerning the first part of the Command. Though the blood of such a hypocrite is lawful, he is not to be pursued and killed, if he has sought asylum in the territory of a non-Muslim State, which is an ally to the Islamic State. This is not because of the sanctity of the blood of the hypocrite but because of the sanctity of the treaty.
bro can summarize for me? and state your point of view? I cannot read so much la. 'pala pening.
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
That is a good question and one I really want to know the answer to as well, however I don't think any of the regulars here is equipped to answer because none of them are in ang mor lands.

maybe someone from ang mor lands cares to answer?
Wat makes u soo sure the forumners here no one is in Ang mor lands? Ask the forum owner where he is.
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
bro can summarize for me? and state your point of view? I cannot read so much la. 'pala pening.

Those "Muslims" were hypocrites. Wats the price to pay for treason? Those days were warring state. Muslims were few. But enemies were by the tons.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
I dont say all. But most refugees were from where...if is not fm ME. U invade a country...cause misery...cause refugees. Whose fault?

well, sure the shit was initiated by a bunch of dumb warmongers, but if a host country takes a refugee in don't you think that the refugee should be a good guest and respect the house and the rules of the host? They shouldn't be making demands of a host to follow their rules like that rite? That's just not good manners or teaching.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Wat makes u soo sure the forumners here no one is in Ang mor lands? Ask the forum owner where he is.

sorry I wasn't clear. I meant none of the forummers are in the group you are talking about who went to ang moh lands. I don't think Ah Sam is demanding for Sharia law in NZ.
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
well, sure the shit was initiated by a bunch of dumb warmongers, but if a host country takes a refugee in don't you think that the refugee should be a good guest and respect the house and the rules of the host? They shouldn't be making demands of a host to follow their rules like that rite? That's just not good manners or teaching.

But who cause the refugees? But i do agree...if we were immigrants we should abide by the host law and order. We are minority afterall.
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
I dont say all. But most refugees were from where...if is not fm ME. U invade a country...cause misery...cause refugees. Whose fault?
Oh yes good point, mudslimes invades Christian lands during the crusades...why no one talk about mudslime aggression?
 

whoami

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
sorry I wasn't clear. I meant none of the forummers are in the group you are talking about who went to ang moh lands. I don't think Ah Sam is asking for Sharia law in NZ.

Its easy to implement sharia law. But u got to be fair. Tats the tricky part. But if one is clean and not corrupted, then shouldnt be afraid. Of course The Hypocrite made alot of noise cos he cant kol chicken anymore else his bird will be chopped off.:roflmao:
 
Top