Marietta Woman Linked to Suspicious Package Killed by Officer : MyFoxATLANTA.com
GEORGIA--A Muslim woman who had been charged with sending fake weapons and a pig’s foot to two New York lawmakers was killed during a struggle with a cop in Georgia on Sunday, authorities said.
Jameela Barnette, 53, of Marietta, was slapped with federal charges last month for sending New York State Sen. Greg Ball (R,C-Patterson) a vial of perfume, a hate-filled letter and a doll of the monkey Curious George wearing two Stars of David.
She had also mailed a pig’s foot to Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) in response to controversial hearings he held in March on the purported radicalization of American Muslims, Politico has reported.
A spokesman for Cobb County Police said an armed Barnette was shot to death after officers responded to a panic alarm she activated at her apartment at 11 a.m. Christmas Day.
When the cops arrived, Barnette opened the door while wielding a knife and a handgun and assaulted an officer with the blade, the spokesman said.
The unnamed officer shot her, killing Barnette at the scene, police said.
"Despite receiving injuries to his arm, the officer was able to use his service weapon to stop the assault," the spokesman said.
The cop was treated for minor injuries to his arm and placed on administrative leave pending an investigation.
Police said they did not know why Barnette triggered the alarm.
Barnette railed to several media outlets against what she called anti-Muslim congressional hearings last spring. She told a local TV station she sent Ball, who represents Putnam County and parts of Westchester and Dutchess counties, the threatening package because he’s racist toward her faith and supported King’s hearings.
“I knew the Jews were behind the hearings,” she told Politico. “A monkey is a representation of who the Jews are.”
A judge released Barnette without bail after her arrest in November.
Both Ball and King are Catholic. (New York Daily News)
22 comments:
"The cop was treated for minor injuries to his arm and placed on administrative leave pending an investigation."
Is that normal to be put on administrative leave in such situation? I thought that this would happen only if an officer's actions were thought to be highly controversial, or unclear as being procedural, or something like that.
"Both Ball and King are Catholic"
This little statement is tacked onto the end, and I'm curious why the author of the article thought that was relevant. Is the implication that because they are catholic they are anti-muslim, or even "Islamaphobic"? I suspect it was a left-leaning anti-religous bias that prompted that sentence being added.
The article does though surprisingly identify the person as being Muslim and attacking first and seems mostly unsympathetic towards Barnette, rather than trying to paint her as a victim.
drum roll please..............
This has nothing to do with Islam!
I remember a "Jameela" being very active in Islamic rooms on PalTalk a number of years ago when I occasionally went on there. I don't recall her user name or exactly which room, but it was in the "Human Rights" section and I remember her first name being spelled just this way and I recall someone saying her last name once and it was a very anglo sounding surname. I wonder if this is the same Jameela? Boy would that be an odd coincidence.
Robert Spencer has published the vile vitriol she had sent him. Now that she has been killed, would she get 72 virgins and prepubescent boys? But since she was a black woman, that may be doubtful. Didn’t Mohammad say black women are a bad omen?
If anyone picks up the bible and determines to follow the teachings and example of Jesus, the risk is that he/she is going to be too loving (love your enemy) and too forgiving (forgive them for they know not what they do) etc.
However, if a Muslim decides to follow the Koran and the example of Mohammad, he will have to be a terrorist and a criminal if he has the courage. As Sam Harris said, “the only problem with Islamic fundamentalism is the fundamentals of Islam.”
at Search for truth
But it does have nothing to do with Islam. With the church bombings, they are completely against what the prophet (pbuh)preached. Some sources on what the Quran and hadith say:
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 49:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr:
The Prophet said, "Whoever killed a Mu'ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling)."
Surah 2:256
There is no compulsion in religion.
"Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment." (Abu Dawud)
"Whoever hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys God." (Bukhari)
"Beware on the Day of Judgement; I shall mysefl be complainant against him who wrongs a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state or lays on him a responsibility greater than he can bear or deprives him of anything that belongs to him." (Al-Mawardi)
Surah Kafiroon
Say: O ye that reject Faith! (1) I worship not that which ye worship, (2) Nor will ye worship that which I worship. (3) And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, (4) Nor will ye worship that which I worship. (5) To you be your Way, and to me mine. (6)
Quranic verse for the day: (55:60)
هَلۡ جَزَآءُ ٱلۡإِحۡسَـٰنِ إِلَّا ٱلۡإِحۡسَـٰنُ
Is there any Reward for Good other than Good?
Quote:
But it does have nothing to do with Islam. With the church bombings, they are completely against what the prophet (pbuh)preached.
end
You are writing to the wrong people.
Write these things to the Nigerian Christians who have just had their churches burnt.
Do you really think that just because churches are burnt Christianity will cease to exist?
Do you really think that if a synagogue is burnt that Judaism stops existing?
If you burnt a Hindu temple, are you really foolish enough to think that Hinduism and Hindus will cease to be?
And did you think, for one minute, that because the Bamyan Buddhas were destroyed, Buddhists would somehow cease to exist?
If you believe these things, then you possess zealotry, not faith.
@Shamatar:
once again Samatar is using half-truths and begged questions. For those who might not know, the "Pledge of protection" he refers to is found in the Koran, 8:39:
"And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do"
Notice it doesn't talk about defensive wars or fighting. The conditions of ceasing of hostilities is FORCED BELIEF IN ISLAM. There is one more condition, found in Quran 9:29:
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"
So, the choice is threefold: 1._)Die 2.)Convert 3.)pay a tax and be a second class citizen ("feel subdued").
Of course, Samatar doesn't mention this part, or bother to show is how these police officers, or the victems of the church bombing he refrences were actually UNDER this pledge. Were they paying a tax to muslims? Does Samatar actually agree with these passages in the Koran?
@Samatar mohammed - are you kidding? Have you ever read your own books and why are you bothering with propaganda - we know it is bull. These are on a former comment by David Wood - perhaps he could post the article on here for you to re-read. How can you possibly still deny it and be a civilised human being?
Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
My Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those who believe not in Allah," it means that Muslims should "fight those who believe not in Allah." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.
Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain.
My Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims "fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain," it means that Muslims "fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.
Continued....
Part 2
Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).
My Interpretation: When the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you," it means that Muslims should "fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.
Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.
My Interpretation: When the Qur'an says that Muslims are "severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves," it means that Muslims are supposed to be "severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.
Sahih Muslim 33—The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.
My Interpretation: When Muhammad said that he had been commanded to "fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah," he meant that he had been commanded to "fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah." Is there anything in the immediate context that suggests another interpretation? No. Anything in the historical context that suggests another interpretation? No. Hence, I take the obvious meaning to be the literal meaning of the words.
How can muslims live in peace when the quran and hadiths command you to kill all non-believers in cold blood? Here are some verses from your own scriptures:
· No muslim should be killed for killing an unbeliever (Sahih Bukhari 1:3:11)
· No muslim should be killed for killing an infidel (Sahih Bukhari 4:52:283)
· No muslim should be killed for killing a non-muslim (Sahih Bukhari 9:83:50)
· A muslim should not be killed for killing an infidel (Sunaan Abu Dawud 39:4491)
· No muslim is to be killed for killing an infidel (Sunaan Abu Dawud 39:4515)
· A muslim must not be killed for killing a non-believer (Sunaan ibn Majah 4:2658, 2659)
· Regard is also to be had to a difference of religion, so that a muslim shall not be put to death for the murder of an unbeliever (Penal of islam, 149. Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri)
· Quran 9:5 “Fight and slay the pagans Christians wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush”.
You just can't make this stuff up. If Mohamed and his followers never ever existed, and the greatest screen writers in the world were to write a story and invent Islam and the things that Muslims believe and practice no one would beleive it.
If the best Hollywood producers the best dirctors, the best actors the best special affects artists where to make a movie about a religion like Islam and it's followers no one would see it becasue there is no way any one would believe it.
Simple Truth,
Yes, being placed on Administrative Leave or assignment to non-patrol duties is routine pending a shooting review board determination.
@ Samatar
Surah 2:256
There is no compulsion in religion.
Why do you think you will get away with this? You know this was abrogated and Mohamed himself didnt follow this ayat!
Either you have absolutely no integrity at all, or you are the in total denial of reality!
And what about Mohameds sunna?
You cant be this stupid, do you think it is good to lie?
Allah's Messenger called Ali [and said]: “Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory,” and Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: “Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?” Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: ”Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger…” (Sahih Muslim 5917)
Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah
Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."
I guess Mohamed wasnt a very good Muslim. Because he certainly didnt follow the Islam you are trying to portray!
I think I have gone over this about a thousand times already. When you bring up passages in the Quran, you must also apply it's historical context. You christians know this very well, because when I bring up a passage in the Bible, you tell me to look at the historical context etc... I am not speaking to an atheist here but a christian who believes everything that is in their bible. When the bible allows masters to beat and punish their slaves as long as they do not die, you would tell me to look at context. When I bring up passages about God ordering the killing of men, women, children, and even animals, you tell me to look at the context. But when you bring passages in the Quran without looking into the historical context, all of a sudden historical context is thrown out the window. I've challenged all christians alike to provide me with one time in the history of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) prophetic career where he allowed and engaged in offensive wars through the Quran and authentic hadith. After all, If the Quran and hadith truly taught to kill all non muslims, you should easily be able to provide me with at least one time the prophet engaged in and allowed offensive wars.
Quranic verse of the day: (2:177)
لَّيۡسَ ٱلۡبِرَّ أَن تُوَلُّواْ وُجُوهَكُمۡ قِبَلَ ٱلۡمَشۡرِقِ وَٱلۡمَغۡرِبِ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱلۡبِرَّ مَنۡ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلۡيَوۡمِ ٱلۡأَخِرِ وَٱلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕڪَةِ وَٱلۡكِتَـٰبِ وَٱلنَّبِيِّـۧنَ وَءَاتَى ٱلۡمَالَ عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِۦ ذَوِى ٱلۡقُرۡبَىٰ وَٱلۡيَتَـٰمَىٰ وَٱلۡمَسَـٰكِينَ وَٱبۡنَ ٱلسَّبِيلِ وَٱلسَّآٮِٕلِينَ وَفِى ٱلرِّقَابِ وَأَقَامَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتَى ٱلزَّڪَوٰةَ وَٱلۡمُوفُونَ بِعَهۡدِهِمۡ إِذَا عَـٰهَدُواْۖ وَٱلصَّـٰبِرِينَ فِى ٱلۡبَأۡسَآءِ وَٱلضَّرَّآءِ وَحِينَ ٱلۡبَأۡسِۗ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ ٱلَّذِينَ صَدَقُواْۖ وَأُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ هُمُ ٱلۡمُتَّقُونَ
It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces towards East or West; but it is righteousness―to believe in Allah and the Last Day and the Angels and the Book and the Messengers; to spend of your substance out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans for the needy, for the wayfarer for those who ask and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer and practise regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient in pain (or suffering) and adversity and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth the Allah-fearing.
Samatar said: “I've challenged all christians alike to provide me with one time in the history of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) prophetic career where he allowed and engaged in offensive wars through the Quran and authentic hadith.”
"I have been ordered by God to fight with people till they bear testimony to the fact that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is his messenger, and that they establish prayer and pay Zakat (money). If they do it, their blood and their property are safe from me" (Bukhari Vol. I, p. 13).
Samatar said: “When you bring up passages in the Quran, you must also apply it's historical context.”
Scholars understood this claim to mean the waging of offensive wars against unbelievers in order to force them to embrace Islam as individuals or communities. This is exactly what Muhammad himself did in carrying out God’s commandment to him.
In his book, "Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography", the Azhar scholar, Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti says the following (page 134, 7th edition):
"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’
http://www.answering-islam.org/BehindVeil/btv2.html
Samatar Mohamed said...
" I think I have gone over this about a thousand times already. When you bring up passages in the Quran, you must also apply it's historical context."
I agree. Then why did you mention surah 2:256 - There is no compulsion in religion? From context, you know that was earlier in Mohammad's prophethood when he was in Mecca. That ayah was abrogated by later ayat from Medina. Surah 9 itself abrogates 2:256. Can you admit that 2:256 historically occurred before Mohammad had any significant following and no power to implement his will on others? The historical context indicates that. Almost immediately after Mohammad moved to Medina, he gained some power and we see his intolerance and compulsion of religion increase. That is undeniable to anyone looking at the progression of this prophethood.
"You christians know this very well, because when I bring up a passage in the Bible, you tell me to look at the historical context etc... I am not speaking to an atheist here but a christian who believes everything that is in their bible. When the bible allows masters to beat and punish their slaves as long as they do not die, you would tell me to look at context. When I bring up passages about God ordering the killing of men, women, children, and even animals, you tell me to look at the context. But when you bring passages in the Quran without looking into the historical context, all of a sudden historical context is thrown out the window."
The problem that I have with you and other Muslims is that you try to make the Biblical circumstances fit with Qu'ranic ones. It doesn't work that way since the context of the Bible, specifically the OT that you try to draw parallels to, is distinct from the Qu'ran. You try to fit slavery in the Bible with slavery in the Qu'ran as if they are equal and apply the same principles. They don't mesh. Slavery in the Bible was intended for a different purpose than in the Qu'ran; so, Qu'ranic context will lead to the wrong understanding. Slavery in the OT was done out of God's judgement of nations. God warns nations for many generations and they don't repent. Finally God's grace on them expires and he has other nations enslaving, and in some cases, killing them. This has nothhing to do with them following the right religion, but of disobedience to what God has required of them. In the case of the Qu'ran, there is no judgment of nations by Allah's orders; instead, we find judgment of people who either don't believe in Mohammad's prophethood, or those who are fought just because they won't accept Islam. This type of paridigm is absent in the Bible. It would be like comparing apples to oranges.
continued..........
"I've challenged all christians alike to provide me with one time in the history of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) prophetic career where he allowed and engaged in offensive wars through the Quran and authentic hadith."
The historical context of surah 9 is evident. Look at 9:5, 29-30. It is obvious to any rational objective person that Mohammad has been given license by Allah to attack nonbelievers because of their disbelief. That is why Mohammad engaged kingdoms near Arabia that belonged to the Roman Empire by sending them letters to join Islam or suffer the consequences. Umar, for example, used Mohammad's template of Jihad to invade non-Muslim lands. That is how Islam spread so fast. Please be honest and stop insulting us with your pretense of stupidity or willing ignorance.
"After all, If the Quran and hadith truly taught to kill all non muslims, you should easily be able to provide me with at least one time the prophet engaged in and allowed offensive wars."
Surah 9 is all you need. Go read and contextualize. It is very difficult for me to believe that you don't know about surah 9 and it's context regarding polytheist, Jews, and Christians. Mohammad himself stated that there would be no religion accepted by Allah other than Islam and that those who didn't accept it would be removed from Arabia until only Islam would remain. I know that you know this stuff. Many of us here have sourced it for you. You can't pretend that you don't know. You have no excuses.
" Quranic verse of the day: (2:177)
لَّيۡسَ ٱلۡبِرَّ أَن تُوَلُّواْ وُجُوهَكُمۡ قِبَلَ ٱلۡمَشۡرِقِ وَٱلۡمَغۡرِبِ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱلۡبِرَّ مَنۡ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلۡيَوۡمِ ٱلۡأَخِرِ وَٱلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕڪَةِ وَٱلۡكِتَـٰبِ وَٱلنَّبِيِّـۧنَ وَءَاتَى ٱلۡمَالَ عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِۦ ذَوِى ٱلۡقُرۡبَىٰ وَٱلۡيَتَـٰمَىٰ وَٱلۡمَسَـٰكِينَ وَٱبۡنَ ٱلسَّبِيلِ وَٱلسَّآٮِٕلِينَ وَفِى ٱلرِّقَابِ وَأَقَامَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتَى ٱلزَّڪَوٰةَ وَٱلۡمُوفُونَ بِعَهۡدِهِمۡ إِذَا عَـٰهَدُواْۖ وَٱلصَّـٰبِرِينَ فِى ٱلۡبَأۡسَآءِ وَٱلضَّرَّآءِ وَحِينَ ٱلۡبَأۡسِۗ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ ٱلَّذِينَ صَدَقُواْۖ وَأُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ هُمُ ٱلۡمُتَّقُونَ
It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces towards East or West; but it is righteousness―to believe in Allah and the Last Day and the Angels and the Book and the Messengers; to spend of your substance out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans for the needy, for the wayfarer for those who ask and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer and practise regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient in pain (or suffering) and adversity and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth the Allah-fearing."
Scripture of the day:
Joh 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.
Joh 10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
@ Samatar Mohamed
Since you object to offensive fighting (Jihad). Then explain this to me.
9:28 O you who believe! Verily, the Mushrikin are impure. So let them not come near Al-Masjid Al- Haram after this year; and if you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you if He wills, out of His bounty. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
-------------->>>>
According to ibn Kathir, the bounty that was to come would be from offensive jihad (9:29-30). The background of this ayah is that Allah was going to compensate Muslims for loss of income since the polytheist would no longer be allowed into the Mosques in Medina. The pilgrimages to the Kaaba, for example, generated lots of money; so, now that money would be cut off. Allah promises that they will get some kind of compensation. The compensation was to come from fighting offensively and collecting Jizyah as stated in 9:29.
-------------->>>>
ibn Kathir tafsir:
9:29 Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture,
This honorable Ayah was revealed with the order to fight the People of the Book, after the pagans were defeated, the people entered Allah's religion in large numbers, and the Arabian Peninsula was secured under the Muslims' control.
Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to Jihad announcing his intent and destination.
The Messenger sent his intent to various Arab areas around Al-Madinah to gather forces, and he collected an army of thirty thousand. Some people from Al-Madinah and some hypocrites, in and around it, lagged behind, for that year was a year of drought and intense heat. The Messenger of Allah marched, heading towards Ash- Sham to fight the Romans until he reached Tabuk, where he set camp for about twenty days next to its water resources. He then prayed to Allah for a decision and went back to Al-Madinah because it was a hard year and the people were weak, as we will mention, Allah willing.
-------------->>>>
Now, tell me that Mohammad didn't go to fight people offensively. Are you willing to confess that you are wrong? Can you be honest and remain dignified after reading this?
@Samatar
Maybe you dont recall. But when I posted this hadith previously you made a an unsubstantiated claim that this was for Bani Mutaliq. But you never provided the evidence to support it. And then Same posted the link that refuted you. And of course we never heard from you again on the topic! Just like every other time you are refuted and really cornered!
Actually this was the battle of Khaybar.
Allah's Messenger called Ali [and said]: “Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory,” and Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: “Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?” Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: ”Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger…” (Sahih Muslim 5917)
And then we have the testimony of Tabari that Mohamed tortured and murder Kinnanah for the sole purpose of stealing what he had and was protecting for his people!
Tabari VIII:122
Ishaq:515 "The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."
Tell me how do you justify this in your mind of what an evil selfish act all for booty. Did Allah need the booty?
Clearly his commands to Ali were to fight the people untill they accepted Islam! You are willfully ignorant once again!
Also
Narrated Abu Hurayrah:
While we were at the Mosque, the Messenger of Allah came to us and said, "Go to the Jews."
So we went out with him until we arrived. So the Messenger of Allah stood up and called on them, "O ye Jewish people, become Muslims and you will be safe."
They replied, "You have delivered [your message] O Aba Al-Qasim."
So he said to them, "That [delivering the message] is what I want. Become Muslims and you will be safe."
They replied, "You have delivered [your message] O Aba Al-Qasim]."
So he repeated what he said for the third time and said, "Know that the land is for Allah and his Messenger, and I want to EXILE you from this land. So let him he who finds something valuable in his possession sell it; or know that the land is for Allah and his Messenger." (Sahih Muslim, Number 1765)
Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab:
He [Umar] heard the Messenger of Allah saying, "I indeed will EXILE the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula until I leave no one but a Muslim." (Sahih Muslim, Number 1767)
Now certainly this would entail fighting people who were not attacking the Muslims. Mohamed wanted to kick everyone out. That was his goal. Untilthe whole Arabian peninsula was Muslim. So that would entail fighting non combatants to leave what his fascist bigoted death cult commanded it!
Mohamed seemed to have a different interpretation of Islam that you.
You are willfully ignorant and a delusional individual!
@ Samatar
2:177 ayat was in response to criticism from the Jews because Mohamed changed the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to the pagan Kaaba!I dont know how your mind works but this proves nothing other than your Allah did change his mind! LOL!
@Samatar:
Oh, out of context. The problem with this is, the context doesn't actually change the meaning of the verses I quoted.
Here is the entire book 8:
http://quran.com/8
Here is the verse before (8:38):
"Say to those who have disbelieved [that] if they cease, what has previously occurred will be forgiven for them. But if they return [to hostility] - then the precedent of the former [rebellious] peoples has already taken place."
Hmm. Ceasing to disbelieve, not ceasing to fight or anything about a defensive war.
And here is book 9:
http://quran.com/9
There's no real context in the verses before or after that show what you claim that this is "out of context", so you are frankly once again LYING hoping we will be cowed by your lies and be too stupid/lazy to actually look for ourselves.
There's nothing that indicates any sort of action first by any other group. This is the problem with your "challange". This doesn't mention a specific group of people (such as cananites, Amorites, Etc. like in the bible), or specific actions made by a group against Mohammad and muslims. it says "the unbeleivers", meaning all of them and does not give an end time to restrict such as the bible does. It says "In the last days". So once again you are outright LYING TO US.
It's interesting also to note as a bonus that the next verse after the one I quoted (9:30) is an outright falsehood (either through ignorance or lies), claiming the Jews believe Ezra to be the son of God. Context!
Another classic case of "Suicide By Cop". She probably couldn't go on promoting the idiocy of Islam so she sought a way out which would bring her honor in the Islamic community.
When one pursues a philosophy that, concomitantly, condemns and supports virtually all aspects of human activity, the conflict for the followers of such a philosophy would, inextricably, lead to various forms of mental infirmities. The inescapability from the Islamic community for some of those so affected could lead to suicide as the only form of escape. Since suicide is frowned upon by the Islamic community, the honorable form of escape is having someone else accomplish the killing.
Suicide By Cop, pure and simple.
Post a Comment