Sharia Law: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You.

So?

Sounds like Christians in the Middle Ages. All answered to the Pope and invading east. Later Catholics and Protestants doing the same. There's no difference, people of both religions waged wars of conquest and dressed them in pious words. Although Islam expanded considerably more through trade in Asia than by conquest, while Christianity's spread was pretty much just through conquest.
So? It shows Muhammad himself was evil and sinful. Jesus was not. Thus there is no comparison.

Muhammad is dead and always will be, even if his evil and hatred ideology continues to plague the world today
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustFunnN'Orange
And neither are Jews. There are white Jews, Arab Jews, and Black Jews.

Also with regard to Islam. While its not a race there is a racial component to it. Most Muslims countries are black or brown while there are almost no white European Muslim countries. So when you say Muslims are barbaric and backwards its hard not read a racial component into it.
There are plenty of white majority Muslim countries, even in Europe.
 
The key is that Muhammad and his direct successors did it. Jesus and his Apostles did NOT. The Caliphate was a religious organization and empire that enforced Islamic Sharia and forever changed the Middle East. Arabs were only limited to the Arabian Peninsula prior to the 650 invasions. Now they are all over North Africa, Middle East, Central Asia, etc. Native populations that were once there have been pushed out (in the name of Islam under the Caliphs).
That's splitting hairs when you have Popes anointing rulers, as "chosen by god 'and leading calls for crusades, and funding them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Then why did the Arabs attack the Byzantines and other Christian Civilizations to spread Islam? Shouldn't they have stayed in the desert instead of invading Syria, Judea, Egypt, etc. in the 600s? Why go into Spain or France? Why try to sack Rome and kill the Pope in 800? What was the Ottoman Empire thing about as well?

I am sorry, history disagrees with you and these were the Caliphs, the religious leaders of Islam. Even Mohammed himself slaughtered Jews that wouldn't convert outside Mecca.

I think you need to get your facts straight on that incident. Mohammed himself never killed them. He allowed the chief of the tribe who they betrayed to decide their judgment. And it was he who decided that all the men of that Jewish tribe be killed in accordance to Jewish law. Now why would a Jewish tribe be massacred near Medina? Because they betrayed their loyalty oath to Muhammad and his followers and instead conspired with the pagans of Mecca to kill the Muslims in Medina. It was treason. And I don't if you know this but even in our society the penalty for treason is death.

Now with regard to the military spread of Islam, this was true of Christianity as well. How do you think Christianity came to the Americas and Africa? European Christians committed genocide, slavery, and colonialism to spread Christianity as well as their European empires. Islam and Christianity didn’t become the two biggest religions on earth by happenstance. They were spread militarily.

Now what happened in those countries after Islam took over? The Muslims didn't just start massacring people. Nor did they force conversions. Instead they employed a taxing system called Jizya where Christians and Jews paid a tax for living peacefully in a Muslim state. If you converted to Islam you didn't have to pay the tax. Now you might say that's still forced conversion. I would argue that at least it wasn't by the sword. And this is why Spain is today still largely Christian despite being occupied by Muslims for almost 700 years. If Islam was about killing Christians and Jews then a place like Spain wouldn't have had Christians left.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
That Mamdani maybe winning in New York and Dearborn floating police patches with Arabic writing mean that sharia law is coming to America. Dearborn dropped the idea BTW. And Mamdani's not going to lead a move from the Constitution to sharia.
She's a professional agitator. Stirring shyte and getting ignorant people riled up is how she makes a good living.
So this was just last week...
 
Other than Albania and a few Balkan regions, what other white majority Muslim countries are there? And no we're not counting Persians and Arabs as white.
Turkey, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Albania and Kosovo.

Turkey is about half "white" which is why I included them.
 
So? It shows Muhammad himself was evil and sinful.

Muhammad is dead and always will be, even if his evil and hatred ideology continues to plague the world today

Once again. Can you please cite one evil or sinful act committed by Muhammad?

Yall keep saying this as if its an obvious truth and yet I've not seen one piece of evidence supporting this assertion. As someone who has studied both the Quran and Islamic history I really want to know these sinful and evil acts committed by Muhammad. Cause if he is as bad as you claim then surely 2 billion people can't keep following him?
 
Turkey, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Albania and Kosovo.

Turkey is about half "white" which is why I included them.

Cenk Uygur is the famous Turk in America and nobody would say he's white. Turks don't look European. They look Middle Eastern. I would say the same is largely true for Azerbaijan. Only Albania and those Balkan states you mentioned would qualify as "white" Muslim countries. Which I what I stated earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Cenk Uygur is the famous Turk in America and nobody would say he's white. Turks don't look European. They look Middle Eastern. I would say the same is largely true for Azerbaijan. Only Albania and those Balkan states you mentioned would qualify as "white" Muslim countries. Which I what I stated earlier.
I don't know about that, their complexion, or a large percentage of their complexion is Greek/Italian mix from years of entanglement in history.

Azerbaijan as well though with different ethnic groups
 
- Executed Nadr/Uqba along with about 50 others after the Battle of Badr which he raided a village for goods, and held other 70 villagers for ransom
- Encouraged Muslims to fight and kill the Meccans, Something Jesus would never have done
- Ordered raids on tons of Meccan caravans, to loot goods, kill people and take prisoners
- Ordered a seige and blockade of Jewish camps, and ordered the murder of Ka'B ibn al-Ashraf under the guise of needing food
- Decided after one of his schizophrenic episodes with Satan, to allow Muslim men to "own" up to 4 wives
- Stole more Jewish land from villages after claiming "he saw a vision where someone dropped a boulder on his head" thus the muslims needed to take the fertile lands
- Invaded the Banu Mustaliq taking all their animals and food, and enslaved 200 women as sex slaves who were raped
- Invaded the Banu Quranyza and beheaded 600-900 of men and enslaved all the women and children; Before the battle Muhammad personally gestured that if they didn't surrender he would slit their throats
- Marrying and having sexual relations with a 6 year old
- Ordered the execution of village leader Umm Qirfa
- Invaded the Jewish city of Khaybar; again executed male prisoners and used the women as sex slaves
- Tortured the chief of the Jews to get treasure and then executed him, and took his wife for his own sex slave
- Invaded Mecca and and forced their residents to convert to Islam or be killed; again killed hundreds, took their wives and children as slaves
- Invaded Syria and forced paid extortion under penalty of death

And that was just his PERSONAL actions, not counting the violent rantings of the Quran

also these are EVIL and SINFUL acts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IhateGA
Are you denying that these things are true? I have seen the actual videos of it as well....not just one or two
I am saying they aren't pervasive and don't define the religion. Do dog fighting and drunkenness define Christianity?
Female circumcision is probably the most pervasive of the issues you listed and it's not a Muslim obligation but a cultural vestige.
 
I am saying they aren't pervasive and don't define the religion. Do dog fighting and drunkenness define Christianity?
Female circumcision is probably the most pervasive of the issues you listed and it's not a Muslim obligation but a cultural vestige.
hahaha dog fighting? Most Islamic countries have cultural "vestiges" such as child rape, and using your hand to wipe your ass.

Show me a free Islamic country that supports complete freedom and liberty especially for women and homosexuals
 
Cenk Uygur is the famous Turk in America and nobody would say he's white. Turks don't look European. They look Middle Eastern. I would say the same is largely true for Azerbaijan. Only Albania and those Balkan states you mentioned would qualify as "white" Muslim countries. Which I what I stated earlier.
Turks are more Central Asian. Some call Xinjiang in China East Turkmenistan.
 
hahaha dog fighting? Most Islamic countries have cultural "vestiges" such as child rape, and using your hand to wipe your ass.

Show me a free Islamic country that supports complete freedom and liberty especially for women and homosexuals
Child rape in most Islamic countries? I've never heard that one. It is or was a problem in Afghanistan from what I've read. But the Taliban outlawed it as against Islam. So is it Islamic or not?
News flash for you: wiping with a hand transcends religion in much of Asia. Hundreds of millions of Hindus, Christians, Jains, Farsis, Buddhists etc. do that in the Subcontinent and SEA.
Show me any country that supports complete freedom and liberty especially for women and homosexuals.
 
Last edited:
- Executed Nadr/Uqba along with about 50 others after the Battle of Badr which he raided a village for goods, and held other 70 villagers for ransom
- Encouraged Muslims to fight and kill the Meccans, Something Jesus would never have done
- Ordered raids on tons of Meccan caravans, to loot goods, kill people and take prisoners
- Ordered a seige and blockade of Jewish camps, and ordered the murder of Ka'B ibn al-Ashraf under the guise of needing food
- Decided after one of his schizophrenic episodes with Satan, to allow Muslim men to "own" up to 4 wives
- Stole more Jewish land from villages after claiming "he saw a vision where someone dropped a boulder on his head" thus the muslims needed to take the fertile lands
- Invaded the Banu Mustaliq taking all their animals and food, and enslaved 200 women as sex slaves who were raped
- Invaded the Banu Quranyza and beheaded 600-900 of men and enslaved all the women and children; Before the battle Muhammad personally gestured that if they didn't surrender he would slit their throats
- Marrying and having sexual relations with a 6 year old
- Ordered the execution of village leader Umm Qirfa
- Invaded the Jewish city of Khaybar; again executed male prisoners and used the women as sex slaves
- Tortured the chief of the Jews to get treasure and then executed him, and took his wife for his own sex slave
- Invaded Mecca and and forced their residents to convert to Islam or be killed; again killed hundreds, took their wives and children as slaves
- Invaded Syria and forced paid extortion under penalty of death

And that was just his PERSONAL actions, not counting the violent rantings of the Quran

also these are EVIL and SINFUL acts.

And what are your sources? Because as you admitted none of that is in the Quran.

Also be accurate in your allegations. Muhammad isn't alleged to have had sexual relations with a 6 year old.
 
And what are your sources? Because as you admitted none of that is in the Quran.

Also be accurate in your allegations. Muhammad isn't alleged to have had sexual relations with a 6 year old.
Are you denying these events happened?

And you are right he only bathed and did masterbation with her at 6, he didn't have full intercourse till she was 9
 
Are you denying these events happened?

And you are right he only bathed and did masterbation with her at 6, he didn't have full intercourse till she was 9

If I claimed that aliens built the pyramids would you just believe it? Or would you ask what my sources were? I'm denying those events because there is no historical evidence supporting them. I know what those sources are. My question is do you know where those claims come from? And do you know what historians think about the reliability of those sources?
 
I think you need to get your facts straight on that incident. Mohammed himself never killed them. He allowed the chief of the tribe who they betrayed to decide their judgment. And it was he who decided that all the men of that Jewish tribe be killed in accordance to Jewish law. Now why would a Jewish tribe be massacred near Medina? Because they betrayed their loyalty oath to Muhammad and his followers and instead conspired with the pagans of Mecca to kill the Muslims in Medina. It was treason. And I don't if you know this but even in our society the penalty for treason is death.

Now with regard to the military spread of Islam, this was true of Christianity as well. How do you think Christianity came to the Americas and Africa? European Christians committed genocide, slavery, and colonialism to spread Christianity as well as their European empires. Islam and Christianity didn’t become the two biggest religions on earth by happenstance. They were spread militarily.

Now what happened in those countries after Islam took over? The Muslims didn't just start massacring people. Nor did they force conversions. Instead they employed a taxing system called Jizya where Christians and Jews paid a tax for living peacefully in a Muslim state. If you converted to Islam you didn't have to pay the tax. Now you might say that's still forced conversion. I would argue that at least it wasn't by the sword. And this is why Spain is today still largely Christian despite being occupied by Muslims for almost 700 years. If Islam was about killing Christians and Jews then a place like Spain wouldn't have had Christians left.

Wrong. Take Iraq and the Assyrians as an example. They were the majority population in Northern Iraq pre-Islamic conquest, now there is less than a million of then left in Iraq. The ethnicity of the areas conquered by Muslims has mostly changed. This is why you don't have Babylonians/Chaldeans, Egyptians (Coptics), Phoenicians, Assyrians, etc. still around or majority in their formal homelands. They are primary Arab today.
Christianity did not spread by war. Read Acts. The events you are talking about are well past 1000 AD and over 1000 years past Christ.
 
That's splitting hairs when you have Popes anointing rulers, as "chosen by god 'and leading calls for crusades, and funding them.
Crusades where in 1096, events i posted were before that. As Rambo stated, they dre first blood. Crusades also were a response to a Muslim attack on the Byzantine Empire during battle of Manzikert.

Blaming the Crusaders is like blaming World War 2 on France and UK. I guess the Catholic world could have rolled over and ignored the cry of help from Alexius Comneus and Byzantium or the massacre of Christian Pilgrims. The lands the Crusaders tried to take were Christian Roman lands pre-Islam.
 
Wrong. Take Iraq and the Assyrians as an example. They were the majority population in Northern Iraq pre-Islamic conquest, now there is less than a million of then left in Iraq. The ethnicity of the areas conquered by Muslims has mostly changed. This is why you don't have Babylonians/Chaldeans, Egyptians (Coptics), Phoenicians, Assyrians, etc. still around or majority in their formal homelands. They are primary Arab today.
Christianity did not spread by war. Read Acts. The events you are talking about are well past 1000 AD and over 1000 years past Christ.

No. You're the one who is wrong. There was no mass displacement of people. There was simply the Arabization of those populations. Much of Northern Sudan is considered Arab today. Yet if you look at the people they look black. Many look no different than populations in neighboring countries like Ethiopia and South Sudan. Why are they considered Arabs? Because they adopted the Arabic language and customs. Same thing happened in much of Northern Africa where it was mostly Berbers but they now speak Arabic and are considered Arabs. The same thing happened in the middle east. This Arabization is just not as obvious as it is in a place like Sudan because the Assyrians and Chaldeans for example probably looked very similar to the early Arabs. So when they got Arabized it was not as obvious as when the Sudanese were Arabized.

This is why genetically that whole region is so similar. The majority of Semitic speaking populations outside of Africa carry Y-DNA haplogroup J while the Afro-Asiatic speaking populations within Africa carry Y-DNA haplogroup E. If there was this mass spread of Arabs displacing these native non-Arab populations we would see it in the genetics. But instead what the genetics show is that the Arab world is very distinct genetically with clear separation between the African populations and the non-African populations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Advertisement

Back
Top