The Brits are coming... the Brits are coming! Paul Revere and Omar al-Farooq and islamic delusions

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jun 12, 2010 at 09:17

Our dear Deb whose ancestors the Hindus were brutalized by islam and who knows very well that the Qur'an says that Islam is the religion of the Arabs only as per al-Qur'an a book that you cannot read in Arabic

Oh you think that I forgot about you our dear Deb al-tablighee?

>Hi,You said this.In response to Debanjan's comment I like to opine that Temple mount was destroyed by muslim savages after invention of islam and then forced convertion of tribals in the middle east and civilized Jews into tribal cult." It makes sense>My Answer : Another despicable lie.

The despicable liar is not him ...

>My Answer : If you can prove me that I have lied by saying that Romans destroyed Jerusalem's second temple ,

Careless reader! Where did I say that?

>prove me a liar. Remember in western tradition , the onus lies on the one who makes the accusation.

A liar is he tells us that islam was not spread through violence in India or that 90M Hidnus were not killed by the followers of Allah! Right our dear Deb?

>So what proof do you that Umayyads are Christianized Arabs ?

Sure and for this see

"The early history of Islam following inscription and numismatic testimony" by Volker Popp and you will find it in Gerd Puin's collection "The Hidden Origns of islam" where Popp reviews the early extant literary sources and here he examines cions and epigraphy

Oh if you want to know more then just ask!

>What proof do you have that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is a Byzantine church ? Remember if you can read history ,

Hello: It is built like a Byzantine Church! It does not even look like a mosque and oh the Muhammadan rasul allah of Abd al-Malik is really Jesus! Sohanallah

>Nestorians never had any good relations with the Byzantines

So?

>so why on earth the "Christian nestorian" Umayyads would built a church on their enemy style ?

Careless reader again. I wrote that the very sophisticated Nestorians were watching what Abd al-Malik was doing in building what looks like a Byzantine Chruch at the site

And by the way the rule of the Nestroians in the religion of the arabs is just amazing as in the case of

1. Bahira al-rahb al-Nistori

2. Ibn Ishaq's family were Nestorians

3. The islamic thoelogy as it pertians to Jesus is very much Syrian/Nestorian Christianity

4. The so called trips by Muslims to al-habasha and to al-seen and al-shat al-malabari (the malabar coast) were made by Nestorians and was plagiarized by the Arabs

You need to stick to Urdu

>Another point has it ever come to you that why the Crusaders did not destroy the Al-aqsa mosque when they ruled Jerusalem for 80 years ?

What does this have to do with Abd al-Malik? Surpise me with an answer

> Remember the Crusaders were sworn enemies of the Orthodox creed so do you think that there is any reason that why the Crusaders did not destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque ? Because they knew that it is a Mosque and destruction of that Mosque would bring the animosity and thereby destruction of the crusader states.

Hello: the Crusadres cared less about islam or public opinions for this matter

But here is a deal: The Crusaders are gone you how about the muslim part of the deal that those Arabs and wannabe Arabs in Jerusalem should head back to al-Hijaz where they claim that they came from? Deal?

> If it was a Byzantine Church then they well have destroyed it since the Byzantines were very much a spent force by that time.

So what does this have to do with Omar al-farooq and Abd al-Malik? Surprise with an answer

>You have made following outrageous claims :1. The first four Caliphs did not exist.

Right there is no extant historical evidence that any of al-khulafa' al-rashduun existed! . But I will give you a chance: Where is your extant evidence that any of these characters existed? And let me help you all the extant evidence about early Islam was collected by Hoyland in his survey and let me help you there is not even a sinlge word about any of these fictional characters at least until 750CE

And you know what? the name of your so called prophet Muhammad does not even appear in the extant (oh darn it extant!) until 72 years after his death so where was he? And is it Muhammad or the Syriac Muhammadan or the Christ?

>2. All the early Muslims were some kind of Christian peoples.

There is no historical evidence that islam existed until the late second century of Islam! Oh the Umayyads? they were Christian Arabs after all

1. Mu3awiyya is the first attested real character in the history of the religion of the Arabs and why would an "Arab" have an Aramaic name after all the word Mu3awiyya is a Syriac name and it means the weeper?

2. Why would Mu3awiyya establish his capital in Damascus and not miserable Mecca ( it would be like the Brits invading India and establshing the capital of their Empire in Delhi the London) so you tell us

3. Why would Mu3awiyya regard kanisat Yuhanna al-Mi3midani as his cutlic center and not miserable Mecca unless he was a Christian Arab? Any other guesses?

4. Why would we have epigraphy from baths at gadara where his name appear with a cross?

5. And why would islam as a religion begins not in the year of Muhammad's so called mab3ath in 610CE but in 622Ce or the year of the so called al-Hijra? Let me help you: the new dating was the year where the Greeks defeated the Persians in Upper Mesopotamia and this left a political vaccum and the take over of power by the Arabs of al-hilal al-khaseeb and the likes of Mu3awiyya?

6. And how about the coins minted in the time of Mu3awiyya with the sign of the cross and his name? any guesses?

7. Why would Abd al-Malik build the first cutlic center of Islam in Jerusalem and not in piserable Mecca? Any idea?

>Now what lie will you tell next ? Tomorrow will you say that Prophet Mohammad himself was a Christian ?

Muhammad more likely than not never existed! gasp!

For the readers:

1. The Qur'an does not tell us much about the life of Muhammad or even if he really existed and the name Muhammad or Ahmad in the Qur'an can the name of anyone

2. Now if we turn to the sira we do not get much help as it is not an independent historical source and it is no more than another form of Quranic exegesis

>Bye the bye I am still waiting for your evidence that Paul Revere did exist.

Oh our Omar al-Farooq? I have no claims to make here and I care less if de did or did not exist! You? you have to worry as we kuffar are destroying the bogus foundation of the religion of the Arabs

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".