A 9-point answer!

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Apr 26, 2013 at 21:52

"1. If this is true then there would be no more Islamic terrorism which is not the case"

Sure - just like . . . there is no gun crime in USA - as the law forbids it . . . would you like me to quote stats? Or how how about - the Jewish command - you shall not kill. . . ?

I hope - this is enough to show the fallacy of your argument. And I don't have to spell it put.

- - -

"2. The subjects of the verse are really the Jews and not the Muslims so our dear Amin is saying that he has another verse where Allah says not to kill but the point here is that it means that he agrees that the subjects of the verse are really the Jews and not Muslims and this is why he is offering another verse right our dear Amin?"

This just highlights that you are unable to deal with replies - I have answered this in some detail . . . yet - rather than answering that - you simply repeat.

*whistels away*

In short - the whole narrative is aimed at Muslims. And I removed the dishonesty of yours - and whosoever quotes the same argument - by poiinting out that this is NOT the only verse - advocating such law.

- - -

"3. And when he was reminded of such fact he told us that the subjects of the verse are really the Muslims which means he changed his mind so where would i find in the verse anything about كتبنا على المسلمين or we wrote for Muslims instead of what we find in the vesrse كتبنا على بني اسراءيل or we wrote for the Children of Israel you tell us our dear Amin!"

I have already answered this . . . too. But DHM - when unable to think up of an answer - put his hope in repeating the same thing!

"And recite to them the story of Adam's tw. . ."

5:27 - The objective of the narrative is Muslims.

- - -

"4. Then he told us his little sob story about the fact that I must have read the bad Rober Spencer and he is my source and when he was reminded that I have been posting about this little lie since 2007 here at danielpipes.org and it is old news his response was the "why now" which means he does not get it and if a lie is repeated then it has to be exposed again and again"

Again repition - again I have answered this! [I know!] . . . take away the meaningless spiel . . . there is nothing left . .

Just beacuse he posted in 2007 - didn't mean the finding was his . . . and in another post he admits it too . . . but then says "so what"

If it is "so what" why is it you made a big deal out of it?

- - -

"5. Then he told us but we kuffar can find it mentioned on the web and my answer was and so is the fact that the Hindu Genocide is all over the web and it is old news so should we stop talking about it?"

See . . .what did I tell you? He is NOT the source of this . . . he admits it . . . but he proceeded to make this an issue! Illogical or what!

Sure . . . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_anti-Sikh_riots

The Hindu massacre of Sikhs - STILL needs resolving . . as Amitabh Bachan is implicated . . . and the indian govt has STILL not managed to resolve this . . .

- - -

"6. Then he changes gears and tells us that Muslims are really the subjects of this little gem so all i did here I provided him with both Ibn kathir and al-Tabari's exegesis and let us see what he says and I'm sure it will be more twists and turns"

Nope - you posted chunks . . . which you do not understand.

- - -

"7. And when nothing seems to be working he says that we kuffar insult and hate Muslims and when he was reminded that it is the so called the god of the universe that hate us and that we kuffar will stop going after his Allah if all the hate against us is gone from the Qur'an I have not heard from him"

Dear one . . . your POSTS are full of petty insults . . . and it's Western set standard such things are by the fools . .

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

So why do it?

And EVEN here you are dishonest . . . my questioning is JUST to you . . . who mentioned "Kuffar"

See - truth telling has NEVER been you er . . . strong point has it.

- - -

"9. Oh the ridiculous islamophobia? I'm waiting for this one"

Bizarre? Very!

---

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".