you have to change your name from ali kalaf ...to someone john patrick or some thing else

Submitted by syed mohammad ali (India), Feb 11, 2007 at 06:01

ali kalaf, i have read that in prophet of doom and the mr craig winn lost the debate anyway .....you are the most hypocrite person i have ever seen after ali sina ...who has a muslim name speak against the islam .well there are war and the booty of war are property ....and widows ...you have to read since from old testament ...anyway .... you have written

Bukhari, Vol4 Chapter 88

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: The Prophet said, "MY LIVELIHOOD IS UNDER THE SHADE OF MY SPEAR, FROM WAR BOOTY, AND HE WHO DISOBEYS MY ORDERS WILL BE HUMILIATED BY PAYING JIZYA TAX."lol it makes laugh tell me how many countries who didnt accept taxes from their people ...and jizya is for ...non muslims who didnt paid the zakat as the part of islamic beliefs....you have also said about bassher al asad who have killed the people of muslim brother hood he was a pure communist...saddam was american stooge so was king abdullah ....who sell their soul for$ ........again your question about kyber war ...Fajr prayer is DAWN prayer; Prayer of fear is SALAT AL KHAWF. Prophet Muhammad's attack on Khaybar is completely justified; go read the history of what those Jews did for them to deserve that. In the United Kingdom the only crime punishable by death is TREASON. In America, spies convicted of treason are executed. If that is justifiable, then the order of the Prophet for the killing of the Jews of Khaybar is more than justifiable, for their betrayal of the Prophet and their breaking of the peace treaty can absolutely not go unpunished.

Narrated By Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, "Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned." Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her 'Mahr'. ...!!!! Because the word warriors show that those men being killed were FIGHTING AGAINST THE MUSLIMS. But when you just put the word "men", like Craig Winn, it seems like innocent people are being killed. HOW DECEPTIVE CAN A MAN GET?There are many possible meanings for this Hadith. I was kind of surprised when I read it at first. But we don't know the EXACT situation or what the Prophet truly meant. Maybe, maybe THOSE particular women and children were planning to fight against the Muslims with the enemy.

Maybe the Muslim army just could not have blown this chance to attack the enemy that they still had to attack them no matter at what cost in order to stop the risk of more blood shed (do a little bad for the greater good). I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THIS IS CORRECT but I am just guessing. Or the hadith is false. Because this is only ONE hadith and we have so many other authentic hadith where the Prophet clearly prohibited the killing of innocent women and children during time of war.Narrated By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children. Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.

THE PROPHET DIDN'T SAY that only MUSLIM WOMEN AND CHILDREN couldn't be killed during time of war (WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE, WHY WOULD THEY FIGHT THEIR OWN WOMEN AND CHILDREN).

IT IS OBVIOUSLY TALKING ABOUT WOMEN AND CHILDREN OF THE DISBELIEVERS

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".