Islam and Nationalism - Divide and Rule - Greece - International Chaos

[dannyuk]

[mranderson]

how is it my pre conceived idea that the Quran is the foundation of Sharia ?

That was why over the years if you look all over the Middle East they looked a lot more civilised and less extreme and women walked around in ordinary clothes etc and people looked a lot more like how Europeans live.

Well where does Iran come into this then ? Under the western controlled Shah and you ALL say that is the case the Iranians looked a lot more European ( not that it matters and I would prefer it if everyone had thier own style to be honest because thats a rich tapestry , I don't think European is the model of humanity , we all need to learn from one another and all have something to offer )

and then came the Ayatollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran and suddenly the veils and the strict adherence comes back ?

so which was it with the case of Iran ? Is it also under British control and CIA control ? How come they have done the exact reverse of what you just stated ?

how is correcting you being facetious ?

you stated Sharia is an invention of the British after WW1

and that is a false statement

and I can see what you are doing , it's more of this bullshit about Islam being the perpetual victim of outsider oppression which funnily enough constitutes the core identity of all three Abrahamic faiths

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by vancity eagle

there are HUNDREDS of different interpretations of the Bible, ALL BASED OFF OF THE SAME BOOK.

Yes "all the requirements" for these hundreds of different interpretations are all there as well.

And just like British intelligence created Wahabisim

Freemasonry created Christian splinter groups like Mormonism or Jehovas witness.

Its really not hard to understand, unless of course you intentionally don't want to.

I agree with that , but it is disingenuous at best to literally say Sharia was created by the British after WW1

and I did peg it by asking if you mean the fall of the Ottoman Empire is what led to the birth of what we see as Islam today with it's splintered interpretations

as far as I can tell Islam has been subjected to the same divide and rule tactics as any other of the three branches of Abraham

it has been used as a method of repression and brutal compliance long before there even was a British Empire

I posted that before you decided to add your two cents but as usual you will ignore what I do post in favor of portraying the opposite

[dannyuk]

Originally Posted by mranderson

how is it my pre conceived idea that the Quran is the foundation of Sharia ?



Well where does Iran come into this then ? Under the western controlled Shah and you ALL say that is the case the Iranians looked a lot more European ( not that it matters and I would prefer it if everyone had thier own style to be honest because thats a rich tapestry , I don't think European is the model of humanity , we all need to learn from one another and all have something to offer )

and then came the Ayatollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran and suddenly the veils and the strict adherence comes back ?

so which was it with the case of Iran ? Is it also under British control and CIA control ? How come they have done the exact reverse of what you just stated ?

how is correcting you being facetious ?

you stated Sharia is an invention of the British after WW1

and that is a false statement

and I can see what you are doing , it's more of this bullshit about Islam being the perpetual victim of outsider oppression which funnily enough constitutes the core identity of all three Abrahamic faiths

Sharia is an interpretation of the Quran not its “foundation”.
Their are many interpretations of the Quran hence there many groups and forms of society just as there is with other philosophical ideologies and religions.

Just as Zionism is created was equally an interpretation of Judaism not Judaism itself but a deception so it could be brought into existence.
It’s like claiming Zionism is 100% Judaism. It’s not but an inversion of Jewish text. The Islamic equivalent is Sharia Law and it’s inversion of Islam so man can rule/control society. Thus this was interfered with by those who wanted to create a level of control among Islamic nations.

I think you’re deliberately being deceptive with what I’m saying.

I’m not saying Europe is the model for humanity so that’s a misinterpretation of my text (you see how easy it is now) but it’s people are able to eat a bacon butties without receiving a lashing or having their arm or head chopped off. That is not Islamic but a deception by the likes of Sharia Law. Such I do not call rich tapestry but a war upon humanity to control and suppress if you like it please feel free to embrace it until you understand the problem.

Iran has had interference by this international Zionist model yes it has and had been regime changed and ruled by them for many years and such has become their norm and culture/way of life (rich tapestry you refer to).
Hence since the Islamic Revolution the Zionists want to get back in and fully control them. They’ve adopted some of those practices within Sharia Law as that has become the norm they’re use to and it’s removal would be their liberation rather than the bombs or US and Israeli Zionists to get a foothold of Iran. So I hope you’re becoming enlightened a little if you can accept these realities...

You’re not “correcting me” your attacking what I’ve said and not offering an alternative to “put me right” if or where I’m wrong.

When you be sarcastic towards a serious comment and ask questions in manner to undermine them which you have preconceived ideas about, which you express within that comment that is what facetious means not by you “correcting me” if you can correct me without doing so and offer an alternative then no, you would not be facetious but you’re not doing that...

Sharia as it exists today is an inversion of an old interpretation of Sharia Law and I’ve already expressed in another reply perhaps I should of worded it a little different which you will see if you read my previous comments.
So please. It’s says a lot more about you than it does me what you choose to focus upon out of all that I’ve written and we have already gone over this.

If you don’t think or understand that much of Islam is a victim due to international Zionism and interests within the Middle East then you don’t understand the problem and I may as well be talking to a wall.
This is the case if you like it or not so these international Zionists can gain control of the Middle East, Land, Resources and occupy people.

I’m not an Islamist if that’s what you’re trying to suggest I don’t particularly like the religion myself for a personal ideology to live by but my principles are more to do with a people being attacked and made to look like the bad guys when they’re overwhelmingly a victim of international interests that I’m strongly against hence my points of view. Religion has nothing to do with my attitude towards this.
Thus these international interests attacks upon the Middle East have created much of those Islamic extremists believe it or not by design and these international powers are using such as a tool and justification to do more attacks.

I’m sure by your attitude that if it was you in their position under attack you’d be in ISIS within 5 minutes so you could resist such attacks.

But again who am I to suggest such a thing like that

[mranderson]

and when it comes to Libya Gaddafi managed to improve the quality of life for his NATION by raising the average life span to one of the highest on the continent of Africa

he built the worlds largest underground aquifer which helped him produce his own food

immediately kicked out the oil companies after taking power the man was no saint but overall was turning Libya into somewhere decent

I am tired of being accused of ''hating Islam'' when really what I am against is religious fundamentalism in all it's forms

I will be the first in line to start speaking up about how ruining Libya was a international crime !

when it came out that the UK had been housing Islamic fundamentalists who tried to destabilize Gaddafi previously , that there was a group known as the Manchester Boys and that the sons of one of the men is the guy thumbed as the suicide bomber of the MEN Arena everyone wanted to rip me a new one !

but all I was trying to point out is that yes the Cabal have been funding and supporting fundamentalist Islam and using it to mess with sovereign nations for a long long time

they did this with Gaddafi and if international law was not a complete farce then Obama , Cameron , Hollande would be in the Hague on trial for war crimes

but when I tried to point out the link between the destabilization of Libya and the Mi5 in the UK like I said people wanted to rip me a new one !

Salmen Abedi was in and out of Libya training with fk knows who before the MEN attack

but it wasn't real was it ? it was a false flag but the bit I am trying to constantly point out and hang me from the rafters for saying it is that there has to be a source material to get these people thinking the way they do and the source material is the scripture they put their life down for

but as usual I will probably have to sit through another page or two of being called a zionist

and as usual what is good for the goose is not good for the gander when it comes to this

Libya was a sovereign nation , national in every sense of the word

Gaddafi was a nationalist , and I supported his right to run his country how he saw fit without submitting to the dictates of the fking globalists he is talking about in all his later speeches

but it's not the same when it's Europeans ? they are not allowed nationalism because it might remind you of Hitler ?

and you think I am the victim of a psyop ? lol

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by dannyuk

Sharia is an interpretation of the Quran not its “foundation”.

wth Danny I literally said

how is it my pre conceived idea that the Quran is the foundation of Sharia ?

I said the Quran is the foundation of Sharia

and that's a true statement

your statement that Sharia is an invention of the British after WW2 is a false statement

it's demonstrably false and the facts speak for themselves on that matter

it's an interesting thread none the less because it's highlighted some glaring differences in the way we are asked to view the world

example being Libyan nationalism under Gaddafi was good , and I agree it was

Iranian nationalism is good , they have a right to determine their own affairs within their own borders

but European nationalism is bad because what ?

[mranderson]

and in doing so you will inspire me to correct you that fundamentalist Islam is rooted in the Quran and the Hadiths , not in the whims of the now defunct '' British Empire '' which to all intents and purposes is a method of the cabal to deflect blame upon a group who exist in the shadows and let others take the fall

I will bold the important bits and if you want to disagree with it then you will have a bloody hard job convincing a billion people to stop listening to their prophet and the Hadiths

https://islamqa.info/en/20327

The ruling of execution because of a word that somebody utters is what the Muslim scholars call al-riddah (apostasy). What is apostasy and what constitutes apostasy? What is the ruling on the apostate (al-murtadd)?

1 – Riddah (apostasy) refers to when a Muslim becomes a disbeliever by saying a clear statement to that effect, or by uttering words which imply that (i.e., which imply kufr or disbelief), or he does something that implies that (i.e., an action which implies kufr or disbelief).

2 – What constitutes apostasy

The matters which constitute apostasy are divided into four categories:

(a) Apostasy in beliefs, such as associating others with Allaah, denying Him, or denying an attribute which is proven to be one of His attributes, or by affirming that Allaah has a son. Whoever believes that is an apostate and a disbeliever.

(b) Apostasy in words, such as insulting Allaah or the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

(c) Apostasy in actions, such as throwing the Qur’an into a filthy place, because doing that shows disrespect towards the words of Allaah, so it is a sign that one does not believe. Other such actions include prostrating to an idol or to the sun or moon.

(d) Apostasy by omission, such as not doing any of the rituals of Islam, or turning away from following it altogether.

3 – What is the ruling on the apostate?

If a Muslim apostatizes and meets the conditions of apostasy – i.e., he is of sound mind, an adult and does that of his own free will – then his blood may be shed with impunity. He is to be executed by the Muslim ruler or by his deputy – such as the qaadi or judge, and he is not to not be washed (after death, in preparation for burial), the funeral prayer is not to be offered for him and he is not to be buried with the Muslims.

The evidence that the apostate is to be executed is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2794). What is meant by religion here is Islam (i.e., whoever changes from Islam to another religion).

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676)

Did the British Intelligence pen al-Bukhaari ?

[dannyuk]

Originally Posted by st jimmy

According to the unholy Quran, Jews and Christians who believe in the one-true God, are just as good "believers" as Muslims...
Muslim is not the same as Arab by the way.

I would like to know more about Danny's claim that Sharia law was invented (by the British Zionists) in WW I.
Without any hard evidence, I can't believe such a claim...
I think that Danny should have investigated this before posting, and if he did, I don't understand why he doesn't just post the evidence.

I’ve just noticed this comment and I don’t intend to go over it again please read over my comments above it could have been worded better it was an early hours post and wasn’t supposed to be as long as it turned out. It was supposed to be just about Greece and the prospect of retaliation over Sharia Law and false flag events which could still very well happen in the future. But as I written it I know this to be a greater problem internationally.

Sharia Law as it exists today in modern times (modern Islam) is how it was instituted after WWI which the British helped facilitate. It’s not the ancient Sharia Law as is often presented and it’s not religion it’s peoples ideas which vary upon peoples ideas of religion and over time. It’s not of religion or any form of religious text whatsoever. Because of this it was used by international political ideology to try and control Islamic nations hence Britain helped defeat other Islamic traditions that didn’t want to institute this extreme form of Sharia Law that has been put in place today along with the British backing of Saudi Arabia and the protection of wahhabism that goes along with this extreme form of Sharia Law that was put in place and kept there after WWI. Then this model has been spread throughout the Middle East again by past regime changes and control of tinpot dictators by the British Empire, the “ancient model” of this now Rothschild One World Dicatorship?

The British helped defend it, supported it, introduced a more extreme form of Sharia Law why do you think they’d do that?
Now they’re against it? Why?
Perhaps you should do the research before commenting also and have thought about such things as this history from WWI and the British support and institution of Sharia Law that has since been carbon coped throughout most of the Middle East. They met resistance and revolution in some places didn’t they...
Now they’re removing that old model because it hasn’t fully worked and it’s fell apart. They have a new model for the Middle East by destruction and are apparently dead against Sharia Law. It’s called international Zionism for a NWO One World Government.
But thanks for your advice anyways ;-)

I should just not post so late and have left it to re read a little more carefully before posting.
But if anyone can do any better please feel free to do so.
I’m not paid by anyone to be here and make these posts or put my time in to make sure it’s bulletproof otherwise
I maybe a little more careful before posting...

Especially with all these critics who have only looked upon the surface and not a little deeper.

[mranderson]

you keep saying Britain introduced a more extreme form of Shariah law well was al-Bukhaari British ? What was his real name ? Alan ?

did British Intelligence write the Quran ? the Hadiths ? Did British Intelligence sit there with Mohammed and tell him whats what ?

how can you say the more fundamental interpretations of Islam are only a creation of western influence when long before anything resembling a british empire the commands to kill apostates were well in place ?

if you are going to present false statements on a public forum they will get challenged

'' i was a bit sleepy ''

yeh right !

so tell me how this links in with your theory , because this is actually not a theory that I am about to present , it's the truth and I will bold the important bits again because Sharia and fundamentalist interpretations of Islam cannot solely rest on the shoulders of the British and to keep ignoring that false statement does a dis service to the truth you want to portray

https://islamqa.info/en/20327

If a Muslim apostatizes and meets the conditions of apostasy – i.e., he is of sound mind, an adult and does that of his own free will – then his blood may be shed with impunity. He is to be executed by the Muslim ruler or by his deputy – such as the qaadi or judge, and he is not to not be washed (after death, in preparation for burial), the funeral prayer is not to be offered for him and he is not to be buried with the Muslims.

The evidence that the apostate is to be executed is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2794). What is meant by religion here is Islam (i.e., whoever changes from Islam to another religion).

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676)

then from http://www.islamweb.net/en/article/1...oks-of-hadeeth

Of all the works of Hadeeth, Saheeh Al-Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim are regarded as the most authentic and authoritative books, after Al-Quran. Indeed the very word "Saheeh" means "authentic". Saheeh Al-Bukhari was compiled by Imam (leader) of Hadeeth, Mohammad Ibn Isma'eel Al-Bukhari, born 194H in Bukhara, central Asia. He traveled at an early age seeking knowledge to Hijaz (Makkah and Madeenah), Ancient Syria, Iraq, Egypt etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_years

this guy was a scholar in around 800 a/d ?

are you seriously telling me the interpretation of the Quran in 800 a/d was the creation of the British Empire ?

and only the fundamental aspects of Quran were observed after WW1 ?

it's just a false statement

[dannyuk]

Originally Posted by mranderson

you keep saying Britain introduced a more extreme form of Shariah law well was al-Bukhaari British ? What was his real name ? Alan ?

We all know you hate Islam, so please change the record answer the comments directly if you want me to answer you, or make your own forum post so you can express your views, as I’m not playing your game if you don’t play mine that’s how this works, you’re on my post answer my comments I’ve already replied to you or do one.

Thank you for your cooperation in this sensitive matter

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by dannyuk

We all know you hate Islam, so please change the record answer the comments directly if you want me to answer you, or make your own forum post so you can express your views, as I’m not playing your game if you don’t play mine that’s how this works, you’re on my post answer my comments I’ve already replied to you or do one.

Thank you for your cooperation in this sensitive matter

I am correcting the statement that Sharia is an invention of the British

It is a demonstrably false statement

*edit* and no , I won't do one because you don't like criticism - what are you going to do ? file a report with the pigs because I questioned the sacred cow ?

[vancity eagle]

Originally Posted by mranderson

and when it comes to Libya Gaddafi managed to improve the quality of life for his NATION by raising the average life span to one of the highest on the continent of Africa

he built the worlds largest underground aquifer which helped him produce his own food

immediately kicked out the oil companies after taking power the man was no saint but overall was turning Libya into somewhere decent

I am tired of being accused of ''hating Islam'' when really what I am against is religious fundamentalism in all it's forms

I will be the first in line to start speaking up about how ruining Libya was a international crime !

when it came out that the UK had been housing Islamic fundamentalists who tried to destabilize Gaddafi previously , that there was a group known as the Manchester Boys and that the sons of one of the men is the guy thumbed as the suicide bomber of the MEN Arena everyone wanted to rip me a new one !

but all I was trying to point out is that yes the Cabal have been funding and supporting fundamentalist Islam and using it to mess with sovereign nations for a long long time

they did this with Gaddafi and if international law was not a complete farce then Obama , Cameron , Hollande would be in the Hague on trial for war crimes

but when I tried to point out the link between the destabilization of Libya and the Mi5 in the UK like I said people wanted to rip me a new one !

Salmen Abedi was in and out of Libya training with fk knows who before the MEN attack

but it wasn't real was it ? it was a false flag but the bit I am trying to constantly point out and hang me from the rafters for saying it is that there has to be a source material to get these people thinking the way they do and the source material is the scripture they put their life down for

but as usual I will probably have to sit through another page or two of being called a zionist

and as usual what is good for the goose is not good for the gander when it comes to this

Libya was a sovereign nation , national in every sense of the word

Gaddafi was a nationalist , and I supported his right to run his country how he saw fit without submitting to the dictates of the fking globalists he is talking about in all his later speeches

but it's not the same when it's Europeans ? they are not allowed nationalism because it might remind you of Hitler ?

and you think I am the victim of a psyop ? lol

comparing Gaddafi to these so called European "nationalists" is quite a fucking joke.

Please tell me which European country has

free post secondary education
heavily subsidized housing, gas,
free loans to start businesses
and does not let bankers and corporations run their nations
does not have a Rothschild bank
attempts to create an independent gold backed currency and bank
calls out the hypocrisy of the imperialists
attempts to break not only his country BUT OTHER COUNTRIES out of the stranglehold of international capitalism.

oh but that would be SOCIALISM wouldn't it, are you frothing at the mouth yet. I said SOCIALISM, is your blood boiling yet.

Let me let you in on a little secret here

Nationalism IS SOCIALISM. Yes Gaddafi was a nationalist, these clowns in Europe pretending to be "populists" are NWO stooges.

[mranderson]

Let me let you in on a little secret here

Nationalism IS SOCIALISM

National Socialists ? So you are a fascist then ? Nice to know

and also my questions are adding up because the first one wasn't addressed

and I have never bad mouthed Gaddafi because I actually admired his contempt for the globalists and I admired his national reforms which led to an improved quality of life ( as far as I am aware )

thanks for letting me in on your little secret though vancity

it's been a long time coming

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by vancity eagle

oh but that would be SOCIALISM wouldn't it, are you frothing at the mouth yet. I said SOCIALISM, is your blood boiling yet.

Let me let you in on a little secret here

Nationalism IS SOCIALISM. Yes Gaddafi was a nationalist, these clowns in Europe pretending to be "populists" are NWO stooges.

quoting this for the record - it;'s vancities little secret so ......

worth the wait

[vancity eagle]

Originally Posted by mranderson

National Socialists ? So you are a fascist then ? Nice to know

and also my questions are adding up because the first one wasn't addressed

and I have never bad mouthed Gaddafi because I actually admired his contempt for the globalists and I admired his national reforms which led to an improved quality of life ( as far as I am aware )

thanks for letting me in on your little secret though vancity

it's been a long time coming

Nazis were "socialists" as much as the Reserve is "Federal" or as much as North Korea is a "democratic peoples republic"

Names are just names.

Nice of you to give credit to a socialist though. First decent thing you've done on this forum.

like I said, if you aint a socialist you aint a nationalist. You'd be for corporations over the people.

[mranderson]

so which model of socialism is working best right now on the Earth ?

which model shall we emulate ?

*edit* anyway wrong place to discuss that , maybe start another thread there must be at least one country you can think of that's got the jazz worth emulating and it would obviously deserve it's own thread

see ya there

[reverendjim]

Originally Posted by mranderson

Seriously was that something put into the article to see if anyone would say anything ?

I'm now wondering where you heard that and what other material is being omitted as you present your world view , or is that a conclusion you have reached yourself ?

By the birth of modern Islam do you mean the end of the Ottoman Empire ?

mr a, your are dealing with the young I think.

[reverendjim]

Originally Posted by davebeard

those idiots putting stickers round saying "sharia law zone"

they're all inside goons, paid to do this kind of crap

do you really think so? I know a youngster, related to me in fact..."all in side goons" is simply bullshit.

[st jimmy]

Originally Posted by dannyuk

I should just not post so late and have left it to re read a little more carefully before posting.
But if anyone can do any better please feel free to do so.

Replying within a day is surely fast enough for me, never mind that there were several posts in between.
As far as I can tell, you've now admitted that Sharia law wasn't made in WW I, but alterred.

Originally Posted by dannyuk

Perhaps you should do the research before commenting also and have thought about such things as this history from WWI and the British support and institution of Sharia Law that has since been carbon coped throughout most of the Middle East. They met resistance and revolution in some places didn’t they...

You accuse me now of doing insufficient research on some topic that you've started. Do you expect others to finish what you haven't?!?

Originally Posted by mranderson

Not exactly true st jimmy is it ? The Quran gives a little and takes a lot when it comes to Christians and Jews.

Why do people make claims about a book (the Quran) that they've never even read?
There are several Sutrahs in the Quran where it is explained that Jews and Christians are equivalent "believers"

Sutrah 2:62

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.

Sutrah 5:69

Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians whoever believes in Allah and the last day and does good-- they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by st jimmy

Why do people make claims about a book (the Quran) that they've never even read?

I have a copy and read it thoroughly and I also understand the process of abrogation.

Abrogation is the process of deciding which of the commands in the Quran are to be followed because there are contradictory commands.

This is due to the fact that while in Mecca to begin with , Mohammed was surrounded by different faiths including Christianity and Judaism and while there his teachings were more lenient.

After then going to Medina ( the start date of the Islamic calendar - the Islamic year 1 starts with his move to Medina ) his teachings become much more un forgiving.

So there are contradictory statements in the Quran and the scholars needed to work out which to follow because the Quran says it is immutable and a believer must follow the word of the Quran.

So the process of abrogation began in which scholars worked through deciding which commands over rule others and the way it was done was by taking any later command to over rule an earlier command if there was a contradiction.

By the process of abrogation is how we came to Sharia in it's many forms.

So for the record , and I previously put this in bold because it should not be overlooked , this is from https://islamqa.info/en/20327

al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676

The ruling of execution because of a word that somebody utters is what the Muslim scholars call al-riddah (apostasy). What is apostasy and what constitutes apostasy? What is the ruling on the apostate (al-murtadd)?

1 – Riddah (apostasy) refers to when a Muslim becomes a disbeliever by saying a clear statement to that effect, or by uttering words which imply that (i.e., which imply kufr or disbelief), or he does something that implies that (i.e., an action which implies kufr or disbelief).

2 – What constitutes apostasy

The matters which constitute apostasy are divided into four categories:

(a) Apostasy in beliefs, such as associating others with Allaah, denying Him, or denying an attribute which is proven to be one of His attributes, or by affirming that Allaah has a son. Whoever believes that is an apostate and a disbeliever.

(b) Apostasy in words, such as insulting Allaah or the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

(c) Apostasy in actions, such as throwing the Qur’an into a filthy place, because doing that shows disrespect towards the words of Allaah, so it is a sign that one does not believe. Other such actions include prostrating to an idol or to the sun or moon.

(d) Apostasy by omission, such as not doing any of the rituals of Islam, or turning away from following it altogether.

3 – What is the ruling on the apostate?

If a Muslim apostatizes and meets the conditions of apostasy – i.e., he is of sound mind, an adult and does that of his own free will – then his blood may be shed with impunity. He is to be executed by the Muslim ruler or by his deputy – such as the qaadi or judge, and he is not to not be washed (after death, in preparation for burial), the funeral prayer is not to be offered for him and he is not to be buried with the Muslims.

The evidence that the apostate is to be executed is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2794). What is meant by religion here is Islam (i.e., whoever changes from Islam to another religion).

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676)

There are also verses in the Quran which state those who say Allah has a partner , or a son, or a wife those people are disbelievers.

Christians are disbelievers in the Quran , because they will not accept the later revelations of the Quran.

The Quran thinks Jesus is a prophet , but they will not accept him as Son of God because to them , God can have no earthly son or partner.

Also Jimmy , how's it going for the Jews in Egypt these days ?

How's it going for the Jews in Saudi Arabia ? Or any other Islamic state for that matter ?

Me personally Jimmy , I think all three branches of Abraham are bearing rotten fruit and have taken us further from a connection to the creator than they have taken us nearer to it.

So I don't think any of them are right , and I will never bend at the knee to any of them.

I'm not a christian or a jew or a muslim , so I don't have to defend any of them or see any of them get special treatment.

If someone else wants to do that I understand , and if it's your faith then so be it , maybe you are right and you get a golden ticket to live with God.

But maybe I'm right and the whole thing is a system of social control introduced by a babylonian mystery school that left Ur which is determined to rule the world one way or another , even at the expense of billions of murdered souls.