Thoughts on his letter to America? Excerpts

>Islam was a political system invented for accruing power
False. Revelation of the Qur'an started many years before the Prophet held or expected to hold a position of power. He and the Ummah were persecuted for many years in Mecca, facing boycotts and other hardship for just practicing their faith. His first wife, Khadija, may Allah be pleased with her, died from this, which he said was the worst year of his whole life. One night his enemies were fed up with waiting and paid assassins to kill him in his sleep. He escaped and fled to Medina, which is where he became established as leader, having a widespread reputation for fairness in arbitration. He established a constitution for the city which brought all the tribes and religions into a mutual defense pact that they would band together against an outside attack; quarrels between families or tribes or Jews and Christians would be arbitrated by him. This is when the first Qur’anic legal precepts began to be revealed, although they only applied to Muslims; other religions he governed according to their own laws.

Cont

Attached: IMG_20200316_064303.jpg (750x937, 177.78K)

based Yas Forums Muslim, where do you guys come from, how many of you are here, and are you ironic about it? I swear, if dawah people are thinking of places to find new blood, they need to come here; hell, they even get to sharpen their apologetics on the crusader larpers who post their rebuttals, win-win

Mohammed Hijab or some other dawah guy needs to rebutt the pic in

Attached: 1584140287552.gif (275x275, 1.79M)

slavery, murder and pedophilia are immoral

What do you think of the idea of Quranic Abrogation?

>he can have all the wives he wants
No, it doesn’t say that, I already addressed this.

>he can have all the female slaves he wants
Any Muslim can, provided she is enslaved in a halal way (through jihad). You are free to have sex with her, however her chastity is protected (24:33). She and slaves in general must be clothed and fed as well as their masters are (Sahih Muslim 4092). If she converts, she cannot be a concubine and you must marry her. If she bears a child, she cannot be sold, and must be either freed or supported as a lifetime concubine and becomes free upon your death; all her children with her master are legally free and legitimate.

>he’s always right
That’s not true at all, verses 8:67-68 are the voice of Allah ﷻ sharply rebuking Muhammad’s ﷺ actions. The Prophet ﷺ is completely correct on doctrine and the paragon of men, the superlative man, but he was still a man, he made mistakes. By calling him “perfect” we don’t mean infallible or inerrant, just that none of his teachings were false and his is the nonpareil of humanity.

Cont

Attached: ruh roh.png (720x1078, 544.91K)

I am rebutting it, read the text

>forbid paintings, poetry, music
He forbid iconography (including depictions of prophets), not painting in general. Although what qualifies as iconography is disputed, it’s universally held to include any depiction of prophets; stricter interpretations hold it be any depiction of humans or animals (anything visibly animate), others simply lifelike, realistic depiction (which normally actually excludes photography as that’s generally ruled as a reflection, although not all say photography is halal, Islamqa for example does not), but photography too can be considered iconography in some contexts, especially in veneration of leaders, in which case it is haram). Poetry was certainly never forbidden, many chapters of the Qur’an, including those used in prayer, are literally rhyming poetry. Music for dancing or using musical instruments is forbidden, singing (if done by men) is not if the lyrics aren’t sinful, also some schools permit percussion instruments accompanying singing; dancing is permitted if it’s just with your spouse, or not in the presence of the opposite sex, men and women often celebrate a wedding by dancing, just in a sex-segregated way. Now while we’re on this subject, there is a western misconception that Islamic calligraphy was used to get around injunctions against art. This is simply false, the very strictest opinion (and this is what I follow) is that animate beings cannot be depicted in detail, but if their face or hands are not detailed, and the picture doesn’t adore a place of honor, it is permitted. Abstract depictions are universally halal and always have been, this was true from the beginning.

Islamic ballet (note women can dress more freely before puberty): metro.co.uk/2019/10/24/ballet-school-for-muslim-kids-uses-poetry-instead-of-music-for-performances-10974080/amp/

Cont

Sublation would be a better translation.

Attached: noooo.png (708x967, 445.4K)

>What is child mariage. What are rape gangs.
Muslims are allowed to rape atheists, for example. Children included.

Cont

>the Qur’an says don’t marry his wives

This applied to all prophets and was a general injunction. Marrying a prophet’s wife could lead to major political and religious problems as it could suggest one is taking over his position.

>the Qur’an gave him permission to marry his adopted son’s (former slave) ex wife
“Hot as hell” is a really silly way of putting it, she was 40 at the time. Yes it was part of the declaration that the Prophet ﷺ has no sons (33:40); indeed none of his male children would survive. This has major political implications because it means his prophethood is not a dynasty and his position cannot be inherited. The story that he saw her in a state of undress and fell in love and then that’s why her husband divorced her has no isnad--that is, there is no chain or source for this, it appeared hundreds of years after his death. Here is what does have isnad: the Prophet ﷺ knew her from childhood and told her to marry his adopted son, which she really did not want to do because he was a freed slave and she was from a noble line, she looked down on him but still did it because Muhammad ﷺ told her to marry for piety and not birth . Their marriage was not happy, she had a bad temper and was very proud. He divorced her--which put her in a very bad position--and the Prophet ﷺ married her. As his wife she continued to be hot tempered and competed with A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) for leadership of the wives, but came to her to defence when the latter was slandered. This is the account based on isnad.

Cont

Attached: were.png (720x748, 205K)

Child marriage is allowed. Concubines are allowed. However raping random people is no more allowed than zina. In order to have sex with a woman she must be either your wife or household slave

>four witnesses
This is for fornication and adultery, rape is not subject to this standard (Sunan Abi Dawud 4379, or 4366 for some English orderings). This is when there is absolutely no evidence besides people saying so. A paternity test or catching them together in your house or his house would be quite enough to convict them, as would other hard forms of tangible evidence. A husband may also swear four times by God his wife committed adultery and on the fifth he will be damned if he is wrong (she may counter it in her defense and is subject to the same divine retribution). But if all else fails, he can easily divorce her if there is any evidence of misconduct on her part, such as texting another man. In such a case he is not required to pay her anything and he recovers the collateral money set aside for her in case of divorce.

>the Qur’an says for people not to visit him too much
Yes. He was extremely courteous, shy and never raised his voice. His etiquette was impeccable and has a leader, both political and religious, people constantly came to his house to talk to him, and being civil and polite he would let them in despite the extreme volume of visitors.
Cont

Attached: hmmm.png (720x960, 405.2K)

Music's been my deepest sticking point with Islam, because I love to dance and I like the different types of music... I understand the wisdom of putting it aside for contemplation, but outlawing listening to stringed instruments according to strict interpretation of that hadith is kinda spergish

By the way, what should a Muslim do as a citizen in America? Should he make hijra to a Muslim nation, vote in political elections here, do nothing and just try to spread the faith, or what?

>they kicked him out
After years of making it illegal for him and his followers to buy or sell or trade or work there, they tried to kill him and he escaped

>he went to Medina, a Jewish city
There were Jewish tribes there, they were not the majority. Medina invited him to be arbitrator as described above. He later ran into trouble with all of the Jewish tribes eventually, yes

>he started to attack caravans
Meccan caravans, yes. This is a completely legitimate practice for wartime. He didn’t massacre the merchants though, I don’t know where he gets that from.

>people started to join his religion
This was more of a product of his extremely good reputation that preceded him to Medina and his exemplary and honest exercise of power there. Raiding caravans didn’t do it, that was a common practice between feuding tribes on the daily, neither did he indiscriminately raid caravans, just Meccan ones.

Cont

Attached: ibd.png (708x912, 266.21K)

It sounds great until you realize they dress boys up as women and fuck them in the ass, and all the rich shieks or whatever do disgusting shit.

I would advise hijra at least to an orthodox enclave if not outside. Voting is a waste

>killed/enslaved all the Jews there
There was trouble with all three of the tribes, yes, two ended up exiled and one killed/enslaved: in one incident a member of the Banu Qaynuqa secretely placed a pin in a Muslim woman’s clothes from behind while she was sitting in his jewelry story; when she stood up, it caused her leg to be exposed, much to her shame and his cackling amusement. A Muslim man did what any good Muslim man would do, he beat the Jew to death. In retaliation, the Jews beat the Muslim man to death. Muhammad ﷺ then declared war on this tribe. Ultimately they were defeated, but they weren’t killed or enslaved, just kicked out. As for the Banu Qurayza, had all their adult males put to death for treachery, siding with an enemy invasion in direct violation of the pact, the Constitution of Medina. Many Jews today talk about the Prophet ﷺ as having committed some sort of genocide on the Jews, but Muhammad ﷺ actually protected Jews when they upheld their agreements, he only came down very hard on usury and unfair business dealings like hoarding, gouging and false advertising, but to this day many Jews refer to this as if it were genocide, in fact he just regulated the economy.

>he returned to Mecca and conquered it and forced everyone to convert
Everyone except Chrstians or Jews, yes. He actually issued a decree, signed with an imprint of his hand (he couldn’t write), that any Muslim who mistreated Christians is to be regarded as an apostate. This decree is known as the Ashtiname. He gave it to the monks of St. Catherine’s monastery, on Mount Sinai, for safekeeping, and it is still there for all to see.
Cont

Attached: jcs.png (1280x720, 695.8K)

Completely wrong, disinfo from the Kike Runner. In fact secularists are the ones who do that, the Taliban kill them

Read these articles and get redpilled

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Omar

blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2018/01/24/the-revised-afghanistan-criminal-code-an-end-for-bacha-bazi/

Attached: 41fhZGgSqsL._SX343_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (345x499, 21.59K)

>Sublation would be a better translation.
Can you elaborate on that? I'm interested in theology, but not overly familiar with theological terms; from what I've been told, the idea of abrogation is that (since the Quran isn't ordered chronologically) in the cases where verses contradict each other, those that were revealed to the Prophet Mohammad later override the previous ones; thus many of the peace and love verses (from when he was in Mecca) are superceded by the fire and sword verses (from when he was in Medina), which jihadist groups use to justify world conquest in the name of Allah.

>random people
atheists

>he was a successful and great conqueror, unifying all the tribes and cities into a centralized state with the sword
“Yes”

>wombs and swords
Yes, and it will continue to spread because we value the womb and the sword, we esteem them highly. You say that’s greed. No. Rather greed is the source of birth decline and a degeneration of martial vigor and love of battle.

>peaceful versus warlike verses
The advent of an organized Muslim army was revealed but also followed quite logically and naturally once Muslims became a polity as opposed to simply a minority that had no weapons or food. user made that number up or got it from someone who made it up; there is no abrogation here, just different contexts. If you want to see the general rules explicated next to each other, read Surah 60, it’s pretty short. Islam is not insane and bloodthirsty, but neither is it pacifist or desirous of peace at all costs. It is imperialist, but honors peace treaties and friendly states. Those who disrespect us or make trouble should be dealt with by force, not by praying for them, but those who are righteous should be respected.

>insane birthrates
>memorizing your holy book
“Yes”

>t. apostate
The worst. The absolute worst. Apostates from Islam are far worse than New Atheists and feel zero compunction about lying. The worst people. Yes they are put to death, and hopefully you can see why. Because they constantly lie and seek to subvert Islam.

Cont

Attached: talibansoldiers.png (1280x720, 678.05K)

Read Surah 60, it will clarify the apparent contradictions

I see. Which nations of the Muslim world are doing things well in terms of governance?

Also, what is your story of embracing Islam?

Atheists we can enslave and rape, certainly. But they must be properly enslaved first. If you can't keep her in your house freely then you can't have sex with her.

I will answer all questions in a bit, I will finish addressing the pic then break to pray and come back and address another pic as well as answer any questions

>robbing Meccan caravans
I really don’t see the issue here, this is normal wartime practice.

>Bani Mustaliq
This wasn’t without provocation, they were allies of Mecca during a war between the Muslims and Mecca.

>Khaybar Oasis
The torture story lacks isnad, the rest it is because they allied with traitorous Jewish tribes from Medina. They weren’t slaughtered, they surrendered and were spared and paid tribute

>Islam is imperialist
“Yes”

>Uthman’s (may Allah be pleased with him) version
Actually what user isn’t telling you is this was the version collated by Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, and that both men were extremely close friends of Muhammad ﷺ and this Qur’an was accepted by everyone who was a close companion of the Prophet ﷺ

>alcohol
No verse had to “allow” it in a society where it was normal and regular. Yes the prohibition on alcohol was not an early revelation and Muslims were not teetotalers until it was revealed later.

>coexist peacefully with kuffar
This is possible if they’re people of the book. Atheists and others, no really. The planet belongs to Allah ﷻ, Who is tolerant toward the people of the book but not toward others trying to rule His creation

Cont

Attached: fhs.png (715x759, 239.93K)

Are there any woman in the world today who are enabled by sharia to be made concubines today? I often hear the gulf Arabs sometimes try to do it with their maids

>tribute
This is literally synonymous with taxes and every government demanded them then and now. Women, children, the elderly, monks and clergy are all exempt however, so all-in-all pretty fair. “But Muslims don’t have to pay it!” Correct, a Muslim empire obviously accords a preferred status to Muslims. Muslims do however have to pay Zakat, which Dhimmis don’t.

>IslamQA
Again, this is an explicitly Salafi site. It’s a really good site but obviously isn’t always indicative of general Sunni jurisprudence.

>it’s given out at mosques

It’s definitely considered a classic of Shafi’i fiqh. It’s also definitely not handed out to new converts who are typically told not to worry about particular schools of fiqh until they have basic practice down. They are given little booklets on ablution and prayer, maybe ones on the Qur’an or Hadiths.

>behind a screen (hijab)
The way hijab is used today tends to refer what is indicated in Abu Dawood 4104. The screen is used for gatherings all the time though, yes, and in education if women and men need to mix in a class for some reason. Covering the face with the niqab is mostly considered a rewarded deed, not obligatory for anyone but the wives of the Prophet ﷺ, but still praiseworthy and recommended in every school

Ok breaking to make wudu and Salat, will be back

Attached: fa.png (720x656, 312.96K)

Oh got it, yeah finish up man

>people of the book
Is this specifically Judeo-Christians, or does it cover religious pagans as well? I seem to recall the whole bloc of religions having common ancestry with Zoroastrianism and Semitic myth.

Oh that's alright then

Addendum: non-JDC religions as well, since e.g. there are obviously other widespread faiths like Buddhism

Fuck Islam.
Fuck Judaism
Fuck Catholicuckism
Fuck all Abrahamic sandnigger religion.
Nuke the Middle East and solve the issue once and for all.

Attached: pope.jpg (313x161, 8.8K)

So it turns out that Osama bin Laden was another one of those guys who was demonized even though pretty much everything he said about America was true (hi, glowies). Still, Islam is more of an opportunistic disease than anything.

Okay back

The Taliban and Hamas, also to a lessor extent al-Qaeda in Africa. The Muslim governments today are either ruled by secularist military castes established by colonists, or dynasties that collaborated with colonialists. However falling short of purity they still are pretty based compared to the west

I researched it to attack it and ended up being convinced by it

Maids you pay can't be. A man recently knocked up his maid in Qatar and they were told to either marry or get 100 lashes each. Concubines must be slaves, they are sort of sex slaves but have more rights. They must be fed and clothed as well as their masters, they can't be pimped, their children are free and they gain freedom when their master dies

This depends on school, there are four major maddhabs as well as Zihiri. All treat Zorastrians as people of the book because the Salaf did though calling them that I contentious. Other pagans no however they can be treated like it depending on school, Hanafi being the most tolerant

Attached: court.jpg (641x619, 72.97K)

Next pic

>clitoris vs prepuce
I can’t find any record of this court case. However the word, which means both the hood and clitoris proper as one organ, is legally understood to mean prepuce (hood) in this context rather than the clitoris proper, based on Abu Dawood 41:5251. This isn’t deceptive, it’s just translating the proper meaning using English vocabulary which makes a complete distinction between the hood and clitoris.

Sunnis don’t use taqiyya. Lying is allowed under certain circumstances, for example if someone puts a gun to your head and says reject Islam you can say you reject it (your life has to be clearly threatened, it can’t just be from pressure), but lying about the nature of Islam is not permissible under any circumstances. The Shia conception of taqiyya is also about avoiding persecution but it is much more liberal in scope and allows for things likes lying about Islam and can be done even if your life is not directly threatened.

>taqiyya is accepted in every sect
Then he shouldn’t have an issue citing daleel instead of an out of context statement from secondary work by a Druze that doesn’t cite anything. One can simply refer to the Hadiths on lying, the overwhelming majority condemn it in extremely harsh terms. There are only a few circumstances where it is overtly sanctioned: once, to accomplish an assassination during wartime; two, to compliment your wife. Three, a man is told to insult the Prophet ﷺ or be put to death, which the man does; he later tells Muhammad ﷺ, and Muhammad ﷺ says he should do it again if a similar situation arises. There is no Sunni justification for lying about Islam in any of the above circumstances, they all exclude that.

Cont

Attached: 1580669545834.jpg (1336x6290, 2.37M)

>infidel
This actually is not generally a translation of mushreek (shirk means “partnership”, a mushreek is someone who ascribes partners to Allahﷻ), but kaffir. Which he would know if he knew what he were talking about. Kaffir means anyone who is not a Muslim, which includes mushrikeen, but also people of the book and atheists and so on. It’s more often translated as “unbeliever” or “disbeliever”, it comes from the root meaning “to cover up”, in this case the truth, someone who rejects truth. Mushreek is commonly translated as “idolater” but also sometimes “polytheist”, it does not include atheists or monotheistic kuffar. And yes, atheists are considered worse than mushrikeen.

>every non-Muslim must be killed unless he becomes a dhimmi
In wartime or after subjugation, every adult male yes, except for clergy and monks. Randomly doing this to people outside of a state of war is not permitted.
Cont

Attached: teacher.png (720x1104, 188.65K)

>sciences of the materialists
Al-Nawawi (who is being quoted at this point in the Reliance of the Traveller) wrote in the 13th Century, “sciences” then meant what “philosophy” does now, “sciences of the materialists” meant specific philosophical schools that taught the universe was an eternal perpetual motion made of simple atoms. To project our use of materialist sciences onto Medieval terminology is so anachronistic I shouldn’t have to actually bother but the guy doesn’t care to note that al-Nawawi is saying this. Philosophy here is of course a translation of “falsafa” which by this time also referred to a specific school which taught doctrines like the eternity of creation, it doesn’t mean “philosophy” in the broader sense, which is actually strongly endorsed (as are the physical sciences) in the work “The Revival of the Religious Sciences”, by al-Ghazali (a crucial Shafi’i thinker).

>jihad
Community (can also be be translated as nation, means country in this context) obligation means that Muslim states are obligated to conquer non-Muslim states, yes. Individual obligation means if you are a member of said state and it goes to war, you are obligated to fight. This shouldn’t be confused with randomly lashing out in your own land.

>wives and slaves
Already went over the wives bit. Every Muslim can have any number of slaves.

>infallible
Already disproved that, at least in the sense he is using it. That the Prohet’s ﷺ teachings are without flaw and that he is our role model, yes, these are true,

Cont

Attached: d228beb4-5123-11e9-8617-6babbcfb60eb_image_hires_144024.jpg (768x768, 120.36K)

>mocking the Prophet ﷺ!
There are several things considered martyrdom in Islam if a man dies in defense of, they are primarily his religion, his family and his honor. If someone insults your honor, you are entitled to seek redress. Preferably this is handled by the legal system to prevent feuds, but if there is no legal system that adresses this and the person isn’t a Muslim, you are entitled to handle it yourself. Anyway, yes, of course, mocking the Prophet ﷺ is not something we take lightly, as has been proven by people who tried to test us on that. This is however quite distinct from bans on musical instruments or iconography. And once again poetry is not haram unless it is lewd or blasphemous or something of that sort.
Cont

Attached: onl.png (720x962, 412.48K)

>Concubines must be slaves, they are sort of sex slaves but have more rights.
Hypocritical to say that degenerate modern America exploits women like products (which it does) while you have literal sex slaves.

>causation
He is strawmanning ocassionalism here. Ocassionalists hold that while efficient causation doesn’t exist, Allahﷻ makes things run in a pattern like it; in fact that each moment leads to a state very closely connected and following from the prior is seen as evidence of divine sustaining of the universe, since causation is not rational and there must be some external factor establishing the consistency. So a dependable law like causation is taken for granted as how things are made to work, it’s just ocassionalists (and not all Muslims are ocassionalists, mainly Ashari are) deny things do this of their own accord. So the very fact that things have an extremely strong pattern of events that spontaneity could simply not dictate, is not seen as blasphemy, but rather proof of an organizing principle. The belief that there is no pattern worth using in research has nothing to do with ocassionalism.

>innovation
There are two kinds. One is general bid’ah, which can be good. The other is religion bid’ah, that is innovation in religious matters, which is of course bad, the current year cannot change Islam

>Avicenna
He built on prior work, saying he just copied it is outright lying. His theology was wonky but his other contributions were regarded and built on. All the other cases he’s making here is like saying, “Newton was heretical, therefore Christianity thinks calculus is heresy.”

>Islam means Submission
Yes, which is very related to peace (salam) from an Arab perspective, both have the S-L-M root. Of course the peace Islam is understood in Arabic thought it is inner peace from passion and rebellion against God, not living a comfortable, pacifistic life.

Attached: Osama Bin Laden 2a.jpg (850x400, 78.4K)

give me a fucking break. osama was a CIA/mossad asset just like all of the saudis.

shove your glow niggerdom up your ass.

9/11 was a big, fat lie of the military-industrial-intelligence-finance complex so that does shed a different light on bin Laden.

You say that word thinking of it basically as a sexual service industry. Concubines in Islam are part of your family, they are even entitled to inheritance. Killing them incurs the death penalty and harming them incurs an eye for an eye.

By Saudi you mean nationality? Or the House of Saud? Bin Laden first became wanted for denouncing the House of Saud and getting exiled

So the hierarchy under Islam would be
>Muslims
>Christians and Zoroastrians
>Jews
>other religious kaffir (pagans)
>dogshit
>atheists
Correct?

It’s still perverse to force them to have sex. A family or “family” can be very abusive.

amp.theguardian.com/world/2004/mar/24/september11.usa2

amp.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

Attached: kirk~2.png (720x898, 452.38K)

Atheists can only live as slaves in Islam. Otherwise you are right. The Qur'an says good things about priests and monks but is very harsh on rabbis

In many species of animals,like hippos, the males fight for the right to mate with the females. Concubinage is no different. When a people are conquered and the women taken as prizes, it is natural for the dominant men to mate with them. This sounds terrible only to those who are indoctrinated with the idea of sex as an expression of subjectivity rather than a role or duty. Sex is of course pleasant and an extreme sin in the wrong context (adultery, fornication, etc) but will a woman attached to just one man who provides for her and protects her, it is very natural. Concubines must be clothed and fed as well as their masters, they can't be shared, they cannot be beaten in a way you wouldn't beat your wife, their children are free and they are entitled to support and freedom when their master dies. They are a part of the household, family. This is very natural. Actually far less distressing to women then flitting from mate to mate with no stability or attachment

Attached: bkt.png (720x721, 289.02K)

According to Islamic eschatology, Jesus, alayhe salam, will return and lead Muslims in a final jihad against the Jews, who will be lead by dajjal, the Antichrist. The one eye is his symbol

Attached: ben.png (720x945, 138.7K)

Understanding the Shia

The Shia are a weird cult that believes Ali, radhi Allahu anhu, is omniscient and omnipotent. They build shrines to him. Twelvers believe this of all their Twelve Imams. This was a perseveration that arose out of believing he got short shrift in the dispute with Abu Bakr, radhi Allahu anhu, after Muhammad's, salla Allahu alayhe wassallam, death. Which is debatable but they follow a belief that the Caliphate is hereditary starting with Aki, radhi Allahu anhu, as they see him as basically Muhammad's, salla Allahu alayhe wassallam, son, which the Qur'an flatly denies (33:40). Because of this they made up ridiculous stories I
their Hadiths and put them in Wikipedia (just like pinkos do) as objective fact accepted by Sunnis as well, like the idea that 200,000 saw everyone swear allegiance to Ali, radhi Allahu anhu, which is obviously ridiculous. Then all these lies and slander about Umar, radhi Allahu anhu. And A'isha, radhi Allahu anha. In reality Abu Bakr appointed Ali his personal advisor, and Ali married his daughter to Umar. Shia agree here, Sunnis do not agree with their nonsense about Umar brutalizing Fatima, radhi Allahu anha.

Because Shia think A'isha was a witch, they reject her account of Muhammad's, salla Allahu alayhe wassallam, teachings. For example saying men can't dress as women. Consequently trannies are halal for Shia

Attached: shia6.png (317x473, 82.96K)

>"If the Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved" and the bombing campaign stopped, "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country", Mr Kabir added.

Another thing she said was temporary marriages are haram. These were marriages the man and woman arranged by oral contract, they lasted twenty minutes to an hour, with the man generally paying. Shia love these and say A'isha is a witch and so must be lying when she said Muhammad, salla Allahu alayhe wassallam, prohibited them

Attached: shia5.png (720x875, 250.89K)