Have a read about the latest Sharia law incident
where a 14 year old girl was lashed to death.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/29/bangladesh.lashing.death/index.html?iref=obinsite


Quote:

Shariatpur, Bangladesh (CNN) -- Hena Akhter's last words to her mother proclaimed her innocence. But it was too late to save the 14-year-old girl. Her fellow villagers in Bangladesh's Shariatpur district had already passed harsh judgment on her. Guilty, they said, of having an affair with a married man. The imam from the local mosque ordered the fatwa, or religious ruling, and the punishment: 101 lashes delivered swiftly, deliberately in public. Hena dropped after 70. Bloodied and bruised, she was taken to hospital, where she died a week later.

Another salutary lesson in proper behaviour from the religion of peace.

Belgarion wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 12:33pm:

Another salutary lesson in proper behaviour from the religion of peace.

She was under age : therefore it was rape under our law.
Why didn't they lash the man?
Sharia law is ridiculous & Abu supports it?

Let's see what Abu has to say about this one.

As sharia law is not vigilantism, this topic makes very little sense.

abu_rashid wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 12:52pm:

As sharia law is not vigilantism, this topic makes very little sense.

Quote:

Aklima feared reprisal for having spoken out against the Imam and the village elders.

An Iman ordered the lashings, therefore it was Sharia law.

bobby, "imam" merely means someone who leads prayers. Some days at my local masjid I am "imam"... it means nothing, as Islam has no such thing as a clergy.

These people are backwards ignorant uneducated vigilantes, and nothing more. They should be arrested and executed for murder, case closed, and THAT is sharia.

These people are backwards ignorant uneducated vigilantes, and nothing more. They should be arrested and executed for murder, case closed, and THAT is sharia.

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT

YOU CAN DELETE ME AS MANY TIMES AS YOU LIKE ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Fred, if you say sensible things, like your last post, you shall not be deleted.

I hold no grudges against anyone, just against rude and unwarranted slander.

abu_rashid wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

bobby, "imam" merely means someone who leads prayers. Some days at my local masjid I am "imam"... it means nothing, as Islam has no such thing as a clergy. These people are backwards ignorant uneducated vigilantes, and nothing more. They should be arrested and executed for murder, case closed, and THAT is sharia.

I understand now -
you can have an educated lashing of a 14 year old girl or
an uneducated lashing of a 14 year old girl.

Both can cause death but the former is o.k.?

Bobby, clearly you're going to go out of this conversation the same way you came into it, blinkers on.

Nothing I say here can change that, so i'm not even going to bother.

Are you saying that people, particularly women, are never executed or flogged under Sharia law Abu? You were right to delete my previous post Abu. To imply the executioners had a mental condition was wrong of me.

http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/08/saudi-girl-executed-for-becoming.html

Grey wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 2:44pm:

Are you saying that people, particularly women, are never executed or flogged under Sharia law Abu? You were right to delete my previous post Abu. To imply the executioners had a mental condition was wrong of me. http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/08/saudi-girl-executed-for-becoming.html

I have trapped Abu.
He says that he supports Sharia law yet rejects the
lashing of a 14 year old girl to death which can happen under Sharia Law.
Abu can't have it both ways.

Abu is full of contradictions - another one:
He has sympathy for Osama being executed but rejects terrorism.

Once again he wants it both ways &
he says that I have blinkers on.

Grey,


Quote:

Are you saying that people, particularly women, are never executed or flogged under Sharia law Abu?

Where did I say that? I see why you're trying to equate any act of physical punishment with shari'ah, because it's about as good as your argument is going to get....

This rationale is about as relevant as saying that if an American executes a shoplifter in his store, then he's acting according to Democratic/American law, since it can prescribe the death penalty for armed robbers.

Absolute nonsense.

Bobby,


Quote:

He says that he supports Sharia law yet rejects the lashing of a 14 year old girl to death which can happen under Sharia Law.

As above. So you believe in the Australian/Democratic practice of imprisoning those who break the law? Therefore you must support if someone captures somebody they believe has broken the law and chains them up in their cellar, since that's what Australian/Democratic law prescribes right?


Quote:

Abu is full of contradictions - another one: He has sympathy for Osama being executed but rejects terrorism.

As I don't believe he's a terrorist. In fact he was a staunch defender of innocents against the grand scale terrorism of the West.

Anyway, regarding the defective reasoning that any kind of vigilantism must equate to shari'ah law, this topic has been discussed on this board at great length, I'd advise you to read over the large number of threads where it's been refuted over and over again. Just search for "honour murder" and you're bound to find plenty of refutations of it.

Ok Abu,

Do you support Sharia law which can have a 14 year old girl lashed?

How does organising 9/11 not equate to terrorism?
Surely that must be terrorism & not a defender of innocents .

Quote:

Do you support Sharia law which can have a 14 year old girl lashed?

What a preposterous question.

Do you support Australian law where a 14 yo. can be imprisoned???

I support law that brings justice and morality to society, a few village elders whipping a girl does not equate to that.


Quote:

How does organising 9/11 not equate to terrorism?

He has only ever denied doing it, and now he's been summarily executed there'll never be any chance to find that out will there?


Quote:

Surely that must be terrorism & not a defender of innocents .

Are all the bombings of Muslim civilians by the West also terrorism?

Come on lets be up front here, do you believe Howard, Bush, Obama, Blair, Gillard etc. are terrorists for ordering operations that have resulted in countless civilian deaths?

Abu,
You answer questions with questions & I don't buy it.
Two wrongs don't make a right.


Quote:

Do you support Australian law where a 14 yo. can be imprisoned???

Yes I do if it's for her safety & the safety of society.


Quote:

I support law that brings justice and morality to society.

Does that include whipping or lashing which can lead to death?
I have to beat the answer out of you -
it's like I have to put you in a head lock & pull a tooth out with pliers!


Quote:

He (Osama)has only ever denied doing it.

I always thought that he admitted to 9/11.


Quote:

Are all the bombings of Muslim civilians by the West also terrorism?

My question wasn't about what the West did but
I find that all bombings are abhorrent including the WW2 bombings
of Dresden & Cologne by the Allies - where they deliberately  targeted civilians.
There is a difference between collateral damage & deliberately  targeted civilians.

Quote:

Yes I do if it's for her safety & the safety of society.

Right, so if a man caught a 14 yo. girl shoplifting from his shop and locked her in his cellar for 6 months, you support that? How disgusting, that's so despicable (<--- In case you aren't intelligent enough to realise, that's precisely how you've argued so far in this discussion)


Quote:

I always thought that he admitted to 9/11.

I guess that's because rather than look to what he said, you looked only at U.S media propaganda.

"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. Neither I had any knowledge of these attacks nor I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people. Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam." (Sheikh Usamah Bin Laden, 28/09/2001)


Quote:

My question wasn't about what the West did but I find that all bombings are abhorrent including the WW2 bombings of Dresden & Cologne by the Allies - where they deliberately  targeted civilians. There is a difference between collateral damage & deliberately  targeted civilians

So which is which? And which is terrorism? Even if we accept the U.S accusations about Usamah Bin Laden, then how do we know they were not collateral damage? The targets were the Pentagon, White House, and U.N, the fact civilians were in all 3 were just an unfortunate side effect... no? Don't tell me you actually believe the U.S apologies time and again after they murder civilians, they couldn't give a damn, they know going into each bombing raid, or imposing sanctions that they're going to be killing a whole heap of civilians, as Albright said about the deaths of half a million Iraqi kids "We think it's worth it".

Those who think it's worth it will inevitably suffer the same fate... what goes around will inevitably come around. So don't complain when it comes back and bites you. The West celebrated lighting up Baghdad and other Muslim cities, and so too their cities were eventually "lit up". The anger is not about what's been done, it's about the idea it could be done to them. When it comes down to it at the end of the day, the U.S have no qualms committing these kinds of acts, they're just angry that being the world's most technologically advanced civilisation that someone can still do it to them.

abu_rashid wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

bobby, "imam" merely means someone who leads prayers. Some days at my local masjid I am "imam"... it means nothing, as Islam has no such thing as a clergy. These people are backwards ignorant uneducated vigilantes, and nothing more. They should be arrested and executed for murder, case closed, and THAT is sharia.

So what would the 'proper' Islamic punishment have been? Only 90 lashes?

Abu says that Osama didn't do it.

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

Quote:

"God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers, but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon—I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women." – Osama bin Laden, 2004

Abu,

Quote:

Right, so if a man caught a 14 yo. girl shoplifting from his shop and locked her in his cellar for 6 months, you support that? How disgusting, that's so despicable (<--- In case you aren't intelligent enough to realise, that's precisely how you've argued so far in this discussion)

Clever fallacious argument by you.
I asked you about official Sharia law not vigilante law in my last question
but you ignored it & stuck with the original question!

Quote:

Abu says that Osama didn't do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

That quote does not say he carried out the WTC bombing.

Whilst above, we have a clear and open statement from him denying that specific act.


Quote:

I asked you about official Sharia law not vigilante law in my last question but you ignored it & stuck with the original question!

This case has nothing to do with Shari'ah law, that's all that is relevant to this thread. Trying to then go off on tangents about hypotheticals is pointless.

Anyway quite clearly I'm not alone in believing no credible evidence has been provided that Usamah did it.

abu_rashid wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 7:13pm:

Quote: Abu says that Osama didn't do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden That quote does not say he carried out the WTC bombing. Whilst above, we have a clear and open statement from him denying that specific act. [quote]I asked you about official Sharia law not vigilante law in my last question but you ignored it & stuck with the original question!

This case has nothing to do with Shari'ah law, that's all that is relevant to this thread. Trying to then go off on tangents about hypotheticals is pointless.[/quote]


There are not too many people who would say that Osama was innocent!

Well - will you answer Freediver's question then?

Quote:

So what would the 'proper' Islamic punishment have been? Only 90 lashes?

Quote:

There are not too many people who would say that Osama was innocent!

A lot more than you think. There's also plenty more who do not know, but unlike you they do not instantly assume his guilt.

Here's an interesting quote about Usamah from the book written about him by the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden tracking unit, Michael Scheuer:

“As to bin Laden himself, Americans have been told that he is many things, but virtually none of the portraits of him feature his piety, generosity, personal bravery, strategic ability, charisma and patience.”


Quote:

Well - will you answer Freediver's question then?

No, since like yours it's mixing up this act with shari'ah, it's based on misconceptions and lies from the beginning and is therefore not worth answering.

Abu,
Osama's Judo prowess is not in question here -
what a red herring!



Quote:

No, since like yours it's mixing up this act with shari'ah, it's based on misconceptions and lies from the beginning and is therefore not worth answering.

Freediver asked you about Sharia Law not from my
"so called lies"
which were posted from CNN.

Bobby. wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 12:27pm:

Have a read about the latest Sharia law incident where a 14 year old girl was lashed to death. http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/29/bangladesh.lashing.death/index.html?iref=obinsite Quote: Shariatpur, Bangladesh (CNN) -- Hena Akhter's last words to her mother proclaimed her innocence. But it was too late to save the 14-year-old girl. Her fellow villagers in Bangladesh's Shariatpur district had already passed harsh judgment on her. Guilty, they said, of having an affair with a married man. The imam from the local mosque ordered the fatwa, or religious ruling, and the punishment: 101 lashes delivered swiftly, deliberately in public. Hena dropped after 70. Bloodied and bruised, she was taken to hospital, where she died a week later.

this is like the times of the Inquisition where anyone could accuse any woman of being a witch and she would certainly be tortured to death at the hands of the Catholic church :(

Nail.

Quote:

this is like the times of the Inquisition where anyone could accuse any woman of being a witch and she would certainly be tortured to death at the hands of the Catholic church

Hi Nail,
It's almost impossible to believe that there are some people who
want to go back to laws which are at least 1500 years old.
Abu is one who does.

Quote:

No, since like yours it's mixing up this act with shari'ah, it's based on misconceptions and lies from the beginning and is therefore not worth answering.

It is hard to understand your criticism then Abu. These people got together in an organised manner and meted out a punishment that, as far as I can tell, is indistinguishable from Islam. You however claim that it is different and therefor somehow invalid, but you cannot explain the difference. Is the only difference that you don't recognise their authority because they don't have a formal caliphate? That is, is your argument the 'Islam does not exist' argument?

Quote:

No, since like yours it's mixing up this act with shari'ah, it's based on misconceptions and lies from the beginning and is therefore not worth answering.

In other words ... once more .. you can't come to terms with it all .. and as such you feel compelled to push it under the carpet of denial.

At least you're consistent Abu.

fd, the major problem with your question is that it relates to a specific event, which was not carried out within a shari'ah jurisdiction, therefore equating it to shari'ah is just moot.

It cannot be compared to shari'ah or judged according to shari'ah, since it's nothing to do with shari'ah. You've asked me to give my opinion of it, and I have (several times over), you don't seem content with that though, instead you want to try and twist it into an attempt to transpose this event onto a theoretical existence of a Caliphate, which is just pointless.

Quote:

fd, the major problem with your question is that it relates to a specific event, which was not carried out within a shari'ah jurisdiction, therefore equating it to shari'ah is just moot.

I didn't equate it. I asked what the proper Islamic punishment could be, so that it might be compared. I even hinted that I expected it to be different. That is different from the same.


Quote:

You've asked me to give my opinion of it

No I didn't. I askled what the proper Islamic punishement was.


Quote:

instead you want to try and twist it into an attempt to transpose this event onto a theoretical existence of a Caliphate, which is just pointless.

No Abu. I merely asked what the proper Islamic punishment would have been.

Yes Abu - what is the correct Sharia punishment for a 14 year old girl who commits adultery?

The very question is littered with nonsensical insinuations.

What's the punishment for a 14 yo. shoplifter in Australian society? Is it incarceration? If so, then I accuse you of wanting to chain up young girls inside your cellar.

This is your argument... it's ridiculous, and really does not warrant a response.

The Islamic punishment for any sane adult who commits adultery is well known, why you are persisting in this childish little attempt to twist situations and apply them to the original story of this thread is beyond me. You seem to think it says something, but it says nothing, other than how simple you are. Your minds are one track, they get stuck in that track, and then they become repetitive.

Abu,

Quote:

The Islamic punishment for any sane adult who commits adultery is well known

I don't know it.
I assume then that it is 101 lashes with a cane on the bare buttocks?
You are supposed to be the Islamic scholar here who tells us the answers -
instead we get talk in riddles.

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 6:10pm:

abu_rashid wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 1:27pm: bobby, "imam" merely means someone who leads prayers. Some days at my local masjid I am "imam"... it means nothing, as Islam has no such thing as a clergy. These people are backwards ignorant uneducated vigilantes, and nothing more. They should be arrested and executed for murder, case closed, and THAT is sharia. So what would the 'proper' Islamic punishment have been? Only 90 lashes?

The punishment would be listening to your stupidity for 90 days. That would be far more painful then 90 lashes.

Bobby. wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 7:29pm:

abu_rashid wrote on May 8th, 2011 at 7:13pm: Quote: Abu says that Osama didn't do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden That quote does not say he carried out the WTC bombing. Whilst above, we have a clear and open statement from him denying that specific act. [quote]I asked you about official Sharia law not vigilante law in my last question but you ignored it & stuck with the original question! This case has nothing to do with Shari'ah law, that's all that is relevant to this thread. Trying to then go off on tangents about hypotheticals is pointless.

There are not too many people who would say that Osama was innocent!

Well - will you answer Freediver's question then?

Quote:

So what would the 'proper' Islamic punishment have been? Only 90 lashes?

[/quote]

Do you have proof that he was guilty. THe onus is on you to provide the proof....you know, innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Or do you reject this underlying right in western courts?

Bobby. wrote on May 8^th, 2011 at 8:33pm:

Nail. Quote: this is like the times of the Inquisition where anyone could accuse any woman of being a witch and she would certainly be tortured to death at the hands of the Catholic church Hi Nail, It's almost impossible to believe that there are some people who want to go back to laws which are at least 1500 years old. Abu is one who does.

Actually far longer then that....the Bible states that the punishment for adultery is stoning.

Islam requires 4 witnesses..something the bible does not. At the end of day, I suspect its not the punishment you object to...but the crime. You don't believe adultery/fornication to be a crime.

Am I correct?

Speaking of stupid laws..how do you feel about a man who punched a 6 month old to death, getting 6 months jail.

Now I wonder where that occurred?

Lisa Jones wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 6:29pm:

Quote: No, since like yours it's mixing up this act with shari'ah, it's based on misconceptions and lies from the beginning and is therefore not worth answering. In other words ... once more .. you can't come to terms with it all .. and as such you feel compelled to push it under the carpet of denial. At least you're consistent Abu.

Why...whenever I read your posts, does the word 'bimbo' come to mind. :D

Lestat wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 9:51am:

Do you have proof that he was guilty. THe onus is on you to provide the proof....you know, innocent until proven guilty and all that. Or do you reject this underlying right in western courts?

That is not an absolute right in Australia, in those cases the reverse onius of proof is applied, thankfully not very often.

Maybe the US executed him under sharia law where no proof is required at all.

The world has one less terrorist and a very expensive trial was avoided, a bloody good outcome if you ask me.  ;D

BigOl64 wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:01am:

That is not an absolute right in Australia, in those cases the reverse onius of proof is applied, thankfully not very often.

Which cases are they? Criminal cases? As far as I am aware, the reverse onus of proof is/can only be applied in civil cases.


BigOl64 wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:01am:

Maybe the US executed him under sharia law where no proof is required at all.

Actually, under Shariah law the onus for proof is far stronger then under western laws...but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your ignorance.


BigOl64 wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:01am:

The world has one less terrorist and a very expensive trial was avoided, a bloody good outcome if you ask me.  ;D

Spoken like a true barbarian. Your mother would be proud. :D

THose 3000 odd western uniformed terrosists killed in Afghanistan and Iraq is a far greater outcome if you ask me. Isn't it great when murderers get a dose of their own medicine???

And when Bush/Blair and those other terrorist leaders are targetted...don't whine like the b(tch you are. The precedent has been set.

Lestat wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:06am:

BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: That is not an absolute right in Australia, in those cases the reverse onius of proof is applied, thankfully not very often. Which cases are they? Criminal cases? As far as I am aware, the reverse onus of proof is/can only be applied in civil cases. BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: Maybe the US executed him under sharia law where no proof is required at all. Actually, under Shariah law the onus for proof is far stronger then under western laws...but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your ignorance. BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: The world has one less terrorist and a very expensive trial was avoided, a bloody good outcome if you ask me.  ;D Spoken like a true barbarian. Your mother would be proud. :D THose 3000 odd western uniformed terrosists killed in Afghanistan and Iraq is a far greater outcome if you ask me. Isn't it great when murderers get a dose of their own medicine??? And when Bush/Blair and those other terrorist leaders are targetted...don't whine like the b(tch you are. The precedent has been set.

As for reverse onus of proof check out the Gretley Mine trial on auslii, the first time it was applied in NSW for the deaths of 4 miners.


The rest of your post was drivel so I won't bother replying, if that's ok with you.


I see your hatred of Aussie soldiers continues, as 23 of those 3000 were our people; Im suprised ASIO and the feds haven't kicked down on your door yet.

BigOl64 wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:20am:

Lestat wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:06am: BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: That is not an absolute right in Australia, in those cases the reverse onius of proof is applied, thankfully not very often. Which cases are they? Criminal cases? As far as I am aware, the reverse onus of proof is/can only be applied in civil cases. BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: Maybe the US executed him under sharia law where no proof is required at all. Actually, under Shariah law the onus for proof is far stronger then under western laws...but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of your ignorance. BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:01am: The world has one less terrorist and a very expensive trial was avoided, a bloody good outcome if you ask me.  ;D Spoken like a true barbarian. Your mother would be proud. :D THose 3000 odd western uniformed terrosists killed in Afghanistan and Iraq is a far greater outcome if you ask me. Isn't it great when murderers get a dose of their own medicine??? And when Bush/Blair and those other terrorist leaders are targetted...don't whine like the b(tch you are. The precedent has been set. As for reverse onus of proof check out the Gretley Mine trial on auslii, the first time it was applied in NSW for the deaths of 4 miners. The rest of your post was drivel so I won't bother replying, if that's ok with you. I see your hatred of Aussie soldiers continues, as 23 of those 3000 were our people; Im suprised ASIO and the feds haven't kicked down on your door yet.

lol...23 murderers don't you mean. Sorry, I don't mourn the deaths of murderers...members of an invading force...even if they are 'ours'. Did you also consider Martin Bryant one  of 'ours' as well...or how bout 'Julian Knight'...he's one of yours as well.

And what do you mean by 'ours' anyways. Your a migrant aren't you? We don't want your murdering ways here...go back to where you came from.

How are those ADF soldiers that killed 2 women and children, and tried to cover it up...how they doing. THey'd really have your respect hey....guess thats just the type of person you are.

ASIO more then welcome to come over...any time they like. Can join me for a cup of coffee, where we can debate the finer points of AFL....I have nothing to hide. If they want to waste their time on someone like myself, whilst the true threats are out there...then fine, who am I to argue. :D

Lestat wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:25am:

lol...23 murderers don't you mean. Sorry, I don't mourn the deaths of murderers...members of an invading force...even if they are 'ours'. Did you also consider Martin Bryant one  of 'ours' as well...or how bout 'Julian Knight'...he's one of yours as well. And what do you mean by 'ours' anyways. Your a migrant aren't you? We don't want your murdering ways here...go back to where you came from. How are those ADF soldiers that killed 2 women and children, and tried to cover it up...how they doing. THey'd really have your respect hey....guess thats just the type of person you are. ASIO more then welcome to come over...any time they like. Can join me for a cup of coffee, where we can debate the finer points of AFL....I have nothing to hide. If they want to waste their time on someone like myself, whilst the true threats are out there...then fine, who am I to argue. :D

Damn you must be champing at the bit to strap on the expanding vest, I always knew you mussies hated the rest of us, but shiat dude your religious beliefs have made you a little sullen haven't they.  ;D


And but us Im mean my fellow service personnel, you know those  who protect their fellow Australians, even deadshiats like yourself.  >:(

Maybe ASIO is keeping and eye on you, especially after the UK learned the hard way to not trust their born and bred mussies.  ;D

abu_rashid wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 11:25pm:

The very question is littered with nonsensical insinuations. What's the punishment for a 14 yo. shoplifter in Australian society? Is it incarceration? If so, then I accuse you of wanting to chain up young girls inside your cellar. This is your argument... it's ridiculous, and really does not warrant a response. The Islamic punishment for any sane adult who commits adultery is well known, why you are persisting in this childish little attempt to twist situations and apply them to the original story of this thread is beyond me. You seem to think it says something, but it says nothing, other than how simple you are. Your minds are one track, they get stuck in that track, and then they become repetitive.

Actually, now I'm wondering what the punishment is.

In Australia, there would be no punishment at all to a 14 year old girl who had sex outside of marriage.

How perverse is that?

Bobby. wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 10:27pm:

Yes Abu - what is the correct Sharia punishment for a 14 year old girl who commits adultery?

abu_rashid wrote on May 9^th, 2011 at 11:25pm:

The very question is littered with nonsensical insinuations. What's the punishment for a 14 yo. shoplifter in Australian society? Is it incarceration? If so, then I accuse you of wanting to chain up young girls inside your cellar. This is your argument... it's ridiculous, and really does not warrant a response. The Islamic punishment for any sane adult who commits adultery is well known, why you are persisting in this childish little attempt to twist situations and apply them to the original story of this thread is beyond me. You seem to think it says something, but it says nothing, other than how simple you are. Your minds are one track, they get stuck in that track, and then they become repetitive.

It insinuates nothing of the sort Abu. It is a simple question. That is all. You are desperate for any excuse to avoid answering it. I am certainly not afraid of such silly insinuations when discussing appropriate punishments for crime. Only you are. It is not something to do with the question that has you afraid to answer. What makes you afraid to answer is the answer itself.

FD.

Quote:

It insinuates nothing of the sort Abu. It is a simple question. That is all. You are desperate for any excuse to avoid answering it. I am certainly not afraid of such silly insinuations when discussing appropriate punishments for crime. Only you are. It is not something to do with the question that has you afraid to answer. What makes you afraid to answer is the answer itself.

Typical Abu - sets himself up as some kind of Islamic scholar
& then can't answer a simple question about Sharia Law.

so you support locking a 14 yo. shoplifter up for 6 months in a cellar fd?

abu_rashid wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 6:36am:

so you support locking a 14 yo. shoplifter up for 6 months in a cellar fd?

Abu avoids a simple question by asking another question.
Nice try Abu - but I won't buy it.  :)

BigOl64 wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:36am:

Lestat wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:25am: lol...23 murderers don't you mean. Sorry, I don't mourn the deaths of murderers...members of an invading force...even if they are 'ours'. Did you also consider Martin Bryant one  of 'ours' as well...or how bout 'Julian Knight'...he's one of yours as well. And what do you mean by 'ours' anyways. Your a migrant aren't you? We don't want your murdering ways here...go back to where you came from. How are those ADF soldiers that killed 2 women and children, and tried to cover it up...how they doing. THey'd really have your respect hey....guess thats just the type of person you are. ASIO more then welcome to come over...any time they like. Can join me for a cup of coffee, where we can debate the finer points of AFL....I have nothing to hide. If they want to waste their time on someone like myself, whilst the true threats are out there...then fine, who am I to argue. :D Damn you must be champing at the bit to strap on the expanding vest, I always knew you mussies hated the rest of us, but shiat dude your religious beliefs have made you a little sullen haven't they.  ;D And but us Im mean my fellow service personnel, you know those  who protect their fellow Australians, even deadshiats like yourself.  >:( Maybe ASIO is keeping and eye on you, especially after the UK learned the hard way to not trust their born and bred mussies.  ;D

lol....'deadshiats'??? What exactly is that? Oh..sorry, must be the migrant in you coming out. hehe

Really...is this the best you can do. Australian soldiers in Afghanistan protecting 'us'....now I've heard it all.

Its unfortunate that in your blind ignorance you cannot see what is clearly before your eyes....the Australian murderers are in Afghanistan not protecting 'us'...but protecting US interests.

Guns for hire...nothing more.

Lestat wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 9:42am:

BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:36am: Lestat wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:25am: lol...23 murderers don't you mean. Sorry, I don't mourn the deaths of murderers...members of an invading force...even if they are 'ours'. Did you also consider Martin Bryant one  of 'ours' as well...or how bout 'Julian Knight'...he's one of yours as well. And what do you mean by 'ours' anyways. Your a migrant aren't you? We don't want your murdering ways here...go back to where you came from. How are those ADF soldiers that killed 2 women and children, and tried to cover it up...how they doing. THey'd really have your respect hey....guess thats just the type of person you are. ASIO more then welcome to come over...any time they like. Can join me for a cup of coffee, where we can debate the finer points of AFL....I have nothing to hide. If they want to waste their time on someone like myself, whilst the true threats are out there...then fine, who am I to argue. :D Damn you must be champing at the bit to strap on the expanding vest, I always knew you mussies hated the rest of us, but shiat dude your religious beliefs have made you a little sullen haven't they.  ;D And but us Im mean my fellow service personnel, you know those  who protect their fellow Australians, even deadshiats like yourself.  >:( Maybe ASIO is keeping and eye on you, especially after the UK learned the hard way to not trust their born and bred mussies.  ;D lol....'deadshiats'??? What exactly is that? Oh..sorry, must be the migrant in you coming out. hehe Really...is this the best you can do. Australian soldiers in Afghanistan protecting 'us'....now I've heard it all. Its unfortunate that in your blind ignorance you cannot see what is clearly before your eyes....the Australian murderers are in Afghanistan not protecting 'us'...but protecting US interests. Guns for hire...nothing more.

Fuken idiot!


bugger you cr@p on, how about you spend a couple of minutes to read what you post before hitting the send button. I can't even reply to most of your drivel, it's nothing more than the the rantings of a 14 yr old wanna-be.

Quote:

so you support locking a 14 yo. shoplifter up for 6 months in a cellar fd?

Sounds a bit over the top to me. I expect you'd get a slap on the wrist for the first offence at that age.

See, that wasn't so hard was it Abu? No insinutations necessary. My world is not crumbling because I gave a straight answer.

Now, can you tell me what the proper Islamic punishment would be for the cheating child bride?

BigOl64 wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 9:58am:

Lestat wrote on May 11th, 2011 at 9:42am: BigOl64 wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:36am: Lestat wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 10:25am: lol...23 murderers don't you mean. Sorry, I don't mourn the deaths of murderers...members of an invading force...even if they are 'ours'. Did you also consider Martin Bryant one  of 'ours' as well...or how bout 'Julian Knight'...he's one of yours as well. And what do you mean by 'ours' anyways. Your a migrant aren't you? We don't want your murdering ways here...go back to where you came from. How are those ADF soldiers that killed 2 women and children, and tried to cover it up...how they doing. THey'd really have your respect hey....guess thats just the type of person you are. ASIO more then welcome to come over...any time they like. Can join me for a cup of coffee, where we can debate the finer points of AFL....I have nothing to hide. If they want to waste their time on someone like myself, whilst the true threats are out there...then fine, who am I to argue. :D Damn you must be champing at the bit to strap on the expanding vest, I always knew you mussies hated the rest of us, but shiat dude your religious beliefs have made you a little sullen haven't they.  ;D And but us Im mean my fellow service personnel, you know those  who protect their fellow Australians, even deadshiats like yourself.  >:( Maybe ASIO is keeping and eye on you, especially after the UK learned the hard way to not trust their born and bred mussies.  ;D lol....'deadshiats'??? What exactly is that? Oh..sorry, must be the migrant in you coming out. hehe Really...is this the best you can do. Australian soldiers in Afghanistan protecting 'us'....now I've heard it all. Its unfortunate that in your blind ignorance you cannot see what is clearly before your eyes....the Australian murderers are in Afghanistan not protecting 'us'...but protecting US interests. Guns for hire...nothing more. Fuken idiot! bugger you cr@p on, how about you spend a couple of minutes to read what you post before hitting the send button. I can't even reply to most of your drivel, it's nothing more than the the rantings of a 14 yr old wanna-be.

Right back at you sunshine.

Quote:

Lestat - lol....'deadshiats'??? What exactly is that? Oh..sorry, must be the migrant in you coming out. hehe Really...is this the best you can do. Australian soldiers in Afghanistan protecting 'us'....now I've heard it all. Its unfortunate that in your blind ignorance you cannot see what is clearly before your eyes....the Australian murderers are in Afghanistan not protecting 'us'...but protecting US interests. Guns for hire...nothing more.

I do wish we had some islamic voices on here that weren't committed to the cause of the Islamofascists. I take the line that there's as much diversity in Islam as there is in Christianity It's a position that's increasingly difficult to maintain. I'm an Atheist but I'm well aware that Christofascists like Pat Robertson don't represent all Christians any more than Bin Laden represented all Muslims.

Fighting the Taliban is fighting fascism, fighting a twisted prehistoric view of the world that embraces throwing acid at  girls who want an education. Their doctrine of exercising absolute control through terror has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with fascism. The case for war against the Taliban was very good well before 9/11 and in absolute contrast with the case for war on Iraq which was next to non-existent.

Lestat wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 9:41am:

Right back at you sunshine.

Alas I am done for, the scoundrel doth struck me a mortal blow with his rapier wit.  


Good one dipshiat, I see your time at primary school wasn't a total waste of time, with your solid command of the 'rubber - glue gambit'.  ;D

FD.

Quote:

Now, can you tell me what the proper Islamic punishment would be for the cheating child bride?

Since Abu won't answer - I'll answer for him.

The correct punishment is to be lashed at least 100 times on the bare buttocks
with a cane or rattan - even to death.

Abu doesn't want to say that because he knows it's barbaric
& would put him in a bad light.
I have revealed him as a true barbaric Islamic person.

100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard?

Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery.

Adultery is a karnal sin.

Quote:

Does it say how hard?

Hard enough to rip the flesh off you back & buttocks.

Karnal wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 1:13pm:

100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard? Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery. Adultery is a karnal sin.

A child bride committing 'adultery' might be a "karnal" sin in your eyes, but in our eyes, peadophilia is the crime here not adultery.

Karnal wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 1:13pm:

100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard? Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery. Adultery is a karnal sin.

Adultery is a fossilised concept. ;D

Grey wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 2:46pm:

Karnal wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 1:13pm: 100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard? Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery. Adultery is a karnal sin. Adultery is a fossilised concept. ;D

Yes, but not if you're Muslim. How to deal with fossilised concepts in a multicultural society?

Karnal wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 4:50pm:

Grey wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 2:46pm: Karnal wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 1:13pm: 100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard? Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery. Adultery is a karnal sin. Adultery is a fossilised concept. ;D Yes, but not if you're Muslim. How to deal with fossilised concepts in a multicultural society?

Oh I suppose we should let Islamofascists have Sharia courts and let them whip or stone women to death under our noses? Look into my eyes, over my dead body >:(

Grey wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 6:45pm:

Karnal wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 4:50pm: Grey wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 2:46pm: Karnal wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 1:13pm: 100 lashes, is it? Does it say how hard? Some kids got six "of the best" when I was at school, but that was for stuff that was much milder than adultery. Adultery is a karnal sin. Adultery is a fossilised concept. ;D Yes, but not if you're Muslim. How to deal with fossilised concepts in a multicultural society? Oh I suppose we should let Islamofascists have Sharia courts and let them whip or stone women to death under our noses?

ISLAM affords all moslems such a religious right.
[i.e. ISLAM's lawful authority over all men, and the right to 'lawfully' kill ANY 'unbeliever' who 'offends' ISLAM.]

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/cartoon-protest12.jpg
Teaching moslem children, ISLAMIC values [London street]




n.b.
A moslem must never, ever, kill another moslem...

"......If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him."
Koran 4.092, 93

BUT, in their act of adultery, moslem adulterers become 'unbelievers', and therefore are worthy of death.

"...the Prophet said, If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260



Grey,

Why can't people like yourself see, that in following the dictates of their religion [in killing those persons who 'offend' their religion], moslems are merely expressing their Allah given 'religious freedom'.
[...i am being completely serious here.]

Do you have a problem with moslems expressing their 'religious freedom'?

WHY SO ????

What are you, an 'intolerant' bigot ???
/sarc offi
Grey wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 6:45pm:

Look into my eyes, over my dead body >:(

Grey,

You don't get it do you ???

Or do you ?

In a jurisdiction where moslems have authority, THAT, can be arranged, 'LAWFULLY'.

Your words in this forum have been expressions of 'intolerance' of Allah's perfect religion and laws, and are 'offensive' to moslems, and to moslems they are an expression of your 'intolerance' of ISLAM.

And in questioning Allah's perfect religion and laws, YOU, are insulting ISLAM, and Allah.

And for that 'CRIME', [according to their religion] moslems may 'LAWFULLY' kill you,
...and then step over your dead body.


+++

No moslem must ever, knowingly kill a fellow human being moslem.

But killing infidels, and those who rise up against, or reject, moslem authority ???

No worries!



SO ON KILLING, ISLAMIC LAW STATES.....???

To kill a fellow moslem is very, very, wrong.

But to kill those 'unbelievers' who resist ISLAM and Allah's perfect religion and laws, that is justified, and actually encouraged.
....so as to create terror in the hearts of other 'unbelievers'.

".....I have been given superiority......; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me:"
hadithsunnah/muslim/ #004.1062



+++

"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other......"
Koran 48.029

"....take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends....
......he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them."
Koran 5.51

"O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as friends (or protectors),- offering them (your) love,..."
Koran 60.1

"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"...those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47:8-11

BigOl64 wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 10:33am:

Lestat wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 9:41am: Right back at you sunshine. Alas I am done for, the scoundrel doth struck me a mortal blow with his rapier wit.   Good one dipshiat, I see your time at primary school wasn't a total waste of time, with your solid command of the 'rubber - glue gambit'.  ;D

wow...thats a good one. Better write it down so that your small mind doesn't forget it. Yeah...thats right 'DIPSHIT'...see how its spelt????

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:15am:

BigOl64 wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 10:33am: Lestat wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 9:41am: Right back at you sunshine. Alas I am done for, the scoundrel doth struck me a mortal blow with his rapier wit.   Good one dipshiat, I see your time at primary school wasn't a total waste of time, with your solid command of the 'rubber - glue gambit'.  ;D wow...thats a good one. Better write it down so that your small mind doesn't forget it. Yeah...thats right 'DIPSHIT'...see how its spelt????

I'm suprised you actually understood what I wrote, good on you!  ;D

So now you are down to attacking me on the basis that the swear word modifier was changed to allow "poo" (0hh look it doesn't) and I was not aware of the change.

Hoisted on my own petard by the mussie retard; once again, good on you!  ;D

Grey wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 10:26am:

Quote: Lestat - lol....'deadshiats'??? What exactly is that? Oh..sorry, must be the migrant in you coming out. hehe Really...is this the best you can do. Australian soldiers in Afghanistan protecting 'us'....now I've heard it all. Its unfortunate that in your blind ignorance you cannot see what is clearly before your eyes....the Australian murderers are in Afghanistan not protecting 'us'...but protecting US interests. Guns for hire...nothing more. I do wish we had some islamic voices on here that weren't committed to the cause of the Islamofascists. I take the line that there's as much diversity in Islam as there is in Christianity It's a position that's increasingly difficult to maintain. I'm an Atheist but I'm well aware that Christofascists like Pat Robertson don't represent all Christians any more than Bin Laden represented all Muslims. Fighting the Taliban is fighting fascism, fighting a twisted prehistoric view of the world that embraces throwing acid at  girls who want an education. Their doctrine of exercising absolute control through terror has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with fascism. The case for war against the Taliban was very good well before 9/11 and in absolute contrast with the case for war on Iraq which was next to non-existent.

So tell me Grey...what would you have us do...when your armies and governments continously invade and meddle in muslims lands.

Would you prefer that muslims suffer in silence? Is that what it is?

You say the case for war against the Taliban was very good before 9/11? Why is that...exactly what case was this?.

And what of the case for war against the numerous other govt's who persecute their people and minorities.

The Chinese, the Russians, the Saudi's, Bahrain, Zimbabwe...and last but not least, Israel...what about the case for war against those governments who's people and minorities continue to suffer to this day.

And funny you talk about the doctrine of exercising absolute control through terror. No other country does this today more then the US. Heck....their whole economy is backed by military power, and they have shown time and time again that they are willing to use terror should anyone change their hedgemony.

It is you and your governments who are the facists....hoping to conquer and inflict suffering on other peoples.

BigOl64 wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:22am:

I'm suprise you actually understood what I wrote, good on you!  ;D

So am I....I bet you get that a fair bit. hehe

Might have something to do with the gibberish and garbage you post.


BigOl64 wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:22am:

So now you are down to attacking me on the basis that the swear word modifier was changed to allow "poo" and I was not aware of the change.

Yes, seems there's a fair bit you are not aware of.


BigOl64 wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:22am:

Hoisted on my own petard by the mussie retard; once again, good on you!  ;D

Retard...wow, thats a big word. And using words that rythme. I'm impressed! For a migrant you've come in leaps and bouds. Your mummy must be proud!

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:26am:

Retard...wow, thats a big word. And using words that rythme. I'm impressed! For a migrant you've come in leaps and bouds. Your mummy must be proud!

She is very proud actually, mostly because I can spell the word 'rhyme'

As much fun as it is to play with the mentally deficient, you really need to become a better speller, if that is going to be the primary focus of your attack.  ;D

Grey wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 10:26am:

I do wish we had some islamic voices on here that weren't committed to the cause of the Islamofascists. I take the line that there's as much diversity in Islam as there is in Christianity It's a position that's increasingly difficult to maintain. I'm an Atheist but I'm well aware that Christofascists like Pat Robertson don't represent all Christians any more than Bin Laden represented all Muslims.

Grey,

You DO NOT get it, still.

You still want to imagine, that there can be a moderate ISLAM.


Q.
And why is it, that you still want to imagine that ???


A.
Because [like so many 'toelrant', 'do gooders' in the West] you arrogantly refuse to accept the truth of what ISLAM truly is.
...EVEN WHEN THAT TRUTH IS STARING YOU IN THE FACE EVERYDAY.






The truth ???

What truth ???

e.g.

Attack on London 'inevitable'
April 19, 2004
"We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/19/1082326119414.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true


N.B.
"...the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity."

BigOl64 wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:34am:

As much fun as it is to play with the mentally deficient, you really need to become a better speller, if that is going to be the primary focus of your attack.  ;D

Playing with the mentally deficient? Yes...I bet you play with yourself a fair bit.

lol@ 'better speller'. Hint: if your going to have a go at someone's spelling or grammer, its best to make sure your own is spot on.

:D

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:43am:

lol@ 'better speller'. Hint: if your going to have a go at someone's spelling or grammer, its best to make sure your own is spot on. :D

Can you spell I R O N Y ?   ;D  ;D  ;D

Later fu ckwit!  

BigOl64 wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:47am:

[quote author=Lestat33 link=1304821631/60#67 date=1305243818 lol@ 'better speller'. Hint: if your going to have a go at someone's spelling or grammer, its best to make sure your own is spot on. :D

Can you spell I R O N Y ?   ;D  ;D  ;D

Later fukwit!  (spelled that way because f u c k is not allowed)

[/quote]

Irony? Is that when someone brags about how he is a 'better speller'?

:D

wow...such colourful language...good to see your true self coming out. Well done...your mummy's proud??? I bet.

:D

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

BigOl64 wrote on May 13th, 2011 at 9:47am: [quote author=Lestat33 link=1304821631/60#67 date=1305243818 lol@ 'better speller'. Hint: if your going to have a go at someone's spelling or grammer, its best to make sure your own is spot on. :D Can you spell I R O N Y ?   ;D  ;D  ;D Later fukwit!  (spelled that way because f u c k is not allowed)

Irony? Is that when someone brags about how he is a 'better speller'?

:D

wow...such colourful language...good to see your true self coming out. Well done...your mummy's proud??? I bet.

:D
[/quote]


Actually irony is when the local moron rips into someone for not spelling poo (sh it) correctly, due to a word modifier, and then misspells rhyme; especially after he went in to fix previous mistakes in his post. (yeh I saw 'your' first effort)  ;D


English is a wonderfiull language, pity you didn't stay awake in class to learn it.  ;D

Grey.

Quote:

Oh I suppose we should let Islamofascists have Sharia courts and let them whip or stone women to death under our noses? Look into my eyes, over my dead body

Well said.

Sorry to change the subject Les, but can you tell me what the proper Islamic punishment would be for a cheating child bride?

Abu is online tonight & just doesn't know what to write in reply.

Yeh I'm speechless when looking at the nonsense posted by you half wits.

abu_rashid wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 9:06pm:

Yeh I'm speechless when looking at the nonsense posted by you half wits.

Halfwits who have some compassion for humanity or Islamofascists who don't?


Quote:

Oh I suppose we should let Islamofascists have Sharia courts and let them whip or stone women to death under our noses? Look into my eyes, over my dead body

Bobby. wrote on May 15^th, 2011 at 10:33am:

abu_rashid wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 9:06pm: Yeh I'm speechless when looking at the nonsense posted by you half wits. Halfwits who have some compassion for humanity or Islamofascists who don't? Quote: Oh I suppose we should let Islamofascists have Sharia courts and let them whip or stone women to death under our noses? Look into my eyes, over my dead body

You have compassion for humanity? Could of fooled me!