mozzaok wrote on Jun 20^th, 2008 at 5:14pm:



Huh?

Hi acid - I have a few things to do. so will do this posting, then disappear for tonight.

Here is my quotes for the trench war you asked for again.


"Tabari VIII:38 "The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish men and boys who had reached puberty should be beheaded. Then the Prophet divided the wealth, wives, and children of the Banu Qurayza Jews among the Muslims."

Ishaq:464 "The Jews were made to come down, and Allah's Messenger imprisoned them. Then the Prophet went out into the marketplace of Medina, and he had trenches dug in it. He sent for the Jewish men and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in batches. They numbered 800 to 900 boys and men."

Tabari VIII:40 "The Messenger commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the Qurayza. Then he sat down. Ali and Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence."

Showing the trenches were dug to contain the blood AFTER the treachery by mohammad. Not before any war.



27.5 million is a MASSIVE % more than your previously stated " the account of a few fundamentalist and radical elements"
We have not considered other muslim countries.


yes, I'm an infidel also.
pagan means having either one or many Gods.
No warring against pagans directed in the new testament.

See you all tomorrow

Take care

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 20^th, 2008 at 6:56pm:

Sprint have you read Tabari and can verify those quotes are in there?

Secondly the trench that you are referring to was in the market place inside Medina, where the people were executed according to JEWISH LAW and NOT according to Islamic Law, due to their choice in Judge which Muhammad pbuh had to honour. The treachery was NOT on the part of Muhammad pbuh but instead was on the part of the Banu Qurayza as they broke the pact which they had made by conspiring with the Pagan Quraysh to invade Medina.

It was called the War of the Trench because the Pagans had brought an army of 10,000 to attack Medina, the inhabitants of Medina had no real way of defending themselves when Salman Al-Farsi suggested to make a big trench in front of Medina to prevent the army of 10,000 from entering the city, which resulted in a stale mate lasting 2 weeks.

Why would they have dug the trenches in the marketplace before the war? The marketplace was in the center of the city, there's no tactical advantage of digging a trench for the war there because it'd give the Pagans the run of half of the city.

Why do you keep speaking without knowing the facts? Your really only making yourself look ignorant.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:49pm:

I certainly didn't refute those quotes you put in which are allegedly from Tabari, do you know why Sprint? It's because I haven't read Tabari, have you read Tabari Sprint? If you haven't read it, do you really think it's a geat idea to be quoting it?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:49pm:

First of all.. That whole load of garbage which you posted as a 'logical' view of history is utter rubbish. I refuted it already and you have yet to respond on that.

Sprint, have you ever actually studied Islam or the Middle East from an academic perspective? Like from a university? My MAJOR at a WESTERN university is Middle Eastern Studies and from what I have studied there all respected Muslim and non Muslim historians agree with the view I have shown of the Battle of the Trench, in that it was called the 'Battle of the Trench' due to the trenches built BEORE the war to prevent the Pagan army from overrunning Medina and also agree that the Banu Qurayza had conspired with the Meccans against Medinah.

You really are making yourself look stupid here because the fact is that you don't actually know enough about pre-Islamic Arabia, Islam nor the Middle East to actually be considered educated on the subject. Instead you get rubbish from websites which are obviously biased and who's only intention is to defame Islam.

How about you show us the sources for your big post on the Battle of the Trench Sprint?
Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:49pm:

Borrowed from the Jews? Are you insane? If that was the case, why would we say that Jesus pbuh was from a miracle birth of a pious virgin named mary pbuh when it is the Jews who claim that Mary pbuh was a whore and Jesus pbuh a liar.. Islam's view is very similar to that of the Christian view regarding Jesus' pbuh miracle birth and virgin mother pbuh.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:49pm:

Sprint, this is where you finally prove how LITTLE you know about what you're commenting on.

First of all, there were NOT two Jewish tribes in Medina, there were THREE, those were the Banu Qaynuqa, the Banu Qurayza, and Banu Nadir. There were also two Pagan tribes, they were the Banu Khazraj and the Banu Aus.

The Banu Aus and the Banu Khazraj were sworn enemies and had been fighting each other for more than 120 years before Muhammad pbuh came. The Banu Aus had the support of the Banu Qurayza and the Banu Nadir against the Banu Khazraj who had the support of the Banu Qaynuqa. They all participated in four wars against each other with the last being only a few years before Muhammad pbuh's coming to Madinah.

To prevent further bloodshed all of the inhabitants, both Jew and Pagan invited Muhammad and the Muslims into their state to arbitrate and create peace between the tribes so that there would be no more bloodshed, in return they agreed that Yathrib (as it was called at the time) would become an Islamic State and the Banu Aws and Khazraj both became Muslim, in addition to some of those from the Jewish tribes. I must stress that at this time, the Muslims from Mecca not only had NO army, but had no wealth either, they came as refugees to Yathrib.


Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 21^st, 2008 at 11:49pm:

Even if they accepted him as their leader after breaking the treaty they would have been killed anyway.

They were sentenced to death for their breaking of the treaty according to JEWISH law, if you have a problem with JEWISH law, go speak to the JEWS about it.. Had they accepted Muhammad pbuh as their judge they would have only been exiled from the city like the other two tribes who broke the treaty.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jun 20^th, 2008 at 6:04pm:


Pagans also have this association of dancing naked around trees. Personally I don't want to go there.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 7:05pm:

I saw that festival on malcolm in the middle lol

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2008 at 7:20pm:

I don't accept those quotes because I haven't read them for myself in Tabari. Have you read Tabari Sprint?

You have no idea about Middle Eastern history Sprint, you've proven that many times.. What you have posted sounds better to you because you want to view Islam as something dangerous and Muhammad pbuh as a blood thirsty murderer. You'll twist the truth in any direction to get that outcome and that is very obvious to everyone on the forum.

Perhaps you don't even understand the family or tribe that Muhammad Mustafa ibn Abdullah came from, he was of the Banu Hashim or Hashemites, they can trace their lineage back to Ishmael and Abraham pbut and were the most noble of all Arabian tribes. If you were able to intellectually grapple with the complexities of his lineage and his name you'd understand why he was brought in and trusted to bring peace between the tribes in Yathrib.

Check your facts sprint because you are only making yourself look more and more stupid.

I copied them from somewhere.
No idea where, can prob search and find it.

What idea is more likely ?
The new kid on the block waged war by whatever means to gain an empire? make no mistakes, he was great at war.
Or those in charge took on a refugee with no arms or money to help them in a 100 year old war ??
Where in the end, most were murdered bar him !!!
Very lucky indeed.

mohammad copied some of the jewish torah. some he missed out.
Think gabriel would err in that?

mohammad was not mentioned in the Bible?
he took on methods unused for over a century, going against what Jesus taught.

What's more likely?