Australian Politics Forum - Dhimmitude is against oppression?

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47352
At my desk.

Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Sep 1^st, 2018 at 12:57am

Keep polishing that turd:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 31^st, 2018 at 2:03pm:

FD's answer - Muhammad the raper and pillager - and ultimate standard bearer of Islam.

The reality is, terrorism, or violence in general that has a distinct and specific Islamic doctrinal foundation, is a very recent phenomenon. For centuries violence committed by muslims has been in the name of nationalism, honour and tribe - with the Islamic doctrine at best a peripheral justification. The evolution of first the caliphate, and then the Ottoman Empire through the centuries, lends weight to the idea that Islamic doctrine was used more in justifying peace and coexistence with non-muslims, rather than inflicting violence on them. Thus you had the dhimmi system - a system specifically against oppressing non-muslims, let alone killing non-muslims, to the extent that jewish and christian communities in places like Syria flourished culturally and scientifically, and contributed significantly to the scientific flowering known as the Islamic golden age. Then you had the Ottoman Empire which during the 19th century implemented radical reforms to elevate the status of non-muslims as equal citizens, and to codify in specific laws things like freedom of belief, and even gay rights - reforms far ahead of anything seen by contemporary western European societies. And most importantly, reforms that were enacted specifically by Islamic scholars, and rooted in Islamic doctrine.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

moses

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6353

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #1 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 3:30pm

part of what was written by the humble Hasan al Kafrawi, the Shafiite.

Dhimmitude in islam:

The Answer Of The Shaikh Hasan Al Kafrawi, The Shafiite [Professor of canon law in Cairo,

Praise be to allah, the guide of the right way!

The decision given by the Shaikh ar-Ramli [a great Cairo legal authority, d. 1596], by the Shaikh al-Islam [the muslim religious authority in Constantinople], and by the learned scholars whose decrees can hardly be written down here, may be worded as follows:

"It is forbidden to the tolerated peoples living on muslim territory to clothe themselves in the same manner as the chiefs, the scholars, and the nobles. They should not be allowed to clothe themselves in costly fabrics which have been cut in the modes which are forbidden to them, in order that they may not offend the sensibilities of poor muslims and in order that their faith in their religion should not be shaken by this. [Poor muslims may regret their faith when they see how well-dressed the Christians and Jews are.]

"They should not be permitted to employ mounts like the muslims. They must use neither saddles, nor iron-stirrups, in order to be distinguished from the true believers. They must under no circumstance ride horses because of the noble character of this animal. The most-high has said [qu'ran 8:62]: 'And through powerful squadrons [of horses] through which you will strike terror into your own and allah's enemies.'[A verse of the qu'ran makes a good support for a law. Verses may even be torn out of their context.]

"They should not be permitted to take muslims into their service because allah has glorified the people of islam. he has given them his aid and has given them a guarantee by these words [qu'ran 3:140]: 'Surely allah will never give preeminence to unbelievers over the true believers.' Now this is just what is happening today, for their servants are muslims taken from among men of a mature age or from those who are still young. This is one of the greatest scandals to which the guardians of authority must put an end. It is wrong to greet them even with a simple 'how-do-you-do'; to serve them, even for wages, at the baths or in what relates to their riding animals; and it is forbidden to accept anything from their hand, for that would be an act of debasement by the faithful. They are forbidden while going through the streets to ape the manners of the muslims, and still less those of the cities of the religion. They shall only walk single-file, and in narrow lanes they must withdraw even more into the most cramped part of the road.

"One may read that which follows in Bukhari and muslim [religious authorities of the ninth century]: 'Jews and Christians shall never begin a greeting; if you encounter one of them on the road, push him into the narrowest and tightest spot.' The absence of every mark of consideration toward them is obligatory for us; we ought never to give them the place of honor in an assembly when a muslim is present. This is in order to humble them and to honor the true believers. They should under no circumstances acquire muslim slaves, white or black. Therefore they should get rid of the slaves which they now have for the), have no right to own them. If one of their slaves who was formerly an infidel, becomes a muslim, he shall be removed from them, and his master, willingly or unwillingly, shall be compelled to sell him and to accept the price for him. "It is no longer permitted them to put themselves, with respect to their houses, on an equal footing with the dwellings of their muslim neighbors, and still less to build their buildings higher. If they are of the same height, or higher, it is incumbent upon us to pull them down to a size a little less than the houses of the true believers. This conforms to the word of the prophet: 'islam rules, and nothing shall raise itself above it.' This is also in order to hinder them from knowing where our weak spots are and in order to make a distinction between their dwellings and ours.

"They are forbidden to build new churches, chapels, or monasteries in any muslim land. We should destroy everything that is of new construction in every place, founded under the muslim religion, for it is said in a tradition of Umar: 'No church shall be built in islam.' They shall no longer be permitted to repair the parts of these [post-islamic] buildings which are in ruins. However, the old buildings [of pre-islamic times] which are found in a land whose population had embraced islam need not be destroyed. They shall not, however, be enlarged by means of repairs or otherwise. In case the tolerated peoples [Jews, Christians, etc.] act contrary to these provisions we will be obliged to destroy everything that has been added to the original size of the building. [Only pre-islamic churches and synagogues may be repaired; new ones must be torn down.]

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20955
A cat with a view

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #2 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:40pm

The gandalf piece, quoted in the OP,
....that is something worthy of Karnal. Grin

Pure sophistry and lies.

Quote:

.....Thus you had the dhimmi system - a system specifically against oppressing non-muslims, let alone killing non-muslims, to the extent that jewish and christian communities in places like Syria flourished culturally and scientifically, and contributed significantly to the scientific flowering known as the Islamic golden age......the Ottoman Empire which during the 19th century implemented radical reforms to elevate the status of non-muslims as equal citizens, and to codify in specific laws things like freedom of belief.....

Moslems are the masters at writing history [i.e. their history], AFTER THE FACT.

.

QUESTION;
Whatever happened to the majority Buddhist population in Afghanistan,
that were there, pre the ISLAMIC invasion and takeover of that land?

Quote:

AN ETHICAL BASIS FOR WAR

by Bill Warner (Jan 2007)

".....Islam has been waging civilizational war for centuries.

Before the Muslims arrived, Egypt and North Africa and the southern coast of the Mediterranean were Christian.

There was a Buddhist monastery in Egypt.

Turkey was Buddhist and Christian.

Persia-now Iran-was Zoroastrian.

The Hindu culture covered an area of the world twice as large as it is now.

When Napoleon invaded Egypt, he discovered that the Muslim population knew nothing about Egypt before Islam.

The 5,000-year-old culture of the Pharaohs had been annihilated.

There are no Buddhists in Afghanistan...."

"....Baghdad was once home to the oldest community of Jews in the world, brought there as Babylonian captives.

Today it is estimated that there are no more than a few dozen Jews left in Iraq.

All cultures living within the borders of Islam are annihilated.

People either leave, convert or die.

Languages disappear to be replaced by Arabic.

There are no exceptions over time."

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm
the link is old, but the article is kosher

Many devout moslems have a unique 'perspective' on 'truth' and truthfulness.

e.g. 'Facts' which serve ISLAM's interests [i.e. expanding the influence of ISLAM] are always true.

Whereas those facts which portray ISLAMIC culture in a poor light, are almost always portrayed as 'insulting' infidel lies.

.

Whenever moslems write accounts of history, it has been shown time and time again, that moslems will shamelessly fabricate the 'history' of some past circumstance or event, so as to favour some current moslem interest.

And these false historical accounts which moslems 'produce' as evidence, invariably always portray moslems, in their current conflicts [with their enemies], as correct/virtuous/or as victims of injustice.
e.g.

Quote:

Chief Muslim claims Jewish Temples never existed

March 15, 2007

"....The Jewish Temples never existed.......descriptions of the Jewish Temples in the Hebrew Tanach, in the Talmud and in Byzantine and Roman writings from the Temple periods were forged, and that the Torah was falsified to claim Biblical patriarchs and matriarchs were Jewish when indeed they were prophets for Islam."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=40628
the link is old, but the article is kosher

Quote:

Temple Mount '100% Islamic'

June 01, 2008

"....Taysir Tamimi, chief Palestinian Justice and one of the most influential Muslim leaders in Israel, argued the Jewish Temples never existed,...."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65919
the link is old, but the article is kosher

n.b.

And just look how moslems respond,

whenever additional, independent historic sources, contradict the moslem 'narrative' of 'their' history....

".....descriptions of the Jewish Temples in the Hebrew Tanach, in the Talmud and in Byzantine and Roman writings from the Temple periods were forged,...."

Oh, but of course they were!

.

"ISLAM ES PAZ"

IMAGE.....

Everyone knows that true ISLAM, is a religion of peace.

/sarc off

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 40485 Gender:	Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression? Reply #3 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

issuevoter Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9200 The Great State of Mind Gender:	Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression? Reply #4 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:51pm Everything Gandalf writes is a desperate attempt to justify his stupid decision to "convert." (Whatever convert means.) He is no different than David Hicks, and should never be forgiven for supporting our enemies.
Back to top	No political allegiance. No philosophy. No religion. IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 39526

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #5 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47352
At my desk.

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #6 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:08pm

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

What do you think Brian, do you agree with what Gandalf said about Dhimmitude? Or do you think he is polishing a turd?

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92258
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #7 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 8:00pm

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Here's your new signature, G.

And remember, it's for their own good.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40485
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #8 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:18pm

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 8:00pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Here's your new signature, G.

And remember, it's for their own good.

Gandalf the agit-prop convert proposed that dhimmitude was instituted by Muslims to protect theitr 'minorities', turd-eater.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17471
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #9 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:22pm

freediver wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

What do you think Brian, do you agree with what Gandalf said about Dhimmitude? Or do you think he is polishing a turd?

I think Gandalf is sugar coating that turd

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92258
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #10 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 11:30pm

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:18pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 8:00pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Here's your new signature, G.

And remember, it's for their own good.

Gandalf the agit-prop convert proposed that dhimmitude was instituted by Muslims to protect theitr 'minorities', turd-eater.

It's a pretty accepted point of view. I myself have no idea.

You have always absolutely never ever and Eternal, so who's more likely to be correct?

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92258
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #11 - Sep 1^st, 2018 at 11:51pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:22pm:

freediver wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

What do you think Brian, do you agree with what Gandalf said about Dhimmitude? Or do you think he is polishing a turd?

I think Gandalf is sugar coating that turd

Do you now?

Quote:

Under sharia, the dhimmi communities were usually subjected to their own special laws, and exempt from some laws applicable to the Muslim community. For example, the Jewish community in Medina was allowed to have its own Halakhic courts,[9] and the Ottoman millet system allowed its various dhimmi communities to rule themselves under separate legal courts. These courts did not cover cases that involved religious groups outside of their own community, or capital offences. Dhimmi communities were also allowed to engage in certain practices that were usually forbidden for the Muslim community, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork.[10][11][12]

Historically, dhimmi status was originally applied to Jews, Christians, and Sabians. This status later also came to be applied to Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists.[13][14][15]

Similar principles applied in many ancient empires, including Rome, where citizenship applied only to Romans with various rights, powers - and taxes - applying to non-citizens.

The issue here was how to apply a rule of law within a civilisation that housed people of different faiths, rules and laws. Dhimmi means "protected", and is generally understood to have been a fair system.

Quote:

Dhimmis had their rights fully protected in their communities, but as citizens in the Islamic state, had certain restrictions,[4] and it was obligatory for them to pay the jizya tax, which complemented the zakat, or alms, paid by the Muslim subjects.[5] Dhimmis were exempt from certain duties assigned specifically to Muslims, and did not enjoy certain political rights reserved for Muslims, but were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.[6][7][8]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

Protecting minorities is correct. It's literally what Dhimmi means.

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20955
A cat with a view

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #12 - Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 8:01am

@ Reply #11,

Yeah, and ISLAM is a benign and tolerant faith.

/sarc off

REBUTTED;

Quote:

Under sharia, the dhimmi communities were usually subjected to their own special laws, and exempt from some laws applicable to the Muslim community.....

LIES - and totally without any Koranic authority - the PRIMARY source of all authority for ISLAMIC doctrine towards disbelievers.

.

REBUTTED;

Quote:

Dhimmi means "protected", and is generally understood to have been a fair system.

LIES - and totally without any Koranic authority - the PRIMARY source of all authority for ISLAMIC doctrine towards disbelievers.

Dhimmihood [wherever it was implemented], was simply a path of cultural humiliation and oppression,
which gradually moved towards the cultural annihilation, of the 'other'.

.

REBUTTED;

Quote:

Dhimmis......were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.

LIES - and totally without any Koranic authority - the PRIMARY source of all authority for ISLAMIC doctrine towards disbelievers.

.

ARGUMENT;
ISLAM's principle and PRIMARY source of inspiration and authority for ISLAMIC doctrine
[the Koran, whose words, all moslems attribute as coming straight from Allah's lips], commands every 'authentic' moslem,
to shun and to hate, to fight and to kill [or enslave], those who are not moslems.

.

ARGUMENT;
Yadda said....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1424590530/17#17
Quote:

The heart of ISLAM is the Koran

[and heart of the Koran, is the ideas and ideals it contains].

The Koran plainly commands the followers of ISLAM, that it is their religious duty to harbour "enmity and hatred for ever" towards disbelievers "unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"
e.g. Koran 60:4

The Koran plainly commands the followers of ISLAM, that it is their religious duty, "for the Cause of Allah", to participate fighting, to kill disbelievers [or, to support those who do fight]
e.g. Koran 9.29, Koran 9.123, Koran 9.111

Google;
"Whosoever dies without participating in an expedition (jihad) nor having the intention to do so, dies on a branch of hypocrisy"
- quoting ISLAMIC scripture, urging the believer to join the fight

The Koran plainly commands the followers of ISLAM, that it is A CAPITAL CRIME to love anyone,
who is a disbeliever. "...Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers."
e.g. Koran 58.22, Koran 9.23, Koran 5.51, Koran 48.29

Allah's Koran does not give the moslem, any religiously authoritative or legal leeway, in his attitude of hatred, and his lawful authority to hate and to oppress the disbeliever.

.

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123

"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47352
At my desk.

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #13 - Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 8:05am

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 11:51pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:22pm:

freediver wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

What do you think Brian, do you agree with what Gandalf said about Dhimmitude? Or do you think he is polishing a turd?

I think Gandalf is sugar coating that turd

Do you now?

Quote:

Under sharia, the dhimmi communities were usually subjected to their own special laws, and exempt from some laws applicable to the Muslim community. For example, the Jewish community in Medina was allowed to have its own Halakhic courts,[9] and the Ottoman millet system allowed its various dhimmi communities to rule themselves under separate legal courts. These courts did not cover cases that involved religious groups outside of their own community, or capital offences. Dhimmi communities were also allowed to engage in certain practices that were usually forbidden for the Muslim community, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork.[10][11][12]

Historically, dhimmi status was originally applied to Jews, Christians, and Sabians. This status later also came to be applied to Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists.[13][14][15]

Similar principles applied in many ancient empires, including Rome, where citizenship applied only to Romans with various rights, powers - and taxes - applying to non-citizens.

The issue here was how to apply a rule of law within a civilisation that housed people of different faiths, rules and laws. Dhimmi means "protected", and is generally understood to have been a fair system.

Quote:

Dhimmis had their rights fully protected in their communities, but as citizens in the Islamic state, had certain restrictions,[4] and it was obligatory for them to pay the jizya tax, which complemented the zakat, or alms, paid by the Muslim subjects.[5] Dhimmis were exempt from certain duties assigned specifically to Muslims, and did not enjoy certain political rights reserved for Muslims, but were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.[6][7][8]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

Protecting minorities is correct. It's literally what Dhimmi means.

Muhammad committed genocide against the Jewish community of Medina.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 92258
Gender: male

Re: Dhimmitude is against oppression?
Reply #14 - Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 12:24pm

freediver wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2018 at 8:05am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 11:51pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 10:22pm:

freediver wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 6:04pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 1^st, 2018 at 5:49pm:

Maybe we should treat Muslims as dhimmis for their own protection. Wear a crescent on their clothes to identify themselves, make them pay extra tax, make sure they always give way to the kuffar on the streets and forbid them to publicly speak about Islam or build any mosques.

Obviously learnt a lot from your superior culture, now haven't you, Soren? Do you want us all to wear nice black uniforms with nice red armbands with a crooked cross emblazoned on them? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

What do you think Brian, do you agree with what Gandalf said about Dhimmitude? Or do you think he is polishing a turd?

I think Gandalf is sugar coating that turd

Do you now?

Quote:

Under sharia, the dhimmi communities were usually subjected to their own special laws, and exempt from some laws applicable to the Muslim community. For example, the Jewish community in Medina was allowed to have its own Halakhic courts,[9] and the Ottoman millet system allowed its various dhimmi communities to rule themselves under separate legal courts. These courts did not cover cases that involved religious groups outside of their own community, or capital offences. Dhimmi communities were also allowed to engage in certain practices that were usually forbidden for the Muslim community, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork.[10][11][12]

Historically, dhimmi status was originally applied to Jews, Christians, and Sabians. This status later also came to be applied to Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists.[13][14][15]

Similar principles applied in many ancient empires, including Rome, where citizenship applied only to Romans with various rights, powers - and taxes - applying to non-citizens.

The issue here was how to apply a rule of law within a civilisation that housed people of different faiths, rules and laws. Dhimmi means "protected", and is generally understood to have been a fair system.

Quote:

Dhimmis had their rights fully protected in their communities, but as citizens in the Islamic state, had certain restrictions,[4] and it was obligatory for them to pay the jizya tax, which complemented the zakat, or alms, paid by the Muslim subjects.[5] Dhimmis were exempt from certain duties assigned specifically to Muslims, and did not enjoy certain political rights reserved for Muslims, but were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.[6][7][8]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

Protecting minorities is correct. It's literally what Dhimmi means.

Muhammad committed genocide against the Jewish community of Medina.

Oh, I know.

Source: the Wiki.

Back to top

IP Logged