Miami imam........prays for ‘annihilation’ of ‘enemies of Islam’

Mar 16, 2024
By Robert Spencer

......

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

𝕏-Muslim
@Thexmuslim

British Maulana says Allah isn't giving Palestine victory because there are too many gay people at the pro Palestine protests.  Where are the Queers for Palestine' now?

https://twitter.com/Thexmuslim/status/1769446370803400879

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 3:52pm:

Because Catholics, both Eastern and Western, support Australia as a nation and do not preach its destruction.
Then Catholicism is a religion whereas Islam is a political movement so there is really no comparison, O Almighty Yawner.

Catholicism was

Why are Catholics allowed a University and Muslims are not?  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Gnads wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 10:48am:


The hate speech is at the Mosques, not from the Mosques.

Gands is a hate fomenter p!ssing into the argument.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 1:33pm:

The hate speech is at the Mosques, that’s the problem; where it’s at.

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 2:01pm:


Have you ever visited a Mosque?  Have you ever listened to a service?  I doubt it.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Frank wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 3:32pm:


Oh, such a silly boy you are, Soren.  I have attended Tory Party branch meetings several times, just as I have attended One Nation meetings.  Indeed I have an autographed copy of Pauline's hagiography.  I have attended a mosque service once, which more than you'll ever do.  I have attended a synagogue and a Hindu temple as well.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Laugh till you cry wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 1:33pm:


The hate speech is at the Mosques, that’s the problem; where it’s at.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

My wife became an Australian citizen, at her ceremony there were two Muslims who swore their allegiance to the Queen and the Government of Australia on their own copies of the Koran.

Jasin wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 4:24am:

I know a lot of people here will claim that as being overdramatic,
but I tend to agree with you—although in the longer term rather
than at the present. 

I'd also guess that by 2050, Islam will be the sole major religion
here in Australia, easily outstripping Catholicism and Protestantism
in practising numbers.  By that time though, I hope that atheism will
form the dominant "religious" status quo.  At the moment, it currently
outnumbers both Catholics and Anglicans.

I am however currently concerned that Australian universities and
public hospitals are now bound to provide religion-specific "prayer
rooms"  and/or "spaces" for Islamic worship.

It also prompts another question in my mind:  Will the Islamic University
in Sydney be bound to provide prayer rooms for each of the Catholic
and the Anglican parishioners? 

 

     Or even a dedicated "space" for the atheists?    

Gnads wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 10:48am:


You have no idea, no idea, at all.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Gnads wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 10:48am:


You have no idea, no idea, at all.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

That's an oxymoronic action

Muslims have already sworn allegiance to the Koran by being muslims, that's their top priority. Swearing allegiance to the Monarchy and the Aust Government would only be secondary, something they just have to do to became citizens of a Western welfare State. But if it came to the crunch, and they had to choose between the Monarchy/Aust Govt, and the Koran, they'd choose the Koran and Sharia

This new Islamic university is going to teach young muslims about how they can live side-by-side with non-muslims, which will amount to living in peaceful co-existence with the rest of the Australia community, which in turn means, eradicating the influence of overseas born Imams who are hostile to the Western way of life and who have preached thus

The new university might also teach Palestinian Australians how to accept Government policy that supports Israel's right to exist and it's right to defend itself

Question:
Some Muslim youth in the West do not believe it is important to avoid breaking the law in countries that are not the Khilafah.

Answer:
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is a Islamic state (al-khilafa), Muslim countries, or non-Muslim countries such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

Some Muslims are under the impression that it is permissible to violate the laws of countries that are not an Islamic state (al-Khilafa), which is totally incorrect. Muslims must adhere to the laws of any country they live in, whether in the west or the east, as long as the law is not in contradiction with one’s religion.

Sayyiduna Abd Allah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “It is necessary upon a Muslim to listen to and obey the ruler, as long as one is not ordered to carry out a sin. If he is commanded to commit a sin, then there is no adherence and obedience.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 2796 & Sunan Tirmidhi)

The above Hadith is general, in that it does not distinguish between Muslim and non-Muslim lands, although the understanding of the scholars is that it generally applies to Muslim lands.

Furthermore, many scholars have divided non-Muslim lands (dar al-Harb/kufr) into two categories, Dar al-Khawf & Dar al-Aman. The former (dar al-khawf) refers to a land where Muslims are under a constant threat and fear with regards to their religion, life and wealth, whilst the latter (dar al-Aman) refers to a land where Muslims are relatively secure and safe. In Dar al-Aman (such as many non-Muslim countries in the west), many of the injunctions and rulings are very similar to Muslim lands (dar al-Islam), thus the command of following the laws of the land would also apply in these non-Muslim lands. (See: Radd al-Muhtar)

Those who are of the view that it is not necessary to obey the laws of the land unless it is ruled by a proper Islamic governance system, usually say that these laws are non-Islamic and man made, and one is only obliged to abide by the laws of Allah!

In reality, this is a very immature understanding of Islam, for even an Islamic Khilafa government would implement laws that are the creation of their own minds and Ijtihad. If an Islamic government sees the need to implement a certain law, then it has the full jurisdiction to do so, even if it is not found in the Qur’an and Sunnah.

All the scholars unanimously agree that, if an Islamic government decides to implement a law for the benefit of the country and its citizens, then there is nothing wrong in doing so, as long as it does not contradict Shariah, and this law will be binding upon every citizen of that country, even if it was not made obligatory by Shariah initially. Therefore, the laws which an Islamic Khilafa government will set down will also be “man made”, and binding upon all the citizens.

Then the case here is not between “Allah’s laws” and “man made laws” rather one must understand and deal with the issue more rationally and deeply.

When one lives in a particular country, one agrees verbally, in writing or effectively to adhere to the rules and regulations of that country. This, according to Shariah, is considered to be a covenant, agreement and trust. One is obliged to fulfil the trust regardless of whether it is contracted with a friend, enemy, Muslim, non-Muslim or a government. The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) and his Companions (Allah be pleased with them all) always stood by their word and did not breach any trust or agreement, as it is clear from the books of Sunnah and history. Thus, to break a promise or breach a trust of even a non-Muslim is absolutely unlawful and considered a sign of being a hypocrite (munafiq).

Quote:


That's why they blow up trains, buses, stadiums, theatres, restaurants, behead strangers across Western cities.

All a misreading. Honestly.

Muslims make what, 3% of the Australian population?  How are they going to "take over"?  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Muslims are instructed to support the laws of where they are situated, according to the Koran.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:


Only if the laws of the host country aren't against Shariah

Quote:


Did you think I wasn't going to read the whole page?  Besides, I already know about it

However, that's not what I was talking about. I'm saying that the influence of foreign born Imams will have to be eradicated if Muslims in Australia are to get on with Jews, Hindus, and Aussie Westerners

[quote author=Brian_Ross link=1710622159/38#38 date=1710904180]

Muslims are instructed to support the laws of where they are situated, according to the Koran.

[quote]Question:
Some Muslim youth in the West do not believe it is important to avoid breaking the law in countries that are not the Khilafah.

Answer:
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is a Islamic state (al-khilafa), Muslim countries, or non-Muslim countries such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

[Source]

What is Islam’s view on obedience to the law of the land?

In Islam obedience to the law of the land is a religious duty. The Qur’an commands Muslims to remain faithful to not only Allah and the Prophet Muhammad(sa), but also the authority they live under:

    O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority over you (Ch.4: V.60).

Any country or government that guarantees religious freedom to followers of different faiths (not just Islam) must be owed loyalty. The Prophet Muhammad(sa) stressed this point when he said:

    ‘One who obeys his authority, obeys me. One who disobeys his authority, disobeys me.’ (Muslim)

The present head of the worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad(aba), has also explained:

     ‘A true Muslim can never raise his voice in hatred against his fellow citizens, nor for that matter against the ruling authority or government of the time. It is the responsibility of a true Muslim that he should remain loyal and fully abide by the laws of the land of which he is a subject.’ (Baitul Futuh Inauguration Reception, 11 Oct 2003)

This makes clear that according to Islam Muslims must obey the law of the land as anything to the contrary would mean that they are not obeying their Prophet or their religion.

If you don't cite this verse we will all see your bullshit on this.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 7:55pm:


Your trouble is that you can't read, I've struck that with you before. You're trying to win an argument you've already lost

"However, if the law demands something that is against Islam & Shariah, then it will be necessary to abstain from adhering to it"

You're getting laughed at for trying to be a smart arse. I suggest you go back to university and learn how to comprehend, without simultaneously wondering who you're going to insult next

I understand what you are saying but what you are saying does not win the argument.  You are claiming an exception is the general rule, rather than an exception.  I would recommend that you actually graduate to University and learn how to argue properly and stop resorting to crayons to emphase  your points, it just demonstrates that you don't really have an argument.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 8:27pm:


Sorry, but you said one thing, and the link you posted said an additional thing that made you look like a dumb-ass ... that muslims are to abstain from obeying laws contrary to Islam and Shariah

 

Muslim Behavior/Terrorism Correlated With Population Size

.....As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States — Muslim 0.6%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1.8%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrases are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 100%

......
......

Allahabad HC Denies Protection to Muslim-Hindu Couple, Citing Shariat Law Constraints on Married Women.
News / By sahodar / March 5, 2024

The Allahabad High Court, ruling on a case involving a Muslim woman and Hindu man living together, said marriage places limits on a wife’s actions. As a result, the court declined to protect them from potential threats by the woman’s family.

A Single Bench of Justice Renu Agarwal observed, “From the factual matrix of the case it is apparent that petitioner no.1 is legally wedded wife petitioner no.2. She has not obtained any decree of divorce from the competent authority. She is living with petitioner no.2 in contravention of the provisions of Muslim Law(Shariat), wherein legally wedded wife can not go out side marriage and this act of Muslim women is defined as Zina and Haram. If we go to the criminality of the act of petitioner no.1 she may be prosecuted for the offence under section 494 and 495 IPC, as such relationship is not covered within the phrase of live-in-relationship or relationship in the nature of marriage.”

Attorney Fareed Ahmad represented the petitioners, while Additional Chief Standing Counsel Ashwani Kumar Tripathi acted on behalf of the respondents.

Case Overview: The petition aimed to obtain a writ order or directive mandating the respondents (the family and relatives) to cease disturbing the peace of the petitioners, a cohabiting couple, and to refrain from harassing them. Additionally, the petitioners sought legal intervention to ensure the couple’s safety. Involved in the case are a 44-year-old Muslim woman and a Hindu man over 36 years of age. It’s noteworthy that the woman was previously married to a Muslim man who later remarried.

Following her voluntary departure from her marital home due to alleged mistreatment by her father, the woman chose to live with her parents. Subsequently, she began living with the Hindu man, petitioner no. 2, in a live-in arrangement. Despite their efforts, the couple faced continuous interference from the woman’s family, raising concerns about their safety and freedom from potential threats. They sought protection from the Senior Superintendent of Police, but their request was unanswered, worsening their situation.

In this case, the High Court noted that the respondents argued that the woman’s ongoing marriage to Mohsin, without obtaining a divorce from her previous spouse, rendered her cohabitation with petitioner no. 2 an act of adultery, thus disqualifying their relationship from legal protection. Precedents such as the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kiran Rawat and Another Vs. State of U.P. and a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the matter of Asha Devi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others were cited as grounds for opposing the petition.

“In the present case petitioner no.1 is Muslim by religion and she has not moved any application to the authority concerned for conversion of her religion under sections 8 and 9 of the Conversion Act. Hence petitioner no.1 is living in relationship with petitioner no.2 without obtaining divorce from her husband, that constitute an offence under sections 494 and 495 IPC and also without complying the provisions of sections 8 & 9 of the -Conversion Act. Hence such type of criminal act cannot be supported and protected by the Court”, it held.
[url] https://sahodar.in/allahabad-hc-denies-protection-to-muslim-hindu-couple-citing-

shariat- I’m law-constraints-on-married-women/[/url]

Islamic education:

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/041/277/903/original/666b6c...

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 1:18pm:


I'm frightened of Muslims -
I worry that they will call me an infidel and stab me.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 1:32pm:


Brian - look at the picture I posted above -

can't you tell they're crazy?    tsk  tsk  tsk ...            

Bias_2012 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 12:41am:


1) I am not the one who resorts to the use of crayons all the time to try and impress upon us your arguments, Bias. You are acting like a six year old.

2) An except to a rule does not win an argument. The point is, it is an exception, not the general rule.

3) Why do you hate Muslims so much.  You've never met, you'd rather change the side of the street you're walking along than share it with a Muslim.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 2:27pm:


Brian - who are you with?

Until you stop using crayons, we have nothing more to discuss, Bias.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 3:10pm:

Says sleepy yawny ijit!!!

AusGeoff wrote on Mar 17^th, 2024 at 5:40pm:

Actually it is.-

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

Frank wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 4:09pm:





Brian Ross wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 7:49pm:

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 2:01pm:


Have you ever visited a Mosque?  Have you ever listened to a service?  I doubt it.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...