Answering
FaithFreedom.org
DEBATE: Suhail Khalid VS Iandonlyi (FFI Member)
iandonlyi posted:

Suhail Wrote:

I will put my opinion in short. I sincerely deem that there are two mad groups in the world who are at war; one is lead by
materialistic desires and other by religion. And none of them is able to justify their acts of what they actually believe.

Actually you are wrong. The materialistic one you talk about has opponents at home and they try their best but they cant you
are right about that but the religious ones you talk about justify it with religion. You see and since they use religion they have
very few opponents even though they are right. The materialistic ones you talk about are doing what a materialistic person
does. Run after materials and so they are doing what they are. But what are the religious ones doing? How are they allowed
by good folks like you to let them do what they are doing? Are you saying they are following something as bad as materialism?

On the surface; YES.

And the correct answer is NO. Ask any logician(if that is what it is), doctor, scientist and a genious. Eating a candy for one day
does not hurt your teeth at all. I mean not even littlebit because your immune system wards it off but eating it for ten days
straight will. So you see Logic is not always right especially when you are talking about human mind, body and soul. There if,
then and else does not work that well. So you cant put everything logically. I understand logic and I am very good at it too but
humans thanks to their thousands of years of evolution are much more advanced. And so when you are talking humans you
have to use reasoning. Reasoning is the closest you can get to human mind. Logic and reasoning are pretty similar but
reasoning gets deeper into the subject while logic is discrete. Please look them both up.

And now let me answer to your rest of the reply which hovers around same thing. Here is where I stand and I confess my
english is not as good as yours so I try to explain.

1) I seriously dont care about any verse in Koran.
2) But then there is huge problems in world between muslims and non-muslims.
3) So my sincere analysis tells me that Muslims are concentrating on bad verses in Koran.
4) However, what is there in Koran or not would be no concern of mine at all if Muslims would not be doing what they are
doing. I mean both of us can agree that beheading someone so brutally and killing innocent can never be right.
5) But they are doing it using your own very beloved Koran. So I analyze that they are acting on behest of Islam.

Also, Just because I said that that verse might not be bad at all does not mean you need to take it that I think Islam is perfect.
But I do not care about those things. I care of results. Because if we are really going to analyze being non-biased that verse is
definately racist. (you will never admit it is a different story) And not only that but there are hundreds of verses like that. But
then what was in minds of Mohammed and people who wrote it is something I am unaware of so I do not consider myself
worthy of commenting on that. You see, I try to use reasoning instead of clear cut, cold, discrete logic.

I mean in India, Sikh Gurus faced severe persecution from Muslims but they did not tell any of their followers to be hard with
non-believers(in this case Muslims). Even if it was part of any chapter about victory.

Hindus faced severe persecution from Muslims but no Hindu Guru has ever said to be hard with non-believers.(in this case
muslims). So according to eastern thought that kind of racist verses are not acceptable. That is why I think Eastern religions
are greater, and I mean way greater in their philosophy and act. I think eastern religions are closest you can get to God. But
obviousy you will disagree.

Caste system is bad because Hinduism is not a divine religion. How are you going to save your religion if I bring in caste
system in our discussion? Caste system is bad and there is no other way you can disprove it. Is there any, brother? Whether
you take it ‘in context’ or ‘out of context’ or do any kind of mental gymnastics, in the end you cannot prove Caste system as
divine decree. No soul on the face of the earth is going to come forward in support of Caste system. No soul can defend Caste
system. Therefore if you are still following such a religion which has scores of examples like Caste system and you cannot
prove them then what is the reason you are following that religion. It is better to be an atheist. Isn’t it, brother?

However, such is not similar to Islam. We believe Quran is a divine book. Allah’s verbatim Words bestowed upon Prophet
Muhammad (Peace be upon him) and we are defending it. The effect it is giving is far more superior if you compare it with the
notion of ‘some’ ‘misunderstood’ Muslims. Effect is number of converts coming in the fold of Islam. It is solid sole evidence that
speaks itself. There are more people joining the fold of Islam rather than negligible amount leaving it. Still fastest growing
religion in the world is Islam. Therefore, websites like FFI became useless in delivering their false message of Islam to people.
Are you aware what was the reason of launching A-FFI.org website; this is just to clarify doubts among Muslims who are
getting confused by the falsehood preached by populace like Ali Sina ‘The Idiot’? We are not after ex-Muslims; rather we are
after conffounded Muslims. I am not here to win converts; however to teach my Muslim brothers and people like you who are
willing to heed (and learning myself as well). We are not ‘converters’ but ‘messengers’. We are not worried about ‘Muslims’
leaving Islam as they are very very very very very very very very very few and such incident happens only once in a blue
moon.

And Let me put a smile on your face; you must be aware of rants of people like Ali Sina who yowl so much against women’s
rights in Islam and allege that Islam has subdued women. “FACT IS THAT THERE ARE MORE WOMEN JOINING THE FOLD
OF ISLAM THAN MEN”.

I would really like to appreciate the way you perceive the truth and admit it manly. You surely be not in the boat of Ali Sina.
Admitting to my statements is not a defeat for you. I do not want to win this debate from you rather I want to win you. I want to
win your heart. I want to win you from Ali Sina. What shall I do by winning a debate with you? Nothing! Rather it would be a
great win for me if I win you by heart. This way I will bring you in my boat and we can both fight together against these ‘some’
‘misunderstood’ Muslims and people who are defaming Islam. Isn’t it brother? Please do not deem that admitting to my
statements means a loss to you.

Brother! If you are still sticking on the notion that some verses of Quran might not be fallible but ‘some’ people have
‘misunderstood’ completely (as you already agreed); then there is no need to continue our debate. You have uttered such
statement then please be a man enough to stand by it. However, if you still have some NEW contentions left then please bring
forth otherwise I would advise to put a stop to our discussion.

Take good care of your self. Hoping to hear from you soon.

Ummm, You can think whatever you want of caste system and I am not insecure to get all offended by it. However, just so you
know many Hindus have justification to it also but I am not going to get into that. In my opinion it is bad. But the reason I
brought caste system over is because I can prove my point better because you will never admit your case and I hate talking to
wall. My whole point is that caste system is bad no doubt, however, if Hindus did not practise it like they do in uneducated
parts of India then bad or not who cares what is written in religion, but what is written is being followed and so I speak up
againt caste system. Similarly, what is written in Koran or not is not my concern if Muslim would not do what they do. i.e. being
unfair to muslims, killing innocents etc. etc. but they do what is written so I speak up againt it.

You however deny that Muslims do what is written in Koran then let me ask where do Hindus get the idea of being castiests?
You will never agree but religions have big effect on our actions.

Actually you see who is greater man between you and me? I talk without ego while you still tell me egoistically that if I am man
enough stand by it. I actually figured that who cares what is written in religions but let's talk results. I am not here to change
religions or destroy them but I am here for amity. But then you had to be egoistic. Now you see the difference between actions
of folower of eastern religion and a western one? So now we will prove that this is a racist verse in Koran.

Anyway, yes I stick by the fact that that verse is racist. And I did not even find any Islamic scholar yet because that was not my
concern. But now I will. Wait. Now it is going to be attack on Islam and Koran itself. Forgive me my friend.

Suhail,

Okay I am going to quote Robert Spencer. He is a scholar of Islam and please dont take that away from him. He is scholar,
period. Just because you think he is not does not mean anything.

Here is a video which I post for you. He was on Fox News.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SddesLgxzHM

Aside from that. Here is his interview with someone.

http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/spencer.php

Please do a search on this page for 48:29 to go right to the point.

And I have actually ordered his book so dont go anywhere please. You thought I had no *** to bring in any proof. The fact was
I was least concerned with religion I was more concerned with results. I thought one good person at a time I can fix something.

More I read more I am convinced that although Ali Sina is a fanatic on other side is not false. He is absolutely right about Islam.
But then I promised I will not quote him so I wont. We will work with Robert Spencer.

Suhail,

Also, can you please confirm what you said, that in Arabic Same verse does not sound that bad. I mean if I understood
correctly in Arabic grammer there is a different word for hard etc. Basically what I am asking is that in Arabic Koran does not
come across as it does in English.

My Response:

Dear Brother iandonlyi,

Hoping that you are in the best of your health. Accept my apologies for a delayed response as I am quite busy these days with
some of my commitments. Please bear with me.

Actually you are wrong. The materialistic one you talk about has opponents at home and they try their best but they cant you
are right about that but the religious ones you talk about justify it with religion. You see and since they use religion they have
very few opponents even though they are right. The materialistic ones you talk about are doing what a materialistic person
does. Run after materials and so they are doing what they are. But what are the religious ones doing? How are they allowed
by good folks like you to let them do what they are doing? Are you saying they are following something as bad as materialism?

I am skipping my detailed reply as I surely deem that I have already substantiated my position on ‘some’ Muslims who are
‘misunderstood’. It is your own way of thinking and you are linking them to rest of the majority of Muslims who do not follow the
way of their school of thought. Therefore, dilemma is in your own way of thinking and not mine.

And the correct answer is NO. Ask any logician(if that is what it is), doctor, scientist and a genious. Eating a candy for one day
does not hurt your teeth at all. I mean not even littlebit because your immune system wards it off but eating it for ten days
straight will. So you see Logic is not always right especially when you are talking about human mind, body and soul. There if,
then and else does not work that well. So you cant put everything logically. I understand logic and I am very good at it too but
humans thanks to their thousands of years of evolution are much more advanced. And so when you are talking humans you
have to use reasoning. Reasoning is the closest you can get to human mind. Logic and reasoning are pretty similar but
reasoning gets deeper into the subject while logic is discrete. Please look them both up.

You are wrong, brother. You are both medically and mathematically wrong in all aspects. You were talking about body and
soul and I was deeming this ‘illogical’ logic from mathematical perspective. This is a logical fallacy and completely childish.
Were you the child eating the candy? There is no proportionality on the rates of eating chocolate and that of tooth decay. A
very important factor is bacterial load, environmental circumstances, confounding extraneous factors such as common
practices, type of bacteria, unless you want me to believe that only one species of bacteria live in the mouth. One cannot put
an equation on rates of infection progression even if the other conditions are standard. You do not think the bacteria causing
tooth decay or any disease for that matter follow a certain equation that humans set. Statistically, this equation is wrong as
there are no confidence limits set, not is there a reference to a standard normal population. Give me another equation to
prove your point and not your tooth decay theory akin to mind decay. This argument is exemplary of intellectual decay.

Pertaining to your boast of ‘reasoning’; show me where you have done any ‘reasoning’ with me? You are not reasoning; but
repeating arguments again and again. I have provided you logic; but you never reasoned but just repeated your arguments
once again. Please look them up both.

And now let me answer to your rest of the reply which hovers around same thing. Here is where I stand and I confess my
english is not as good as yours so I try to explain.

Don’t worry about your English. As long as you are able to convey your message properly and as long as I and readers can
comprehend very well then it is fine. I know that it is not your mother tongue; neither is it mine :).

I seriously dont care about any verse in Koran.

I am skipping my reply.

But then there is huge problems in world between muslims and non-muslims.

For the sake of argument, I agree.

So my sincere analysis tells me that Muslims are concentrating on bad verses in Koran.

Incorrect! I have already afforded you with ample of my understanding on this issue. Please refer to my earlier posts.

However, what is there in Koran or not would be no concern of mine at all if Muslims would not be doing what they are doing. I
mean both of us can agree that beheading someone so brutally and killing innocent can never be right.

Oh yes! I condemn such an act. On the other hand you cannot locate such an act in the Quran where it says to kill the
disbelievers innocently. In my earlier posts I have given you a verse of Quran where it says that killing an innocent is likewise
killing the whole human kind. This is generic and straightforward commandment of Quran. If some one is not following such a
commandment then it means he is not a Muslim. Simple calculation states that if a Muslims kills an innocent person then he is
out of the fold of Islam.

You made a mistake again, brother. You are labeling all the Muslims as bad because one of them has done something
ruthless to some one. This is illogical again. Then it means if your brother is bad; it means your whole family is evil. See the
fallacy of your argument.

But they are doing it using your own very beloved Koran. So I analyze that they are acting on behest of Islam.

Yes! They are employing such verses 'out of context' and making it a justification for their atrocities towards non-Muslims (over
here I am only speaking about innocent non-Muslims). I condemn that as well. Some one may ask them a question that why
are they discarding the precise verse of Quran, which is generic and straightforward, where it says that to kill an innocent
human being is likewise to kill the whole humanity. Why they are not following this commandment? Besides they are following
other ‘vague’ verses of Quran which require me and you to debate? And I feel myself on a strong position as I have a better
fallacy of ‘out of context’ to address, which is mainly used to misquote such verses.

Also, Just because I said that that verse might not be bad at all does not mean you need to take it that I think Islam is perfect.
But I do not care about those things. I care of results. Because if we are really going to analyze being non-biased that verse is
definately racist. (you will never admit it is a different story) And not only that but there are hundreds of verses like that. But
then what was in minds of Mohammed and people who wrote it is something I am unaware of so I do not consider myself
worthy of commenting on that. You see, I try to use reasoning instead of clear cut, cold, discrete logic.

You are not ‘reasoning’; but you are repeating your arguments again and again. There is no place in our discussion where
you have proved to me that this precise verse is ‘racist’. You are following a fallacy of quoting ‘out of context’ and this is not
acceptable because it is a misleading notion. You are deliberately filching out the action of unbelievers where they had acted
wrongly towards Muslims and you are blaming Muslims for their stubbornness. You have never bothered to comment on my
logics, examples and arguments; besides every time you are repeating the same things that ‘this verse is racist’, like a broken
player. At least show me some reasoning by refuting my examples, logics and arguments. You have never done that. Did you?
Show me where.

I mean in India, Sikh Gurus faced severe persecution from Muslims but they did not tell any of their followers to be hard with
non-believers(in this case Muslims). Even if it was part of any chapter about victory.

Baseless argument again!

Hindus faced severe persecution from Muslims but no Hindu Guru has ever said to be hard with non-believers.(in this case
muslims). So according to eastern thought that kind of racist verses are not acceptable. That is why I think Eastern religions
are greater, and I mean way greater in their philosophy and act. I think eastern religions are closest you can get to God. But
obviousy you will disagree.

Baseless arguments once again! So why you do not apply your Eastern thought to the verse (5:32) where it says to kill an
innocent means to kill the whole human kind? Such comparison is only present in Quran; therefore, according to your design,
as set by you, Islam is greater than all the religions of the world. Isn’t it? I fail to perceive your logic completely where you have
fallen short to prove me erroneous on a fact that the verse 48:29 you are quoting is ‘out of context’ and you are not even
speaking about verse 5:32 which is generic and straightforward?

I am skipping the part where you have presented Hindus as the innocent victims. Irrelevant comparison! Please do not portray
them as mere innocent people who never initiated or retaliated. Rubbish!

Ummm, You can think whatever you want of caste system and I am not insecure to get all offended by it. However, just so you
know many Hindus have justification to it also but I am not going to get into that. In my opinion it is bad. But the reason I
brought caste system over is because I can prove my point better because you will never admit your case and I hate talking to
wall. My whole point is that caste system is bad no doubt, however, if Hindus did not practise it like they do in uneducated
parts of India then bad or not who cares what is written in religion, but what is written is being followed and so I speak up
againt caste system.


For the sake of argument I agree that Caste system is bad; however, on the other hand, Hindus do have a valid justification in
support of this doctrine. However; I still wonder what those ‘educated’ Hindus deem about ‘uneducated’ Hindus who are still
practicing Caste System? What do they call them? Where do they place them in regards to their religion? Please clarify.

Similarly, what is written in Koran or not is not my concern if Muslim would not do what they do. i.e. being unfair to muslims,
killing innocents etc. etc. but they do what is written so I speak up againt it.

Prove me wrong once and for all. Prove to me the way I interpreted this particular verse is flawed or not? Call in your scholars
of Islam, Islamic Scholars or any genius. Prove to me that quoting ‘out of context’ is acceptable and it is not a fallacy. You are
doing nothing but just repeating your arguments again and again, that I have already retorted millions times earlier.

You however deny that Muslims do what is written in Koran then let me ask where do Hindus get the idea of being castiests?
You will never agree but religions have big effect on our actions.

I agree that religions have big effect on our actions. However, I do not deem that religion to be from God in which there are
things that you cannot justify.

Actually you see who is greater man between you and me? I talk without ego while you still tell me egoistically that if I am man
enough stand by it. I actually figured that who cares what is written in religions but let's talk results. I am not here to change
religions or destroy them but I am here for amity. But then you had to be egoistic. Now you see the difference between actions
of folower of eastern religion and a western one? So now we will prove that this is a racist verse in Koran.

I am skipping the major part of your paragraph as I deem it is irrelevant. If you want to keep your stance on this verse being
racist in all angles then please let it be this way. At least I have proven my point that the translation you brought is off beam
and the interpretation is also wide of the mark. If you still believe that I am mistaken then please prove me incorrect once and
for all. I shall not label my family as ‘bad’ just because my brother is a menace to society. No matter if he is taking my family
rules and regulations ‘out of context’ for his own warped justifications; still it does not mean I should label my family as
‘menace’ too. The least I could do is to throw him out of our family and that’s what we did to those ‘some’ ‘misunderstood’
Muslims. However, if you still want to beat the drums again and again that “No! your brother is wrong it means your whole
family is wrong”, then please let it be your own school of thought. I will leave it for the readers to fix upon.

Anyway, yes I stick by the fact that that verse is racist. And I did not even find any Islamic scholar yet because that was not my
concern. But now I will. Wait. Now it is going to be attack on Islam and Koran itself. Forgive me my friend.

I have refuted almost all your arguments. And surely you will not find any ‘Islamic Scholar’ who can give you a diverse
perception of this verse as from the one I have afforded. Note down my words.

I am waiting brother; I am not going anywhere. I am not likewise Ali Sina who runs away blabbering rubbish with world seeing
his tail between his legs. Let’s see what else you come up with.

Robert Spencer:

Okay I am going to quote Robert Spencer. He is a scholar of Islam and please dont take that away from him. He is scholar,
period. Just because you think he is not does not mean anything.

Aha! Mr. Robert Spencer, one of the ‘daddies’ of Ali Sina. Have you heard of an idiom ‘Like Father Like Son’; Ali Sina is some
what similar to his ‘Daddy’ Robert Spencer.

Brother! Look what you have done now. Refer to your earlier post and look what you had uttered about ‘Scholar of Islam’ or
‘Islamic Scholar’.

“So now my WHOLE point has been even the translation of Islamic scholars are no better. And then I have to consult Islamic
scholar, I dont know why not scholar of Islam? That is unfair. But then you can argue that Scholar of Islam can be biased but
then Islamic scholar can also be baised about their own religion. Is that not possible? I mean he can make day look like night
or vice versa because it suits his agenda and his ego and faith in his religion, NO?”

And I replied:

“A Muslim Scholar can be biased towards his religion than ‘Scholar of Islam’, and may not be of any advantage for a Muslim in
order to prove his point. Similarly, I can defy your ‘Scholar of Islam’ by saying that he is bias towards your concept than Islamic
Scholar, and may not be of any advantage to you in order to prove your point. In this way both of them would be futile for us,
in order to utilize them as our evidences. That is the reason I have never brought one in the picture and speaking logic only.
Logic is one of the ways that is acceptable to every logical person. Isn’t it brother?”

Therefore; according to the design set by you; both of us can neither use their ‘Scholars’ to quote them nor even present
them as evidences due to their biasness towards their own faith. I did not do it yet. Did I? You have already done it.
Congratulations on taking the lead.

Therefore, now I have an opportunity ‘given by you’ to reject your ‘Scholar of Islam’ by your own statement. You said that such
‘Scholars’ can be biased towards their own faith; then why did you bring one? And I replied in agreement that such a practice
is not going to work therefore I did not bring one yet. Now you cannot blame me for rejecting your own so-called Scholar of
Islam (Daddy) because I can easily bring one for me and can reject yours. What do you say now? Why should I believe your
‘Scholar of Islam’ (Daddy) rather than having faith in my ‘Islamic Scholar’? See you are trapped again in your own created
web. I want see how you would make your way out.

For the sake of argument; I will accept your evidence ‘authentic’ and let’s see who actually is ‘daddy’ and what he says
pertaining to this precise verse.

My first contention:

Iandonlyi! Show me from where ‘daddy’ has done his academic training in Islamic Studies. Show me the proofs. ‘Daddy’ has
done M.A. in Religious Studies of Early Christianity from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1986. He has studied
Christianity and not Islam. Islam he has read is likewise daddy’s son Ali Sina. That is why I call him daddy of Ali Sina. If this is
what you are calling ‘Scholarly’ then I myself is a big scholar than daddy (Robert Spencer) and his son (Ali Sina), as I do not
know the Hebrew and Greek languages; however I can make the world upside down for a Christian who gets in argument with
me on his religion using Bible’s English translation.

My second contention:

Iandonlyi! Show me where it is written that ‘daddy’ is aware of Arabic Language. Show me the proofs of his proficiency in
Arabic Language; specifically the Quran’s Arabic.

My third contention:

I am throwing away your evidence of daddy’s video on fox news in to the dustbin. I am only considering your other evidence
“Daddy’s Interview”. In his interview he again used the word ‘ruthless’ in his translation. CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE ME THE
NAME OF THE TRANSLATOR WHO DID THIS TRANSLATION? Stop beating around the bush iandonlyi; bring me the name of
the translator who used the word ‘ruthless’ in his translation. ‘Daddy’ is not different than you; you are telling me that ‘earth is
flat’ and he rants the same. Ask Ali Sina’s Daddy to give you the name of the translator. Or otherwise let Daddy read this
debate we are having and make his comments.

Note for the readers: Dear Readers! Please do a Google search on this phrase (“"but ruthless to unbelievers" translation).
And see for yourself how many sites you have hit upon and how many of them are Muslim sites. Almost all the websites you
would hit upon are non-Muslims. No wonder iandonlyi failed to give me the name of the translator. It looks like some drunkard
did the translation and they have deliberately fixed it to Quran to serve their own perverted purposes. Such a disgusting
practice.

My fourth contention:

Let us see what ‘daddy’ says in his other articles. These are all his quotes:

“it is clearly Islamically unlawful to murder an innocent person”.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22737

“Also there are many rich and grand aspects of Islamic history and culture which also make the religion attractive today.”

http://www.jihadwatch.org/spencer/

“I would like to see efforts to impose the Sharia in the U.S. and elsewhere”

http://www.jihadwatch.org/spencer/

Brother iandonlyi! You have misunderstood ‘Daddy’ completely as he is not against Islam. If I am wrong then please correct
me. The reason I am saying this, are his own statements which I mentioned above.

And I have actually ordered his book so dont go anywhere please. You thought I had no *** to bring in any proof. The fact was
I was least concerned with religion I was more concerned with results. I thought one good person at a time I can fix something.

I am not going anywhere, brother. I am here. You cannot ‘re-fix’ me; I am already fixed. It should be you who require fixing
yourself. I am repeating myself again and again that such ‘Muslims’ are wrong and whatever they are doing is erroneous.
What else do you want me to say? I am not with these so-called ‘Muslims’. Therefore, I am already fixed. It is actually you who
is supporting such ‘Muslims’ by sticking them to the religion of Islam. I have already proved that Quran is not fallible and it
does not speak about harming unbelievers anywhere.

Purchase of ‘Daddy’s’ book surely clarifies your position that you were never willing to heed to our story. If it would be this
case, then you should have ordered Quran and not ‘Daddy’s’ book. You are looking for biological answers in a book of
chemistry. You have gone out of your senses. You have wasted your money.

However, let’s bring ‘Daddy’s’ book and I will see what he says pertaining to Quranic verse 48:29.

More I read more I am convinced that although Ali Sina is a fanatic on other side is not false. He is absolutely right about Islam.
But then I promised I will not quote him so I wont. We will work with Robert Spencer.

I have already provided you a simple proposition to refute me once and for all; to show me that quoting ‘out of context’ is not a
fallacy and show me one ‘unfair’ act of Muslims in the chapter, this way I would be proven erroneous. Am I asking too much,
brother?

Also, can you please confirm what you said, that in Arabic Same verse does not sound that bad. I mean if I understood
correctly in Arabic grammer there is a different word for hard etc. Basically what I am asking is that in Arabic Koran does not
come across as it does in English.

Correction! In Arabic or in English, this verse is never bad. Evidently, for a reason, that it never implies any act of ‘injustice’ or
being ‘unfair’ to unbelievers in the whole chapter. Muslims just altered their attitude towards unbelievers; but, never done any
harm to them. On the contrary, unbelievers did harm Muslims by ‘hindering them in entering Sacred Mosque’ and ‘detaining
their animals’.

The reason I got into the depth of languages in regards to their proper meanings, because you were comparing the English
word ‘hard’, ‘harsh’ or ‘strong’ with ‘ruthless’ and ‘unfair’. They may be synonymous in English; however, they are not in Arabic.
In Arabic there are different words for ‘ruthless’ or ‘unfair’.

Take good care of yourself. Hoping to hear from you soon.

Kindest regards.

iandonlyi posted:

Suhail

I will break down your replies in multiple posts so your readers can understand better.

I asked you

"Also, can you please confirm what you said, that in Arabic Same verse does not sound that bad. I mean if I understood
correctly in Arabic grammer there is a different word for hard etc. Basically what I am asking is that in Arabic Koran does not
come across as it does in English."

Then you had a correction.

Correction! In Arabic or in English, this verse is never bad. Evidently, for a reason, that it never implies any act of ‘injustice’ or
being ‘unfair’ to unbelievers in the whole chapter. Muslims just altered their attitude towards unbelievers; but, never done any
harm to them. On the contrary, unbelievers did harm Muslims by ‘hindering them in entering Sacred Mosque’ and ‘detaining
their animals’.

The reason I got into the depth of languages in regards to their proper meanings, because you were comparing the English
word ‘hard’, ‘harsh’ or ‘strong’ with ‘ruthless’ and ‘unfair’. They may be synonymous in English; however, they are not in Arabic.
In Arabic there are different words for ‘ruthless’ or ‘unfair’.

And then in the same reply you ask of where Robert Spencer has done his study of Arabic. Hahaha.

Iandonlyi! Show me where it is written that ‘daddy’ is aware of Arabic Language. Show me the proofs of his proficiency in
Arabic Language; specifically the Quran’s Arabic.

So I will take it as Arabic is important for study of Islam. Now, Why cant you just admit this straight up instead of making
corrections to minor issues? After all your hoopla about the words 'Ruthless" and 'Hard" you are saying that in English or
Arabic verse is not bad. How can that be? Being ruthless to anyone is unfair in itself. While you almost got hurt by me using
word ruthless instead of hard because in Arabic word ruthless is synonym with zulm or something and hard has another word
and they are not synonym at all. This is freaking oxy moron. But it is your readers reading not mine.

Suhail Wrote:

Oh yes! I condemn such an act. On the other hand you cannot locate such an act in the Quran where it says to kill the
disbelievers innocently. In my earlier posts I have given you a verse of Quran where it says that killing an innocent is likewise
killing the whole human kind. This is generic and straightforward commandment of Quran. If some one is not following such a
commandment then it means he is not a Muslim. Simple calculation states that if a Muslims kills an innocent person then he is
out of the fold of Islam.

You made a mistake again, brother. You are labeling all the Muslims as bad because one of them has done something
ruthless to some one. This is illogical again. Then it means if your brother is bad; it means your whole family is evil. See the
fallacy of your argument.

First of all, I have never said all Muslims are bad at all. You want to lie to prove your point and make your Islam look great then
go for it.

Yes but Muslims dont put Muslims like that out of Islam, instead, they are called martyrs or muhajidins(or somerhing). You
see? Is that not true? And I really dont think you condemn such an act really, because you are specifically mentioning the
word "Innocent" which means you wouldn't mind beheading people if they are not innocent. And that is the whole problem. The
argument is innocent or not beheading is not civilized.

Yes, dont kill disbelievers innocently but make them pay Jizya right? You so smartly try to use word "Innocent" again. So your
religion teaches that if a person is not innocent he can be killed. Is that what I should understand? And besides, what is the
basis of Innocent or noninnocent? Is that basis of fairness for all or fairness for only Muslims?

Suhail Wrote:

You are wrong, brother. You are both medically and mathematically wrong in all aspects. You were talking about body and
soul and I was deeming this ‘illogical’ logic from mathematical perspective. This is a logical fallacy and completely childish.
Were you the child eating the candy? There is no proportionality on the rates of eating chocolate and that of tooth decay. A
very important factor is bacterial load, environmental circumstances, confounding extraneous factors such as common
practices, type of bacteria, unless you want me to believe that only one species of bacteria live in the mouth. One cannot put
an equation on rates of infection progression even if the other conditions are standard. You do not think the bacteria causing
tooth decay or any disease for that matter follow a certain equation that humans set. Statistically, this equation is wrong as
there are no confidence limits set, not is there a reference to a standard normal population. Give me another equation to
prove your point and not your tooth decay theory akin to mind decay. This argument is exemplary of intellectual decay.

Pertaining to your boast of ‘reasoning’; show me where you have done any ‘reasoning’ with me? You are not reasoning; but
repeating arguments again and again. I have provided you logic; but you never reasoned but just repeated your arguments
once again. Please look them up both.

Okay I was not aware that I was talking to a child otherwise it should normally be obvious that we are talking about a normally
healthy mouth. If someone's teeth is already decayed then one candy can also hurt. And the point here is logic and the fact
that logic is not always right as far as humans are concerned. If logic worked so good religions would not even come to
existence and idiots would not belive in things. I tried to give you very basic example of candy which is correct no doubt and
your arguments aside(as they make no sense) any doctor will agree with what I said. But I gave you basic example knowing
your ability but I could've easily said that if human mind and body were as straight foward as logic then two friends smoking
cigerettes from same day of their lives and same amount and for same length but one will get cancer and the other will not.
Where is logic in that? The point to be noted here was that human mind and body are not straight foward as logic and logics
need not be applied to everything. Get it? I bet not. But your readers are reading. And reasoning says at the end of the day
humans will take side of what is right naturally so mend your ways to prove your false points. You are pushing your own
muslims away from islam by your lies and trying to change topics and statements.

Suhail wrote:

Yes! They are employing such verses 'out of context' and making it a justification for their atrocities towards non-Muslims (over
here I am only speaking about innocent non-Muslims). I condemn that as well. Some one may ask them a question that why
are they discarding the precise verse of Quran, which is generic and straightforward, where it says that to kill an innocent
human being is likewise to kill the whole humanity. Why they are not following this commandment? Besides they are following
other ‘vague’ verses of Quran which require me and you to debate? And I feel myself on a strong position as I have a better
fallacy of ‘out of context’ to address, which is mainly used to misquote such verses.

Just so you know, I never came here to show other people of our debate. I was here for a very good and pious reason. My
reason to be here was to be a good human. But to you and the referee what is more important is to show the rest of muslims
here that "You are more right" while I was never here for right or wrong. I was only here for humanity but now you change the
game so I will play your game. The point is that I shall only highlight two things in your paragraph above for your readers to
see.

Maybe someone can tell me how can something be straightforward and be taken out of context at same time? It is taken out of
context because it is not straightfoward. But it is for your readers to see.

BTW you keep mentioning the word innocent too much. I bet you are in England or US or Australia. Please tell us what do you
think of the soldiers of these countries in Iraq? Are they innocent or not? If they are not innocents they should be beheaded? I
cant wait to hear what you have to say about these soldiers? Dont skip this one. Please tell the world.

Yes! They are employing such verses 'out of context' and making it a justification for their atrocities towards non-Muslims (over
here I am only speaking about innocent non-Muslims)

let me quote you again from you rparagraph. So you believe beheading is OK for non innocents?

I said

"I mean in India, Sikh Gurus faced severe persecution from Muslims but they did not tell any of their followers to be hard with
non-believers(in this case Muslims). Even if it was part of any chapter about victory."

Baseless argument again!

Oh so a simple comparision of religion makes my argument baseless? Good, let your readers see. Just so you know my
argument above is right on dot. Nowhere in Sikh religion does it say to be "hard, harsh, ruthless" with disbelievers. But in
Koran it does, while what Muslims did to Sikh Gurus was same or most likely worst than what non-muslims did to Mohammed
(which I seriously doubt non-muslims did anything to mohammed and his band except for some stupid nuisance).

Baseless arguments once again! So why you do not apply your Eastern thought to the verse (5:32) where it says to kill an
innocent means to kill the whole human kind? Such comparison is only present in Quran; therefore, according to your design,
as set by you, Islam is greater than all the religions of the world. Isn’t it? I fail to perceive your logic completely where you have
fallen short to prove me erroneous on a fact that the verse 48:29 you are quoting is ‘out of context’ and you are not even
speaking about verse 5:32 which is generic and straightforward?

There is no design set by me but as per the design, as set by you, Koran also tells Muslims to be hard with disbelievers
(people who are not muslims) so on one hand you are told not to kill any innocent(I hope you are told that, otherwise Koran
would be worst than what it is) and on other hand make the lives of non-muslims a living hell. History is the proof. dont ask me
read history.

I am skipping the part where you have presented Hindus as the innocent victims. Irrelevant comparison! Please do not portray
them as mere innocent people who never initiated or retaliated. Rubbish!

Well unless the history as written is wrong and unless I am going to start believing in Islamic history, history says that Muslims
came to India, plundered, rapes, looted, took money and forcefully converted people. Oh retaliation? Is retaliation is a right of
only Muslims huh? You start *** and everybody is suppose to tolerate it, die or accept Islam, isnt it? I see how it is.

Suhail wrote:

You are not ‘reasoning’; but you are repeating your arguments again and again. There is no place in our discussion where
you have proved to me that this precise verse is ‘racist’. You are following a fallacy of quoting ‘out of context’ and this is not
acceptable because it is a misleading notion. You are deliberately filching out the action of unbelievers where they had acted
wrongly towards Muslims and you are blaming Muslims for their stubbornness. You have never bothered to comment on my
logics, examples and arguments; besides every time you are repeating the same things that ‘this verse is racist’, like a broken
player. At least show me some reasoning by refuting my examples, logics and arguments. You have never done that. Did you?
Show me where.

yes because that verse is ract. No matter how clearly or "out of context" you see it. There are no two minds abou tit.

And just so you know, I picked a least worrysome verse. There are plenty of worst verses. But let's just stick to this one. I am
having enough fun destroying you and your arguments.

Suhail wrote:

For the sake of argument I agree that Caste system is bad; however, on the other hand, Hindus do have a valid justification in
support of this doctrine. However; I still wonder what those ‘educated’ Hindus deem about ‘uneducated’ Hindus who are still
practicing Caste System? What do they call them? Where do they place them in regards to their religion? Please clarify.

Who cares what justification is and how valid it is, I have argued with many Hindus about it jus the way I am arguing with you.
Stop being unfair and valid or not who cares, likewise, stop fighting valid or not, from god or not, divine or not, who cares what
is written in Koran. But the care for what is written comes when there are problems. So nothing personal here, you are not the
only one on recieving end. If you care go FFi and see what I have said to Hindus and their caste system. I actually told them to
chance their religion. Abolish everyting about caste system.

Suhail wrote:

Therefore, now I have an opportunity ‘given by you’ to reject your ‘Scholar of Islam’ by your own statement. You said that such
‘Scholars’ can be biased towards their own faith; then why did you bring one? And I replied in agreement that such a practice
is not going to work therefore I did not bring one yet. Now you cannot blame me for rejecting your own so-called Scholar of
Islam (Daddy) because I can easily bring one for me and can reject yours. What do you say now? Why should I believe your
‘Scholar of Islam’ (Daddy) rather than having faith in my ‘Islamic Scholar’? See you are trapped again in your own created
web. I want see how you would make your way out.

HAHAHA, There is a saying in Indian. If you are Paki you would know. "Aab aaya na uunt pahad ke niche". So now we can
conclude that we cant bring in scholars from either side. I guess I scared you off enough to bring in this argument. Oh just so
you know, I did not buy his book. I swear to my mother.

And about starting ***. Our argument was pretty much over but you had to say "Be a man" so you started the aggression I am
only defending and defending I will. I am a man and you will see. If I want to be a dick brother I can be the worst of kind. And
you forced me to be one. So that is what I am doing. Honestly I have no disrespect in my heart for Koran, Allah, and none of
that ***. Goto FFI and find me one time when I have disrespected any of the above. I have been there for a year so I am no
imposter.

But you had to be a PRICK so I am just showing you that I can be a BIGGER ONE. So now I will insult whatever I can to be like
Ali Sina.

Purchase of ‘Daddy’s’ book surely clarifies your position that you were never willing to heed to our story. If it would be this
case, then you should have ordered Quran and not ‘Daddy’s’ book. You are looking for biological answers in a book of
chemistry. You have gone out of your senses. You have wasted your money.

However, let’s bring ‘Daddy’s’ book and I will see what he says pertaining to Quranic verse 48:29.

Playing immotional blackmail, are we? I am heartless person with dicks. I careless what you think. I was nice untill you had to
say "Be a man enough". Instead of understanding my point you had to try to prove me wrong so I rebelled and retaliated. Now
that is what I will do.

And I told you that I did not buy his book, so stop being insecure and stop crying. And dont ever tell me to buy Koran. Dont
ever because I see that as one of those stupid ploys by western religions to convert people and I hate that.

Understand this simple words. Fix the garbage in your people. I careless what Koran says really. But I seriously think these
idiots in your society are using these verses to their advantage without even changing any meaning of it. But if yo udont think
so it is good enough with me. I only care for results. Result is you guys are *** up the world. We are pretty much close to world
war, damn it.

Remember I am a sardar and never *** with SARDARS, dont ever.

GROW UP.

My Response:

Dear brother iandonlyi,

Hoping that you are in the best of your health.

I will break down your replies in multiple posts so your readers can understand better.

Oh apologies! I have failed to perceive the logic behind this. How readers could understand better if you break down your
replies into multiple posts? I am stumped. From where do you get your enlightenment? Does one of 'Holy Ghosts' (besides
Christianity) speaks to you as well 'in private' and ask you to do such imprudent things?

And then in the same reply you ask of where Robert Spencer has done his study of Arabic. Hahaha.

Outright stupidity from your side again. The only motive I solicited from you to put on view the authentic source from where
'Daddy' has completed his academic training in Arabic language; is because he goes about doing his own perverted
interpretations of Holy Quran. Does he have any authority to do interpretations? If yes! Then where are his academic
qualifications that render him as an authentic source in the field of interpretations? If there are none; then he is no diverse
than his 'son' Ali Sina. Do I have any authority to do interpretations of Hindu Scriptures or Bible? No! Therefore I do not go
about doing my own interpretations and try to impose false picture on populace. This is actually a fraud and people likewise
‘Daddy’ and his ‘son’ proved themselves the same. I wonder where I shall place you.

You sense like a being that is more willing to heed to only those groups who are not even experts in their fields. No crisis for
us at all. This is only confirming you dim-witted in the end.

So I will take it as Arabic is important for study of Islam. Now, Why cant you just admit this straight up instead of making
corrections to minor issues? After all your hoopla about the words 'Ruthless" and 'Hard" you are saying that in English or
Arabic verse is not bad. How can that be? Being ruthless to anyone is unfair in itself. While you almost got hurt by me using
word ruthless instead of hard because in Arabic word ruthless is synonym with zulm or something and hard has another word
and they are not synonym at all. This is freaking oxy moron. But it is your readers reading not mine.

Learning Arabic is obligatory if you desire being an expert on Islamic rules and regulations; likewise an Islamic Scholar. If you
are not able to learn Arabic for some reasons, then you have to refer to tafsirs by Islamic Scholars. What you had provided me
as your evidence was a person (‘Daddy’) who is not even aware of the language. Why should I listen to a person who is
not well-versed in Quranic language besides listening to a person who is connoisseur in this line of work? This is stupidity.
Inanity from your side once again. No wonder you emit filth from your mouth as you look like an individual who rather listen to a
hooligan, besides a person who can teach you etiquettes. Anyways, if it suites you well to trust a person who is not even
familiar with science and says 'Earth is flat' besides having faith in well-versed scientist who provides you accurate
discernment; then please keep on doing this. This is only harming you in the end. And remember readers are reading.

First of all, I have never said all Muslims are bad at all. You want to lie to prove your point and make your Islam look great then
go for it.

Alright! Please find below some of your ‘enlightened’ statements:

“I do think however that Muslims are nuts.”

“There is no point of debate with Muslims untill you morons grow up.”

“Freakin idiots.”

“And out of all people Muslims suck.”

“Another reason why this debate would not exist is if Muslims were living in the world peacefully like the rest of non-
muslims or atleast not commit crimes quoting a religion and in name of religion.”

“If we were to point at a single reason why this debate, FFI etc. exists are Muslims have become very violent and show
no respect to the non-muslims.”

“Muslims have been most unfair to non-muslims anywhre in the world and you are trying to play victim? BS. Not
acceptable.”

“Are Muslims offensive or defensive in general? You will obviously not agree but in any situation between Muslims and non-
muslims the offensive side is almost always muslim.”

Yes but Muslims dont put Muslims like that out of Islam, instead, they are called martyrs or muhajidins(or somerhing). You
see? Is that not true? And I really dont think you condemn such an act really, because you are specifically mentioning the
word "Innocent" which means you wouldn't mind beheading people if they are not innocent. And that is the whole problem. The
argument is innocent or not beheading is not civilized.

Again you are yapping a propos 'some' Muslims entitling martyrs or mujahidins to their fellow 'some' Muslims. Meaning your
'bad' brother is labeling his own friend as 'good', when his own friend on the other hand, is still 'bad' in your
family's opinion. Such comparisons do not carry any weight? Bring me something else.

I do condemn such an act. Do not misquote me. Do not impose your nutty views on me. 'Innocent' signifies a being that has
not caused detriment to anyone but dealt with severely as a result. If some one breaks in to my house and impairs me and my
family then please do not expect me to 'turn other cheek'. If he comes about to kill one of my family members then I will
definitely retaliate; and my retaliation may extend to killing him as well. My religion gives me permission to retaliate in self
defense and law also permits. Just imagine if some one kills your mother (God forbid); are you not going to retaliate if you
have a chance at that moment? Or, are you going to remain being a ‘chicken’? Even law shall not hold you responsible if you
exterminate the murderer. Isn't it? If such an incident happens to my mother (God forbid) and if I would have likelihood to
retaliate there and then; I would never ever behead the murderer for sure. However, I would slaughter him in a more
gruesome manner. On the other hand, if you still do not want to retaliate then it goes along fine with me.

Yes, dont kill disbelievers innocently but make them pay Jizya right? You so smartly try to use word "Innocent" again.

Do not just throw statements with out any basis. What is the problem with you all non-Muslims (or should I say ‘Kafirs’)? When
you people miserably fall short to establish anything in support of your day-dreaming and in order to corner us, you start
yapping about other topics. You again seemed likewise your mentor (Ali Sina). You have already admitted your defeat by
doing such acts.

So your religion teaches that if a person is not innocent he can be killed

Show me where is it written in the Quran? Show me where I have said that as well? I challenge you once again. Stop
misquoting me, iandonlyi. Stop being juvenile in your approach. Stop exposing yourself a laughing stock to the world.

Is that what I should understand?

Actually you are suffering from your dumb intellect that is keeping you miles away from comprehending the real truth. It is
better if you consult a doctor. You really require some ‘hard’, ‘harsh’ or ‘strong’ medications.

Go back to my post where I cited with reference to ‘innocent’ people and try to press your brain a bit harder and perceive the
actual context of it. If you cannot do so; then please ask any literate gentleman regarding the actual context of what I was
trying to clarify in my earlier post. Do not just come with your own twisted conclusions which are only results of little gymnastic
of your trivial meat over your shoulders.

And besides, what is the basis of Innocent or noninnocent? Is that basis of fairness for all or fairness for only Muslims?

See Quranic verse 5:32.

Okay I was not aware that I was talking to a child otherwise it should normally be obvious that we are talking about a normally
healthy mouth. If someone's teeth is already decayed then one candy can also hurt. And the point here is logic and the fact
that logic is not always right as far as humans are concerned. If logic worked so good religions would not even come to
existence and idiots would not belive in things. I tried to give you very basic example of candy which is correct no doubt and
your arguments aside(as they make no sense) any doctor will agree with what I said. But I gave you basic example knowing
your ability but I could've easily said that if human mind and body were as straight foward as logic then two friends smoking
cigerettes from same day of their lives and same amount and for same length but one will get cancer and the other will not.
Where is logic in that? The point to be noted here was that human mind and body are not straight foward as logic and logics
need not be applied to everything. Get it? I bet not. But your readers are reading. And reasoning says at the end of the day
humans will take side of what is right naturally so mend your ways to prove your false points. You are pushing your own
muslims away from islam by your lies and trying to change topics and statements.

Hhhmmmm! It seems we have initiated another debate on your illogical 'logic'. Therefore in order to cease you in deliberately
diverting the concentration of readers from the actual topic; I hereby pronounce you the winner (bravo!) (In the game of
illogical 'logic') and I accept the defeat. Now better stay on the topic.

Thus, I will revert back to your proposition of 'reasoning'; alright! We will do ‘reasoning’. Show me where you have done any
reasoning with me besides repeating your arguments again and again like a broken player. And also show me where I have
changed the topics and or any of my statements. All along this debate you were the one who is setting off new topics
and changing statements. You are going around in circles all along this debate.

Just so you know, I never came here to show other people of our debate. I was here for a very good and pious reason. My
reason to be here was to be a good human. But to you and the referee what is more important is to show the rest of muslims
here that "You are more right" while I was never here for right or wrong. I was only here for humanity but now you change the
game so I will play your game. The point is that I shall only highlight two things in your paragraph above for your readers to
see.

You are lying once again. You never came here for pious reasons. Go back to your first post and read it well that how you
initiated your contention. Afterwards, I dealt with you strictly in my later posts and then you came out of your frenzy trance and
became normal. Is this your piousness? Do you even know the meaning of piousness? You throw garbage from your mouth
when being cornered and you are yowling about piousness. Reminding you that readers are reading.

And you lied once again when you uttered that you are not here to show other people of our debate. In your earlier posts; you
had asked me if you could make this debate public and I told you that we are already in public. What do you say now? Again,
you are changing statements. Please find below your statement:

“ALso, do you mind if I make our discussion public? I mean I dont want to go behind your back but I just want to let you know
beforehand that whatever the case I will give this discussion as a link to haters and non haters as I feel. If that is not OK, it I
wont. Let me know.”

Referee is not part of this debate; then why are you dragging him in?

If you seriously deem that I am forcing my readers to have faith in, that “I am more right”. Then please prove me wrong. What
is the use of just throwing statements without any basis? Why you do not refute my arguments? By the way, what are you
doing? You are also trying to prove yourself as 'Mr. Right' all along your repetitive discussion without providing any proofs.
However, it is failing for you and labeling you stupid in the end.

Maybe someone can tell me how can something be straightforward and be taken out of context at same time? It is taken out of
context because it is not straightfoward. But it is for your readers to see.

Prove me quoting 'out of context' is not a fallacy. This way you will prove me wrong once and for all.

Similarly, if you can enlighten me on a notion if your statement “I will leave and debate is over” is straightforward or not?

BTW you keep mentioning the word innocent too much. I bet you are in England or US or Australia. Please tell us what do you
think of the soldiers of these countries in Iraq? Are they innocent or not? If they are not innocents they should be beheaded? I
cant wait to hear what you have to say about these soldiers? Dont skip this one. Please tell the world.

First you have to inform me what do you deem about them? Do you think that they are at war in Iraq? Do you think this war is
sound from all aspects? If this war is not justifiable then what are they doing in Iraq? For a reason, if they helped Iraq in getting
rid of Saddam Hussain then why they lied at first regarding WMD's?

If you reckon that they are at war in Iraq then why are you expecting Muslims to afford them with pizzas and coke in retaliation?
Don’t you fight in war? Or you give pizzas and coke? Please you better tell the world first.

Clarification on stance of soldiers depends upon of what you actually deem about presence of America in Iraq. Please keep
this in your limited memory that it is America in Iraq and not the other way around.

let me quote you again from you rparagraph. So you believe beheading is OK for non innocents?

So, do you believe that Muslims should afford them with pizzas and coke in a war as their retaliation?

Oh so a simple comparision of religion makes my argument baseless? Good, let your readers see. Just so you know my
argument above is right on dot. Nowhere in Sikh religion does it say to be "hard, harsh, ruthless" with disbelievers. But in
Koran it does, while what Muslims did to Sikh Gurus was same or most likely worst than what non-muslims did to Mohammed
(which I seriously doubt non-muslims did anything to mohammed and his band except for some stupid nuisance).

Do you really want me to kick off this topic? Why are you speaking about your personal experiences where you cannot even
endow with any proofs? Regarding, sikh religion not articulating anything about being 'hard', 'harsh' or 'strong' with
disbelievers and according to your inadequate insight Quran does so. Alright! Here I go again,

- Prove me that quoting 'out of context' is not a fallacy.

- Provide me a generic verse from Quran where it says to kill a person (any one) without any reason is acceptable.

I am not conferring anything from your Sikh scriptures in order for you to refute and at the same time not providing you any
evidences of atrocities from your 1.5% of total population of world, exemplars of ‘some’ ‘misunderstood’ Sikhs. Search
Internet you will hit upon many.

At the outset of this debate I had already clarified my stance that I am not going to follow the followers. Followers are not true
picture of their respective religions. Likewise yourself; as you excrete junk from your mouth, it does not mean your
religion advised you to do so. Similarly, I cannot label Sikh Religion as a ruthless faith because of atrocities of
Babbar Khalsa. However, I am going to follow the Scriptures. Nevertheless, you didn’t pay attention to my request and
purposely dragged in followers. And you did this, just only to salvage yourself from more humiliation where you have already
failed miserably to attest that Quran is anti humanity. Keeping in consideration the design ‘as set by you’ again, where you
continually seemed fascinated in speaking about followers only rather than arguing apropos Scriptures; hence, I might make
yourself a paradigm of actual preaching of Sikh Religion by labeling your religion as inhumane, keeping in view the gutter
language you employ while you argue. Is this what your religion teaches? Should I label your religion ‘bad’ because you
are very ‘bad? Is it acceptable to you? If some one might ask me about Sikh religion and its preaching; should I advise him to
read the posts of ‘iandonlyi’ and tag him as a role model in order to appropriately comprehending the actual preaching of Sikh
religion. Or should I afford them the google search page of “Sikh atrocities” and portray the results as the true teachings of
Sikh Religion and omit the search phrase. How are you going to feel then? This is what actually you people are doing to Islam.
You are showing ‘some’ ‘misunderstood’ Muslims to the world and telling them that this is actually ‘Islam’. And you are just only
doing to serve your own tampered purposes. Similarly, I am going to show to the world your debate with me (along with your
foul mouth and stinky personality) and tell the world that this is Sikhism. Am I doing anything wrong over here? This is mere tit-
for-tat! This precise debate is also available on the homepage of Answering FaithFreedom.org. Remember, readers are
reading!

Don’t worry iandonlyi, I am never going to do that. I am a Muslim and do not belong to the ‘Cult of Golden Rule’ whose Prophet
is Ali Sina with all of his awry disciples. My religion does not permit me to do fraud.

I wonder what actually is impeding people to merge with Sikhism if your scripture does not verbalize about being
‘hard’, ‘harsh’ or ‘strong’ to disbelievers. I again wonder that why scores and scores of people are joining the
fold of Islam if this religion is so ‘against’ humanity. I am ‘perplexed’.

There is no design set by me but as per the design, as set by you, Koran also tells Muslims to be hard with disbelievers
(people who are not muslims) so on one hand you are told not to kill any innocent(I hope you are told that, otherwise Koran
would be worst than what it is) and on other hand make the lives of non-muslims a living hell. History is the proof. dont ask me
read history.

Design was ‘set by you’ where you uttered in your earlier posts that you are more inclined towards Eastern religions
because they speak more about 'humanity'. In turn, I used your way of thinking (as design set by you) and ask you for a
reason that why you do not apply your inclined Eastern thought to Quranic verse 5:32 which articulates more about
humanity as compared to other religions in the world. Intensity of this verse can be determined by the usage of mode of
comparison of killing a/one/sole human being with killing the whole humanity. Such a comparison is not present in any other
holy book on the face of the earth. Therefore it means Islam is greater than all religion. Thus, I asked you to pay attention to
Quranic verse 5:32 because it goes along with your way of thinking (as design set by you). So, I just used your way of thinking
(as design set by you) and proved to you that Islam is greater than all the religions in the world.

Regarding Quran telling Muslims to be hard with disbelievers is again you are just yapping like a broken player. I challenged
you multiple times to show me a single verse from this chapter where Muslims had done anything unfair to disbelievers. You
failed wretchedly. You are consciously filching out the 'unfairness' of disbeliever (48:25) and you are blaming Muslim's
retaliation by being hard, harsh or strong in their attitude. You are doing fraud. If you are not speaking about Quranic verse
48:25 then it is only making you suspicious in the end. Show me any unfair act of Muslims in this precise chapter and prove
me wrong.

You cannot prove me erroneous in this particular debate; bringing in your own history would not do any good to you. And by
the way; I wonder if this ‘your owned history’ is inscribed by a human or is it a divine revelation? And if this ‘human author’ was
a Muslim or a Muslim hater? In countering your ‘owned history’ I will bring history from my side as well where I will show Sikhs
killing Muslims. Are you going to accept my proofs of history?

Well unless the history as written is wrong and unless I am going to start believing in Islamic history, history says that Muslims
came to India, plundered, rapes, looted, took money and forcefully converted people. Oh retaliation? Is retaliation is a right of
only Muslims huh? You start *** and everybody is suppose to tolerate it, die or accept Islam, isnt it? I see how it is.

Read my reply above with regards to history.

yes because that verse is ract. No matter how clearly or "out of context" you see it. There are no two minds abou tit.

In one of my earlier posts I have asked you to try quoting ‘out of context’ with any one you know and see what he says in
return. Such statements devoid of any basis mean nothing. You have to either prove your point or prove me erroneous.
However, you failed to do both. It means your faith is erroneous and you have nothing to disprove besides yowling about the
same old story like a broken player.

And just so you know, I picked a least worrysome verse. There are plenty of worst verses. But let's just stick to this one. I am
having enough fun destroying you and your arguments.

Get yourself out of day-dreaming. There are no ‘worry some’ verses in Quran. At the outset of our debate, I had afforded
you with liberty to bring a verse which is keeping you awake at night. Then why did you bring a less worry some
verse? Why didn’t you bring a verse that could provide you more potency in shielding your contentions and in turn proving
me wrong? You are lying. You are just using statements to comfort your heart which is already filled with disgrace now.

Show me a single place where you had demolished my arguments and evidences. I have been asking you questions to
disprove me that quoting ‘out of context’ is a fallacy and show me a single verse from this chapter where Muslims had done
any ‘unfair’ act to disbelievers. You did not provide me anything. Besides you have started other topics. Such a practice is
only making you suspicious in the end and I am getting out clean.

You might be having fun; however, I am not having fun at all. I was not here to have fun but to discuss some serious issues
with some ‘serious’ person. However, you just proved yourself one of jesters of Ali Sina. You portrayed yourself a clown who is
having fun with himself and entertaining the readers as well. Keep it up.

Who cares what justification is and how valid it is, I have argued with many Hindus about it jus the way I am arguing with you.
Stop being unfair and valid or not who cares, likewise, stop fighting valid or not, from god or not, divine or not, who cares what
is written in Koran. But the care for what is written comes when there are problems. So nothing personal here, you are not the
only one on recieving end. If you care go FFi and see what I have said to Hindus and their caste system. I actually told them to
chance their religion. Abolish everyting about caste system.

You didn’t really answer my question. Did you? I have asked you some valid questions, however; you have avoided answering
them. It is making you dubious once again. Reverse your gears and go back to my earlier posts and have a close look at it.
Did I give you any explanation? No! In turn; however, I just asked you some questions from your own post to inform me of what
those ‘educated’ Hindus deem about ‘uneducated’ Hindus who are still practicing Caste System? What do they call them?
Where do they place them in regards to their religion? These are very important questions. And I know why you have avoided
them to answer. For a reason that your answers may go against your own doctrine which you are trying to impose on us? Isn’t
it? Nice try; but, remember readers are reading.

HAHAHA, There is a saying in Indian. If you are Paki you would know. "Aab aaya na uunt pahad ke niche". So now we can
conclude that we cant bring in scholars from either side. I guess I scared you off enough to bring in this argument. Oh just so
you know, I did not buy his book. I swear to my mother.

Your idiom in Urdu is actually speaking about you. Think ‘seriously’ (I think I am asking too much) for a moment and read
your post where you had provided ‘Daddy’ as your beefy evidence. Let me clarify it for you once again. You brought in ‘Daddy’
(Robert Spencer) as your sturdy evidence and virtually jumping up and down with joy on inkling that you have cornered me
now. And when I threw your evidence back at your face and when it hit hard and hurt you pretty well, you turned your back
from your evidence. Let an intellectual person read this and ask him that who actually “Aab aaya na uunt pahad ke niche”.
Please find below your statement where you consented on bringing Islamic Scholar:

“Anyway Suhail Khalid, We dont have to use ALi SIna's interpretation and yes you can bring in anyone but as long as his/her
interpretation does not sound irrational & Illogical.”

You scared me off! Grow up. It was you who were crying at the outset that why am I not accepting your ‘Scholar of Islam’? I
gave you the explanation in the end and asked you to bring one (here I was not scared). You brought one (‘Daddy Robert
Spencer’); but I still didn’t bring one (here I was not scared again). I bashed your evidence and threw it in the dustbin (here
I was not scared once again). I asked you to bring ‘Daddy’ and let him read this debate and make his comments (here I
was not scared again). I asked you to purchase Daddy’s book and I would see what he says pertaining to Quranic verse 48:
29 (here I was not scared once again). I agree to everything you require to make me feel defeated (here I was not even
a bit scared). And in turn what you did? You did nothing but just turn your back from your evidence (‘Daddy’). Therefore, it
was you who got scared. If you were not then you would have commented on my replies to your evidence (‘Daddy’). You did
nothing but just turned your back from your evidence to skip more humiliation. And out of envy you tried to turn the tables to
my side. However, I just showed the world that how ‘chicken’ you are. Remember, readers are reading.

And about starting ***. Our argument was pretty much over but you had to say "Be a man" so you started the aggression I am
only defending and defending I will. I am a man and you will see. If I want to be a dick brother I can be the worst of kind. And
you forced me to be one. So that is what I am doing.

Note for Readers: I would request my readers to read this debate and decide for yourself that who actually initiated the
aggression first. Also please read the first few posts of iandonlyi for better understanding of his stance which he was bragging
on being pious. Look for these “***” as well and do the decoding yourself by employing the filthiest word that comes first into
your mind.

Honestly I have no disrespect in my heart for Koran, Allah, and none of that ***. Goto FFI and find me one time when I have
disrespected any of the above. I have been there for a year so I am no imposter.

You are a big liar. Readers! Go back to his first few posts and look for yourselves if he has ever revered Muslims. Afterwards,
you will definitely locate some more in the middle of the debate. Many a times he contradicted himself. He changes colors to
suite his mood.

Regarding disrespect; are you going to disgrace your own fellow ‘brothers’ on FFI? You would not do that. Isn’t it? This is out
of nature. They are like your brothers; therefore, you are not going to say anything against them and their filthy doctrine which
is not quite dissimilar from yours. For your lust of disrespecting anyone; you eventually had found us and started excreting
dung from your mouth apropos our religion. Unfortunately, you have found me and now the world has seen you as “ “. You fill
in the blank. I should give you something to sooth your heart for a moment.

Playing immotional blackmail, are we? I am heartless person with dicks. I careless what you think. I was nice untill you had to
say "Be a man enough". Instead of understanding my point you had to try to prove me wrong so I rebelled and retaliated. Now
that is what I will do.

Oh! You started again excreting filth from your mouth. Why? Don’t you have anything else which is more ‘scholarly’ in order to
humiliate me? Well for your kind information I am not getting humiliated a bit. Such things are only portraying you rubbish in
the end. These are the traits of a person when he does not find anything else to corner his opponent he starts excreting filth
from his mouth and this is only to conceal his humiliation and to show to the world his ‘chicken’ brawns. You portrayed
yourself as ‘Ali Sina’ and nothing else. At least learn from me how to humiliate a person in a very ‘scholarly’ way.

I wonder if this was you who promised never to use ‘bad words’ in our discussion. Please find below:

“Whatever it is bad words shall not enter our discussion going forward. Promise. Let's put that behind.”

“I careless what you think”; thank you; this justifies your stance in this debate. This is also what I am trying to prove all along
this debate. Congratulations on your admission of defeat. And thank you for wasting my time.

"I was nice untill you had to say "Be a man enough". Compare this with your gutter language and come to a conclusion which
one is actually bad. Ask a gentleman; preferably ask your fellow Muslim friends.

And what is this “I am heartless person with dicks”. Why ‘s’? It is giving a very wrong perception.

I clearly understood your point and I dearly refuted all your allegations. But you never came back with fruitful replies besides
repeating yourself like a broken player and excreting garbage from your mouth. There is not a sole place in this whole debate
where you have proven me wrong.

And I told you that I did not buy his book, so stop being insecure and stop crying. And dont ever tell me to buy Koran. Dont
ever because I see that as one of those stupid ploys by western religions to convert people and I hate that.

Do I care what you hate or what your like? I care least. Once again you have repeated your arguments. Do I care if you buy
‘Daddy’s’ book. I even challenged you to go ahead and purchase the book and I would see what ‘Daddy’ has to say. I am
not scared from any one of you. Bring any one you like who can defeat us; and I will bring my Allah.

Understand this simple words. Fix the garbage in your people. I careless what Koran says really. But I seriously think these
idiots in your society are using these verses to their advantage without even changing any meaning of it. But if yo udont think
so it is good enough with me. I only care for results. Result is you guys are *** up the world. We are pretty much close to world
war, damn it.

We are trying to fix it; but you people are trying to create more garbage by advertising ‘such’ people and this is just only to
satisfy your own perverted purposes. You have to stop first. This is the only way to nail down ‘such’ people. If media were in
the hands of Muslims then you would have definitely seen the other side of the picture. Open your other eye and you will
definitely see a different world. People likewise you and Ali Sina are of no use for a reason, besides making things better
around you; you criticize those who are actually doing good things.

Remember I am a sardar and never *** with SARDARS, dont ever.

Is it a joke? I will take it as a joke as you people are leading this humorous discipline as well. I wonder why there are more
jokes about you people. I got the answer now (whispering to readers: Sssshhhhh!!! read this debate).

Take good care of yourself. It is not likely to see you again.

Kindest regards.

Ends ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages: [1] [2] [3]

Back to the section of Suhail Khalid
Send Email to Suhail Khalid