Was Islam's beloved Muhammed a pedophile?

[TheNoNamedOne]

In Islam, Muslims do not only give great weight to the Koran to learn about the life of their beloved prophet, Muhammed, but also to the stories of the Hadith which describes his life.

Through Muhammed's pedophilia, even today's Muslims could claim that having sex with children is fine. After all, Muhammed did it, so why should we also not do so?

... that the Prophet (http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b1muhammadca.htm) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years.(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 7 : 62 : 64)

But as we see in Christianity, dreams really are the word of God; or at least Muhammed believed so, too:

"...[T]he Prophet (Muhammed) said to her (Aisha), 'You have been shown to me twice in my dream. I saw you pictured on a piece of silk and someone said (to me). 'This is your wife.' When I uncovered the picture, I saw that it was yours. I said, 'If this is from Allah, it will be done.'" (Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 5: 58: 235)

And since he did marry her and consumated the relationship, it must have been the word of god because the fact of it being so rested on the provisional "if". Circular reasoning! Gotta love it!

[TheNoNamedOne]

Pedophilia is respected down to the followers of Muhammed who lead the way with example. Here is the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran expounding on it more:

"A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child (http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/JenniferKing50718p2.htm) as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. ...

“It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Does anyone with any study in comparative religion or some such field know more about this? I don't know much about Islam. A Google check brings up some similar information.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/JenniferKing50718.htm

I found a counterpoint a little further into the search.
http://www.ijtihad.org/women2.htm
Worth reading in its entirety. A few quotes:

Why blame Jerry Vine for calling the Prophet as a pedophile when Muslims themselves have been saying this and believing it for hundreds of years. The books of hadith say this clearly. There is never any critical discussion of this issue. If it is false than it must be deleted form the books of faith and if it is true then Muslims must advance an explanation of this and accept that it can be a legitimate source of concern.

According to Islamic sources there are many differing reports of how old Ayesha was when the Prophet married her. T. O. Shanavas in an excellent article ("Was Ayesha A Six-year-old Bride," The Minaret (March, 1999) (http://www.ilaam.net/Articles/Ayesha.html), shows from Islamic sources that Ayesha could have been anywhere between 14-21 when she married Muhammad.

It is time Muslims revisited their sources with a critical perspective and discarded what is false, improbable and inconsistent with the values of mercy, tolerance and justice, which are constitutive to the Islamic creed.



The reason why issues such as Muhammad's relationship with women get so much undue and unfair attention is because the condition of women in Muslim societies is indeed deplorable. Their access to education and the public sphere remains unequal to the access men enjoy. Their share of the familial and societal resources is far less than that used by men. Regardless of how Muhammad related with women, Muslims must realize that if they wish to develop more egalitarian, more progressive and just societies, they cannot allow one half of their community to languish while the other thrives. Muhammad would not allow it.
For more on Ayesha (rah's) age see: http://www.iiie.net/Articles/AyeshasAge.html

[hankypanky]

you guys are ****in' sick:thumbdown:

[TheNoNamedOne]

you guys are ****in' sick:thumbdown:

How so, Hank?

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

I guess the link and quotes to Dr. Muqtedar Khand's rebuttal of criticisms against Islam upset Hank.

Hank, are you upset because Dr. Khand's remarks hit too close to home?


The Bigotry of Evangelical Christians
In the after math of September 11th, Islam, Muhammad and everything Muslim has come under close scrutiny in the America that seeks to blame Islam rather than American Foreign Policy for that horrible tragedy. It seems that a section of American society ・ evangelical Christians -- are determined to label Islam as an evil religion and Muhammad as Prophet of violence for the actions of 19 Muslims. It is like blaming Jesus and Christianity for what Hitler did to Jews (holocaust), or what Queen Isabelle did to Muslims and Jews (inquisition), or for what Americans did to African Americans (slavery and racism). Since September 11th Evangelical Christian leaders have called the Prophet of Islam a Terrorist (Rev. Jerry Falwell) and a "demon possessed pedophile who had twelve wives" (Rev. Jerry Vine).

In these and similar attacks Christian Evangelists are seeking to stem the tide of conversions to Islam. By demonizing Muhammad as a pedophile and a polygamist they hope to generate enough distaste for Islam that it becomes difficult for more open and tolerant Americans to be accepting of Muslims and Islam. They also hope that they can reverse the growth of Islam in America. According to many scholars, Islam is the fastest growing religion in America attracting thousands of converts from all segments of American society, who usually were Christians before they chose Islam. While the traffic from Christianity to Islam is very heavy, the reverse flow, much to the frustration of the evangelists, is barely a trickle.

This tirade of hate from the evangelists is merely the continuation of a very old Christian preoccupation with the demonization of Muhammad. Christian thinkers have always abused the Prophet of Islam a famous example is Dante, who in his Inferno, considered by many as perhaps the pinnacle of literature in medieval Europe and quite certainly one of the most influential literary works of Western Civilization, throws him in the bowels of hell.

The earliest Christian thinker to launch polemics against Muhammad was a ninth century activist, Eulogius of Cordoba who in a book titled Liber Apologeticus Martyrum, includes a polemic against Muhammad. Other Christians who have abused the Prophet include Peter the venerable (Of Cluny) and Alexader Du Pont. It is interesting to contrast Christian writings from that of the enlightenment scholars. Leibniz in Theodize (1710) praised Muhammad for preaching a natural religion (Islam describes itself as Din-al-fitrah or the natural religion). Voltaire in 1756 published Essai sur les Moerurs, which includes a chapter on Muhammad titled "de l'arabie et de Mahomet," in which he describes him as a wise man, an accomplished poet, a brilliant general, and a remarkable visionary. It is not difficult to see why the latter scholars are called as enlightened thinkers.

While most Christian thinkers have recognized the greatness of Muhammad, many others have demonized him, as do contemporary evangelists. Often the point of departure is his practice of polygamy, which is equated, with the reduced status of women in Islam. Needless to say Muslims disagree and vehemently oppose such conjectures.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I guess the link and quotes to Dr. Muqtedar Khand's rebuttal of criticisms against Islam upset Hank.

Maybe it is too insulting to even question if the greatest religious figure of one of the world's largest religions was a pedophile and that his example within the religion he created supports pedophilia and propels it. ???

I would expect indignance at the question to be louder than questioning if a secondary religious icon were a whore? Isn't being a pedophile worse than being a whore? Maybe it is favoritism that decides the volume of protest, and not the principle of potentially being offensive to others.

What I find interesting is that Muhammed took Aisha (the child) away from her father who protested strongly against it? How would someone feel if the pope or any city dioceses priest or cardinal came into their home and forcefully took their 6 year old child away to lay their penis between their thighs and marry the girl? -- then consumate that marriage a few years later while she were still a child?

And the figurehead who did that in Islam is respected as a great person!

[Asshat]

In an earlier thread, the doc pointed out that the Afghan men had "men's night" where they had anal sex with young boys. We discussed this at length.

Without going too deep (I am busy actually working now) if you are going to defame someone for their morality, they must first understand that social mores vary greatly in different societies.

Didn't Huckabee just now attempt to gain more Christian supporters by attacking the faith of Romney?

Muhammed wasn't a pedophile. I was just having boy's night out, and I don't mean to trivialize this but social comparison's do come into play. I would hate to think TP is fomenting those statements cast by Christians looking to defame Islam. Like any other religion, it is the individual and his actions that should be judged.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

What I find interesting is that Muhammed took Aisha (the child) away from her father who protested strongly against it? How would someone feel if the pope or any city dioceses priest or cardinal came into their home and forcefully took their 6 year old child away...
TP, did you read Dr. Khand's discussion of this issue in the link I posted to his website? And the links to additional evidence for Dr. Khand's position? Thoughts...?

[TheNoNamedOne]

I've just read parts of the quotes above, E. I will read those links in detail later this afternoon or evening. Looks interesting.

[Asshat]

Pedophilia is respected down to the followers of Muhammed who lead the way with example. Here is the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran expounding on it more:

So, there you have it. By Western standards, some practices fall under the heading of a pedophile.

Mohamed did it too, so yep, he was a pedophile by Western standards too.

What else is there to discuss then?

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

So, there you have it. By Western standards, some practices fall under the heading of a pedophile.

Mohamed did it too, so yep, he was a pedophile by Western standards too.

What else is there to discuss then?
For starters, what of Muslim immigrants to Western societies? Should they be allowed to continue these cultural practices? How about converts to Islam in Western societies? Should they be allowed to take up these practices?

[dk]

When in Rome...

[DougP]

When in Rome...

have orgies :thumbup:

[okisteve]

For starters, what of Muslim immigrants to Western societies? Should they be allowed to continue these cultural practices? How about converts to Islam in Western societies? Should they be allowed to take up these practices?

It boils down to different concepts of freedom. Two issues in the news lately have been the ban on headscarves for students in the UK, and the worldwide campaign against female genital mutilation (female circumcision). I believe the former is being contested in the courts, while the latter is being circumvented illegally in some western countries by traditional immigrant women who want their daughters cut.

[Asshat]

For starters, what of Muslim immigrants to Western societies? Should they be allowed to continue these cultural practices? How about converts to Islam in Western societies? Should they be allowed to take up these practices?

No, they should do like we do...watch AFN and learn how to use the chopsticks.

Anyone moving to anywhere should adhere to the local customs. Issues of sexuality are personal in the first place and never mandated anywhere I know.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Issues of sexuality are personal in the first place and never mandated anywhere I know.
Riiiiiight...
http://bertc.com/sexlaws.htm

Or:

By Jim Spencer


Got together with the wife last weekend. We thought we were expressing our love for each other in the privacy of our bedroom. But according to the Code of Virginia, there’s always a chance we committed a Class 6 felony...

...the rest of the story (http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/virginia/vaeditorial15.htm)

[okisteve]

Riiiiiight...
http://bertc.com/sexlaws.htm

Or:
http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/virginia/vaeditorial15.htm]...the rest of the story (http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/virginia/vaeditorial15.htm%5D...the%20rest%20of%20the%20sto ry)

The second link doesn't work, but as for the first:

(And I swear on my Koran I have never used this expression on the Internet before): LMFAO!

But I am going into deep cover as of next Saint Swithins Day because I have broken at least two of those laws.

[dk]

http://bertc.com/sexlaws.htm
This can't be true... The author should have at least provided links or something...

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

This can't be true... The author should have at least provided links or something...
There are plenty of other sites with the same and similar laws listed...

The second link doesn't work...

Try again. Should be OK now.:)

[dk]

There are plenty of other sites with the same and similar laws listed...
Well he got the information from somewhere. It wouldn't be that hard to provide a link when building the list or at least give some kind of citation. But it'd be even easier to just make it all up and imagine that most people are gullible and will just accept it as the gospel truth.

But hey, I'll stop being a buzz-kill. It's funny, none-the-less.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Well he got the information from somewhere. It wouldn't be that hard to provide a link when building the list or at least give some kind of citation. But it'd be even easier to just make it all up and imagine that most people are gullible and will just accept it as the gospel truth.

But hey, I'll stop being a buzz-kill. It's funny, none-the-less.
It's not difficult do *just a little* legwork if you really wanted to know, and voila! Sources that have probably been checked a little more thoroughly...
http://www.ncstatecollege.edu/Webpub/Blewis/Acrobatfiles/sexlaws.pdf
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/00/13108.ctl
http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/discrim/11886res20030626.html

The mother lode:
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2269/
http://www.inhumane.org/data/Beastiality.htm

[dk]

I'm at work.

I love that excuse. :p

Thanks for doing the legwork.

[TheNoNamedOne]

TP, did you read Dr. Khand's discussion of this issue in the link I posted to his website? And the links to additional evidence for Dr. Khand's position? Thoughts...?

Ok, E, just finished reading them.

My thought is that Dr. Khand wants Islam to go through an "Enlightenment" or "Reformation", somewhat similar to what Christianity did. I view him as pushing for some revisionism to take the heat off of Muhammed for his pedophilia and other negative aspects of Islam.

I mean, isn't that the goal of revisionism -- to revise the accepted view/practice of something? -- done usually when that past thing has come to be viewed as wrong.

I think revisionism can open up a big can of worms for religions -- mainly fracturing them into more numerous denominations. Christianity survived it, but could Islam survive it just as successfully?

[hankypanky]

I guess the link and quotes to Dr. Muqtedar Khand's rebuttal of criticisms against Islam upset Hank.

Hank, are you upset because Dr. Khand's remarks hit too close to home?

no, not quite. ******* kids is just ******* sick!

But to each his own. Sometimes i catch myself watching the high school girls though:thumbup:

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

no, not quite. ******* kids is just ******* sick!

But to each his own. Sometimes i catch myself watching the high school girls though:thumbup:
Yes, I think Dr. Khand (as well as many others) would probably agree with you there. That's the point Hank. You didn't really read the posts before you chimed in. My post and link was primarily regarding info I found for a defense of Islam - a rebuttal of criticisms such as TP's. You automatically lumped me as being in exactly the same camp as TP, without bothering to read before jumping to conclusions. None of your posts in this thread have added anything to the discussion at all.

[TheNoNamedOne]

In an earlier thread, the doc pointed out that the Afghan men had "men's night" where they had anal sex with young boys. We discussed this at length.

Without going too deep (I am busy actually working now) if you are going to defame someone for their morality, they must first understand that social mores vary greatly in different societies.

And this is the view of moral relativism. Moral relativism justifies suffering. If one accepts moral relativism then basically one is setting it up so that judgement cannot be past on behaviour and, therefore, why should the status quo ever changes. It locks things down. I mean, "Hey, what we are doing is not wrong. It is relative to our present culture, so why should we change it?" Nonsense! Things should change if it causes suffering and suffering is what moral absolutism strikes at.

Muhammed wasn't a pedophile. I was just having boy's night out, and I don't mean to trivialize this but social comparison's do come into play. I would hate to think TP is fomenting those statements cast by Christians looking to defame Islam. Like any other religion, it is the individual and his actions that should be judged.

Sure Muhammed was a pedophile. It is a descriptive word to his behaviour. George Washington was a slave owner, wasn't he, eventhough slavery was legal? It being illegal now doesn't erase the fact that he was a slave holder or that it was wrong then as it is now. Recognized as wrong then is irrelevant as to whether it is inherently wrong -- that which I think we know intuitively from the point of "suffering."

The discussion has nothing to do with fomenting statements to purposely defame Islam. It is discussing facts about Islam and Mohammed. Mohammed and his actions are rightly judged as pedophilia, and if Muslims are urged to use him as an example to be like, then there is a lot of room for Islamic leaders to declare what Mohammed done was not wrong and is not wrong for his followers to imitate.

The fact that Christians view him as a pedophile, too, is irrelevant as to whether I do or not. The hadith speak independently for themselves to show us Mohammed's actions and to let us call a spade a spade. The Hadith themselves defame its own prophet. I am merely pointing it out.

[Asshat]

Well TP, then you can join the religious right in your defamation of Islam because their prophet (acting in what was then considered normal) was a pedophile.

It does nothing to diminish the validity of Islam however. And yes, I am a moral relativist. Untill the entire planet becomes of one dogma, one culture, one idiology, there is no other way to live.

As an intelligent man, I am sure you read "The Ugly American." Wouldn't the present-day moral majority- those who think in definite terms of black and white in all their Victorian splendor- be offended to read the passage which describes young island couple disappearing into the jungle for a quick trist and reappear satiated, happy, yet all scratched up to show the rest of the community that they had sex?

Better yet, are social mores the same as individual morality? While I will never be a pedophile, I can certainly understand another culture's differential views on raping a young boy as a fete, while homosexuality is a crime. I don't agree with it, I don't like it, but I can understand the different social mores at play which condone it.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Well TP, then you can join the religious right in your defamation of Islam because their prophet (acting in what was then considered normal) was a pedophile.

I don't think it was normal then, Umi. The young girl, Aishaya (sp) had a father who strongly protested against Mohammed and did not want her taken. But, she was. When Muslims cite taking children for brides now, they do not cite the tradition predating Mohammed -- they look to the Hadith, and to me that is where it starts if Muslims are going to reference that instead of their regional culture.

But come on, it is not about joining the religious right. Why can't criticism of Islam be done without the person doing the criticism being lumped in with the right? Besides, I agree with Muslims, too, who call the Christian religion a great lie.

I am an equal opportunity skeptic for all religions. If I find their existence dangerous and harmful to the world, then yes I would very much like to see their icons debunked.

It does nothing to diminish the validity of Islam however.

I geuss that depends to the individual who is swayed or not swayed by the argument.

And yes, I am a moral relativist. Untill the entire planet becomes of one dogma, one culture, one idiology, there is no other way to live.

No problem about you and I or others being some relativists and others absolutists. Without such a dichotomy then I doubt there would be differences and debate amongst us. People change. I think once, I, too, was a relativist.

I really do think this is the core of differences to a lot of people. I think I have a thread in my profile I created at the beginning of the forums discussing moral relativism/absolutism.

As an intelligent man, I am sure you read "The Ugly American." Wouldn't the present-day moral majority- those who think in definite terms of black and white in all their Victorian splendor- be offended to read the passage which describes young island couple disappearing into the jungle for a quick trist and reappear satiated, happy, yet all scratched up to show the rest of the community that they had sex?

Indeed they would. That is why I see value in destroying that which holds up and together the moral majority -- their beloved superstitions between the covers of the Bible.

Better yet, are social mores the same as individual morality?

Good question! I'd have to think on it and their relationship towards each other a little more. I think it could be a whole discussion standing on its own. Would you mind if I created a thread just for that? Or if you'd like, you could.

While I will never be a pedophile, I can certainly understand another culture's differential views on raping a young boy as a fete, while homosexuality is a crime. I don't agree with it, I don't like it, but I can understand the different social mores at play which condone it.

All that is fair enough and I understand it is coming from a relativist point of view. I can understand it, too. But, I would still judge it absolutely wrong now as it was absolutely wrong then, even if it was not judged so by the laws of society then. But, look at the intuition of the father Aishaya who protested against his daughter being taken away for Mohammed's dreams.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Seems like the Madrassas are teaching a little about pedophilia, too. Now, who would they look to to perhaps garner some permission for it?

http://www.geocities.com/ritzy2ritzy/madrassa2.jpg

[okisteve]

Maybe the kid fainted in his august Presence and he was giving artificial respiration.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Look at the boys behind them looking on with bug-eyed envy.

[commando]

http://www.jesusandmo.net/strips/2005-11-28.jpg

[TheLastDon]

------------------------

LMAO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OOI8zw3X5s&feature=related

[commando]

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-why-should-i-respect-these-oppressive-religions-1517789.html
But a free society cannot be structured to soothe the hardcore faithful. It is based on a deal. You have an absolute right to voice your beliefs – but the price is that I too have a right to respond as I wish. Neither of us can set aside the rules and demand to be protected from offence. :scratchchin:

[DougP]

LMAO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OOI8zw3X5s&feature=related

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/fb19.jpg?w=375&h=500

[commando]

doug posting about forgery...return to base, your irony detector is malfuctioning

[Muku]

wtf point is there in necromancing this particular thread?

Damn.....that took some serious looking for this was buried up to toilet papers large colon....or it just means that someone here is not whom they seem to be and are playing games.:scratchchin:

I mean hell it is over 13 months old, from the last post, 01-02-2008 08:29 PM

[commando]

oh sure, it'd go equally well in the "was mary a whore?" thread, but why start new topics when these ones are perfectly fine for the comic strip? not like searching aisha and mary is a particularly challenging task.

[commando]

http://www.jesusandmo.net/strips/2007-03-29.jpg

[commando]

Graham is sitting, as usual at his computer:

Graham:
So the Prophet Muhammad walks into a bar... Uh, no... Not a bar, no. Let's start again. The Prophet Muhammad walks into a cafe that has no license to serve alcohol.

Cartoon: An invisible man in a robe and turban walks up to a counter where Grey Bloke is standing wearing a waiter's apron.

Graham (voiceover):
And he walks up to the counter, and the barman - I mean the cafeman - says:

Graham as Cafeman:
"Why the invisible face?"

And the Prophet Muhammad says
"Well, it's like this. About 1400 years ago I wrote a book that became something of a bestseller, very highly-regarded in many countries of the world, and taken as scripture by millions of people."

We see the turban bobbing around as we hear Muhammad's voice.

And the Cafeman says
"Congratulations."

And Muhammad says
"Thanks. But the thing is, out of all the millions of people who have read my book and find it very helpful to them, there are some who get extremely defensive about its contents. And not just about its contents, but also about other things that I'm reported to have said."

And the Cafeman says
"You're losing me a bit... What do you mean?"

And Muhammad says
"Well, I'll give you a "for instance". In my book, God features quite a lot, and he makes it very clear that only he should be worshipped. Nobody else - and he's very particular about this - absolutely nobody else is allowed to be venerated to the extent that God is."

And the Cafeman says
"Sounds reasonable."

And Muhammad says
"Well, sure. He is God. But what happened is, the people who followed me obviously had a lot of respect for me, me being Main Prophet, so to speak, and after I died, the clerics who were in charge of maintaining the faith decided that there was a danger that some people might start to put me on more or less the same level as the creator."

Cafeman
"To idolise you, you mean?"

Muhammad
"Exactly. Possibly the clerics of the time had seen what was happening with Christianity - pictures of Jesus and Mary and various Saints; statues going up all over the place - you know, arguably the idolisation of all of these religious characters transformed Christianity from a monotheistic religion into a polytheistic one - and a lot of clerics were probably afraid that if images of myself were permitted, a similar thing might happen with Islam."

Cafeman
"What? Even if someone just painted a picture to remind people of what you'd looked like? There was a fear that they might start worshipping the picture?"

Muhammad
"Well, yes, that. But also, I am reported to have been quite negative about painters and figurative imagery in general."

Cafeman
"Ah. And you put that in your book, did you?"

Muhammad
"Um, no. Not in so many words. Not in any words at all, to be honest. But despite that, depicting me in visual form is now one of Islam's biggest taboos, and all Muslims must refrain from doing so."

Cafeman
"Right. That's fair enough, isn't it? Nobody should violate the taboos of their own faith, that would be stupid."

And Muhammad says
"Well, quite."

Pause.

Cafeman
"What about non-Muslims?"

Muhammad
"Excuse me?"

Cafeman
"Presumably the taboo doesn't apply if you're not a follower of the faith, right? I mean, Muslims don't expect non-Muslims to not eat pork or drink beer, for instance, so...?

Muhammad
"Yeah, it's an interesting question, isn't it? Obviously, in an ideal world, it wouldn't be an issue - because there wouldn't be any non-Muslims. But given that there are billions of people and thousands of different belief systems on the planet, it would seem unreasonable for everybody to be expected to have the same reverence for me that Muslims do."

Cafeman
"Right."

Muhammad
"However, there are quite a few of my fans who tend to react in a very... um... extreme manner, whenever they hear about something that they think might be insulting to me."

Cafeman
"So, you're saying...?"

Muhammad
"I think I'm saying that if you are an unbeliever, then theoretically - and legally, if you live in a non-Muslim country - you're free to draw as many pictures of me as you like. But on a practical level, you probably will have to spend the rest of your life hiding from fanatical idiots who want your head on a stick."

Cafeman
"Interesting. Anyway, welcome to the twenty first century. What can I get you?"

http://somegreybloke.blogspot.com/2008/04/joke-about-prophet-muhammad.html

[TheLastDon]

Oh boy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_TfBbR6L0M&feature=related

[commando]

Somebody's having problems posting anyting of substance.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/strips/2008-07-17.jpg

[aby aof]

wtf point is there in necromancing this particular thread?

Damn.....that took some serious looking for this was buried up to toilet papers large colon....or it just means that someone here is not whom they seem to be and are playing games.:scratchchin:

I mean hell it is over 13 months old, from the last post, 01-02-2008 08:29 PM

i think it the time refresh some of my old threads, like the one about israel, or the one about the holy quran !!!:scratchchin:

[aby aof]

Somebody's having problems posting anyting of substance.


commando, from ur post i can say very confident, u r big ignorant
thank u for ur trifle posts

[P_chan]

commando, from ur post i can say very confident, u r big ignorant
thank u for ur trifle posts

http://rudezone.net/images/notThisShitAgain.gif