Pakistan: Christian man beaten by mob, given life sentence over quran desecration

Hi John, when you talk about defiled tomb of Joseph of Arithemia, are you talking about recent or early 11th century wholesale leveling of Christian sites by the Egyptian Caliphe Hakim?

Curious, as trying to google recent events and get nothing but your own item.

It's not curious at all, Solkhar. It happened again in October, 2000. Try googling "Muslims burn" or "Muslims desecrate" to find more Muslims acting in the name of "the religion of peace" and the disgusting double standard that exists in the twisted world of Islam.

BTW - John did not post this article.

Oh, you mean the very questionable items by WND that "a Palestinian authority member told them...." which also says that "the IDF had no such evidence of......."

Yeah searching under google with "Muslims burn" gets lots of ......... you guessed it .... right-wing blog sites and not many real news items at all.

Thanks, thought it was Johh, so the question still comes about the desicration of the tomb..... what event are we talking about??

No, that's not what I mean. There are plenty of sources to prove this incident. Look for them, or do I need to list them for you??

The WND quote (misquote actually) that you site is from an incident that took place in February, 2008, not October, 2000. Anyway, the quote should read “The IDF was not aware (at that time) of the fire or any unusual activity near the tomb but that it would immediately inquire” and not "the IDF had no such evidence of......." There you go again changing the words of others for your benefit. Again, the incident I am talking about took place in OCTOBER, 2000!

Only "right-wing blog sites"?? "not many real news items at all"? But they are there! How many do you need?? Whatever, Solkhar. Keep denying the truth; it is what you do best.

So now your reading into things, did I say I am denying any truth? No, did not.

My entire point is I wanted the example of what happened so I can no the facts, if it happened then it happened and I can condemn or whatever. Simply put I was unaware of any such event and wanted to know. Your jumping down and giving half-hearted answers that tell me nothing becomes simply that - nothing. Add to that your rather weak generalized cr*p about Muslims do this and Muslims do that is rather tiresome rantings that only discredit your case and simply does not stick as being credible at all.

We all know there are radical groups that usurp their faith for their sick political goals, we all know about the extremist elements of Hamas and other Palestinian groups that are nothing short of murderously ugly, and we just as much know that there are westerners whom exagerate no-end like school-yard gossip regardless if the story that started the gossip-train was based on real events.

So again, would you please be so kind as to give me a real reference to that event you talked about as I am genuinely curious to know what happened and if/who is responsible. Thank you.

http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/templemount....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/ap_on_re_af...
http://www.thehindu.com/fline/fl1726/17260700.htm
http://www.thehindu.com/fline/fl1725/17250620.htm
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/7945.html



Muslims desecrating som ething is not unheard of.

And your point is? That you like to say "Muslims this and Muslims this" in generalist terms reflects your own xenophobia and bigotry. Yes bad things happen and in South Asia it happens a lot from all sides. I spent two years on posting there, I know what happens. I can play your game and "hindus this and hindus that" but I am not xenophobic or bigotted, I just try and see the whole picture and the contexts that happened. The massacres of the division of Pakistan and India that both hindu and Muslim communities did, not to mention what "both" did to minority Sikhs, Buddhist and Christians is well recorded. The oldest Mosque in India was destroyed by a mob about 20 odd years ago, hindus massacering Christians in Ossira less than 2 years ago, etc, etc, etc. I will not denegrate myself to post some examples, if I did I will go back to my files about what Serbian Orthodox Christian Nationalists did, and they certainly used religion as an excuse - I was there, I know.

Context and reality checks, not what you imagine or "want to believe" really counts, like your pushing the academically discredited moon-god rubbish - it does not stick.

When did religion become something "xenophobic". Do you know what xenophobia is?

If we use your crooked logic, I would be xenophobic towards Hindu's, Christians,Jews, Pagans. and the sort. Why? Well, Christians, because it started in the middle East, Hindu's, because it started in India, and etc...

Do I look like the person who cares what Hindu's and christians do? I'm an atheist!

Being an atheist gives me a unique perspective into something:

Christians, though some are quite violent, they are very different from your garden variety violent muslim. Most of those will forgive you. Violent Muslims, not so much.

The difference is, that christianity teaches forgiveness, whilst Islam, teaches that anyone who questions islam should be dead.

Another key point as to why Christianity is better than islam is that IT WASN'T CREATED BY A PEDOPHILE!


Even with all the christian, hindu mobs out there, you must understand that they are just a franction of what muslims do. Besides, islam destroyed India, conquered and butchered thousands of Indians, so that is another reason as to why they destroyed a mosque... which in my opinion serves no good purpose but to indocrinate someone to become violent.

Your questions about your morality just raises more doubt about your own capacities, nothing else. Being an aethiest only puts your in another category, gives you a different perspective, not a better one.

What you consider forgiveness and such is again, your perspective of "what you wish it was like" and again nothing like the reality of totals. Like in your other posts, with quotes from questionable sites, your capacity to know what is real fails because you have assumed a context and then searched not for truths but what fits that context you have made up "before" you bothered to start looking.

Islam was not created by a paedophile so that agenda-based propogonda gets thrown out, another perefect example of your rights to consider discussing what is Muslim or Islam.

As for India, Indians were massacering themselves by the hundreds of thousands all the time and just another culture came in that happened to be Muslim because Timur and his family became Muslim before they turned up. They could have just as much followed the Mongol philosophies before hand and then simply eradicated the entire population. Your history is also clouded over with your agenda, that is sad. I studied South Asian history, I suggest you read about the history correctly both pre and during Timur's time.

I even wonder what your last post was about, there was nothing either relevant, factual or even morally logical in what you posted....... you did go to school and study some history did you not?

"Islam was not created by a paedophile so that agenda-based propogonda gets thrown out, another perefect example of your rights to consider discussing what is Muslim or Islam."

Mmmm..... so....that old flea bag Mo was not numero uno? Someone else created the Islam virus? Do tell! He would have killed you for such blasphemy!
Mo(pus be upon him) was a paedophile:fact.

So, you decided to label Ali Sina as wrong because you can't refute his claims, and because he managed to do it so well that not even a scholar could.

Interesting manner to defend your points. I believe this is what most people would classify as "unable to dicuss". In other words, you are unable to create arguments to discuss something, instead, you decided to attack the source without providing any evidence to your arguments about the source.

Fascinating... Then you claim something about my capacity. You clearly have no knowledge of the correct history, only what your Imam taught you, right?

You must remember, that Islam killed more Hindu's than between themselves. The other culture classified the Buddhists and Hindu's lower than second class citizens(christians and jews). Reason as to why you don't find any pagans today in any islamic country.

So you dispute the fact that Mohammed had sex with a 9 year old girl? That he used women as sex slaves, or that he stole from caravans, that he was a liar and a crook.


Fascinating, I wonder at what lengths you will go to defend islam.

Ali Sina loves to do the Spencer twist - which means quote those elements from the Qur'an - but only those that suit the argument and then go around arguing that "everything I said is there". Ali Sina has chosen to express his abuse at the hands of clerics and official in Iran by blaming the entire religion instead of political, social and clerical culprits themselves, like the rape victim that choses to "hate all men". It is as simple as that. Ali Sina also loves to say, prove me wrong but avoids debate and uses that tiresome response like Wilders of "security reasons" because as long as the "arguments and case" that he provides is in text and thus cannot be expanded, stays in his mind as sound.

If Ali Sina, like some very good Muslim and ex-Muslim websites chose instead to point out the real issue of radicalism, extremism, theological monopolizing and how governments do little or nothing to stop it, then he would have been commended instead of rightly being ignored from academia, western governments and other institutions.

I have nothing personally against apostacy, which I believe in most cases is just human reaction to abuse by politics and society and nothing really agains the religion. Those non-religous, aethiest or agena-driven anti-Islam spouters simply assume and jump to the assumption that it shows full-on rejection of Islam when it is not. Agreed, that very problem of politics, cultural, social and theocratic monopolizing condemns and is brutal with apostacy and that obviously plays into the hands of those groups.

The problem with the non-Muslim and agenda-based groups is they like to read the Qur'an as literal even though they do not do so for their own religious texts. Apostacy is a crime in most Muslim countries because they fear the theocrats but the practice in many is simply to ignore them unless they themselves makes something of it, ie to openly encourage it. If apostacy was, as all of you "wish it to be" then you would be seeing mass hangings in every Muslim country because you can go to most cafés in the Muslim world and you will find at least one person who simply will say "fuck Islam". Yes fear stops most of them from saying it aloud because of the power of radicals. Note from all that I have said, Islamic principles has not even come into play here.

The "death penalty" idea of apostacy comes from how important tribal unity was in 7th century Arabia and tribal life was fragile with disputes over faith, adultery etc, being enough to destory not only families but possibly the tribe. It is radical Islam using those man-made haddiths and naturally following their own tribal-customs that has turned apostacy into a deadly result - not Islamic principles. Were does it say that economics, cultural maturity, education, literacy, globalization cannot make such a position no longer valid? Radical Muslims still wait late at night on mountain tops for the moon to arrive to tell if it is the first day of Ramadan or not, but they could have found out exactly on the internet.

Ali Sina chose to condemn everything on the religion instead of the backwardness of man and that is why I think he fails and should be ignored for being a simplistic fool that he is, not to mention he wants his his pseudonym to be up there on the monitors of everyone as some ego trip.

Yes I dispute totally as illogical that Mohammed had sex with a nine year old. That age and the timing of the event has been disputed since Aisha pointed out that she did not even know how old she was, which most people then did not. I have already and will no bother to go find the links of all the real factual reasons why it is not the case, but to summarize there are events in the Qur'an that are set to real dates and simply put Aisha could not have been that age. She was probably "betrothed" at between the ages of 9 or 12 and the consumation at least from 14 to 16 years and that also socially and culturally is more logical to the practices of that time. The entire problem with this topic is that there was an error put in the haddiths of Bhukari and the vast majority of Muslims are too afraid argue against them. Simple as that.

I thought really hard, if I should waste my time in explaining you the same things that everyone else has explained to you before here.

I decided it was a major waste of time; better spent in studying more about astronomy(something that islam disagrees) than explaining to you.

I'm just going to say that, whatever you disagree you try to attack and lower it without sources.

If what you is true, then, I suggest you to go faithfreedom forum and try to disprove Ali Sina yourself. I'm sure the users there, which are really great people, will answer you... Perhaps, even himself.



Before I finish, I'll leave you with a question; What should and shouldn't be taken literally in the koran? What rule book has those rules? Where exactly it is written or who tells you what you should take it as literal?

You are exactly right, Necrowulf. Only sources with Solkhar's seal of approval will be accepted for discussion. For future reference, you may only include links that are deemed "credible" by Solkhar - otherwise they will be immediately dismissed as "right-wing ... agenda-based ... Islamophobic ... utter bullshit..." and, therefore, "of no value".

"Fascinating, I wonder at what lengths you will go to defend islam" Like any "good Muslim" he will continue to lie his ass off to defend his sickening "religion".

lol sources with "solkhar seal of approval" . islamicawakening.com has it, I'm sure.


This is why I question his "moderation", I don't think he is moderate at all; His actions prove otherwise.

"...What you consider forgiveness and such is again, your perspective of "what you wish it was like" and again nothing like the reality of totals...."
He thinks christians are unable to forgive; I actually did laugh a lot when I read it. I've already received a few threats from evangelical nutjobs in Brazil*, but I'm sure they will never go at the same lengths as muslims do. From forming worldwide protests to bombings. Put those aside, the vast majority, which is almost everyone who I had any discussion, personally or even over the internet were capable to forgive.


* : Yes, Pat Robertson is not the only one who said something stupid; Remember the Tsunami in Asia a few years ago? A few Evangelical Pastors claimed that the people there died because they refused to follow Jesus.

I went a bit off-topic in my reply to you, but alas, it actually answers one of the Solkhar's arguments in another post, in which he claims that poverty and fundamentalism brews terrorism. Again, Solkhar got it wrong, there a lot of people there who barely got anything to eat, and follow those Pastors... But no one ever heard of them being terrorists.