The house of Allah in the eyes of the aloners on free-minds

**AhmedBahgat**

Hello All

Sorry for leaving this thread for a ong time without finalising it, I wanted to have a break from the non sense spewed every day by the Aloners. I was actually involoved in another struggle with the boys and girls on faithfreedon web site Very Happy

anyway the reaosn I want to get this thread back on track is to keep exposing the aloners and their cult leaders on free-minds.org, they are so bias that if you try to expose them on their web site they ban you, for example there a confused freak in there named Lobster, he is also a membetr here named "Phoniex", this guy does the following on free-minds.org web site:

1) Call himself Allah
2) Call Allah a liar
3) Says he knows better than Allah
4) Says the Qutan is full of non sense

Yeterday, when he called Allah a liar, i wen off at him, and guess what?, the tyrats of that Kuffar place called free-minds.org banned me for the third time Laughing

See, they dont ban the freaks who insult and mock Allah, but they ban those who insult those freaks who insults Allah and mock His message

Sounds like a very guided bunch of aloners

Any way, free-islam main mission is to expose those freaks Muslims or not who lie about out great religion, the aloners think that by banning me they can shut me up, they need to think again because actiing low as such will make me more determined to expose their non sense and warn the young Muslims from that Kuffar web site, therefore I have to finish this refute soon inshaallah so i move on to epoxse more of their daily non sense

Salam all

**AhmedBahgat** · Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Mon 19 May, 2008 5:30 pm; edited 2 times in total

Hello All

Sorry for the not continuing to reply to this allegation by free-minds cult leader due to a lot of commitments I have in minds, while I still have more in hand to do I believe finishing this refute is a matter of urgency as those tyrants on FM try to always shut me up when I expose them on their web site, they use the childish excuse that I insult some kafirs in there while on te other hand they allow those kafirs that I insult to insult Allah and mock His message, I was going to post this refute on their web site as I promised one member in there who was almost being dragged under the fake charm they drug the young Muslims with, on the other hand their Tyrancy is evident, for example two moderators in there Savage_carrot & Nadeem was caught red handed many times being bias and abusing their power, if you compare them with faithfreedom web site (a clear cut anti islam web site) you should see with ease that even the kafirs and moderators on faithfreedom have far more integrity than those kafirs on free-minds.org, unfortunately for them if they succeed in shutting me up on their web site, they will never be able to shut me up on free-islam so let's get the ball rolling and try to finish this refute despite I honestly believe that my refutes to the first two parts were enough to demolish this non sense and satanic allegation by free-minds cult leader:

**AhmedBahgat**

Salam all,

This is a very good vdeo, it certainly proves that the freak minders are wrong:

Link

The

@ahmedbahgat: let 's look at the article which was authored by someone named Layth, and i believe he is the cult leader of free-minds.org

This particular dissimulator's article is a great example of what was said in the other threads, being a restatement of a handful of Orientalists' conjecture, and exemplifies the dissimulators' approach of attempting every dirty trick in the book. There are more errors and lies in this article then I would bother to comment on, so let's look at just one of the many instances of his unabashed and dumb plagiarism:

Mohammed is situated near Lot's town (Soddom);

“And you pass by their ruins (Sodom) in the morning; And in the night. Do you not understand?” (The Message 37:137-138)

“And they have come upon the town (Sodom) that was showered with a miserable shower. Did they not see it? No, they do not expect any resurrection.” (The Message 25:40)

How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?

The only way you can achieve that, is if you LIVED NEAR THERE!

The word used in the verse 138 is "al layl," and in his quoted translation the word is correctly translated as "night". Yet, mysteriously, he then uses the word "evening" in his clever rhetoric that follows. Can we glean something from it, or is this a usual stumbling disbeliever?

A little later he writes:

Thus, if the people of Jerusalem were looking out in the morning, or upon returning in the evening, they would be able to glimpse the land where Lot’s town stood and was destroyed by the Lord!

As we see here, our clever dissimulator has once again used "evening" instead of "night," and one time too many has this dissimulator slipped for it to be insignificant. As mentioned earlier, he has simply reproduced the rejected conjecture of some Orientalists, so let us see if we can locate his source of inspiration.

Here is what Crone has to observe about the ruins of Lot's town:

In addition, the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.

Observe how Crone, referring to 37:138, mistakenly talks about "evening" instead of "night". Evidently, the Crone goddess is among those who have been illuminating our clueless disbeliever. And her devotee has reproduced not only her "historical" conjectures, but also copied over, faithfully, her misconception of the Quranic verse.

Let us put it in another form:

Crone Goddess: The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening".

Dissimulator: How can someone pass-by the remains of another people EVERY MORNING & EVERY EVENING?

Crone Goddess: The only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.

: grin :

Talk about a disbeliever's dissimulation and devotion, blind or otherwise.

**AhmedBahgat**

Salam mate

I have to say, that was a clear slam dunk of one of the many crap spewed by the freak minders

Thanks a lot for your investigation

The

This disbeliever could not even stick to his (originally Crone's) "pass by every morning and evening" theory, because she proposes by "somewhere in the vicinity" locations in northwest Arabia (a trail picked up by another set of disbelievers and dissimulators).

To fit Jerusalem in the picture, this one suggests getting on top of Mount Olives and catching a glimpse of Bab edh-dhra (one of the places proposed as Lot's site), which is a little under 50 miles away. Add to it the fact that the Mount is some 2700 feet above sea level and Bab edh-dhra some 800 feet below sea level, and anybody can imagine just how well one might be able to see down that drop at a distance of nearly 50 miles. Observe how this dirty disbeliever has gone from twisting the verse to "every morning and evening" to "living there" to "catching a glimpse from an impossible distance".

We have Jerusalem pretty well documented, and there are no records of Muhammad and his mission over there. Further, the Quran states that it was revealed in manifest Arabic. I think it's a safe bet to say that this Jew lookalike would have next liked to propose that Arabic is not Arabic and that Muhammad never existed as there are no records of him in Jerusalem's annals.

**AhmedBahgat** · Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Sat 23 Jul, 2016 7:48 am; edited 2 times in total

**AhmedBahgat** · Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Sat 23 Jul, 2016 7:49 am; edited 1 time in total

Read above first ^^^^

**BMZ**

Hello, Ahmed

That was a precision bombing and a superb demolition.

I would like to read and see how the FFI goons and Clowns can put any spin over this utter demolition.

The Cat appears to be a sensible Qur'aan Only Kafir, so he may concede. Please ignore other FFI minions.

Well done, mate.

Salaams
BMZ

**AhmedBahgat** · Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Sat 23 Jul, 2016 7:50 am; edited 2 times in total

**BMZ**

**AhmedBahgat** · Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Sat 23 Jul, 2016 7:51 am; edited 1 time in total

Hello the Cat

I will look at this one for now, then I will look at the other one later inshaallah:

The Cat of FFI said to Ahmed:
All this fabulation (Ishmael/al-Muttalib/Muhammad/Mecca) has been debunked by the inscription of king Abraha

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

The inscription dated 552CE reads:
"With the power of the Almighty and His Messiah, King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen
and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya
in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan
with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in
Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban
and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir. (Abraha) appointed the son (of Omro)
as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan
in the year sixty-two and six hundred."

-- Abraha won.
-- No mention of Mecca whatsoever, while the province of Kinda is...
-- No mention of elephants (they would have needed a ton of water supply).
-- No mention of al-Muttalib nor of the Quraysh tribe.
--The inscription is ascertained 552AD, destroying the whole hadiths fabrications.
Thanks again for the time and trouble you took in your researched presentation.
-------------------

Ahmed says
Apparently you do not see the flaw in your logic above concerning your so called archaeological evidence of the inscription of King Abraha.

King Abraha was living in Sanaa Tamen, therefore he was an Arabic speaker. Your Barbie scripture is written in a language that you did not even tell us about, but certainly not Arabic, it is not like someone will come with some chicken shit or rubbish and claim this is the inscription of Abraha and so it is a fact.

The above so called inscription looks to me a forgery, a photo shop job, you can see how the letters are so bright which makes no sense especially with the two different directions of the rows which are overlapping each other in the middle, as seen with the three arrows I added to this forged photo shop image.

Now, Abraha lived for some time and conquered many villages as told in this funny inscription, therefore it is not like these only 10 lines or so are telling us all his history and what he did or heard about, just thinking this way is totally insane and ridiculous. It is not like we should have read in this unknown language of a few words that Abraha heard of Kabba and he is going to destroy it.

The un-mentioning of Kabba in this funny so called archaeological evidence does not really mean that Abraha did not know about it. And certainly he could have never added it after after he was killed in the battle of Mecca as the Quran told us. One guy whom I know responded to one of the deluded idiots like Cat concerning the same archaeological Abraha crap. So I would like to copy it but direct it at the Cat instead:

Here is the Cat believing in wild stories about Abraha's army advancing on Arab tribes that was written on some alleged rock that was discovered some years before Muhammad's time. And the fact that he leaves out who and when this archaeological discovery was found, or proof that such a discovery was made probably has the audience on the edge of their seats in suspense of his magical rock. I mean what Arabs would agree to make up a story of their people being flogged to death?. You see, Cat thinks that a picture of a rock with clearly made up writing (as no old rock would be dug up with clear, bright, white writing on it) and no proof of who and when this rock was discovered, and whether it is actually authentic and that any other historically backed up evidence. The Cat has fallen for the old adage that If a lie is told over a long period of time it becomes fact. But this cannot change the fact that it is still a lie.

The Cat thinks that because the alleged archaeological find predates Islam by nearly 50 years somehow disproves the fact that Muhammad received revelation around 610 in Mecca. Yet we should note that he himself stated that the rock does not mention Mecca or the Kabba. Then it's absolutely absurd to say that the mentioning of Abraha trying to attack the Kabba is an invention of Muslims. For since it's two different stories, then there's a possibility of two different events being spoken of. See the idiocy in his posts. It's the same kind of foolish logic we find in all the freak minder arguments.

Back to Abraha's conquest; according to his make-believe archaeological find. Abraha was victorious and the carved stone has been confirmed and date confirmed. So where does this leave us? Well, we can rely on an alleged archaeological find supported by no proof of who or when or how it was discovered or whether the inscription is true. It isn't possible that some rock discovery can disprove or overrule the fact that Abraha was alive in 570 to conduct his quest upon Mecca. The inscription on the alleged rock which mentioned some prominent areas and peoples of Arabia but not Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh proves nothing, because of the simple fact that the possibility that of it not being mentioned can be due to the fact that it relates to a different event. One should also take note that Mecca, the Kabba and Quraysh are all in Arabia and Cat even states that Abraha led a military expedition on Arab tribes. So a claim that Abraha intended to attack the Kabba is not far-fetched, unlike his claim through the freak minders about Mecca.

I'm really glad you are having a go at this conspiracy theory about Islam and Mecca because after what you copied from the freak minders and their likes, I am confident the absurdity in your logic is crystal clear to any reasonable person. You are pretty much admitting how flawed your logic is with such so called Abraha's Inscription which is plagiarism of the freak minders argument. But now, you will not be able to debunk my argument, because by doing so, you will be debunking yours, as my argument regarding the so called Abraha's Inscription is the same as yours. All wishful thinking, what I warned you about earlier regarding the always doubtful so called archaeological evidences.

So let me now make it clear, the Cat, just because you or else claim that an archaeological discovery is found, is not proof that it was found. Just because you refer to the freak minders which states your evidence is not proof that it is true. You have proven nothing as the freak minders and others proved nothing before you. You are simply copying and pasting links and articles claiming that they are true, but you don't have proof. There are websites stating that Big Foot is real, and Tupac and Elvis are still alive, but it doesn't make it true.

The point is that I'm not even stating that the archaeological find was not discovered, but that your logic behind stating that something is true is severely flawed. I've been demonstrating that in my plagiarism of your argument concering Abraha's Inscription, in effect debunking me would be debunking yourself.

Even if the find was actually discovered, it is not proof that the inscription is true. Nor can you prove that the inscription is true. And even if the inscription is true, it still does not prove your point. For as you stated, the rock is dated 552 A.D., while Muhammad was born 570 A.D. Then since there are two different dates and the inscription states an event different from the year of the elephant in Islamic sources, then the logical conclusion is that the discovery refers to a DIFFERENT event. How do we know? Because you just told us that the date of the inscription and events are different. Thus your argument that the year of the elephant is made up in Islamic records is bogus. To even further debunk your absurdity, those who were first to accept Islam were Arabs themselves. The simple fact that they accepted Islam is further evidence which supports the fact that the story is true. For the Arabs of that time would know their history and would have easily criticized and rejected Islam for such a false interpolation of their history of their own people. Yet there is no such case or document in which the Arabs questioned that the year of the elephant is wrong explained in Islamic. So as demonstrated and as usual, your argument fails. I suggest you pick up a book on how to use logical thinking and proof, for your habit of copying and pasting and then stating it is true with no proof is truly an embarrassment.

An archaeological discovery mentioning a different year and instances is proof of a different event, not that another story is made up. Such a conclusion is absurd. By that logic, that means that all history which is not mentioned in the archaeological fins is false. That is simply ridiculous. Secondly, the fact that the Arabs accepted and embraced Islam is very strong evidence to support the fact that the incident concerning the year of the elephant mentioned in Islamic records is true. Otherwise, the Arabs would have rejected Islam, not embrace it. Your logic is utterly flawed Cat. Get over it.

Thanks to my friend, and thank you Cat

Cheers

**BMZ**

**AhmedBahgat**

Salam bro BMZ

I know man, the Game was Over using Muir and Arabic grammar, and I know their tactics of diversions, however I am not going to leave the playground empty for them, my previous comment was a reply to their diversion, the important point is this, I do not divert the debate as they always do

Cheers