69 million page views

The ignorant one here is none but you

Reader comment on item: Israel Has a War to Win
in response to reader comment: Our dear Michael al-tablighee and more drivel

Submitted by Michael (United Arab Emirates), Jan 13, 2022 at 14:23

>ROTFL Tablighee Tablighi Tomato, Tomato Shish kkabab Falafel Hummus and Shakshouka. You are embarrassing yourself again

If embarrassing someone is that easy, here is your embarrassment:
ROTFL Tablighee Tablighi Tomato, Tomato Shish kkabab Falafel Hummus and Shakshouka
HAHAHA EMBARRASSED

>Are you against same sex couples? Shame on you brother we the readers will report you to YouTube and Twitter and Facebook and they will suspend you for being against same sex couples!

BRUH WHEN DID I SAY THAT LMFAO!!

>Who is Nikola Tesla? Is she your mother in-law? Or was she one of the wives of your so called prophet?

Nikola Tesla was a man, please know better.

>So how come Mirza Ghulam was not prescribed camel's urine before he died from diarrhea in a bathroom? And how come prophet Quthm your so called prophet did not drink camel's urine after he suffered from food poisoning that led to his death? Could it be because he was making things up?

Oh and do you drink camel's urine when you get sick our dear Michael al-Tablighee?

Do a thing: go back to my post and check all the links sent; you are so ignorant you don't even check them out.

>My name is DNM are you making fun of my name?

That is your username on a website. How is that supposed to be an actual name?

>he teaches Arabic and that he is posting from the UAE. No one asked him.

So, can I interpret that you are against freedom of speech? ...

>Now, where does he work as a teacher of Arabic? I think the UAE should know because his command of very basic Arabic is poor.

Man's literally there correcting you and then you say this. *Face palm*

And since you were annoyed, here's the Lenny face again: (͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

And I found an article regarding Qur'anic errors. And since you are ignorant enough to not click any links, let me just help you by copy-pasting it here myself.

(Please read the whole thing before ya jump to conclusions)

Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an?

By

Moiz Amjad

Mr. P. Newton with Mr. Rafiqul-Haqq has written an article titled: "Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an [1]". He writes:

Muslims claim the Qur'an not just to be a human literary masterpiece, but a divine literary miracle. But this claim does not square with the facts. For the Qur'an, which we have in our hands contains obvious grammatical errors which is plain to see for all who know Arabic.

Mr. Newton has cited the following verses of the Qur'an to substantiate his claim:

1. Al-Maaidah 5: 69

2. Al-Nisaa 4: 162

3. Ta Ha 20: 63

4. Al-Baqarah 2: 177

5. Aal Imraan 3: 59

6. Al-Anbiaa 21: 3

7. Al-Mominun 22: 19

8. Al-Hujraat 49: 9

9. Al-Munaafiqun 63: 10

10. Al-Shams 91: 5

11. Fussilat 41: 11

12. Al-Aa'raaf 7: 57

13. Al-Aa'raaf 7: 160

After citing these examples, Mr. Newton ends his article with the following words:

The Qur'an, because of these errors, is not even a masterpiece. If, humanly speaking, the Qur'an cannot be called a masterpiece, can anyone honestly call it a divine literary miracle?

The object of this article is to give answers to the following questions:

1. How does the grammar of a language develop?

2. Why and how did the Arabic grammar develop?

3. What were the sources of deriving grammatical rules of the Arabic language?

The writer believes that answers to these questions will themselves be an adequate evidence of the absurdity of trying to find Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an.

Grammar - A Stage in the Development of a Language

It is a commonly known and an established fact that compilation of grammar is a stage in the development of a language. This statement needs a little explanation.

Laying down 'Grammatical Rules' of any language does not and cannot precede speaking and comprehension of that language by its native speakers. For instance, the English language was being spoken for a long time before someone sat down to lay down the rules of the English language. The grammar of a language is created, but not before that language is spoken and understood by the natives.

We can take Greek, as a case in point. Greek, as we know is a very old language. But it was only in the second Century B.C. that Dionysius Thrax, wrote a book of Grammar on the Greek language and that too was limited only to the word morphology. This work, incidentally, was the first systematic grammar of the Western tradition. It was not before the second century A.D. that a study of sentence syntax of the Greek language was conducted by Apollonius Dyscolus. Dionysius Thrax also defined Grammar. His definition is as under:

The acquaintance with [or observation of] what is uttered by poets and writers [2].

A close look at this definition would further substantiate the obvious. According to it, Grammar was developed:

1. through the observation of the utterances of (established) poets and writer of that language - which obviously implies that before any grammatical rules were laid down, writers and poets were using that language to convey their messages and to do their works,

2. to get acquainted with the language of these (established) poets and writers - which, to some extent implies that such grammatical rules are not a need for a people whose native language is under consideration. It is a need for peoples for whom the language in question is either a foreign language or is a language not completely the same as the language they speak. For instance, a modern-day Englishman normally does not need to study English grammar to fully comprehend modern-day works. However, for comprehension of the classical English literature he may require to take a course in grammar and word usage of the classical English language.

It should be clear from the foregoing points that knowing the correct language is really a matter of knowing what and how the native speakers of that language speak. Grammatical rules are derived from this usage of the native speakers. This fact is irrefutable [3]. This fact also points out the reason and basis of development and change in a language. It is stated in Britannica:

When a child learns to speak he tends to regularize the anomalous, or irregular, forms by analogy with the more regular and productive patterns of formation in the language; e.g., he will tend to say "comed" rather than "came," "dived" rather than "dove," and so on, just as he will say "talked," "loved," and so forth. The fact that the child does this is evidence that he has learned or is learning the regularities or rules of his language. He will go on to "unlearn" some of the analogical forms and substitute for them the anomalous forms current in the speech of the previous generation. But in some cases, he will keep a "new" analogical form (e.g., "dived" rather than "dove"), and this may then become the recognized and accepted form. [4]

The reader should note the words: '... and this may become the recognized and accepted form.' This statement once again is evidence of the fact that what we refer to as 'correct language' is really the language recognized and accepted by the natives of that particular language as correct.

This process is the usual case in the development of grammar and the dependable sources of deriving its 'rules'. Now, once these concepts are clearly understood, consider the following example:

Suppose that Group X was the accepted and recognized literati of Latin, prior to the compilation of Latin grammar. Later on, some scholars of Latin sat down to compile the Latin grammar. They looked for various sources for their work. The scholars find that the works of Group X comprises of Latin literature, recognized and accepted to be correct by the natives of that language. So these scholars, without any reservations accept the works of Group X as one of the sources for their work. Time moved on. After a few hundred years, some other 'scholars' sit to analyze the works of Group X on the basis of the work done by the 'grammarians' (the scholars who compiled the rules of grammar). Now, after "thorough deliberation" if they declare, on the basis of the work of the grammarians, that the writings of Group X contains a number of 'grammatical' errors, these modern "scholars" in their exuberance may even claim (or at least expect) a literary award for their findings, yet even an ordinary person would only laugh at their findings. For he would hopefully have the common sense of asking himself: "How can something be analyzed for errors on the basis of another thing which itself is based on the first thing". This basis for analysis would really be like saying: "the human body (the source) does not correspond to the books written on human physiology (the derived result), and therefore, the human body (the source), when analyzed on the basis of these books has such and such errors". The common man, rather than going into such "sick" logic, would almost certainly take to the point that the books written on human physiology (the derived result) do not adequately describe the human body (the source). Obviously, the same principle would also apply to the appraisal of the writings of Group X on the basis of the work of the grammarians. If the rules laid down by the grammarians do not correspond to the writings of Group X, then the fault lies with the rules of the grammarians and not with the writings of Group X. Obviously, appraising the source, on the basis of the results derived from that very source is nothing but absurd.

Two Distinct Stages in the Development of a Language

There is yet another important aspect of history of the development of a language.

If we analyze the development of a language closely, we shall see that in relation to conformity to grammatical rules, the history of a language can normally, be divided into two distinct stages. One is the "Pre-grammar" stage, and the other is the "Post-grammar" stage. Each of these stages has a set of characteristics peculiar to it.

First let us see the Pre-grammar stage. In this stage, a language is in its purest and most natural form. The natives of the language speak their hearts and minds out, and whatever and however they speak and accept and recognize as correct is the standard for correct language. In these times, poets, writers and orators are criticized, not for wrong grammar, as no such thing as compiled grammar has any existence, but for lack of clarity, non-idiomatic use of language, improper use of words and poor style. It is not just improbable, but inconceivable that these writers, poets or orators commit such mistakes as may be termed as "grammatical errors". For whatever they say and however they say it provides the very grounds on which, later on, the grammarians base their "grammatical rules". It is on the very authority of these writers, poets, orators and other established users of a language that "rules" of grammar are laid down. For instance, in later times, a grammarian might say: "XYZ is a rule of language A, as is obvious from the statements/verses of the poet D, who was accepted and recognized by the natives of language A, as qualified to be held as an authority on that language", or "XYZ is a rule of language A, because this is how it is spoken by the natives of that language". Another important aspect of this stage is that even such deviations from the common and regular usage as are recognized and accepted by the natives of that language to be correct, cannot be termed as incorrect. What the grammarians, in fact, do is to try and find out the reasons for such deviations and the added meaning a certain deviation provides to the regular and common usage, but even if some grammarians are unable to find out the reasons for these deviations, they still cannot be termed as incorrect.

Now, let us also have a brief look at the Post-grammar stage of a language. In the first stage, it is the poets, writers, orators and users of that language that provide guidelines for the work of the grammarians. In the Post-grammar stage, it is normally, the other way round. In this stage, generally, grammatical rules are held by the writers, poets, orators and other users, as the standard for the correctness of their written or spoken words. In the first stage, grammatical rules are derived from the usage of writers, poets etc., and every grammatical rule along with every deviation from such a rule, which can be substantiated by the usage of such writers and orators is held to be correct. On the other hand, in the second stage it is normally the accepted rules (and the accepted deviations from these rules) that substantiate the correctness of a writer's, poet's, orator's or anyone else's usage. Obviously, it can so happen that a writer uses a style, which is considered to be against the general grammatical rules of the language. The writer is then criticized for this deviation. Nevertheless, sometimes the writer can provide examples of such deviations from the 'Original' authorities of the language, which had previously been missed by the grammarians of that language. In such an event, the style of the writer is then accepted to be correct. Furthermore, sometimes a writer, because of the native acceptance that he may acquire over time for his usage and style, can become so influential that even his deviations may later on be considered as authentic. Thus, grammatical rules may even be modified on the authority of the deviations of such a writer. This tendency of accepting new grammatical rules because of any new styles introduced by modern writers is far less in peoples who are more conscious and conservative about maintaining the purity of their language, as compared to those who are not.

These are some of the major changes that take place in the development of a language before and after the compilation of grammatical rules.

The Particular Case of the Arabic Language

Generally, the grammar of a language is developed to teach that language to such peoples, who are not native speakers of that language. However, in the case of the development of the Arabic grammar there was a difference. One other factor played an important role in the initiation of the compilation of Arabic grammar. This factor was the concern and the consciousness of the Arabs for maintaining the purity of their language.

It is quite clear to all those who are aware of the history and psyche of the Arabs that they were a people who took great pride in the beauty, simplicity, purity and eloquence of their language. This pride was so deep-rooted in their psyche that the word used for non-Arabs in the Arabic language - 'ajami - means 'a person who stammers and is not eloquent'.

The conquests of the Arabs and the conversion of a large number of non-Arabs to Islam, during the first century after the Prophet (pbuh) created a need for the compilation of Arabic grammar as a large number of non-Arabs, now developed an inclination of learning the Arabic language to understand the Qur'an and the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh). Furthermore, these conquests and the resultant expansion of the Muslim state also opened up the hitherto closed Arabian society. This situation, on the one hand, provided an opportunity of rich social, cultural, political and economic exposure to the Arabs and, on the other, threatened the more conscious among them with the adulteration of their language by the social and cultural interaction with other peoples. This fear provided the other important basis for the yet unknown and unconsidered task of the compilation of Arabic grammar [5].

The first person to take up this task was Abu al-Aswad Al-Du'wali (A.D. 605-688). Some people ascribe the book "Usul al-Nahw al-'Arabi" to Abu al-Aswad. Later on, a chain of grammarians made their contribution to the now esteemed task of the compilation and research on Arabic grammar. The grammarians' job, in the later stages became so esteemed and exalted that the most outstanding grammarian, along with the best Jurist, was given a distinct position in the royal assemblies.

The Primary Sources in the Compilation of the Arabic Grammar

The Grammarians and other scholars of linguistic fields, in their task of compiling their rules, used all the compiled or scattered Arabic literature that was accepted by the Arabs to be in its unadulterated verbal tradition and representative of the correct usage of their language. The two major, unanimously accepted sources of this literature were the Qur'an and the pre-Islamic and Islamic poetry. There was a difference among the linguists regarding whether or not the words of the Prophet (SWS) and addresses of well known orators as reported in isolated narrations may be used as source material in their work. Those who were in favor of using these narratives believed such material to be reliable enough for the derivation of linguistic and grammatical rules and were of the opinion that because of the recognition of the Prophet (SWS), in particular, and the considered orators, in general by the Arabs as authorities in the Arabic language, such material should be held as a source for their work. On the other hand, those who were against using these traditions as source material gave their dissent on the basis that contrary to the Qur'an and the poetic works, it is difficult to rely on these narratives to be verbally accurate and unadulterated. The basis of their argument was that the Qur'an, because of its religious importance and the Arabic poetry, because of the Arab culture were not only accepted authorities in Arabic language, but were also transmitted from one generation to the other, in their exact and unaltered verbal form, whereas the narratives of the Prophet (SWS) and the addresses of the well known orators lacked this quality. 'Abd al-Qadir ibn 'Omar al-Baghdadi states in his book "Khazanatul-Adab" [6] writes:

Undalasi explaning his colleague's - Ibn Jabir's - literature, says: "There are six sciences related with language: Linguistics, Morphology, Syntax, Rhetoric, Connotation and the science related to the figures of speech. In the first three, a citable authority can only be the Classical Arab speech. While in the later three, as they are a matter related to the common sense and reason, even the post-classical people or even non-Arab people may be cited. This is the reason why in these fields citations have also been made from the literature of people like Buhtari, Abu-Tamam, Abu-Tayyeb etc.

My point of view is that a citable authority in linguistic sciences is of two kinds: one is poetry and the other anything besides poetry. As far as the first category is concerned, scholars have divided the Arab poets in four categories: 1) "Al-Sho'ara al-Jahiliyyah", that is the Classical, pre-Islamic poets... 2) "Al-Mukhadhramun" or the poets who witnessed the pre-Islamic as well as the Islamic era... 3) "Al-Mutaqaddimun" or the poets of the early Islamic era... and 4) "Al-Muwalladun" those after the early Islamic era till the poets of our day.

Citations from the first two groups are unanimously accepted by all linguists as authority... As far as the third group is concerned, [although there exists some difference] but it is [normally held to be] correct to accept their references as authoritative... While from the fourth group, citations from only those who are held to be reliable among them are accepted as authority, this opinion is also held by Zamakhshuriy...

The non-poetic sources include either the Blessed Book of our Lord, the purest, the most fluent and the most eloquent piece of Arabic literature, citations therefrom are accepted to be authoritative, whether they are from its continual [most well known] tradition or from its irregular [not so well known] traditions, as has been declared by Ibn Janni in the beginning of his book "Al-Mohtasib". Besides [the Qur'an] such [non-poetical] sources include [speech] references from the first three categories of Arabs, as we have mentioned in the categorization of poets, above. As far as citations from the Hadith (narrative traditions) of the prophet are concerned, Ibn Malik accepts them as authoritative... while, Ibn Dhai' and Abu Hayyan refuse to do so. Their refusal is based on two reasons: 1) these traditions are not verbal narrations of the speech of the Prophet. On the contrary, only their content has been narrated [in the words of the narrators]. And 2) the great grammarians of Basra and Kufa do not hold them as citable authorities [in the derivation of Grammatical rules].

Thus, all the grammarians and other linguists of the Arabic language, without exception have accepted the Qur'an as a source of grammar and other linguistic sciences of the Arabic language. It is because of this reason that such well known grammarians and linguists as Al-Siibwayh, Al- Zamakhshuriy, Ibn Hisham, Malik, Al-Akhfash, Al-Kasai, Al-Farazdaq, Al-Farra', Khalil, Al-Farahidi and innumerable others, while stating a particular grammatical or linguistic rule present wherever possible, as evidence supporting their claim not only poetical but also Qur'anic verses. It would be accurate to say that for them - the fathers and founders of the compiled Arabic Grammar - the Qur'an has always been the most dependable source for their work. All that is required to appreciate the importance that these people give to the Qur'an is to have a look at their works. Al-Farahidi writes in the preface of his book, "Kitab al-Jumal Fi al-Nahw" (Muassasatul-Risalah, Beirut, 1987):

We have placed all the discussions in their respective chapters providing support for each argument from the Qur'an and Arabic poetry.

Likewise, Howell writes in the preface of his book, "A Grammar of the Classical Arabic language":

The object of the Grammarians being to demonstrate the classical usage, they endeavor to support every proposition and illustrate every rule by one or more evidentiary examples taken from the classical language. These examples consist of texts from the Kur'an, passages from tradition, proverbs, phrases transmitted by the learned from the Arabs of the desert, and verses from the poets.... A text from the Kur'an, as being the very word of God, delivered in the purest dialect of the Arabs, according to the theory of direct verbal inspiration inculcated by Muslim theologians, is of necessity infallible. A passage from tradition, if it be the word of the Prophet, is universally accepted as conclusive evidence; and if it be the word of a Companion, is generally so received, while some hyper critical purists affect to consider the Companions as liable to the suspicion of solecism. A proverb if it dates from heathen times, is admittedly excellent evidence of classical usage. But a saying transmitted by a Grammarian or a Lexicologist from an Arab of the desert varies in authority with the antiquity of its transmitter, a saying transmitted by Ibn Hisham, for instance, not being nearly so authoritative as one transmitted by Al-Akhfash al-Akbar. [7]

This, then is the accepted and acknowledged position of the Qur'an in all the sciences of Arabic language and literature.

The Absurdity of Searching For Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an

Once this position of the Qur'an, which it holds in the eyes of the most approved native or naturalized authorities of the Arabic language and literature and also in the eyes of the grammarians, lexicologists etc. of the Arabic language is fully understood and appreciated, one can easily see the absurdity of claiming 'Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an'.

The Qur'an being one of the major source materials of the grammarians' works can obviously not be judged on the basis of the grammarians' work. Trying to do so would actually be like trying to find faults in in the Universe on the basis of the books written by astronomers.

Logically, had the position of the "Human Body" or the "Universe" as a source material for the works of physiologists and astronomers respectively, been fully appreciated it would be more appropriate and understandable if someone challenged the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the works of these physiologists and astronomers. Similarly, had the position of the Qur'an as a source material of the compiled Arabic grammar been fully appreciated, it would have been more appropriate and understandable if someone had challenged the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the grammarians' work, rather than challenge the reliability of the Qur'an, when and if an inexplicable deviation was found in the Qur'an.

To sum it up, the process of the development of the Arabic grammar is such that does not allow the appraisal of the Qur'anic language on the basis of the rules laid down by the grammarians of the Arabic language. Appraising or criticizing the Qur'an or any other source material used by the linguists, grammarians, lexicologists etc. is like refusing to accept Arabic, even as a language... and this, obviously is absolutely absurd.

The Sayings Ascribed to 'Ayesha and 'Uthman

From the foregoing discussion, it should be quite clear that the Qur'an, logically cannot be criticized on the basis of the work of the grammarians and other linguists, because of the simple fact that the Qur'an was the very basis (or one of the bases) of the works of these linguists and grammarians, and, furthermore, the Qur'an been recognized and accepted by all the linguistic authorities of the Arabic language as the most outstanding, in fact, miraculous piece of their literature. How, then, can we appraise or critically evaluate the reliability or otherwise of the language of the Qur'an.

Once it is known that the Qur'an was generally accepted and recognized by the Classical, pre-Islamic Arabs, as a piece of unparalleled literature in its purity, fluency and eloquence, then it has to be accepted as such by the later people as well. As far as the primary evidence, in this regard is concerned, it is overwhelmingly in favor of the general acceptance of the Qur'an. It was obviously, primarily on the basis of this Qur'an that the Arabs - eloquent and proud of their language as they were - started converting to Islam. The Prophet during the first thirteen years of his prophethood had just the Qur'an to present to the people. Surprisingly, no one objected to the language or style of the Qur'an. On the contrary, even those Arabs who refused to accept Islam had nothing to say regarding its language and style. They could obviously see that it was effectively winning the hearts of more and more people each day. They knew that it was not human literature... yet they were just not willing to accept it to be Divine. Under these circumstances, they direly needed a good excuse for their refusal to accept the Qur'an as a revealed word of God. Yet, even under these circumstances, they - with all their eloquence and linguistic pride - were unable to point-out even a single error in the Glorious Qur'an; all that they could come up with was that "it is nothing but 'Magic' and 'Sorcery'."

Obviously, had the Qur'an - that claimed to be in "Arabiyun Mobin" (clearest and purest Arabic dialect) - entailed any grammatical or other linguistic 'errors', it would then have been impossible for the Prophet to win even a single Arab soul. However, we know that during the first thirteen years, it was only the character of the Prophet and the content of Qur'an that had actually won the hearts and minds of the God-fearing Arabs, through whom, later on an Islamic State was setup first in Medina, and subsequently, in the whole of Arabia.

This is an irrefutable historical fact.

Now, with this in mind, let us examine another aspect of the arguments presented by the author of the referred article. He writes:

It is reported that 'Uthman, after viewing the first standard copy of the Qur'an, said, 'I see grammatical errors in it, and the Arabs will read it correctly with their tongues.'

Then, he further states:

The Muslim scholar Ibn al-Khatib who quoted the above report in his book al-Furqan, went on to mention another report on the authority of 'Aa'isha, one of Mohammad's wives, saying, 'There are three grammatical errors in the Book of Allah, they are the fault of the scribe:

In 20:63

"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."

And in 5:69

"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."

And in 4:162

"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bi-maaa 'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."

In the following paragraphs, we shall analyze the cited sayings of 'Ayesha and 'Uthman.

The Saying Ascribed to 'Uthman

The first among these narratives is ascribed to 'Uthman (ra). According to this narrative, 'Uthman is reported to have said that he could see (a few/many?) mistakes in the official standardized copy of the Qur'an, but was of the opinion that because the Arabs shall have no difficulty in finding these errors - appreciating them as "errors" - and shall be in a position to correct them, themselves, he, therefore, did not give such "errors" much importance.

Now, the first thing about this tradition is that even if we accept that the later generations were not aware of these errors (because of any reason), still it relates to a matter that concerns not a few but all the Muslims that were present during 'Uthman's (ra) time. It thus relates to a matter, which, if it had really happened, should have been reported, not by one, two or a few people, but by hundreds and thousands of people. It should have become as well known a fact as, for instance the existence of a person called 'Uthman is, but as we see, that is not the case. According to one of the principles of some of the Jurists, especially Abu Hanifah, if one, two, three or a few people report an incident that should logically be reported by hundreds or thousands of people, such traditions shall not be accepted. To understand this concept, let us consider an example of our everyday life. If someone declares that an earthquake in a neighboring country has killed thousands of people and that "someone" is the only person giving such a news, none of the newspapers or any other of the well known communication media is giving such a news, every reasonable person shall reject such a news on the same principle. Obviously, something as big, as significant and as well known cannot be accepted on the basis of a report of one, two or just a few people.

Furthermore, looking at this narrative closely, we are faced with another very serious question. If 'Uthman (ra) had really known that there were mistakes in the text of the Qur'an, why did he not correct them immediately. It is generally believed that in his effort to standardize the reading of the Qur'an and to disseminate the official copy of the Qur'an, 'Uthman ordered the burning of all the other copies of the Qur'an, which were in circulation at that time. If 'Uthman could, as is generally believed, destroy all the copies of the Qur'an once, for the purpose of standardization, then why could he not do it a second time, for the purpose of correction? Obviously, the tradition does not answer this question. This simple, unanswered question leaves the tradition inconsistent with common sense. According to another one of the principles laid down by the Muhaddithin (the scholars of the Prophet's traditions), if a tradition is inconsistent with common sense, it shall not be accepted.

Then again, according to the cited narrative, 'Uthman ignored the so-called 'mistakes' and 'errors' because he thought that the Arabs would have no problems in recognizing these 'errors' and, consequently, making emends in them. However, this narrative completely ignores the point that the original idea of the 'Uthmanic compilation of the Qur'an - if it ever actually took place - was to standardize the style of writing and the recitation of the Qur'anic text, for the very purpose of making it possible for the newly conquered non-Arab territories (and peoples) to be able to read the Qur'anic text in a standardized manner. It seems quite ridiculous that even though the whole exercise of standardizing the Qur'an was undertaken for the purpose of making it easier for the newly converted non-Arabs to read the Qur'anic text in a standardized manner, yet the so-called 'errors' and 'mistakes' were so easily ignored on the presumption that the 'Arabs would have no problems in recognizing these errors'. The whole incident reported in the cited narrative is, obviously, an unfounded concoction of someone, whose intention were only to create doubts about the Qur'anic text in the minds of the subsequent generations.

Moreover, this tradition ascribed to 'Uthman very seriously questions the correctness of the verbal tradition of the Qur'an. It, therefore, can be termed as a tradition against the Qur'an. Thus, according to yet another one of the principles laid down by the Muhaddithin any narrative, which is against the Qur'an or the established unanimously held beliefs or unanimously followed actions of the Muslims is not acceptable. The aforementioned principles of the Muhaddithin have been combined in a single statement, in one of the most well known and accepted books on the principles of the Muhaddithin relating to the acceptance of narratives. Khatib Baghdadi in his book "Kitab ul-Kifayah fi 'ilm al-riwayah" writes [8]:

No such narative reported by a few people shall be accepted, which is against common sense, or against an established ruling of the Qur'an or against a known Sunnah of the Prophet or against any thing accepted and followed by the Muslims as the Sunnah, or against logic.

Unless satisfactory answers are provided for these questions, this narrative cannot be taken as correctly ascribed to 'Uthman (ra). The general acceptance of the vast Arab population of the Qur'an as an infallible piece of Arabic literature makes the content of such narratives highly questionable. If such was really the opinion of 'Uthman, as is mentioned in this narrative, the Qur'an would obviously not have received such tremendous acceptance from, at least the Arabs. To the contrary, we see that it was none other than the Arabs themselves, who not only accepted the Qur'an to be infallible in language, literary style, grammar etc., but were also the primary source of propagation of this book in the whole world.

The Saying Ascribed to 'Ayesha (ra)

Now let us turn to the narrative ascribed to 'Ayesha (ra).

Acceptance of this narrative again hangs on the answers to the following questions:

1. Why were these so-called 'errors' not recognized and reported by a large number of Arabs, rather than just one or two of them? It is even more surprising that even after these 'errors' were pointed-out by two of the most well known personalities of Islamic history, the common Arabs remained oblivious of them. If such narratives had any truth in them, they would have gained the status of generally accepted public narratives, which, even if they were not reported in the various compilations of narratives, would most certainly have become well known through simple public transmission.

2. Why did 'Ayesha (ra) not take any step to correct these 'errors'? It must be kept in mind that 'Ayesha (ra) is the person, who is said to have made a public appearance in a political matter after 'Uthman's murder. Why did she not plan any action to correct the 'errors' that she knew were only a result of scribal and human mistakes? Why did she let these mistakes become so sacrosanct that even the possibility of retrieving the correct (original) words, in future, was reduced to non-existent?

3. This narrative is against the Qur'an. Thus, according to the cited principles of the Muhaddithin it cannot be accepted.

Besides these reservations, there are also some other problems in accepting these narratives as correct. Some of these problems are given below:

· This narrative is reported by Abu Mu'awiyah Mohammad ibn Khazim al-Tamimi al-Dharir al-Kufi to Ibn Hamid or Ibn Humaid. According to Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, his father Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: Abu Muawiyah's narrations except those reported by Al-Aa'mash, are not reliable. [9] Likewise, Abu Dawood states: I asked Ahmad ibn Hanbal: what do you think about the narratives of Hisham ibn 'Urwah (another narrator in this narrative) that are reported by Abu Muawiyah? He replied: These narratives include such narratives that are not reliable. According to Ibn Kharrash, narratives reported by Abu Muawiyah are dependable if they come through Al-Aa'mash [10].

The first verse stated in this narrative (20: 63) has been transliterated by the author of the article thus:

"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."

the "error" in this verse, as is stated by the author is:

The word saahiraan should be saahirayn.

The word saahiraan was declined incorrectly because the word inna in the beginning of the nominal sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" to the nominative and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb".

At close examination of the actual verse, as it appears in the Qur'an, it, however, becomes obvious that the whole objection is unfounded. The referred verse does not even read as the author has stated. The reading as it appears in the Qur'an is:

"Qaalu in haazaani la-saahiraani ..." (Ta Ha 20: 63)

'Unfortunately', in this verse, it is not the word "inna" but "in". Because of this, the whole argument of the author is completely unfounded. The word "in" as the learned author would obviously be well aware of, does not "cause a form of declension called 'nasb' to the nominative".

Thus, the narrative cited by the author does not even state the verse in its correct form. Now, how can such a narrative be accepted to be correctly ascribed to 'Ayesha?

· The second 'error', mentioned in 'Ayesha's (ra) narrative, lies in 5: 69. The verse reads thus:

"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."

The author states:

There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word "Saabi'uuna" has been declined wrongly.

In two other verses, the same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was declined correctly.

2:62 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaaraa was-Saabi'iina ..."

22:17 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina wan-Nasaaraa ..."

You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and was written Saabi'iina in 2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical error.

As is clear from the cited argument, the author has tried to establish that the two verses of the Qur'an: 2: 62 and 22: 17, are themselves an evidence that the word in the above verse should have been "Saabi'iina" rather than "Saabi'uuna". The author, by quoting the two verses (2: 62 and 22: 17) has, at least, recognized the fact that whoever authored the Qur'an was not unaware of the "correct" declension of the word "saabi'uuna". However, even after recognizing this fact, the author finds no option but to term such a deviation, of even someone who is fully aware of the general rule as an "Error".

The most well known and acknowledged grammarians of the Arabic language were also faced with the same situation. However, they dealt with it differently and thus, drew a different conclusion. After looking at the Qur'an, they felt that there could be no doubting the fact that the author of the Qur'an was fully aware of the general rules of the language (and most certainly that of the declension of nouns after "inna"). Then they were also faced with the verse 5: 69. Now, rather than finding the easier way out by calling the deviation from the general rule an "error", the grammarians, on the presumption that a "person" as knowledgeable as the author of the Qur'an, could not commit such a trivial mistake in a book as important and as significant as the Qur'an, started looking for such deviations in other sources of the Arabic literature and grammar.... and found them. They collected all such deviations and tried to analyze them. They drew their conclusions and were, subsequently, in a position to safely say that such deviations in the Qur'an were not "errors". Even though these, indeed, were deviations from the normal usage, yet such deviations could not be called "errors". Thus, al- Zamakhshuriy in his commentary on the Qur'an, under the referred verse has alluded to a verse of one of the pre-Islamic poets. The alluded verse reads as follows:

the part "anna wa antum" of this verse, as per the argument presented by the author of the article, should have read "anna wa iyya kum", but we can see that there is a deviation here from the generally followed rule. This is adequate evidence that such deviations cannot be termed as "Grammatical Errors". As far as the meaning added by such a deviation is concerned, it is not directly related to "grammar" or to "Grammatical Errors" and therefore, we leave it out of the folds of our discussion here.

The argument presented above, substantiates the fact that such deviations were and are known to be existent in the works of, at least the poets of the pre-Islamic era, and therefore cannot and could not have been termed as 'errors' by anyone, who was well versed with the language and its literature. It is thus difficult to accept that 'Ayesha (ra) could have missed the existence of such deviations in the Arabic literature. Furthermore, even if someone as knowledgeable of the Arabic literature as 'Ayesha, could have missed-out on such deviations, it is unlikely that even all the Arabs who heard 'Ayesha's (ra) cited statements would be so ignorant of their own language that they did not correct her.

· The third 'error', mentioned in 'Ayesha's (ra) narrative, is in 4: 162. The verse reads thus:

"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bi-maaa 'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."

The author, explaining the mistake in this verse, states:

The word muqiimiin should be muqiimuun. The word should be declined by the "raf'a sign" like the other nouns in the sentence. Indeed the two nouns before it (Raasi-khuun and Mu'-minuun), and the noun after it (mu'-tuun) are declined correctly. Some have argued that this word was declined as such to distinguish and praise the act of praying, but the scholar Ibn al-Khatib says that this is a sick reasoning. (al-Furqan by Mohammad M. 'abd al-Latif Ibn al-Katib, Dar al-Kutub al-'elmiyah, Beirut, p.43). Such reasoning defies logic. Why would one distinguish prayer, which is a branch of religion, and not faith, which is the fundamental and root of religion? Besides can this logic apply to the error of declension in the previous verse? Do we conclude that the Saabi'iin are more distinguished than those who believe, and the People of the Book? And why do they get distinguished in one verse and not the other as we have seen? God is much higher than this sick logic. This again is an obvious grammatical error.

It seems from the above statement that the author is in agreement with Ibn al-Khatib in his refusal to accept the explanation given by various grammarians. Even so, it must be clearly understood that this particular deviation, whether the explanation (of distinction) is accepted or held to be "sick", is an established deviation, and every person who has knowledge of even only the basics of the Arabic language is well aware of it (I am sure the author would not even question this point...). The only question that could be asked or the only objection that could be levied on this verse is that the meaning added by this deviation from the general rules is not clear or not logical. Such an objection, as should be clear on the readers, cannot and should not be termed as a "Grammatical Error".

Under these circumstances, it is obvious that ascribing the cited narrative to 'Ayesha (ra), is highly questionable.

With the stated problems, it seems quite obvious that on the basis of a narrative reported by a few people, which themselves do not stand upto the test of acceptability, the infallibility of the Qur'an which has always been and still is accepted by the vast Arab population as the epitome of the purest, the most fluent and the most eloquent Arabic language cannot be challenged.

A Final Word

To summarize, the language and the style of the Qur'an, because of the general acceptance it has received from the classical, as well as the modern, Arabs is above all kinds of linguistic criticism. Any one who is seriously interested in challenging this position of the Qur'an can do so, only after establishing:

1. The Qur'an was not accepted by the classical Arabs to be a piece of unmatched Arabic literature. Evidence of this point must also include an acceptable answer to the question: With the existence of such grammatical and other linguistic errors, why did the Arabs - classical as well as modern - accept the Qur'an to be of a divine origin?

2. The linguists of the Arabic language did not hold the Qur'an to be a source material for their work.

3. The most recognized and acknowledged grammarians of the Arabic language have refused to substantiate their linguistic findings on the basis of any verses of the Qur'an.

Only after these points are established, the grammatical objections levied by the author of "Grammatical Errors in the Qur'an" need to be dealt with seriously and answered. Till such time, these objections do not even come upto the standard of being considerable.

Reference List

1) The original article may be seen at the following internet address:

http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4U/grammar.html

2) Encyclopedia Britannica, Linguistics, Greek and Roman antiquity

3) This, incidentally is also what the author of the referred article stated, in response to one of my questions: "What were the sources which were relied upon for the purpose of the development of Arabic Grammar?" His answer was: "So the source of the Arabic grammar is the Arabic language itself."

4) Encyclopedia Britannica, Linguistics, The role of analogy

5) For details, see "Grammar", Ibn Khuldoon's "Muqaddamah".

6) "Khazanatul-Adab" (Arabic), Abd al-Qadir Ibn 'Omar al-Baghdadi, Volume I, Dar Sadir, Beirut, (First Edition) Pgs. 3 - 5.

7) For details, see "A Grammar of the Classical Arabic Language", Howell, Mortimer Sloper, Allahabad, 1883, pages xxxiv, xxxv - xxxvi (Preface).

8) Page 432

9) "Tahzib ul-Tahzib" (Arabic), Ibn Hajar, Dar Ihya al-Islami, First Edition, 1326 Hijrah, Volume 9, page 138, 139

10) "Meezan ul ai'tidal", Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Uthman al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatul-Athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Volume 4, Page 575.

I say to you again, leave the trap of Hinduism and become atheist.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (542) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Haaretz's darling Guy Hirschfeld - another racist guy (this one against people of color) - indicted [266 words]GilaOct 31, 2022 16:24288093
Lefty Ohad Hamu interviews young random passers-by in Shuafat, who tell him "every Jew and Jew need to die, including you" as their Quran says [138 words]NirMay 10, 2022 08:15280953
Pervasive Nature of Threats Against Jewish Nation Abides as Religous Intolerance Continues to be Taught [118 words]M ToveyMay 11, 2022 11:14280953
The Palestine flag, mosque and Swastika prior to racist Arab massacre in Bnei Brak (March 29, 2022) [218 words]MorrisMar 30, 2022 11:45279545
Hate site, hate paper: HAARETZ blamed for racist Arab terror-attacke in Bnei Brack [941 words]GedalyahMar 29, 2022 19:10279540
Hate site, hate paper: HAARETZ - N. Shtrasler, blamed for racist Arab terror-attacke in Elad too [859 words]GedalyahMay 6, 2022 08:40279540
"Palestinian" Arab attacks pious Haredi conscientious objectors town Bnei Brack - Gaza rejoices [118 words]MorrisMar 29, 2022 17:13279539
Nehemia Shtrasler of Haaretz incited to attack Haredim, shortly before the massacre on Mar 29, 2022 [233 words]BernardMar 29, 2022 14:00279535
The ADL and Wokeism! [33 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
dhimmi no moreJan 28, 2022 07:55278531
ADL and the Cult of Wokeism! [30 words]dhimmi no moreJan 30, 2022 10:24278531
This is the ultimate in CBC's Virtue Signaling secondary to Wokesim! [335 words]dhimmi no moreJan 30, 2022 17:28278531
Is there a concerted effort by Islamists to takeover the media? [105 words]PrashantJan 31, 2022 22:34278531
2Whoopi Goldberg and Wokeism is Flawed [180 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 1, 2022 16:44278531
2Prashant: Here is another "Diversity Hire": MSNBC's Mehdi Hasan صلى الله عليه وسلم [325 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 2, 2022 07:17278531
1Mehdi Hasan's quotes Amnesti International on MSNBC on Israeli 'apartheid' [304 words]PrashantFeb 2, 2022 19:21278531
1Attention Prashant: An Egyptian Islamic Scholar and his twitter thread about when and how can a man BEAT HIS WIFE! [85 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 4, 2022 05:50278531
After Decades and Millennia - Which War Does Israel Need to Win [202 words]M ToveyDec 30, 2021 17:07277894
Clarification of Who's on First - Torah from Millennia Prior to CE - Or Quran 600 years After [71 words]M ToveyDec 22, 2021 15:56277447
3Israelis are war weary [120 words]StasJun 6, 2012 10:28196072
1Prosperity can be the very cause of decline [275 words]PrashantDec 23, 2021 01:46196072
Prosperity in Proper Context Can be Blessing; Abused, It Can Be a Cursing [127 words]M ToveyDec 27, 2021 13:11196072
Sitting Down to Tea in Iranian Islamic Regime's Latest Threat to Israeli Security [74 words]M ToveyDec 28, 2021 19:45196072
symbolic of America [175 words]TinaNov 11, 2006 21:5365875
3Israel Has a War to Win [33 words]S.C.PandaAug 31, 2006 02:0754438
5Jerusalem Belongs to Jews [101 words]Charles NickalopoulosJul 4, 2009 15:4454438
4Does Israel belong to the Jews? [49 words]ImranSep 30, 2009 09:5754438
Fake [17 words]JaleelJan 16, 2018 14:5854438
Reader Charles Nickalopoulos is wrong (sarcasm on Islamic logic) [78 words]PrashantDec 19, 2021 19:4554438
Our dear Imarn is another lost tablighee is not aware that his Allah is a Zionist [120 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 16:5354438
1Jerusalem surely doesn't belong to Muslims [46 words]PrashantDec 21, 2021 17:1254438
Possession of Jerusalem Remains Where the Owner Has Dictated - In the Torah [116 words]M ToveyDec 22, 2021 17:1154438
Circular Arguments Never Solved Disagreements Against Truth [181 words]M ToveyDec 23, 2021 13:2354438
Latest Lebanese govt. proposal [166 words]VijayAug 8, 2006 17:4252111
nice slideshow at youtube [23 words]John MarlinAug 3, 2006 09:1651587
1Coincidence [75 words]AlanAug 2, 2006 23:2151564
maybe not or why? [73 words]ahmad zafireAug 3, 2006 21:3651564
8ALL YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT LEBANON [422 words]Lebanese BoyJul 31, 2006 09:1451287
1Culpability of the Government of Lebanon [246 words]VijayAug 1, 2006 06:5051287
Reply to the "Lebanese boy" [81 words]rachelleAug 1, 2006 07:5651287
Is it a crime? [17 words]JasonAug 1, 2006 08:3451287
Well not exactly everything [97 words]JerryAug 2, 2006 09:4551287
Lebanese Boy, you're right but try to tell this to Nasralla [61 words]MosheAug 2, 2006 11:2451287
10 million [222 words]DaisyAug 2, 2006 22:2751287
1whats wrong with your countries???? [52 words]ahmad zafireAug 3, 2006 00:1751287
Lebanese Boy, Your silence speaks volumes! [60 words]JerryAug 3, 2006 17:0551287
Why lebanon took help from Hezbullah? [365 words]Bharat KhanAug 4, 2006 10:2751287
To Lebanese boy. Questions [382 words]marianaDec 23, 2006 11:4251287
I agree with Lebanese Boy [99 words]MariamSep 19, 2007 23:5751287
but... are they gonna try to win it this time? [100 words]Donald OJul 30, 2006 20:2151258
Disproportionate reactions [145 words]Daniel BraunschvigJul 30, 2006 11:3451236
2Indian Intellectual openly supports & Justifies current Israeli War against Hizballah and Hamas [1064 words]SundaramJul 29, 2006 17:2751166
2UN deception [494 words]VijayJul 29, 2006 08:3551146
A Righteous War [95 words]Felma Roel R. SingcoJul 29, 2006 03:1451126
Did Kofi Annan lose his tongue ? [140 words]Adam EylatJul 29, 2006 02:2951122
right on! [58 words]sam randallJul 30, 2006 01:5551122
Kofi Annan's Tongue [189 words]DaisyJul 30, 2006 10:1351122
Kudos Daisy! (EOM) [1 words]MosheAug 2, 2006 11:2951122
Whose war is it? [299 words]John MarlinJul 28, 2006 11:3051049
Positive Arab response? [151 words]DaisyJul 28, 2006 10:0751044
definition of terrorist [328 words]AyanJul 29, 2006 13:4351044
¡Way to go, Israel! [51 words]robJul 27, 2006 05:3750965
What is the World Community waiting for ? [212 words]ReshamiyaJul 30, 2006 06:1650965
a Fijian had been shot in the chest as he tried to prevent Hezbollah fighters from firing rockets [186 words]Adam EylatJul 26, 2006 13:1350898
1islam promotes not only violence but also genocide [217 words]sam randallJul 26, 2006 03:1950850
Good job Sam! [9 words]PDMJul 28, 2006 13:2150850
4Ethnic Cleansing of Jews : Learn lessons from Ethnic cleansing of Pandits in Kashmir [1839 words]SardarJul 29, 2006 17:3950850
1lslam promote violence and genocide around the world (seem like the purpose in their live) [41 words]yongNov 15, 2008 05:5550850
Religion of oppression, violence and hatred [149 words]demetriosJul 11, 2009 09:4050850
Big Shiny Guns! Oh, My! [535 words]orange yonasonJul 26, 2006 00:4950843
1Islamists and the World of Infidels [222 words]NariJul 25, 2006 21:5750833
Daniel Pipes' Article on Current Israeli - Hezbollah War in Lebannon [176 words]Arnie DahlJul 25, 2006 20:4950827
Israel war [56 words]C B GarwareAug 6, 2006 03:3450827
1BRAVO ISRAEL [108 words]V. RAJAGOPALANJul 25, 2006 05:4250798
Fake people say Bravo in the beginning, real people say it the end [31 words]HarrakJul 25, 2006 20:5450798
1Difference between India and Israel [182 words]JaladhiJul 26, 2006 15:3750798
6Using Kafir women in the service of Muslim demography : Common Islamic Tactics [1659 words]DangiramJul 30, 2006 05:5850798
5A MESSAGE TO HINDUS [110 words]AbhishekJun 7, 2007 13:1050798
8I love Islam [169 words]Chitra MuleSep 1, 2010 02:3150798
16Chitra - Do not shame the legacy of Chatrapati Shivaji!!! [217 words]JaladhiSep 2, 2010 19:5650798
You r a proper hindu [10 words]GunjanNov 1, 2015 04:4750798
2You can't compare genocides of Hindus by brutal Islamic invaders with your one experience [132 words]Sue parmarOct 17, 2021 17:2650798
Obstructed Observation - Limited Comparison of Variant Religious Virtues [118 words]M ToveyOct 24, 2021 18:2750798
Well done, Israel [124 words]VijayJul 25, 2006 04:2950795
Sounds good but why not kill them with kindness? [951 words]Chris HolteJul 24, 2006 20:1650766
Who to blame? [359 words]PavelJul 24, 2006 14:0250747
Only EUROPE is to blame, never Israel [111 words]Bela MichaelJul 25, 2006 06:5850747
Sign of Victory [209 words]EnkayJul 25, 2006 21:2050747
Great Analysis [354 words]stuart williamsonJul 24, 2006 00:0350712
Counter Terrorism Techniques from Israel [279 words]RamonJul 23, 2006 23:2750709
What is the real reason for Islamist Awakening or Rise of Militant Islam ??? [301 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
TimJul 23, 2006 23:1150708
King David's solution [98 words]Randy WarrenJul 23, 2006 22:2650706
You underestimate the danger of Islam & Moslems [70 words]f.shakkiJul 23, 2006 20:5650701
PLEASE ENOUGH ALREADY!!! [23 words]ahmad zafireJul 24, 2006 22:2450701
1Yes, Indeed Enough is Enough [370 words]JerryJul 25, 2006 16:5250701
2The bloody history of Islam [226 words]f.shakkiJul 25, 2006 22:1950701
Repression breeds agression and a thirst for death [246 words]BriarsJul 25, 2006 23:1350701
jerry [143 words]ahmad zafireJul 26, 2006 07:1550701
briars [80 words]ahmad zafireJul 26, 2006 17:1550701
f.shakki [229 words]ahmad zafireJul 26, 2006 17:3750701
Peace be with you, Ahmad [146 words]JerryJul 27, 2006 12:2150701
An answer to a moderate Moslem [362 words]f.shakkiJul 27, 2006 17:2150701
Jerry [121 words]SaladinJul 27, 2006 17:2750701
f. shakki [381 words]ahmad zafireJul 27, 2006 19:1550701
Short Answer to Mr. Zafire [15 words]f.shakkiJul 28, 2006 17:1250701
a muslim's response to f.shakki [249 words]ImranSep 29, 2009 12:5150701
1Please give references [18 words]Abdul HadiDec 19, 2021 08:2250701
2Boys and girls we have a scholar in the house! His name is Abdul Hadi صلى الله عليه وسلم [441 words]dhimmi no moreDec 20, 2021 08:0850701
1Misinterpretations from my question [702 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 09:5850701
Our dear Abdul صلى الله عليه وسلم and more disasters including the Qur'an says that Islam is the religion of the Arabs only [535 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 15:0450701
Our dear Abdul (sic) صلى الله عليه وسلم, Salvation History and Konrad Elst and other sordid matters [321 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 16:0350701
Responses [398 words]Abdul HadiDec 23, 2021 02:2650701
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi is an Idolater Read and Laugh [702 words]dhimmi no moreDec 24, 2021 11:4450701
2The pointless discussion [701 words]HamzahDec 26, 2021 11:3650701
Our dear Abdul (sic) I mean Hamzah (sic) is back! I wonder why! [559 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 15:0650701
1I'm not a replacement for Abdul Hadi [536 words]HamzahDec 27, 2021 06:2450701
1Muslims should confront bizarre and inconvenient aspects of their history [246 words]PrashantDec 27, 2021 10:0850701
Our dear Abdul aka Hamzah (sic) and the 'A'isha's disaster! [547 words]dhimmi no moreDec 27, 2021 11:4950701
Agreed - Discussions About Truth if NOT Discussed in Truth is Pointless [128 words]M ToveyDec 27, 2021 17:2750701
1Thanks for being a BIT more polite [252 words]HamzahDec 28, 2021 04:3350701
3Disasters, disasters, disasters [419 words]HamzahDec 28, 2021 05:1250701
2Please look into what your people did as well [81 words]HamzahDec 28, 2021 05:1750701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) and names, names and more names! And 'Abd al-Kalam, Zakir Naik and Ambassador Akbar Zeb! [280 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2021 07:2050701
Our dear Hamazh (sic) and the Qur'an says that Islam is the religion of the Hijazi Arabs only! Read and laugh [433 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2021 08:0550701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) Apologize for your bogus claim that I wrote that 600 Million Hindus were murdered by the Muslim invaders of India! I'm waiting [440 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2021 09:0750701
Addendum and Q79:30 and the "Earth Is Flat" Verse [25 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2021 09:1150701
Our dear Hamzah must be saying that al-Tabari is a liar for saying that Jihad means Holy War! [360 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2021 15:1250701
Preposterous assumption [74 words]PrashantDec 28, 2021 21:0550701
Abide by a country's law [127 words]JeffDec 28, 2021 22:1550701
2this is a comedy show right now ngl [425 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 02:5850701
2King of removing context [436 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 03:3350701
1Already responded to this [4 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 03:3450701
2OH MY GOD... [204 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 04:2750701
1Applying the principle of equivalence correctly [266 words]PrashantDec 29, 2021 09:4250701
1My perspective on this [297 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 12:2350701
1Thank you for politely keeping your opinion [139 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 12:3350701
1This is what I would rather say [254 words]HamzahDec 29, 2021 12:5350701
Our dear Hamzah al-tablighee and the disaster of The Earth Is Flat Aya! [240 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 12:5950701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) and al-Ahmadiyya and The Buddha صلى الله عليه وسلم and Q10:47! Disasters and more disasters [185 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 13:1350701
1Our dear Hamazh (sic) and I, the big time kafir, am in good company because Allah also makes typos and misspelling and Shish Kabab Falafel and Hummus [255 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 13:3350701
Our dear Hamazh al-tablighee and Zakir Naik is a scholar? Mashallah and the word Jihad from an Arabic/Arabic dictionary [587 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 13:5150701
Teaching Arabic to wannabe Arabs the likes of our dear Hamzah (sic) and Allah has no clue about the chronology of his own creation [207 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 14:0650701
Our dear Hamzah who is embarrassing himself and the Quran says that Islam is the religion of the Hijazi Arabs only [336 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 14:4950701
Seeking Religious Equivalence Not on Agenda of Maintaining Dominance [190 words]M ToveyDec 29, 2021 15:1450701
1Oh, the clichéd Islamic definition of Jihad [173 words]PrashantDec 29, 2021 15:3350701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) and the Quran v. Shakespearean English and the disaster of Surat al-Kahf [390 words]dhimmi no moreDec 29, 2021 16:3050701
1New definition of war [301 words]PrashantDec 29, 2021 18:3150701
Qutub minar was built on a temple complex [122 words]PrashantDec 29, 2021 23:2350701
2You're just dodging me right now [225 words]HamzahDec 30, 2021 01:2750701
1You just changed the text of the Qur'an [155 words]HamzahDec 30, 2021 01:3850701
1I'm sorry but this comment is disastrous [191 words]HamzahDec 30, 2021 02:2050701
Guiding the perplexed: Our dear Hamzah (sic) and the disaster of "The Earth is Flat Verse" And is it بعد or مع or قبل [296 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 07:2650701
Teaching Classical Arabic to wannabe Arabs the likes of our dear Hamzah al-tablighee [145 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 12:0450701
Didn't Editors of Quran Change Interpreting the Tanakh? [32 words]M ToveyDec 30, 2021 12:1150701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Hamzah al-tablighee [67 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 12:1350701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) is not happy that the Quran says that Islam is the religion of the Arabs only [194 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 12:2450701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs and the word إلاه or God in Classical Arabic and اله in Modern Arabic [27 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 13:3050701
1Last mellow message [156 words]HamzahDec 30, 2021 14:5750701
1Hamza stands out. [40 words]PrashantDec 30, 2021 14:5950701
Paging the genius our dear Hamzah al-tablighee and monotheism and other disasters! [296 words]dhimmi no moreDec 30, 2021 16:0150701
2Hamzah and Abdul Hadi: Naipaul's "Among the Believers" [163 words]dhimmi no moreDec 31, 2021 06:3050701
Hamzah and Abdul Hadi and exposing your so called scholars! Are they liars or ignorant? You decide [392 words]dhimmi no moreJan 1, 2022 14:5150701
4You are an absolute dunce for stating that the Quran has mistakes [227 words]MatthewJan 3, 2022 08:2050701
1Something's Gotta Give [112 words]PrashantJan 4, 2022 00:1650701
The Reincarnation of our dear Hamzah (sic)! He is now متّى (aka Matthew) al-Tablighee! Mashallah [520 words]dhimmi no moreJan 4, 2022 07:4850701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم must be calling 'A'isha an "Absolute Dunce" and he is calling Othman an "Absolute Dunce" too! [475 words]dhimmi no moreJan 4, 2022 08:1650701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee is really saying that al-Tabari must be an "Absolute dunce"! [249 words]dhimmi no moreJan 4, 2022 10:0850701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم is running away! [149 words]dhimmi no moreJan 4, 2022 12:2050701
How does DNM know that... [19 words]PrashantJan 4, 2022 17:4650701
You are an intellect [182 words]AnushJan 5, 2022 07:5550701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم is running away part 2 [420 words]dhimmi no moreJan 5, 2022 10:4450701
1so you finally found out, huh? [203 words]MichaelJan 5, 2022 12:5150701
Prashant: I swear by the figs and olives oh and the mountain! [229 words]dhimmi no moreJan 5, 2022 13:1550701
2I am not a Muslim [271 words]MatthewJan 5, 2022 13:2650701
1Thank you Anush [135 words]dhimmi no moreJan 5, 2022 13:3250701
Blatant Appropriation of Jewish Prophetic Pronouncement Regarding HaMashiach [90 words]M ToveyJan 5, 2022 14:1150701
1Do not judge Islam by Islamic standards [360 words]PrashantJan 5, 2022 18:1550701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم: You teach Arabic and philosophy? Are you serious? [819 words]dhimmi no moreJan 6, 2022 06:5750701
Thank you for acknowledging me [51 words]AnushJan 6, 2022 08:2250701
No, no VPN [116 words]MichaelJan 6, 2022 08:3450701
Religious Standards are not Moderated by Outside Guidlines - Intolerance is Ingrained [257 words]M ToveyJan 6, 2022 12:0350701
Our dear Michael and his 15 minutes of fame and Yes Yes Yes VPN in the UAE! [113 words]dhimmi no moreJan 6, 2022 13:0650701
1Anush: Deconstructing our dear Matthew al-tablighee! [196 words]dhimmi no moreJan 7, 2022 07:4450701
Our dear Hamzah (sic) and "The Earth is Flat" verse disaster and the claim that Dahaha means "Egg-Shaped" is a lie [599 words]dhimmi no moreJan 9, 2022 08:0450701
Our dear Hamzah: Why do Indian Muslims seem to be fond of transliterating Arabic words in English language texts? [256 words]dhimmi no moreJan 9, 2022 16:0050701
Quran 20:12 and the strange word Tuwa or طوى [261 words]dhimmi no moreJan 9, 2022 17:0950701
1Bruh chill [141 words]MichaelJan 10, 2022 09:3150701
1Troll too much? [546 words]MichaelJan 10, 2022 09:4050701
2I am no Muslim [282 words]MatthewJan 10, 2022 09:5750701
1You talk about disasters? this is one [105 words]MichaelJan 10, 2022 11:4650701
You're one of those guys who don't know what they say, they just say it [279 words]MatthewJan 10, 2022 12:1250701
1LOL [44 words]MichaelJan 10, 2022 12:2950701
1HAHAHAHAHA [55 words]MatthewJan 10, 2022 12:3350701
Quran 79:30 and the "Earth is Flat" disaster and the Tablighee "context" [286 words]dhimmi no moreJan 10, 2022 14:2350701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم and so called brotherly love Islamic style [262 words]dhimmi no moreJan 10, 2022 14:4350701
Cherry picking time and our dear Michael al-Tablighee and teaching Arabic to wannabe Arabs [340 words]dhimmi no moreJan 10, 2022 15:0350701
1You still didnt get what I was trying to say [124 words]MatthewJan 10, 2022 22:5150701
1MY GOD [156 words]MichaelJan 11, 2022 01:2150701
1too much... [165 words]MichaelJan 11, 2022 01:2950701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم is admitting that "it is no crime in adding an H to Sura" [161 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 06:3250701
Our dear Michael likes to embarrass himself! I wonder why! [139 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 06:4050701
Why do tablighees the likes of our dear Michael al-tablighee like to embarrass themselves and the word Tuwa [422 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 07:4250701
Our dear Matthew is not aware that the Qur'an says that Jesus is the WORD OF ALLAH! I wonder why? Ignorance may be? [174 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 07:5450701
Our dear Michael: The author of the Qur'an is not aware of the chronology of his own creation! What a disaster [310 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 11:5350701
Our dear Michael al-Tablighee: This is how to fix the poor grammar/syntax of the disasters in Surat Taha 12 [256 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 12:2550701
1Speaking with no absolute knowledge [59 words]MatthewJan 11, 2022 13:1450701
1YOOOOO [44 words]MichaelJan 11, 2022 13:1750701
1Why do YOU like to embarrass yourself? [155 words]MatthewJan 11, 2022 13:4250701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم and so called brotherly love Islamic style and Q22:40 is a disastser [539 words]dhimmi no moreJan 11, 2022 13:5750701
Islamic gobbledygook [128 words]PrashantJan 11, 2022 19:5650701
By Whose Testimony is the WORD of Yeshua Corrupted - by a Man? [204 words]M ToveyJan 11, 2022 22:2950701
1Embarrassed your own self again [242 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 00:5150701
1Says the guy who doesn't know anything [237 words]MichaelJan 12, 2022 03:1350701
1Yet again [189 words]MichaelJan 12, 2022 03:2550701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee is confusing his god and الفيلولوجيا and علم فقه اللغة and other sordid matters [273 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 06:5850701
Why do tablighees like to embarrass themselves? More disasters and our dear Michael al-Tablighee [220 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 07:1250701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم and so called brotherly love Islamic style and demolishing/burning and destruction of Churches [122 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 07:4950701
Our dear Michael and "Argument from: but it is not in the Qur'an" and camel's urine cures all! [424 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 09:5650701
1I'm a Christian, c'mon [75 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 12:1150701
1I love embarrassing people like you [227 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 12:2850701
1Saying the same thing over and over again [34 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 12:3150701
1Lenny face [176 words]MichaelJan 12, 2022 13:1150701
1I have all the answerrsssss [313 words]MichaelJan 12, 2022 14:1450701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee and comedy time! Greek, Aramaic/Syriac and Hebrew and our dear Mohamed Hegab is a scholar! Masahallah [301 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 14:5550701
1Generosity shown and withdrawn right after [101 words]PrashantJan 12, 2022 15:0850701
Teaching Arabic and Aramaic to wannabe Arabs from India our dear Matthew al-tablighee [202 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 15:2350701
Our dear Michael and cherry picking time and ignorance is bliss! [286 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 15:4450701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee: Here is Sahih al-Bukhari and Camel's urine cures all! What a disaster [56 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 15:5150701
Comedy time and our dear Matthew al-tablighee is saying that Allah is lying Astaghfirullah! and more Shish Kabab Falafel and Hummus [170 words]dhimmi no moreJan 12, 2022 16:4050701
1Drinking camel's urine (or not) is the smallest problem in sunnah 5686 [298 words]PrashantJan 12, 2022 22:3650701
1Embarrassed, yet again [190 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 23:5150701
1Teaching Arabic to newborns [116 words]MatthewJan 12, 2022 23:5850701
1Lenny face (pt. 2) [126 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 00:1150701
1Lenny face (pt. 3) [91 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 00:1750701
1Female Lenny face [37 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 00:2150701
1Teaching who Abdur Rahman was to uneducated Pandit bhakts [56 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 04:5950701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and more drivel [679 words]dhimmi no moreJan 13, 2022 08:0050701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and a few questions [254 words]dhimmi no moreJan 13, 2022 08:2850701
1Haha! humorous [225 words]MatthewJan 13, 2022 13:4950701
1The ignorant one here is none but you [7916 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 14:2350701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and Quranic disasters: Allah forbids circumcision? What a disaster [170 words]dhimmi no moreJan 13, 2022 16:1750701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and the Quranic disaster of: Muslims can eat pork and yummy bacon. It is hahal brother [107 words]dhimmi no moreJan 13, 2022 16:3250701
2Attention our dear Michael and Matthew al-Tablighyeen: Our dear "world renowned" Zakir Naik is peddling camel's urine! [61 words]dhimmi no moreJan 13, 2022 17:4850701
Watch the other one [41 words]MichaelJan 13, 2022 22:3350701
1Double checking DNM re Zakir Naik and Camel Urine [222 words]PrashantJan 13, 2022 22:3450701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and Cut-Paste job! and cherry picking and Allah prays "upon" or "for"? [169 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 06:5650701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee and comedy time! [527 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 07:2850701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and more drivel Teaching Arabic to wannabe Arabs from India and Singular v Plural [116 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 07:4350701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Matthew al-tablighee [296 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 08:1450701
Comedy time and teaching Arabic to wannabe Arabs the likes of our dear Matthew al-tablighee [564 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 09:2850701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Michael al-Tablighee [416 words]dhimmi no moreJan 14, 2022 11:1150701
Our dear Matta aka Matthew's command of the Arabic language is Shish Kabab Falafel and Hummus! [313 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 08:4450701
1Peak of ignorance [533 words]MatthewJan 15, 2022 08:5750701
1Lack of knowledge leads to disasters [380 words]MatthewJan 15, 2022 09:5650701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee: Clueless our dear Matthew al-Tablighee needs your help and "Monotheism"! [256 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 10:3650701
Our dear Michael al-Tablighee and the Cut-Copy-Paste from a certain Mioz Amjad Sala Allahu 'Alyahi wa Salam [170 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 11:2650701
Guiding the Perplexed our dear Matta aka Matthew al-Tablighee and the trouble with Tablighees and Ta Marbouta [205 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 11:4550701
1YOU are the one in need of help [338 words]MatthewJan 15, 2022 11:4850701
You just contradicted your own self in the same comment! [93 words]MichaelJan 15, 2022 11:5750701
I apologize, now your turn [84 words]MichaelJan 15, 2022 12:0350701
Comedy Time and our dear Michael al-Tablighee is saying that there are grammatical errors in the Qura'n! I'm shocked! [284 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 14:5450701
Cherry Picking time and our dear Matthew is saying that his god is not omnipotent! What a disaster [104 words]dhimmi no moreJan 15, 2022 16:1450701
So Allah prays, huh? [155 words]PrashantJan 15, 2022 20:4150701
Our dear Michael and the Quranic disaster of today? Sheikh al-Azhar's book: شبهات المشككين [536 words]dhimmi no moreJan 16, 2022 07:2650701
Comedy Time: Our dear Michael al-Tablighee [653 words]dhimmi no moreJan 16, 2022 08:1250701
Ignorance is very much present here [598 words]MatthewJan 16, 2022 23:5650701
Why do you keep mistaking me for someone else? [159 words]MatthewJan 17, 2022 00:1550701
Ok, please correct me if I'm wrong [174 words]MatthewJan 17, 2022 00:3450701
Our dear Michael al-Tablighee: For Allah's sake stop embarrassing yourself! "For" and "To" and "Upon"! Oh and stick to Urdu [333 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 06:4950701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Michael al-Tablighee [537 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 07:2350701
Comedy Time Our dear Michael al-tablighee is saying that Allah's rasm is not correct! I smell a fatwa [98 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 07:3050701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Michael al-Tablighee [281 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 07:4450701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee and comedy time! And Allah says that he sent an illiterate prophet to illiterate/ignorant people like you [101 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 08:0250701
1Prashant: Deconstructing our dear Michael and our dear Matthew [113 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 08:1850701
More disasters? The Jews pray in a Church! Mashallah. Is that true our dear Michael and our dear Matthew? [224 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 09:4150701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Michael al-Tablighee and the word Naik! [105 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 10:1250701
Our dear Matthew the lost tablighee; Could you tell us what the Hebrew word "תביעות" mean? [206 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 11:3350701
al-Ahmadiyya is banned in Saudi Arabia as per Sheikh google is that true our dear Michael? [85 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 11:4950701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee: The title of the book is:شبهات المشككين! Do you know what this means? [221 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 14:0350701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee: Sheikh al-Azhar and Quranic disasters [287 words]dhimmi no moreJan 17, 2022 17:0050701
Teaching our dear Michael al-tablighee Very Brief Introduction to the History of the Quanic Text and رسم المصحف [388 words]dhimmi no moreJan 18, 2022 08:0150701
our dear Michael and our dear Matthew al-tablighyeen Can you comment on this article from the Daily Mail and an Ahmadiyya Mosque in London [36 words]dhimmi no moreJan 18, 2022 16:0950701
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and the Arabic alphabet is derived from Syriac alphabet [227 words]dhimmi no moreJan 19, 2022 09:2750701
1Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and this is what al-Tabari wrote and prove me wrong! [178 words]dhimmi no moreJan 19, 2022 13:1650701
Typo: Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and al-Tabari [208 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 07:3950701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Matthew al-tablighee and ال التعريف و اللام الشمسية واللام القمرية [233 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 08:3250701
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and other sordid matters [361 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 09:2350701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee and half knowledge is damn dangerous and ܨܠܘܬܐ or صلوتا or Slouta [120 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 10:0950701
Teaching Our dear Matthew The Lost Tablighhee Very Basic Arabic and التكرار يعلم الجحش والحمار [386 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 15:3750701
Typo: It is اللام not الام [22 words]dhimmi no moreJan 20, 2022 15:4950701
Teaching Basic Arabic grammar to wannabe Arabs the likes of our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and ال التعريف [347 words]dhimmi no moreJan 21, 2022 08:5450701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee and the disaster of the tablighee: An-Nisa' transliteration [267 words]dhimmi no moreJan 21, 2022 10:4750701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and a few old questions [316 words]dhimmi no moreJan 22, 2022 08:1150701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee told us he teaches "Philology" but he has no clue about Rasm al-Mushaf! I wonder why! Ignorance may be? [451 words]dhimmi no moreJan 22, 2022 09:3950701
Comedy Time: Our dear Matthes al-tablighee: Is it true that al-Ahmadiyya corrupted the Qur'an? [301 words]dhimmi no moreJan 22, 2022 12:4150701
Our dear Matthew and the Quranic disaster of 23:50 and al-Ahmadiyya and it is بزرميط /بزرميطة [605 words]dhimmi no moreJan 23, 2022 08:4450701
1A very interesting examination of the cost of food in Turkey today. [273 words]dhimmi no moreJan 23, 2022 11:4750701
1Our dear Matthew al-tablighee and "Khatam an nabiyyin"! Mashallah [226 words]dhimmi no moreJan 24, 2022 10:2350701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and the disaster of Surat al-Ankaboot (not the tablighee Surah Ankaboot): 27 and yet another disaster [412 words]dhimmi no moreJan 25, 2022 07:1150701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and India and Kashmir in the Qur'an? [198 words]dhimmi no moreJan 26, 2022 06:3750701
1Surah al-Anfal 41 is absolutely objectionable [237 words]PrashantJan 27, 2022 03:0750701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and what on earth is: سجين? Hint: No one has a clue! [484 words]dhimmi no moreJan 27, 2022 09:1250701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee and more disasters in Q83:18 and what on earth is the meaning of عليين? [549 words]dhimmi no moreJan 28, 2022 07:4250701
Our dear Matthew (sic) al-Tablighee and more disasters from سورة المطففين or Quran 83 and what on earth is مرقوم? [346 words]dhimmi no moreJan 29, 2022 08:3850701
Translations, interpretations, and distortions of Quran should be welcome [214 words]PrashantJan 29, 2022 15:3850701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee and a free lesson in Arabic grammar [213 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 3, 2022 08:0950701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Long Version [1167 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 6, 2022 16:0450701
Our dear Matthew al-tablighee صلى الله عليه وسلم and ابن خويز منداد and العهدة العمرية والشروط العمرية and the Qurna says: DO NOT PRAY! [290 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 6, 2022 17:1850701
Our dear Matthew who had zero clue about العهدة العمرية الشروط العمرية and the bogus claim that Omar is mentioned in a "corrupted" book [540 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 8, 2022 06:4850701
Why is the Pact of Omar Evil? [41 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 8, 2022 14:2650701
1Re-visiting old posts by our dear Matthew al-tablighee! Read and Laugh [335 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 14, 2022 08:5250701
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and Old business: Love Islamic Style and it is a disaster [256 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 16, 2022 12:4250701
Old Business: Our dear Hamzah al-Tablighee and the word al-Ilah straight from the Saudi copy of the Qur'an [161 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 27, 2022 15:2150701
1Why are you still criticizing non-existent people? [113 words]MichaelMar 8, 2022 10:3550701
1Michael's narrative is exactly what needs to be challenged [147 words]PrashantMar 8, 2022 16:4650701
Guiding the Perplexed, our dear Michael al-tablighee and Quranic Arabic Part 1 [406 words]dhimmi no moreMar 8, 2022 17:2850701
Our dear Michael and here is a video about the vast differences between the Samarkand Quran and todays Qur'an [31 words]dhimmi no moreMar 8, 2022 17:3250701
Finallly?!!! Who are the Greatest Original Poets of Arabia? And Do Not List Persians [34 words]M ToveyMar 8, 2022 18:1450701
I'm crying [229 words]MichaelMar 9, 2022 01:5650701
out of comment titles [359 words]MichaelMar 9, 2022 02:0750701
Teaching Quranic Arabic to wannabe Arabs the likes of our dear Michael صلى الله عليه وسلم [424 words]dhimmi no moreMar 9, 2022 08:3650701
Our dear Michael and gobbledygook English/Arabic and Shish Kabab Falafel and Hummus! [127 words]dhimmi no moreMar 9, 2022 08:4650701
Michael's frustration is palpable [124 words]PrashantMar 10, 2022 06:3850701
Our dear Michael and the "Quranic Challenge" what ever that is and "Argument from Homophones"! [276 words]dhimmi no moreMar 10, 2022 07:1550701
By Quranic standards q9:60 is benign [172 words]PrashantMar 10, 2022 17:3950701
1True Christian Charity is No Compulsion Compared to Quranic Beneficence [144 words]M ToveyMar 11, 2022 12:2550701
Muslims cannot blame the escalation on so called Israeli occupation because .......... [597 words]JyotiJul 23, 2006 18:1750688
basic tenets [533 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDJul 23, 2006 18:1450687
Is this War about wining? [142 words]Abir ChaabanJul 23, 2006 18:0150684
Fear is the key [302 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDJul 24, 2006 15:5250684
A Difficult War to Win Outright [761 words]BlackspeareJul 24, 2006 21:5650684
Israel Has a War to Win [51 words]Ben IsraelJul 23, 2006 17:3050679
Islam's War against The West [1605 words]BladimirJul 23, 2006 17:0150675
Impressive Article, Pls Write More [23 words]InfidelJul 23, 2006 21:0450675
1Ground reality - Mr.Bladimir [600 words]sharmaJul 24, 2006 04:1950675
immensely sobering [15 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDJul 25, 2006 14:0850675
364MUSLIMS KILLED 600 MILLION HINDUS!!! [430 words]MussoliniMay 18, 2010 13:3750675
1enemy of hinduism [10 words]dibyendu dasJul 29, 2015 17:2750675
Spot on [4 words]Andrea WilliamsSep 10, 2015 21:1050675
You are totally wrong!!! [36 words]Aadil ZargarOct 15, 2015 06:0050675
Really? -_- [29 words]ChanlerJan 12, 2016 20:5050675
Wrong Statement against THE HINDUS [207 words]Jai sree RamJan 21, 2016 03:3650675
1murder of hindus [21 words]sreenivasMar 4, 2016 13:0050675
maadarchod mulle [14 words]dexterAug 19, 2016 05:0750675
Muslim Killed 600 million Hindus [98 words]Md. Kohinoor HossainOct 14, 2016 03:5450675
Sounds about right [25 words]DeepakDec 11, 2016 05:1350675
Provoking and instigating data [37 words]Matiur RahamanJun 27, 2017 05:3050675
religion & community. [110 words]Tarun Roy ChowdhuryDec 7, 2017 14:5550675
there will no more peace nor Love without hindu [414 words]anilkumarApr 4, 2018 18:3850675
Hindus the Lambs [132 words]NariApr 9, 2018 18:5150675
2Don't be a lamb [175 words]PrashantApr 11, 2018 03:4250675
I'm hindu. [2 words]Mohinder Paul AroraOct 2, 2018 06:4750675
Support from England [23 words]John PeterMar 24, 2019 03:5850675
I am very disappointed. [4 words]BikashJun 4, 2019 16:5150675
Muslims are the UN-civilized Nations in the world. [27 words]NANI GOPAL ADHIKARIJun 5, 2019 01:0350675
1How it is possible to kill 600 million Hindus? [52 words]Joy.JAug 1, 2019 15:5350675
1Logic wins: number of Hindus murdered is wrong [157 words]PrashantAug 3, 2019 17:4150675
What? [31 words]PatrickDec 25, 2020 01:3950675
1Why does the world refuse to talk about this [69 words]She parmarOct 17, 2021 10:4550675
Pavlovian Political Patterns [241 words]M ToveyOct 20, 2021 12:5650675
2False information stated with proofs. [3950 words]Abdul HadiDec 19, 2021 05:2650675
1Our dear Abdul Hadi v. the Indian Historian and Academic K. S. Lal and why did Muslims invade India? Hint: Looting [122 words]dhimmi no moreDec 20, 2021 08:1750675
3Thank you our dear Abdul Hadi for keeping us kuffar entertained. [165 words]dhimmi no moreDec 20, 2021 10:4750675
1Look into the criticisms as well [40 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 06:0350675
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi: For your Allah's sake stop making a fool of yourself. On terrorists and terrorism! [345 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 06:0950675
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi is CORRUPTING the Qur'an, Astaghfirullah [293 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 06:5850675
Wrong, absolutely wrong [35 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 11:2050675
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi is not aware that Q20:63 is the most celebrated grammatical mistake in the Qur'an! [249 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 14:4050675
Challenging an Islamist on separation of church and state [232 words]PrashantDec 21, 2021 18:5250675
You responded to nothing [207 words]Abdul HadiDec 22, 2021 01:1350675
Responses [139 words]Abdul HadiDec 22, 2021 01:2950675
Responses [181 words]Abdul HadiDec 23, 2021 02:1050675
Here is the book for our dear Abdul about the disasters in the Quranic text it is called شبهات المشككين [598 words]dhimmi no moreDec 24, 2021 12:2350675
Lebanon is not an enemy , Hizballah & Syria are ............. [65 words]NatashaJul 23, 2006 16:3850672
1Cowardice in the Middle-East [177 words]Marcos BerensteinJul 24, 2006 09:5350672
Just place these events on a map and a clear picture emerges : You will be shocked and afraid [217 words]TarioJul 23, 2006 16:2950671
I'm afraid [31 words]marioJul 23, 2006 09:3950648
GREAT ANALYSIS [80 words]HAROLD CHIOTTJul 22, 2006 16:4650597
A Funny Thing Could Happen on the Way to Damascus [211 words]Susan WalkerJul 22, 2006 16:0050592
a reply [54 words]miekJul 23, 2006 17:3650592
Civilians have always suffered in war [293 words]JasonJul 26, 2006 07:2250592
Your last 2 takes [152 words]Al RameyJul 22, 2006 15:5650591
Ditto for America [158 words]Ralph C Whaley MDJul 22, 2006 07:3850564
3A Lebanese Plague Called Hezb-Allah [45 words]Franken HarpoJul 21, 2006 21:0350503
Victory's Price is Higher [381 words]Reuben HorneJul 21, 2006 19:4150498
Causation... [359 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
J.S.Jul 21, 2006 16:1050479
so called Canadian! [135 words]HarrakJul 21, 2006 23:0750479
1Israel needs Hasbara and everybody must support this campaign for defending Freedom [273 words]DayaJul 23, 2006 15:5250479
Thank you for the response, Dr. Pipes (and Daya)... [764 words]J.S.Jul 24, 2006 16:3850479
Hezbollah under attack from... Saudis and... HRW [237 words]Alain Jean-MairetJul 21, 2006 14:0350469
Is Islam and muslim governent Hijacked and Kidnapped? [270 words]Adam WeinrichJul 21, 2006 13:3750467
Mr. Pipes we will never be too tired to work for peace. [18 words]Adam EylatJul 21, 2006 13:0050461
What does "Winning" mean? [547 words]Terry BrauerJul 21, 2006 11:5050456
Only way to Win the War [105 words]Donny JonesJul 21, 2006 11:4650455
If they also feel the pain, the BS will stop! [405 words]JasonJul 26, 2006 06:4750455
1Work while it is Day, the Night cometh when no man can work.-Jesus [291 words]MichaelJul 21, 2006 11:3250453
Pathetic Bleeding Heart Opinions? [717 words]Sheldon PadawerJul 21, 2006 11:3050452
Middle east not listening...or impotent [206 words]PDMJul 21, 2006 11:1350448
Lebanon crisis [82 words]Giv CornfieldJul 21, 2006 10:5150442
A response to Giv Cornfield [221 words]Rodni ChaletJul 21, 2006 23:0450442
ADVANTAGE OF THE DIRECT MESSAGE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH [122 words]Carmen WaggonerJul 21, 2006 09:3750433
Israel's fatigue [197 words]Nissim AvrahamJul 21, 2006 08:5750428
Israel is the excuse. [56 words]Edit - AustraliaJul 21, 2006 03:4050419
1Israel Has to Win for Indians Too! [186 words]kamekishJul 21, 2006 02:5850418
Israel's war to win [159 words]Bernard MostJul 21, 2006 01:4250415
Israel's War Weariness [53 words]Joel BlockJul 21, 2006 00:1550403
Israel should not repeat the mistakes of India otherwise ... [811 words]AlexanderJul 21, 2006 00:1050402
1We feel sorry for fate of India , We hope Israel will not repeat these mistakes [115 words]KurjaJul 23, 2006 18:3050402
Do not worry, Mr Alexander [11 words]Sam JJan 9, 2007 00:2650402
1I don't know what to write here, just read what I wrote. [395 words]Abdul HadiDec 20, 2021 12:1450402
1Our dear Abdul Hadi is either ignorant or he is making things up about who is really the father of Algebra [354 words]dhimmi no moreDec 20, 2021 14:5950402
1Our dear Abdul Hadi: Delete hate in your holy books [71 words]dhimmi no moreDec 20, 2021 15:2050402
1Parsing Abdul Hadi's message [466 words]PrashantDec 20, 2021 17:1650402
1Relentless intellectual pressure on Islam and Muslims is needed [148 words]PrashantDec 21, 2021 03:4750402
1At least give quotations [5 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 05:4150402
Answers to statements [2018 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 05:5850402
Answer to criticism [167 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 06:2250402
I'm not Mr. Wannabe Arab [321 words]Abdul HadiDec 21, 2021 09:1350402
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi and the creepy "No Hate" and Q62:2 [100 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 10:0350402
It will take an epic to rebut all Mr Hadi said [128 words]PrashantDec 21, 2021 17:0350402
Our dear Abdul (sic) صلى الله عليه وسلم is not aware that Mahdi Hasan calls non Muslims: Beasts! [136 words]dhimmi no moreDec 21, 2021 17:0550402
Quote for Mr Hadi [69 words]PrashantDec 21, 2021 17:2450402
1More responses to his...claims [85 words]Abdul HadiDec 22, 2021 01:3450402
Our dear Abdul (sic) صلى الله عليه وسلم is not aware that Mahdi Hasan calls non Muslims: Beasts! Part 2 [364 words]dhimmi no moreDec 22, 2021 07:5450402
...I responded to everything [441 words]Abdul HadiDec 22, 2021 09:3150402
Our dear Abdul (sic) Ignorance of Lies and Q5:32, Q20:63, Q62:2 and Monotheism and he needs to stick to Urdu [543 words]dhimmi no moreDec 22, 2021 15:2550402
Jizya was indeed an instrument of hate [140 words]PrashantDec 22, 2021 17:3150402
Responses to dhimmi [130 words]Abdul HadiDec 23, 2021 03:2350402
Final message [606 words]Abdul HadiDec 23, 2021 05:0650402
Our dear Abdul (sic) صلى الله عليه وسلم Apologize to the readers for spreading bogus Tablighee claims about who is the "father" of Algebra! We are waiting [389 words]dhimmi no moreDec 23, 2021 07:0650402
Our dear Abdul (sic) صلى الله عليه وسلم must be accusing 'A'isha of being a liar! I smell riots [353 words]dhimmi no moreDec 23, 2021 09:2450402
Our dear Abdul Hadi help Kuffar to spot the mistakes in the book of your god [408 words]dhimmi no moreDec 23, 2021 10:2250402
1Polytheism, idolatry, and monotheism [261 words]PrashantDec 23, 2021 11:2050402
Our dear Abdul Hadi al-tablighee and does he curse the Jews and Christians not once but 5 times per day? [89 words]dhimmi no moreDec 23, 2021 11:3550402
Teaching basic Arabic to wannabe Arabs our dear Abdul al-Tablighee and the word نحو [105 words]dhimmi no moreDec 23, 2021 14:0750402
Only in Secularistic Absolution is Abortion Not a Religious Issue - Spiritualistic Notices to Contrary [101 words]M ToveyDec 23, 2021 15:1350402
Apologies - But Issues of Christianity Predate Issues of Islamic Replacement Theologies [164 words]M ToveyDec 23, 2021 18:5250402
1Seems like you didn't read what I wrote [281 words]Abdul HadiDec 24, 2021 05:0250402
Our dear Abdul (sic) is not happy that his god says that he sent an ignorant/illiterate prophet to ignorant/illiterate people like him [772 words]dhimmi no moreDec 24, 2021 09:0950402
All but the 7th verse of Al-fatiha are OK [215 words]PrashanDec 24, 2021 10:5750402
Our dear Abdul the hate monger is running away! Darn it! [1065 words]dhimmi no moreDec 25, 2021 08:0950402
Our dear Abdul is running away! Darn it Part 2 [398 words]dhimmi no moreDec 25, 2021 09:0950402
Guiding the perplexed: Do Muslims curse the Jews and Christians when reciting al-Fatiha: 7? It seems that they do [669 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 08:3450402
Our dear Abdul (sic) Hadi why is monotheism good and polytheism bad? [53 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 08:4050402
Our dear Abdul (sic) is not happy because the Qur'an says that Islam is the religion of the Hijazi Arabs only! [162 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 08:5050402
No one should defend q5-33 [76 words]PrashantDec 26, 2021 09:0250402
Our dear Abdul (sic) and his obsession with the Islamic "Science of the Latrines"! [244 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 09:1250402
1Prashant: Allah cursing the Jews and Christians [68 words]dhimmi no moreDec 26, 2021 15:1350402
Reactions to Gospel Message are Expected - Starting From the Cross to the Return [185 words]M ToveyDec 26, 2021 17:0450402
Propaganda of Replacement Theology [78 words]M ToveyDec 27, 2021 11:4150402
Allah is unkind to every one but Al-fatiha verses 1 to 6 are OK [68 words]PrashantDec 27, 2021 11:5250402
2You guys are breaking the guidelines [96 words]UriJan 4, 2022 07:5850402
Our dear Uri and the trouble with his Allah! [52 words]dhimmi no moreJan 5, 2022 13:2050402
One more question for our dear Uri al-tablighee [31 words]dhimmi no moreJan 5, 2022 13:2350402
My emerging standard of conduct on danielpipes.org and elsewhere [185 words]PrashantJan 5, 2022 18:4350402
I acknowledge that [40 words]UriJan 6, 2022 08:1350402
BRUUHH [20 words]UriJan 11, 2022 01:1550402
Our dear Matthew and our dear Abdul al-tablighee! [431 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 6, 2022 08:4850402
Comedy Time: Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and "Monotheism v. Polytheism" Read and Laugh! [513 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 12, 2022 15:3650402
Our dear Matthew al-Tablighee and "Monotheism v. Polytheism" The Pagans of Mecca and the Jews Refute Muhammad's "monotheism"! What a disaster [905 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 14, 2022 18:0950402
2Old Business: Our dear Abdul Hadi صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Indian Mathematician Aryabhata and Algebra. [272 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 21, 2022 10:0250402
There are 'no own people' for Muslims. [76 words]PrashantFeb 21, 2022 11:5650402
Old Business: Our dear Abdul Hadi صلى الله عليه وسلم and other earlier fathers of Algebra [268 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 22, 2022 11:4850402
Old Business: Our dear Abdul Hadi صلى الله عليه وسلم and Euclidean Algorithm! [220 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 23, 2022 06:5750402
Old Business: Our dear Abdul Hadi صلى الله عليه وسلم and al-Khawarizmi's كتاب الجمع والتفريق في الحساب الهندي [599 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 24, 2022 08:4150402
1More about al-Khawarizmi's book [203 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 25, 2022 07:2750402
5Well said, DNM [58 words]PrashantFeb 25, 2022 21:3550402
1Bruh wtf u still at it? [914 words]MichaelMar 8, 2022 05:5850402
Finally; One Quotes Hebrew Scripture: But Do You Know Why? [99 words]M ToveyMar 8, 2022 13:0050402
Our dear Michael al-tablighee and Allah sends a prophet to a nation only if he speaks their language [407 words]dhimmi no moreMar 8, 2022 16:0950402
Our dear Michael al-Tablighee: For Allah's sake stop embarrassing yourself! [257 words]dhimmi no moreMar 8, 2022 16:2850402
zamn [572 words]MichaelMar 9, 2022 01:3950402
gud dam [304 words]MichaelMar 9, 2022 01:5050402
Old Business: Our dear Michael and Sheikh Estes the "world renowned scholar" claims that Alexander the Great founded Catholicism! What a disaster [143 words]dhimmi no moreMar 9, 2022 07:3250402
Guiding the Perplexed: Our dear Michael al-tablighee and Ethnocentric religions v Proselytizing Religions [339 words]dhimmi no moreMar 9, 2022 10:3450402
Our dear Michael and the GOAT that ate the Qur'an [748 words]dhimmi no moreMar 9, 2022 17:5550402
Guiding the Perplexed Our dear Michael and his avatars. [1080 words]dhimmi no moreMar 10, 2022 09:5850402
In Quest of Allah's uncorrupted Torah! And our dear Michael or any of his multiple avatars! [178 words]dhimmi no moreMar 12, 2022 09:0050402
Identity Crisis - Torah has Only One Author - Multiple Scribes [69 words]M ToveyMar 12, 2022 18:2150402
A Very Concerned Reader, "The Romance of Alexander" and Musa Cerantonio of Australia: "I always knew that being proficient in Aramaic would one day prove useful." [376 words]dhimmi no moreApr 2, 2022 16:2850402
Israel Has a War to Win [257 words]Fazal CurmallyJul 20, 2006 23:5450400
We Are At War With Demons [89 words]orange yonasonJul 20, 2006 23:4350399
Demons Indeed!! [141 words]JaladhiJul 25, 2006 10:4850399
Israel has a war to win for whom? [155 words]Nenette GrunbergJul 20, 2006 21:0650384
Israel needs to win for whom? [86 words]Anubhav SinghJul 24, 2006 08:1250384
Well Said Anbubhav!! [108 words]Another infidelJul 25, 2006 03:0450384
STEP UP [82 words]JOHN MANITTAJul 20, 2006 20:2950377
Israel is toast, eventually [25 words]Howard VeitJul 20, 2006 18:2850369
Psychics, Tarot Cards and futurists [209 words]JerryJul 22, 2006 15:2950369
A moderate Islam? [16 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Ethelred SmithJul 20, 2006 18:1750368
Israel Has No Choice [402 words]BlackspeareJul 20, 2006 17:4450362
Slow Motion Train Wreck [135 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 16:5150351
When did peace fail ? Here's when: [91 words]Adam EylatJul 21, 2006 13:0850351
Thank you... [73 words]LDCJul 21, 2006 21:2050351
Do we want to [71 words]David W. LincolnJul 20, 2006 16:2650349
CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS [163 words]Abu NudnikJul 20, 2006 16:1150348
Israeli-Arabs and Missiles [152 words]Frederick BainhauerJul 21, 2006 12:0250348
Sure Fred, but what's it got to do with the CMC? [197 words]Abu NudnikJul 23, 2006 17:3550348
Palestinian Arab Muslims first class citizens in Israel whereas Israeli Jews are second class citizens? [1477 words]FreeNov 27, 2006 14:2150348
yea right [29 words]no oneJan 29, 2009 12:0550348
Arabs as second class citizens in the Jewish state [47 words]Wallace BrandFeb 8, 2017 00:3450348
Is anybody listening [183 words]john w. mcginleyJul 20, 2006 16:0950347
No ceasefire before Hizb'allah & Hamas are destroyed completely [190 words]RusselJul 20, 2006 23:0950347
Does Olmert sounds like a likely candidate to replace Vince Lombardi? [139 words]SHmuel HaLeviJul 20, 2006 15:5850346
US-Israel alliance [126 words]Jay ShayevitzJul 20, 2006 15:5750345
War with Islam [158 words]Capt Dave PetteysJul 20, 2006 15:5450344
Left Wing Malady [83 words]JaladhiJul 20, 2006 16:2650344
On Second Thought [42 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 17:1450344
2Islamic Religious War : Muslims want to destroy us , our civilisation and culture completely [1173 words]VincentJul 30, 2006 05:4250344
1TIME TO HIT THE GROUND [2294 words]FERN SIDMANJul 20, 2006 15:4250341
Religion. [233 words]darrenSep 2, 2006 21:1550341
darren, what's your point? [36 words]MosheSep 28, 2006 07:4950341
Fern: YOU GO GIRL !!!!!!!!! [51 words]marianaDec 20, 2006 14:4550341
A bully is a bully [214 words]Les LiebermanJul 20, 2006 15:2850340
the bully and the goaly.. [169 words]HarrakJul 22, 2006 19:3550340
Reply to penalty kicks [833 words]Les LiebermanJul 24, 2006 04:1450340
1Toward the destruction of Islam [102 words]Seamus MacNemiJan 11, 2009 09:4750340
Excellent points. [98 words]B. AlotaibiJul 20, 2006 15:1650338
Nuke Teheran or else [408 words]Moshe LevyJul 20, 2006 18:2850338
Moshe, Bush, Clinton and I [182 words]HarrakJul 21, 2006 22:4850338
Heading Off Return of the Dark Ages. [96 words]Len SarkonJul 20, 2006 15:1250337
On "Israel has a war to win" [21 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Phyllis StraussJul 20, 2006 15:1150336
IDF ... [97 words]HarrakJul 20, 2006 20:1850336
Clothes Line [34 words]F HarrisJul 20, 2006 15:0650335
Think Again [167 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 17:1150335
Requests of Tel Aviv? [12 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
TreetopJul 20, 2006 14:5050334
Yup [14 words]Joel RosenbergJul 20, 2006 15:4850334
"Tel Aviv" [43 words]Mark GoldJul 20, 2006 15:5250334
name of capital of Israel [14 words]daniel mokadyJul 21, 2006 09:4150334
Regarding "Israel Has a War to Win" [120 words]David SchachterJul 21, 2006 11:2050334
Tel Aviv?? [108 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDJul 22, 2006 13:4250334
I think Israel should... [127 words]AlexJul 20, 2006 14:4650333
Yea, but... [103 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 16:5950333
On To Damascus and Tehran [144 words]John R. PeacherJul 20, 2006 14:2150329
Another flawless analysis by Dr. Pipes [144 words]Nathan RosenJul 20, 2006 14:2150328
What is the capital of Israel? [88 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
A. S. KraditorJul 20, 2006 14:0550325
Isreal Is Showing The World That Civilization Must Stand Up To Terrorism Evil [79 words]AnneMJul 20, 2006 14:0050324
How to emplement the suggestion! Dr Pipes in contradiction [146 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
HarrakJul 20, 2006 13:5950323
Are you surprised? I am not [75 words]Nissim AvrahamJul 21, 2006 09:0650323
Good war, Israel! [3 words]Andras BerenyJul 20, 2006 13:4550320
Except... [15 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 16:5350320
A limited objective for Israel in this war. [64 words]VijayJul 20, 2006 13:1150316
Absolutely Right (EOM) [2 words]LDCJul 20, 2006 16:5450316

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)