general'murtad'duke. who said asmara? where is your adeer?

you dream about indhacade too much

mr.dude, your uncle AY is a puppet who said: without ethios we'r nothing. AY will go the same way his little brother went.insha'allah

Young girls were married off to much older men in bible Aside from the point that the Hadiths (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad) were literally written 100s of years after the death of Prophet Muhammad, his companions and all of the people during his days, which clearly by itself proves that the narrations that Sam Shamoun provided above are all doubtful and may very well be out of context or straight lies, but I will go ahead and assume that they are Truthful. Prophet Muhammad committed no adultery or fornication with Aisha. She was his wife even before they consummated! The culture back then and still today in many parts of the world as we'll see shortly did allow for such marriage to take place. The Bible too allowed for little girls being married off as well: Exodus 21:7-11 7. "If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do. 8. "If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her. 9. "If he designates her for his son [Note: his son means that the master is either her father's age or even much older!], he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10. "If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. 11. "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money. First of all, did the daughter have any choice to be sold off by her father, married off by her master to either himself or his son? No! Also, the fact that the master can either marry her or marry her off to his son, means that MOST LIKELY, SHE IS HIS DAUGHTER'S AGE and younger than his son!! So he's probably at least 30+ years older than her. Yet, he himself (her father's age or even MUCH older) can marry her. Strange things: Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible. Let us look at the following Verses in the Bible: "If a man takes a wife and, after laying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, 'I married this woman but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,' then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof [how do you think they would do that?] that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.' Then her parents shall display the cloth [the father would literally stick his two fingers covered with a piece of cloth into his daughter's vagina before she gets married and keep that bloody cloth for as long as his daughter is married] with before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:13-18)" Here is a more clear translation from Hebrew Resources: "The girl's father and mother shall produce the evidence of the girl's virginity before the elders of the town at the gate. And the girl's father shall say to the elders, "I gave this man my daughter to wife, but he had taken an aversion to her; so he has made up charges, saying, 'I did not find your daughter a virgin.' But here is the evidence of my daughter's virginity!" And they shall spread out the cloth before the elders of the town. (From the New JPS translation, Deuteronomy 22:15-17)" The New JPS translation of Deuteronomy 22:15-17 makes it even more clear about having the parents of the girl displaying the bloody piece of cloth before the elders of the town. According to the Talmud, the cloth should be "A cloth of less than 3 square finger-breadths. (From the Talmud, Eruvin 29b-30a and Succah 16a)", and before it is being used, it should be "soft, woolen and clean. (From the Talmud, Niddah 17a)" Also, the fact that there is no AGE LIMIT to how girls in the Bible were sold off and married off to other men, WITHOUT ANY CHOICE, who were much much older than them as also the case with the Biblical Prophets who married 100s of wives clearly proves the hypocrisy of some Christians who attack Islam through Aisha's very young age, while they clearly ignore the same fact in their own Bible. Here is a sample of the 100s of wives of the Biblical Prophets: In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry. In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines. In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines. Even today, girls in many third-world countries are married off at the same or similar age. Also, it is believed by many Jews and Roman Catholics that Mary was 12 - 14 when she had Jesus. Also as I said, the Biblical Prophets who had 100s of wives each most probably married young girls as well. Also, what about Aisha's PARENTS (MOM AND DAD)? Didn't they see it right and fit to marry their daughter at that age and at that time? Who are we to judge? Fathers can sell their daughters as slave girls to other men in the Bible Fathers can sell their daughters as slave girls to other men in the Bible Exodus 21:7-11 7. "If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do. 8. "If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her. 9. "If he designates her for his son [Note: his son means that the master is either her father's age or even much older!], he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10. "If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. 11. "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money. First of all, did the daughter have any choice to be sold off by her father, married off by her master to either himself or his son? No! Also, the fact that the master can either marry her or marry her off to his son, means that MOST LIKELY, SHE IS HIS DAUGHTER'S AGE and younger than his son!! So he's probably at least 30+ years older than her. Yet, he himself (her father's age or even MUCH older) can marry her. Fathers have full control over their daughters The thing that we all must know is that the father in the Bible has full control over his daughters. Let us look at few quotes from Talmudic and Biblical resources: The father has the right to force their daughters into marriage: "The father has the obligation to marry off his daughters. (From the Talmud, Kiddushin 29a, 30b)", and "Marrying off one's daughter as soon after she reaches adulthood as possible, even to one's Slave. (From the Talmud, Pesachim 113a)" The father even has the right to sell his daughter as a servant (slave girl) to other men: "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. (From the NIV Bible, Exodus 21:7-8)" There is even pre-arranged marriage before the child is even born! People before they are even born are arranged for marriage: "A Divine Voice announces who a soon-to-be-born boy and girl will marry when they grow up. (From the Talmud, Moed Katan 18b, Sotah 2a, Moed Katan 18b and Moed Katan 18b)" A The woman's virginity can be taken through a person's hands, a father's finger inside his daughter. As I showed above, "digital defloration" means inserting a finger or thumb into the woman's vagina. I had some Christians raise high objections to this point, and some had even criticized me of being a "liar". Well, beside from the above references that clearly prove my point, if you still do not believe me then go and seek it among OLD MIDDLE EASTERN Jews for yourself. Also, using your own personal common sense, explain to me what the Bible means by "her parents shall display the cloth" and its relationship to the girl's virginity? If the husband is the one to take his wife's virginity through sexual intercourse, then what would having the girl's parents displaying "the cloth" have anything to do with it? You might then think, then how would the husband be able to know whether his wife was ever touched by another man if her father took her virginity away from her before marriage? The answer to this question is that some men can tell by instinct whether their wives had previous relationships before when they sleep with their wives. This however is very difficult and doesn't apply to all men, especially when their wives are good in faking it. In the old Jewish culture fathers were to take their daughters' virginity and must keep the bloody cloth for as long as their daughters were married as a solid proof. That is why the Bible mentions "the cloth" and orders the parents to use it as a proof. Using your own common sense, the cloth would not be a clean one like anyone you have at home. It has to be a bloody one. These laws however are not GOD Almighty's Laws, even though they are considered as such. These are old Jewish Laws that had corrupted the Bible: "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)" The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)" In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie! Why would fathers do that? Back in the old Biblical days, if a girl commits fornication, she would bring a big shame to the family. The family would lose their reputation and respect in the town. That is why you see Biblical verses such as the following: "And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire. (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 21:9)" "...and the birth of ANY daughter is a loss. (From the New Jerusalem Bible, Ecclesiasticus 22:3)" "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a MALE child: then she shall be unclean SEVEN DAYS; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying THIRTY THREE days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a FEMALE child, then she shall be unclean TWO WEEKS, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying SIXTY SIX days. (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 12:2-5)" The entire Bible is corrupted anyway according to its Theologians! The Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and corrupted by man's alterations and corruptions: "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)" The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)" And regarding who wrote the books and gospels of the Bible, well here is a sample of what the NIV Bible's theologians and historians wrote: "Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)" "Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)" "The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)" "The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)" "It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)" "Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)" "The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)" "The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)" "Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368)" "There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)" "Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)" "According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)" "Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)" "The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources....(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722)" "Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)" etc... How can you justify "digital defloration" to your sister or daughter? As we've seen above, it was part of the old Jewish culture to do digital defloration (inserting a finger into the vagina) to women. Mary, the mother of Jesus, even got digitally deflowered herself! I'd like to ask all Jews and Christians this simple question: How can you justify to your daughter or sister that it is Biblically and religiously OK to insert a (middle) finger (whether by male or female; it doesn't matter) into her vagina to take away her virginity? I mean, beside the woman's husband, who should really have the authority to touch her in her private like that? And also, could Jeremiah in Jeremiah 8:8 meant exactly this when he said that the Jews had so badly corrupted the Bible and turned it into a "lie"? "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)" As we've seen above, Deuteronomy 22:13-18 absolutely could not have referred to the husband covering his penis with the cloth and inserting it into his wife's vagina. The verse clearly talked about the cloth being in the parents' possession, and it clearly referred to having the evidence right before the wedding night. So, could this digital defloration by the bride's relative (whether it is her father, mother, brother, sister, or what have you) be nothing but a ridiculous LIE that was put in GOD Almighty's Holy Mouth as a Revelation sent from Him as Jeremiah 8:8 above clearly suggests? IS NEXT Girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex in both the Talmud and the Bible. Also, the age consent in US and Europe was as low as 10: warsameh do you want to read that corrupted book?

Gospel of Jesus Qur’an 3:3 It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong). Christians have problems with this claim of the Quran that the Gospel was sent by God completely and directly rather than being written by man. Christians claim that men who were inspired by God wrote the Gospel and this was written after the departure of Jesus. Christians also reject the idea of the Gospel of Jesus. Quran says that God revealed a book on Jesus, so this is the truth and Jesus in the Christian Bible has also mentioned it. In Mark 8:35 Jesus said: "...but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it." How could Jesus have said this when there was no gospel when he lived? The gospel did not appear until after his departure from earth. It is very clear that there was some Gospel that was with Jesus, the one that Jesus followed and called it worth giving your life for. This is a big ask; giving you life for a book. It is important to note here that Jesus is not talking about the future but is speaking of a Gospel already available. The tenses used are present and the person whom he is talking to does not wonder as to what he is talking about. This verse of Jesus clearly proves that the current Gospels written by men are nothing more than storybooks. One more thing to note here is that Paul never met Jesus, he came much later and therefore, all his books and teachings are useless as the original Gospel was already there which Jesus followed. As for Paul, we can conclude from this verse that whatever he has to say should be thrown away in garbage, even if he speaks the truth as some places, it should be thrown away as it has no relation to the Gospel of Jesus. Some Christians claim that the Qur’an tells the Muslims to read the Gospel and Torah and they also quote verses from the Qur’an to support their claim. The Quran does not give any such order to the Muslims. It says that the Gospel was from God, which no longer is from God as supported by the above statement of Jesus, which no Christian can reject. Another point that is raised by this verse is that to call the Gospel corrupt is incorrect as it is completely altered. A corrupt book has the original part in it as well. If we read the Quran we see that the pronouns used indicate that the words are only and only of God, for example, God says, “I favored Israel above all nations…” indicates that God is speaking whereas the Christian Bibles would say such a statement as, “God favored Israel…” clearly indicating that a human being is writing rather than God. Since Christians themselves say that their books are written by men, this argument is not completely worth discussing. A proper gospel of Jesus should not have the words of any of the disciples, nor of Jesus but of God only. But for argument, we suppose that Jesus wrote the Gospel of Jesus, then the present gospel is still completely not the real Gospel as it should not contain the statements of any of the disciples, neither of Paul. Mark 8:35 "...but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it." Christians should reject all present Gospels and follow the Quran, which God sent for all of mankind. Please do not take this as an attack but rather be thankful to God for sending us the Qur’an which corrects the Old books and brings mankind back to the true religion of God. i can show you more about the corrupted bible if you want.

is warsameh christian? if he is i will show him what bible really is.

these clowns doesnt call kuffars for help. and turki is training mujahideen for battle inshaallah.

ameeeen

do you even know his son(mansur)? yes they control dhoobley, ras kamboni, afmadow beledweyne and other towns. and shabaab never controlled baidoa. do you even know their commander abu zubeyr? watch when they raided balidoogle under his command. alaaaahu akbar

IndaCade was fired long time ago, even Xasan dahir was fired. and why do you mention Xasan dahir, IndaCade and Cayrow all the time? its because you want confuse others with one sub clan. you never mention shangole, abu mansur ,zubeyr and turki.

you may be from garowe or bosaso but be prepared when mujahideen seizes it. insha'allah

agree with you. abu mansur is a true leader. doesnt care about qabiil. our future amir insha'allah

do you have nightdreams about asmara?

if i had a daughter i would offer her to a good brother of course. but i would never offer her to someone who smokes and do jaad. insha'allah

a.y is a murtad thinking about power. do you remember what happened to his little brother?

mhh to what?

maybe you mean saciid

The spokesman of Al-Shabab Islamic movement, Sheikh Mukhtar Robow, aka Abu Mansur, has urged the new Ethiopian-trained Somali government forces not to harm residents in Bay and Bakol regions in southwestern Somalia. In a telephone interview with Mareeg online the spokesman urged them (soldiers) to return to their respective home districts, adding that the soldiers of the weak government did not have the power to fight Al-Shabab. He stated that their islamist fighters would target the new soldiers. Al-Shabab's statement came after Somali military officers said they had received well-trained servicemen who would restore peace and order in the country. The newly trained soldiers have conducted security operations in parts of Bay Region, which is one of the strongholds of Al-Shabab fighters. Mansur has also avowed that the Ethiopian-trained Somali troops are the finishing power of Somali government. In Tele-conference to the local media Sheikh Robow also said that the new troops are allowed to surrender to the Islamists. " We will give them protection if they offer in to the Mujahidiin fighters" Robow said. He also said that Djibouti agreement was subterfuge made by USA saying that USA wantd to break up the alliance for the Reliberation of Somalia. " This was the aspiration of USA, but they will not be successful" he added.

thats true. but maybe she lies.

haaahahaaaha, why did she lie about that?

masha'allah

al shabaab is recruiting for everyday. and the tfg can only say foreign fighters.

hahaaaaahaa

because allaah said so.

i.c.u will be in mogd inshallah