Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nadeeshaF" data-source="post: 2981820" data-attributes="member: 119936">This will probably be my last reply to this thread, but in my defense - 200%? Don't exaggerate.   For your information taking this thread as an example, the following links were posted by me: Islamic and general websites(<a href="http://www.central-mosque.com/fiqh/contra1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.central-mosque.com/fiqh/contra1.htm</a>).<a href="http://www.bestandworst.com/r/50430.htm" target="_blank">http://www.bestandworst.com/r/50430.htm</a><a href="http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.2076" target="_blank">http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.2076</a><a href="http://www.islamicmedicine.org/nonmuslim.htm" target="_blank">http://www.islamicmedicine.org/nonmuslim.htm</a><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion" target="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...ience.religion</a> = 83.33%   possible anti-islamic website(<a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/012002.php" target="_blank">http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/012002.php</a>) = 16.66% Of the six links, the only one that can be considered anti-islamic is Jihadwatch. So there you have it, I've even given the percentages. I only use such sites to quote the evil versus in the quran, because I doubt an Islamic site will provide an accurate depiction. You can't really blame these sites though, for if the quran didn't carry such versus they wouldn't be quoted in the first place. Blames on Islam. And I'm out, you can save the cut/pastes for someone else.</blockquote>

Verification: Hathara warak wissa keeyada? (Hathara wadi karanna 20)

Top Bottom