Lance H 🇦🇺✧

“A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence”
Free Cyprus Free Afghanistan Free Iran 𓄂𓆃 Free Sana’a Free Sindh Free the Sahel Free Jilib

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@JSims77766 @mohammed_hijab @ChtyCommission Nurse, he’s out again! There he is!

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

You made so many terrible arguments and assertions that are outright provably wrong. I’m like should I even go into the ijma’ on child marriage, should I go into what Muhammad did to the pagan Arabs, should I go into the riddah wars, the statemwnts of the fuqaha’ regarding the different categories of non-Muslims, their statements on forced marriages, their statements on marital rape, their position on rape of prepubescents, going into the conditions of bulugh, definitions of genocide, ceasefire violations, hamas’ charter, the different views within traditional Judaism about Israel, the historical context of zionism.

You made so many terrible arguments, mentioned so many red herrings, ignored so many arguments, and reasoned so poorly in this entire conversation. Maybe you should reconsider debating a religion you know nothing about next time.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

I’m not even going to go point by point. I’m only going to select your stupidest issues because you’re in way over your head:

1. ‘Aisha said a girl is a woman when she turns 9 so she’s a woman when she turns 9.” This is like saying “A man married a 5 year-old and told her ‘you’re mature for your age,’ she repeated it, so she’s mature.” What a retarded argument.
2. I have found no isnad for this narration. The narration you give is معلق. Bayhaqi says it’s conditional on menstruation in the portion you highlighted so it doesn’t even prove your point unless you can prove Aisha had menstruated at 9.
3. A million died in Iraq war on Saddam. False. The count that gives a million is probably the least reliable of all counts based on a flawed methodology. Serious estimates are considerably lower. Around 300,000 died in Iraq, ~200,000 were civilians. Between 2003-2008, the coalition is calculated to have accounted for only 12% of civilian deaths per peer-reviewed study.
4. 500,000 died in the Afghanistan war in the War on Terror. False. Around 176,000 or 241,000 died. The Brown University estimate counts 46,319 civilian among them. So much lower than you imply.
5. Thanks for giving me the answer about Saddam you refused earlier.
6. I didn’t respond to Australia’s 12 year age of consent you allege. I did respond. I said Australia doesn’t set the standard for morality, I am condemnatory of it and I’m horrified that there are more people in this country promoting we start accepting prophets who marry 9 year olds as well.
7. “They accepted the punishment” so if it says rape children in their ‘punishment book’ you think muhammad should’ve raped children? Complete retardation here.
8. “You can’t be surprised when people defend themselves.” I can be surprised if that includes murdering civilians and children in cold blood as Hamas does.
9. “Zionism prohibited in traditional Judaism.” Who cares?
10. You said I’m concerned with a ‘stone striking a tank when the terrorist who the IDF eliminate was on a higheay and I had explained how it has killed and injured dozens including 5 month old Yehuda Shoham, Asher Palemer and his 1 year old som in the same scenario of Palestiniasn throwing massive stones onto moving civilian cars. You call these stones ‘pebbles.’
11. You completely ignored Nasser Hospital link to Hamas.
12. You said the Hadith طلب العلم is not about Islamic knowledge. Could you show me a single classical scholar who said this Hadith means every man woman child and elderly needs to learn maths? You said I can’t prove it’s about Islamic knowledge: Ibn Qutaybah المسائل والاجوبة p.57, معالم السنن 4/186-187 Al-Khattabi, Al-Baydawi in تحفة الابرار 1/155, in شرح المشكاة للطيبي 2/678, Ibn Rajab in ورثة الانبياء 1/22. I can go on forever. All of tjem say it’s knowing the halal from the prohibited and obligatory matters of the religion.
13. You keep implied Sa’d ruled this way because of the Torah or that they wnated to be genocided, have their children raped by Muhammad and enslaved. This simply isn’t the case. (1) No classical sources say he ruled this way because of the Torah. This is the statement of the lobotmised modern half-witted apologists. (2) The classical sources which explain why they chose Sa’d all say they chose him expecting mercy and to be granted amnesty. (3) They agreed on his judgement assuming (2). (4) They agreed upon his judgement BEFORE knowing what it will be. (5) And WHO is the one who said قد حكمت فيهم بحكم الله من فوق سبع سماوات؟! Not the torah, not moses MUHAMMAD said that. So who is the one that wnated little girls to become rape-slaves along with their mothers and their small sons while all the boys were sexually abused then either enslaved or murdered according to Muhammad? حكم ALLAH.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@IkechukwuA95536 @DrizzyJeri Egyptian Colonisation of Nubia

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@probmaticmedias @goyuritup This is just a fabricated ahistorical talking point.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@radfemsiren It’s probably more to do with the fact that the dresses are designed with a certain body in mind while a suit can be worn on either body and fit normally. So the dresses look more artificial and out of place.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

Maybe you should take more than a minute to contemplate on why you follow a man who genocided an entire tribe, beheading them and throwing them into mass graves including small boys, then endlaving the rest including all the women and girls into a system of sexual slavery instead of looking for one little sentence from an apologist to justity it. I have no interest in discussing with you what you consider a right time or wrong time to kill or enslave another tribe.

As for Israel:
Hospital: then you can see independent UN confirmation of Hamas militants using the Nasser hospital complex including independent witnesses and MSF. There are other independent reports throughout the years of Hamas tunnels under hospitals, fighting near hospitals, etc.

1948:
False. Palestinian terror against Jews in Palestine has been ongoing for centuries and continuously until now since attacks all the way back I think it's in 1896. I won't go into detail but for a long timr Jews didn't retaliate adopting the concept of Havlagah eventually Irgun and Lehi began to retaliate and it wa( until much later that the main Israeli military would engage in acts against Palestinian civilians people found questionable probably around 1947 however still in a military context.
Israel was a state established based on international in 1948, it was the Arab armies who attacked it not the other way around.

The 'nakba' was 2/3 the Arabs running away themselves and 1/3 temporary expulsions to secure the army's rear as many Palestinian villages had insurgents and acted as military complexes for militants. There was a much larger 'Jewish nakba' from the Arab world in terms of being forced to flee due to persecution.
Israel wasn't established as an 'apartheid' state even by serious people who call it that. Apartheid primarily refers to the West Bank policy which didn't exist until decades later.

Hamas isn't a unique group. It's one of many groups that emerged in the Islamist world following Muhammad in the steps of slaughter, slavery, rape, torture, genocide, massacre, that he left behind for them. These groups extend from South-East Asia to the North Caucus, from South Asia to the Middle East and from the Middle East to Africa. They are a continuation first and foremost of
Muhammad's reign of terror and then with the Islamic empires of pre-modern times.

Israel breaking ceasefires is a non-issue. It doesn't owe terror grouns like Hamas Hezbollah except their complete annihilation. That's besides the fact the issue of ceasefires is more complicated than you present it and these groups always break their ceasefires.

White phosphorus isn't illegal in itself though using it in certain circumstances can violate the CCW (Convention) Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons)but Israel isn't a party to it along with 78 other states that also aren't a party to it.

I can't believe you still believe that chidren's tale they teach in the ME: Israel is a big monster that destroys people's homes randomly and mills them and it's this abstracted entity of evil connected to the illuminati and the freemasons while the Palestinians have nothing to resist with except small rocks they throw on tanks.

It's evident you still retain a substantial portion if not all of this frameowrk especially since you didn't mention many other things I do disagree with Israel on. It sounds like you just combined a random set of social media talking points off the top of your head

So far: You've justiifed Muhammad marrying a 6 year old, having sex with a 9 year old, justified Qurayza which historically included: killing the males, enslaving the women and girls into sex slavery, enslaving the small boys, expropriating their property. And then you complain about Israel.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

I think we’ve had a substantial amount of discussion already there’s mo point in me pointing out Muhammad’s genocide at Qurayza, the fact that Hamas has tunnels underground and uses civilian buildings or the fact that throwing stones at civilian cars and slaughtering families is terrorism
But in the case of Josh Giddey, I said ‘I’m no Josh Giddey’ meaning I don’t resemble him in the way you imply.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

I think I can decipher the answer from what you’re trying to say here. Yes, throwing massive stones at moving cars because the drivers are Jewish is an act of terrorism. Didn’t I already mention how many have been killed by this in the past including a 5-month-old who died from brain injuries?

I’m not a ‘Josh Giddey.’ Can you take a hint? Just because you live in North America, it doesn’t mean you’re not of Iraqi origin. As for my own background, that’s private of course but the social media profile is just a social media profile.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@Yanitoh932 One last question: is it true that most Sunni Iraqis still support Saddam or have Saddam nostalgia?

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@Yanitoh932 Still: No, yes.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@Yanitoh932 No to your first question. To the second

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

Respectfully, you just repeated your assertions and ignored the substance of my arguments. Since we’re making suggestions and giving advice, I’d advise you to: Be calmer, take it slow, read the entire sentence not just the part you want to give a nominal response to, and more.

Have a good day.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

For the traditional Islamic position on child marriage you can check out my most recent reply in which I demonstrate my command of اللغة العربية والعلوم الشرعية بدقة. However, perhaps a final response to some other allegations:

Firstly, I think I’ve been pretty respectful and educated responding to your points one by one with sources, not insulting Muhammad, not using heavier terms like ‘rape,’ etc. So I deserve a little credit there surely

But you also say:
-> Muslim 7144 says to obey the laws of the land you live in.
- False. The concept of السمع والطاعة is a technical concept and this is a term of art, not a generic command. It specifically refers to the Muslim ruler. As you can see in Muslim 1855 it says وَشِرَارُ أَئِمَّتِكُمُ الَّذِينَ تُبْغِضُونَهُمْ وَيُبْغِضُونَكُمْ وَتَلْعَنُونَهُمْ وَيَلْعَنُونَكُمْ " . قِيلَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَفَلاَ نُنَابِذُهُمْ بِالسَّيْفِ فَقَالَ " لاَ مَا أَقَامُوا فِيكُمُ الصَّلاَةَ وَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمْ مِنْ وُلاَتِكُمْ شَيْئًا تَكْرَهُونَهُ فَاكْرَهُوا عَمَلَهُ وَلاَ تَنْزِعُوا يَدًا مِنْ طَاعَ
-> Listening and obeying has nothing to do with dictatorships
- False as well. قَالَ " يَكُونُ بَعْدِي أَئِمَّةٌ لاَ يَهْتَدُونَ بِهُدَاىَ وَلاَ يَسْتَنُّونَ بِسُنَّتِي وَسَ��َقُومُ فِيهِمْ رِجَالٌ قُلُوبُهُمْ قُلُوبُ الشَّيَاطِينِ فِي جُثْمَانِ إِنْسٍ " . قَالَ قُل��تُ كَيْفَ أَصْنَعُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنْ أَدْرَكْتُ ذَلِكَ قَالَ " تَسْمَعُ وَتُطِيعُ لِلأَمِيرِ وَإِنْ ضُرِبَ ظَهْرُكَ وَأُخِذَ مَالُكَ فَاسْمَعْ وَأَطِعْ (Muslim 1847)
-> I don’t follow laws.
- I do
-> Atheists have an inferior position on morality compared to theists.
- This isn’t true. My moral preferences are not less authoritative than those of Muhammad or those of Allah even if he did exist. To say this, you would need to proge that there are an objective set of morals first then explain why Allah is best at accessing them. For example saying Allah is more knowledgeable is irrelevant if morality isn’t determined by more knowledge. If you can independently reason to ehat should be objectively moral without Allah, then there is no need for him to attain morality. If no morality exists except what Allah says is moral, then how do we know Allah doesn’t think lying for a legitimate interest is moral and so he is lying to us and deceiving us about everything since prophets are allowed to lie per Bukhari 3358. That’s beside the fact Islam tells us we all have innate moral reasoning we can use so why can’t I discuss it with you?
-> An atheist can change their mind whenever they want about morality?
- Will Allah change his mind again about child murder after he commanded Abraham to engage in it then switched again?
-> Palestine prohibits child marriage and the reason they marry children is the war
- They’ve been marrying children in Palestine before the war, you don’t marry children in a war and West Bank law has a loophole for ‘if it’s in their interests.’ Gaza’s supreme sharia court has exceptions for ‘parental consent in the child’s interests.’ These act as loopholes instead of as extreme exceptions for borderline cases elsewhere.
-> Traditional Islam commands everyone to seek out an academic education
- False. The hadith refers to Islamic knowledge. Taking that as absolute would be like taking إِنَّا أُمَّةٌ أُمِّيَّةٌ، لَا نَكْتُبُ وَلَا ��َحْسُب to mean writing and calculations are prohibited
-> stone-throwing is ‘pebble-throwing’
- False. Yehuda Chaim Shoh was lilled by Palestinain terrorists who threw tocks through a car travelling through a road in the West Bank - the same act I criticised.
-> I’m a different kind of ridiculous
- False.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

Of course it does and don’t let them tell you otherwise.

As you can see, the verse says
ولائي يئسن من المحيض ولائي لم يحضن
“Those who have become *too old* to menstruate as well as those who have *not menstruated*”
This is clearly a form of antithetical correspondence. The two objects are mirrored and are opposites. This is why he doesn’t just say ‘those who don’t menstruate,’ he contrasts those who are too old with the opposite: that is, those who are too young.
You see again: there’s a difference between لا and لم here. لم means she hasn’t menstruated while لا would mean she doesn’t menstruate. In this case, it’s the former that is used because the description is fundamentally about someone who hasn’t menstruated yet not somebody who doesn’t menstruate at all. If it was the latter, the contrast makes no sense between the old and the young as explained earlier. He would’ve just said لا.

Evidence for this interpretation:
The Hadith:

قَالَ أَبِيُّ بْنْ كَعْبِ: " يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، إِنَّ عَدَدًا مِنْ عِدَدِ النِّسَاءِ، لَمْ يُذْكَرْ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ، الصِّغَارُ وَالْكِبَارُ وَأُولَاتُ الْأَحْمَالِ، فَأُنْوْلَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: وَاللَّائِي يَمِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِنْ نِسَائِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَ��ِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللَّاثِي ولَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُولَاتُ الْأَحْمَالٍ أَجَلْهُنَّ أَنْ يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ "(Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah 17104. Adh-Dhahabi authenticated it although there is some discussion around it)

Athar:
، عن قتادة، قوله: ﴿وَاللائِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِنْ نِسَائِكُمْ﴾ وهنّ اللواتي قعدن من المحيض فلا يحضن، واللائي لم يحضن هنّ الأبكار التي لم يحضن، فعدتهنّ ثلاثة أشهر. (Tafsir at-Tabari)

Muqatil bin Sulayman says (after relying on the hadith quoted): فكذلك أيضا يعني عدة الجواري اللاتي لم يبلغن الحيض، وقد نكحن، ثم طلقن، فعدتهن ثلاثة أشهر.

At-Tabari himself says: يقول: وكذلك عدد اللائي لم يحضن من الجواري لصغر إذا طلقهنّ أزواجهنّ بعد الدخول.

Al-Azhari says: وقول أهل التفسير أنها نزلت في التي لا تحيض من صغر أو كبر أصوب وبظاهر القران أشبه (Al-Zahir fi Gharib al-Quran 1/228) (this is after mentioning a baseless narration that implies otherwise)

Al-Shafi’i relies on the hadith to say وَإِذَاوَإِذَا طَلْقَ الرَ��جُلُ امْرَأَتَهُ وَهِيَ كَمَنْ لَا تَحِيضُ مِنْ صِغَرِ أَوْ كِبِرٍ فَأْوْقَعَ الطَّلَاق عَلَيْهَا فِي أَوَّلِ الشَّهْرِ أُوْ آخِرِهِ اعْتَدَّتْ… (Al-‘Umm 5/229) and he goes on to explain the specifics.

Al-Mawardi says, after quoting Shafi’i: وَهَذَا كَمَا قَالَ، لِأَنَّ عِدَّةَ مَنْ لَا تَحِيضُ بِصِغَرِ أَوْ إِيَاسٍ ثَلَاثَةُ أَشْهُرِ، كَمَا قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: وَللاثِي يَسْنَ مِنَ الْمَجِيعرِ
مِنْ تِسَائِكُمْ إِنِ ارْيْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللائِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ (Al-Hawi al-Kabeer 11/193)

Ibn Abi Zamanin also says in his tafseer ونسخ أيضا من الثلاثة قروء التي لا تحيض من صغر أو كبر

From Fiqh Discussions:
You will find the phrase يوطأ مثلها or مثلها يوطأ in abundance as thr jurists discussed the specifics of raping prepubescents. There’s so many I don’t know where to start. So I’ll just give Ibn Hajar’s ijma’ statement that combines the ijma’ and the point about يوطأ مثلها and that it can be forced too:
اجمعوا أَنَّهُ يَجُورُ لِلْأَبِ تَرْوِيجُ البْتِهِ الصَّغِيرَةِ الْبِكْرِ وَلَوْ كَانَتْ لَا يُوطَا مِثْلُهَا، (Fath 9/190)
And he mentions the disagreement of Ibn Shubruma that some people report and when he transmits the ijma’ elsewhere he says الا من شذ (Fath 9/191). So it is considered Shaadh and doesn’t affect the ijma’ which is transmitted by at least a dozen others.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@intentionalisms Because its rulings are basically the laundry list of some 7th cnetury Arab shepherd who wanted to create a religion mixing Arab traditions, personal pet peeves and Jewish/Christian ideas.

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

@mohammed_hijab @ChtyCommission Hijab could you please demonstrate what in particular you’d like to have investigated in any of these charities?

Is it this: “Muslims are more likely to have a positive than a negative view of Hamas;only 24% have a negative view of Hamas” or did you have something else in mind?

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

Being of Iraqi heritage ≠ knowing Arabic. Many in the diaspora don’t know their mother tongue. If they do, they may not be able to read or write it. And if they can, they may not understand classical Arabic as most people don’t. I probably know 100x more Arabic and religion than you do.

As for the Muslim 7144 hadith then you invoke it where it’s not its place. Your implied argument was, with regards to listening and obeying: ‘even if it was permissible go marry children, Islam still commands obeying the Muslim rulers so if they say it’s 18 then a Muslim can’t surpass it.’ So granting this model poses the obvious problem: Morality is determined by the harm incurred upon the girl, not by some dictator. So this line of debate was conditional to begin with.

Muslim 7144 is still an abhorrent hadith because it’s supportive of dictatord and entrenches oppression. But more than that, the Taliban rely on this ruling of the Imam being able to make novel rules for Maslahah to prevent girls from schooling and Saudi fid it with the cars in the past.

As for me ‘misinterpreting’ the verse, then actually… you were half-right. This verse doesn’t say anything about the age of marriage at all. It turns out the word نكاح here is just a case of polysemmy where the word نكاح means to reach puberty. This would show a massive problem if you tried to use it as it would imply Islam really does allow the abuse of girls as young as 9 but this isn’t what it means. This is simply an Arabic word with multiple meanings. Ibn Faris says: النِّكَاحُ فِي الْقُرْآنِ التَّزَوُّجُ إِلَّا قَوْلَهُ جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ: ﴿حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغُوا النكاح﴾ فإنه يعني الحلم
So it really is in passing and has nothing to do with marriageable age, but it doesn’t refer to marriage. So you get 0.25 points on that one.

I don’t know why you’re morally policing me on Israel: I think it’s quite clear me and you have very different values and the values of a Palestinian state would probably be closer to yours - that, in some way, it would justify child marriage since: the rate of child marriage is around 20% in Gaza and the West Bank. So doesn’t it make sense that I wouldn’t support a Palestinian state?

[Lance H 🇦🇺✧ @AxelNcxt]

Our entire discussion can be reduced to three questions:
1. How much of Muhammad’s actions are morally exemplary timelessly?
2. How much moral relativism is permitted and is the relevant variable time or place?
3. Regardless, Muhammad did *marry* her at 6 because his father gave her to him. So how can Muhammad marry a girl without her permission?

The basic problem is: You’re making up your religion as you go while I know it in much greater depth. I can show you very clearly that Islamic scholars have interpreted this hadith to allow forced marriages and to allow sexual relations with children.
But you don’t know Arabic, fiqh, usul al-fiqh, tafsir, etc.

So I’m trying to appeal to you on a basic level; Do you think it’s ok to ever be attracted to 9 year old bodies or to marry a 6 year old only with her father’s permission? Any person with any sense of moral intuition should say: NO!

As for Rebecca, then there are not many Orthodox Jews on this app for me to debate.

As for Australia, then the age was still 33% greater than Muhammad’s age of consummation and 100% greater than his age of marriage. And Australia’s history doesn’t dictate morality.

As for my tweet you quoted showing I’m a Zionist then this has become more of a slur than a genuine term.