"ajali" wrote in message
news:92e46555.0405051749.1ddc19d9@posting.google.com...
> Dear Jack $ Paul Saccani,
>
> I have written inaccurate respond to your question/s. I have no
> intention to fool you around.
Really?
I was sure fooled.
LOL.
>The idea is to get people like Observer
> to do some research on his own.
And why do you need to do that?
You mean by posting inaccurate information
you'll provoke a need to research something
which I even those not acquainted with Islam
also can detect and question?
And that its proven that you dare not even
answer simple direct questions that was asked
of you?
LOL.
> I am playing his own game.
No you're not..
You're a BALD faced LIAR...thats
been caught...LOL
> However you
> Jack $ Paul Saccani, you enter in the middle of the game. I am not an
> Islamic scholars.
Hehe....
Well thats not how you tried to present yourself
just a couple of posts back then.
BTW...why do you apologise to non Muslim
sounding names but REFUSE to do so to
those that sounded like Muslims when you've
been caught?
Does it mean that you take it that it is sinful
only to LIE to non Muslim whilst you take it
as your God given right to LIE and BULLSHIT
the Muslims?
You are exactly the SCUM in the Muslim world
trying to take advantage of the unwary Muslims
and trying to run their lives thru your LIES...but
when you're faced with no Muslim who you detect
to have more firepower and are not within the ambit
of control from your criminally minded religious
police....you have no choice but to apologise and
appear sincere as you sense that these non Muslmis
may have control over your career or job thru their
international network that you know you cannot
control or influence...
Hey...am I getting all this right.?...
You lowly scumbag....LOL.
>The question about hadiths is a complicated one. You
> can make several dissertations out of that. But if you really
> interested, check this site:
>
> http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/
Which yet again do not address the
question of the date...OR the accuracy
of the Hadiths which you claimed.
> Again, Sorry for the inaccurate respond to your question. I
> appologize.
Even your apology is dishonest.
If you're sincere in admitting posting
inaccurate data....then you've got to point
out NOW which of the "facts" that you claim
to be true is FALSE and then post the correct
ones...idiot.
You only admit your ways when you've
been cornered and attempted to justify
your intellectual dishonesty by claiming
to want to "educate" the illustrious Observer...
LOL
This is BULLSHIT and you know it..
How can you educate me when I've NEVER
posted anything and then claimed it to be a fact when
its not?
You did....
Dishonest MORON.
Padan muka lu...PENIPU terlaknat....LOL.
>
> > Dear Ajali:
> >
> > I'm a social scientist as well as a physical scientist.
> >
> > I have NEVER come across the word "trigulation", nor can you find such a
> > word in the Oxford, Websters, Collins or Macquarie dictionaries.
> >
> > Furthermore, you have not answered the questions posed by Observer about
the
> > reliability and accuracy of the Hadiths, which I am curious to learn of
too.
> > Other arguments posed by Observer were also not addressed by you.
Although
> > Observers arguments and questions are direct and clear, I think he
befuddled
> > it by using harsh name-calling. However, I would like to see you refute
his
> > arguments.
|