Cancel cultur is not dead. Yesterday I was called racist because I was mentioning the problem of grooming gangs justified by religion (the holy texts, a bunch of Words and letters). I never said something about race.
You can't even equate being called racist to having people call your workplace, getting you fired, and trying to ruin your online presence and your life.
Elon Musk rejects position of UK prime minister. He prefers to promote Andrew Tate as the next UK prime minister and first president of the popularist democratic Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The unelected House of the Lords must be abolished. Everything will be elected and UK will be like Switzerland, a direct democracy.
Musk has been DISAPPOINTING me recently with his position on H-1B visas and how he's turned against MAGA republicans who criticize him and them. Still, I'm for pretty-much anything that damages M. Hijab.
I guess beggars cant be choosers sometimes 😢 i just hope he knows the H-1B visa is the cause leading up to all this BS. Anything that uncover Is slam lies, i will take. Get that w.an.ke.r out of no 10, elon!!
1:35:09 Not quite sure how the question wasn't clear this 2nd time around, perhaps it's the character limit in superchats that leads to the point being obfuscated. Posting this to clarify. 1. I wasn't saying pagans would've pointed out anything, in that example I meant the Jews ("they", in my superchat, was in reference to them). 2. The point wasn't whether or not Jews in Arabia saying that at Muhammad's time would vindicate the Quran's general claim that Jews say 'Uzayr is the son of god, I'm well aware it wouldn't and that it's an error regardless; I was giving an example where the historical principle Muslims employ regarding events in Muhammad's environment would apply, and was asking concerning what you think of its validity *as a historical principle for things happening in Arabia, in Muhammad's environment*. Thus, whether or not it would vindicate the broad claim made in the Quran regarding what Jews say was completely irrelevant to the point. We are - and were already - in agreement that it wouldn't; the question, in this example, would be whether it would be valid to claim that Jews in his environment were saying it on that basis. 3. Islamic reports were also irrelevant to the question. Yes, there's an Islamic bias in Islamic reports, that much goes without saying. The point Muslims make is "If Muhammad says, publicly, that X group of people or person says or does Y at his time in his environment, wouldn't its being an error be pointed out by X and lead Muhammad's followers to abandoning him (as it would falsify his prophethood); thus, since that didnt happen, what's being described is probably accurate". Whether or not there are reports of people saying it has nothing to do with anything; the question pertains to the validity of this principle, and the principle doesn't necessarily depend on Islamic reports. 4. The ex*cution point - although valid in Medinan contexts - doesn't necessarily apply, there are Meccan instances of what I'm referring to as well. It could very well apply to the Jews/Uzayr example though, fair enough. 5. Lastly, not sure what you meant by "Share that with your buddies", it sounds like you think I'm a Muslim pretending to be a non-Muslim? In which case the response is simply that if you're going to start a channel based on responding to Islamic arguments, it shouldn't be at all suspicious for people to ask you to do just that; that's pretty much what you signed up for. Forgive me for misinterpreting if you did not mean any such thing, though. I don't necessarily think the historical principle is valid either and have my own objections to it, but was nonetheless simply curious as to your thoughts as you often provide greater insight than I have into the validity of arguments given your philosophical background and so on. And I'm not hating, to be clear, I obviously appreciate your work and thoughts; I'm merely posting this to clarify. Take care. P.S Ridvan actually understood the point and gave his thoughts on the matter without gratuitous condescension, so props to him.
Ridvan said roughly,'What if a fully grown elephant was the size of a fly?' Is that the response? As in its possible a very small group of jews said X? Also, this clarification is not great without the first time stamp. If I am understanding you, BIG IF hahaha. This argument is still basically an argument from silence. There is simply not enough data to conclude that Muhammeds claims are accurate because of no records of anyone opposing him. Since we have other instances of an opposer being killed, it would be more likely if it was recorded that someone opposed Muhammed and got killed. However. There is in other cases a way to say that opposition and response rising up proves a norm. (If applied to Muhammed, it goes; it is normal for Muhammed to report accurately, this is proven by instances of opposition and then violent response and then returning to the norm of Muhammed reporting accurately)The greek orthodox say that iconodulia was the norm because there was no opposition until later, requiring a clarification and forming doctrine during nicea 2 proving the norm of iconodulia. This is an argument from silence that probably fails upon close examination. I would say it also fails for Muhammed. But again, I probably misunderstood you anyway. Hopefully someone can respond to what you really meant. Miscommunication is such a drag sometimes. God bless.
I dont want to pose myself as someone insensitive. But I have to make my point quite clear. The UK for generations had been a close ally of Muslims and Muslim states. In Nigeria, the UK colonial policy was fashioned to project Muslims over non Muslims and it still tells to this day. Nothing was done to even expose Western civilization to Muslims while non Muslims were defined as "citizens of convenience". Propagation of Christianity was banned by the UK colonial government while at the same time, the UK not only preserved the Muslim caliphates, it also extended it rulership even to non Muslim areas througfh its "indirect rule" It does not end there, the UK went further to inflate the population of Muslim areas to guarantee them a "quota" politically and Muslims had been keeping to that through a "Baby Jihad" These people likely procreate more than any other part of the World. It is a deliberate quest to meet up with that "quota" and use it to dominate the country politically, a vision fostered by the "genial" colonial policies. The only thing the UK at that time seemed to be keen on was to stop the slave trade which was in the 19th century dominated by the emirates created by the Fulani (a nomadic group). The UK as it seems, saw the Fulani (a group with North African racial admixture) as a "superior race" and did all it can to make them "Masters of the North" and make the North "Masters of Nigeria" Hundreds of thousands of lives had been lost, millions had been ruined because of such policies while at the same time, the UK policy is to feign ignorance and claim that the responsibility of dealing with the problem it created (in the first place) lies with the Nigerian state. A state that is weak and designed deliberately to be like that. Interestingly the same UK has adopted the same policy it had developed and designed for other peoples right within their own country. The chickens have come home to roost.
Jesus is the only way humbly ask God to reveal himself to you and he will. Eternity is a long time to be in the lake of fire when all you have to do is humbly ask
Good video much love and many prayers for you and yours and all of Israel for supernatural protection peace and joy beyond understanding I humbly pray in the only way Yeshua the Christ from Nazareth
Awesome to hear you went to church for the first time AP. I hope and pray 🙏 you continue to grow closer to God.
UK Politicians are a sorry bunch.
Complicit with the grooming gangs.
The labour party voting against the national inquiry is like if the Nazis voted against a national inquiry of their exterminations...
27:08 We should be thanking Elon for this
And I understand the churches have been muzzled in England to keep out of these issues..
Cancel cultur is not dead. Yesterday I was called racist because I was mentioning the problem of grooming gangs justified by religion (the holy texts, a bunch of Words and letters). I never said something about race.
You can't even equate being called racist to having people call your workplace, getting you fired, and trying to ruin your online presence and your life.
@@davidschmidt2081if you support pdfiles you deserve all of the above
Sorry to say that but UK politics has been a disgrace for years.
Politicians reflect their voters values
Its not grooming it's simply rapping
Missed opportunity to call it:
"The Biggest troll of history vs The biggest muslim king of today"
elon musk for the uk
Elon Musk rejects position of UK prime minister. He prefers to promote Andrew Tate as the next UK prime minister and first president of the popularist democratic Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The unelected House of the Lords must be abolished. Everything will be elected and UK will be like Switzerland, a direct democracy.
Queen Elizabeth's successor Charles Windsor will be sacked for his Zionist link.
Can please upload this properly after the live broadcast? It's epic!
This makes me so angry.
Musk has been DISAPPOINTING me recently with his position on H-1B visas and how he's turned against MAGA republicans who criticize him and them. Still, I'm for pretty-much anything that damages M. Hijab.
I guess beggars cant be choosers sometimes 😢 i just hope he knows the H-1B visa is the cause leading up to all this BS. Anything that uncover Is slam lies, i will take. Get that w.an.ke.r out of no 10, elon!!
Beggars cant be choosers sometimes i guess😢😢 anything that uncover the lies of. Piss-lam, i'd take gladly. Hope elon get that w@nk3r out of no 10.
Beggars cant be choosers sometimes i guess😢😢 anything that uncover the lies of. Piss-lam, i'd take gladly. Hope elon get that w@nk3r out of no 10.
Beggars cant be choosers sometimes i guess😢😢 anything that uncover the lies of. Piss-lam, i'd take gladly. Hope elon get that w@nk3r out of no 10.
Beggars cant be choosers sometimes i guess😢😢 anything that uncover the lies of. Piss-lam, i'd take gladly. Hope elon get that w@nk3r out of no 10.
"Sneaking into conservative circles"
Or 'wolfs in sheep's clothing'.
That dad who tried to rescue his daughter was in a 2nd amendment situation. Greatful I'm living in America.
1:35:09
Not quite sure how the question wasn't clear this 2nd time around, perhaps it's the character limit in superchats that leads to the point being obfuscated. Posting this to clarify.
1. I wasn't saying pagans would've pointed out anything, in that example I meant the Jews ("they", in my superchat, was in reference to them).
2. The point wasn't whether or not Jews in Arabia saying that at Muhammad's time would vindicate the Quran's general claim that Jews say 'Uzayr is the son of god, I'm well aware it wouldn't and that it's an error regardless; I was giving an example where the historical principle Muslims employ regarding events in Muhammad's environment would apply, and was asking concerning what you think of its validity *as a historical principle for things happening in Arabia, in Muhammad's environment*.
Thus, whether or not it would vindicate the broad claim made in the Quran regarding what Jews say was completely irrelevant to the point.
We are - and were already - in agreement that it wouldn't; the question, in this example, would be whether it would be valid to claim that Jews in his environment were saying it on that basis.
3. Islamic reports were also irrelevant to the question.
Yes, there's an Islamic bias in Islamic reports, that much goes without saying.
The point Muslims make is "If Muhammad says, publicly, that X group of people or person says or does Y at his time in his environment, wouldn't its being an error be pointed out by X and lead Muhammad's followers to abandoning him (as it would falsify his prophethood); thus, since that didnt happen, what's being described is probably accurate". Whether or not there are reports of people saying it has nothing to do with anything; the question pertains to the validity of this principle, and the principle doesn't necessarily depend on Islamic reports.
4. The ex*cution point - although valid in Medinan contexts - doesn't necessarily apply, there are Meccan instances of what I'm referring to as well.
It could very well apply to the Jews/Uzayr example though, fair enough.
5. Lastly, not sure what you meant by "Share that with your buddies", it sounds like you think I'm a Muslim pretending to be a non-Muslim? In which case the response is simply that if you're going to start a channel based on responding to Islamic arguments, it shouldn't be at all suspicious for people to ask you to do just that; that's pretty much what you signed up for.
Forgive me for misinterpreting if you did not mean any such thing, though.
I don't necessarily think the historical principle is valid either and have my own objections to it, but was nonetheless simply curious as to your thoughts as you often provide greater insight than I have into the validity of arguments given your philosophical background and so on.
And I'm not hating, to be clear, I obviously appreciate your work and thoughts; I'm merely posting this to clarify.
Take care.
P.S
Ridvan actually understood the point and gave his thoughts on the matter without gratuitous condescension, so props to him.
Ridvan said roughly,'What if a fully grown elephant was the size of a fly?' Is that the response? As in its possible a very small group of jews said X? Also, this clarification is not great without the first time stamp.
If I am understanding you, BIG IF hahaha. This argument is still basically an argument from silence. There is simply not enough data to conclude that Muhammeds claims are accurate because of no records of anyone opposing him. Since we have other instances of an opposer being killed, it would be more likely if it was recorded that someone opposed Muhammed and got killed.
However. There is in other cases a way to say that opposition and response rising up proves a norm. (If applied to Muhammed, it goes; it is normal for Muhammed to report accurately, this is proven by instances of opposition and then violent response and then returning to the norm of Muhammed reporting accurately)The greek orthodox say that iconodulia was the norm because there was no opposition until later, requiring a clarification and forming doctrine during nicea 2 proving the norm of iconodulia. This is an argument from silence that probably fails upon close examination. I would say it also fails for Muhammed. But again, I probably misunderstood you anyway. Hopefully someone can respond to what you really meant. Miscommunication is such a drag sometimes. God bless.
very inspiring
This issue breaks my heart so so much. But I will power through and listen to as much as I can to face the evil and see it for what it is.
Muhammad Hijab is treated like the joke that he is even by the more sensible Muslims.
Just joined when the stream ended lol
Separation of church from state was the biggest mistake West did.
Gotta suck to be two people and have to share the income...
❤❤❤❤❤❤
Elon Musk lowered himself to talk to Hijab ?? As if the dude didnt need an ego boost
2:56:50 😂😂😂😂
I dont want to pose myself as someone insensitive. But I have to make my point quite clear. The UK for generations had been a close ally of Muslims and Muslim states. In Nigeria, the UK colonial policy was fashioned to project Muslims over non Muslims and it still tells to this day. Nothing was done to even expose Western civilization to Muslims while non Muslims were defined as "citizens of convenience".
Propagation of Christianity was banned by the UK colonial government while at the same time, the UK not only preserved the Muslim caliphates, it also extended it rulership even to non Muslim areas througfh its "indirect rule" It does not end there, the UK went further to inflate the population of Muslim areas to guarantee them a "quota" politically and Muslims had been keeping to that through a "Baby Jihad" These people likely procreate more than any other part of the World. It is a deliberate quest to meet up with that "quota" and use it to dominate the country politically, a vision fostered by the "genial" colonial policies. The only thing the UK at that time seemed to be keen on was to stop the slave trade which was in the 19th century dominated by the emirates created by the Fulani (a nomadic group). The UK as it seems, saw the Fulani (a group with North African racial admixture) as a "superior race" and did all it can to make them "Masters of the North" and make the North "Masters of Nigeria"
Hundreds of thousands of lives had been lost, millions had been ruined because of such policies while at the same time, the UK policy is to feign ignorance and claim that the responsibility of dealing with the problem it created (in the first place) lies with the Nigerian state. A state that is weak and designed deliberately to be like that. Interestingly the same UK has adopted the same policy it had developed and designed for other peoples right within their own country. The chickens have come home to roost.
57:49 Let him finish what he's saying. You can see that he felt cut-off. It's not nice.
Jesus is the only way humbly ask God to reveal himself to you and he will. Eternity is a long time to be in the lake of fire when all you have to do is humbly ask
Big up Tommy Robinson
Good video much love and many prayers for you and yours and all of Israel for supernatural protection peace and joy beyond understanding I humbly pray in the only way Yeshua the Christ from Nazareth
Brother we have no king calm down
Stop your gaslighting. It won’t divert attention from the truth
😂😂😂
Why does AP look like Jesus?
1:47:00
I can't handle the fake voices it's too much
Some viewers have insulted included Islam Quran Muslim .Hence response from Muslim
Mohammed HIJAB for PM Mashallah
OOOH TOMMY TOMMY
UK has fallen. Nothing else to say. 🫠
Talk about grooming , Elons daddy Errol married and had a child with his stepdaughter 😂😂😂 Pot calling the kettle much