Official AMA Soybooru General

[Slopjakker]

what the fuck

 

[Scientoloju]

They are based of gapejak
>erm they don't have a heckin stubble or something so therfore LE NAS
Then they should remove pretty much all buff soyjak edits especially mexiaryan, slopjaks and many soyjak parodys or templates.
Keep in mind NAS is straight up allowed as long as it is related to soyjak media.

I think it would be pointless, everything should be approved on the 'ru as long as it fits under the rules regardless if it is "bad" or "good", that should be the job of the approver. Trying to put that in so you can call an approver as a "bad" approver is retarded as they are just doing their job.

wordswordswords let me fucking see who is approving this niggerbrim. a good approver would be reluctant to approve 30 duplicate liquified terrible mice and just let the next guy do it. a bad approver will approve them without hesitation. i want to fucking see who it is let me see who it is

 

[CrimsonVoidMari1488]

Another attentionwhoring faggot commented on my recent post and uhhh, OH SONOFABITCH! that SBTCfags are investigating and lurking on the 'ru.

 

[Warrior-Z]

Another attentionwhoring faggot commented on my recent post and uhhh, OH SONOFABITCH! that SBTCfags are investigating and lurking on the 'ru.

If I had permissions to I'd ban those pedos right now, but looks like we'll have to wait.

 

[CrimsonVoidMari1488]

If I had permissions to I'd ban those pedos right now, but looks like we'll have to wait.

THAT'LL BE FUCKING GREAT IDEA

 

[CrimsonVoidMari1488]

Oh great. Now those subhuman UTTPedos kept lurking on the 'ru again...
WE NEED JANNIES TO BAN THEM AND DELETE THOSE ATTENTIONWHORING COMMENTS.

 

[Warrior-Z]

Oh great. Now those subhuman UTTPedos kept lurking on the 'ru again...
WE NEED JANNIES TO BAN THEM AND DELETE THOSE ATTENTIONWHORING COMMENTS.

I should get promoted and BTFO these guys...

 

[CrimsonVoidMari1488]

I should get promoted and BTFO these guys...

THIS WOULD BE A GREAT FUCKING IDEA!!!

 

[4tehlulz]

That’s a copypasta.

🖐👁🗣🕴⛑🕶🕷🕸🕊🐿️️🌪🌤️🌥🌦🌧⛈🌩🌨️🌬️🌫🌶️🍽️️️⛸⛷🎖🏵🎗🎟🏎🏍🛩🛰️🛥🛳⛴️️🗺🏟️⛱🏖🏝🏜⛰🏔🏕️🏘🏚🏗🏛️⛩🛤🛣🏞🏙️🖥🖨🖱🖲🕹🗜📽🎞🎙🎚🎛⏱⏲🕰️🕯🗑🛢⚒🛠⛏⛓🗡🛡🕳🌡🗝🛋🛏🖼🛍🏷🗒🗓🗃🗳🗄🗂🗞🖇🕉️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⏸⏯⏹⏺⏭⏮️️️️️️👁‍🗨🗯️

 

[Mist]

I should get promoted and BTFO these guys...

Promote warrior z and rename the website to warriorbooru.st NOWWWW

 

[Username:Required]

Half of this variant:unknown is undebatible NAS and should be removed

McChallenge

The other half is questionable

 

[Warrior-Z]

Astrofene is back in his alt account and vandalized @garf 's post geg.

McChallenge

booru.soyjak.st

 

[Warrior-Z]

Astrofene is back in his alt account and vandalized @garf 's post geg.

McChallenge

booru.soyjak.st

Let me know if he vandalized any more posts, I've found 2 more.

 

[dino]

mr clitty keeps vandalizing my brenton tarrant post and its like 2 weeks old

 

[Mist]

 

[dino]

View attachment 163242

 

[Xiuhcoyotl]

View attachment 163242

@Mist where the banners at?

 

[Mist]

@Mist where the banners at?

Mustard doesn't have direct server access so it has to be quote that adds them

 

[Warrior-Z]

I couldn't post this refutation on the 'ru because of the "banned terms" thing so I'll just link this page of the thread to the guy:
Not all hadiths hold an equal place in authenticity or interpretation. That is precisely the reason that scholars like al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Kathir, and others would refer to multiple sources for reconstituting events. You cherry-pick one part of al-Ṭabarī, even ignoring the actual analysis done by historians: peak bad faith. The History of al-Ṭabarī (vol. 4, p. 50) also mentions Abu Bakr's offspring as having been born during the pre-Islamic era. Aisha's elder brother, Abd al-Rahman, was 21-22 years old when he fought at Badr in 624 CE. If he was only a few years older than Aisha, then she could not have been nine in 623-624. Basic math; something you, of course, struggle with. Also Ibn Kathir recorded that Asma, Aisha's elder sister, was hundred years old when died in 73 AH (692 CE). Hence Asma was born around 27-28 years before Hijrah. Asma was then 10 years older than Aisha, making it about 4-5 years prior to Call of 624 AD for Aisha. Aisha would have been thus 17-18 at the time of marriage in 2 AH (624 CE). So are you saying that Ibn Kathir is lying? Because if you accept one part of his work and discard parts that dismantle your narrative, you're just being dishonest. Now about the Quran:
Surah an-Nisa (4:6): The marriage goes on the intellectual maturity AND puberty. This will not align if Aisha RA was playing with dolls. Just because a hadith exists in a book does not also mean that it is the only different version or most historically authentic. That is why historical analysis matters. Misrepresentation in calculations I made in the previous debates, and you're acting like I took random battle dates and claimed that Aisha is 88 years old.

 

[Warrior-Z]

>He accuses me of cherry-picking when he’s the one selectively ignoring historical contradictions within the same sources.
>I presented multiple pieces of historical evidence—al-Ṭ1abarī’s record on Abu Bakr’s children, 1bn Kathir’s calculation based on >Asma’s age, and even contradictions within Sahih Bukhari itself (Surah al-Qamar issue).
>Meanwhile, he just keeps screaming "ALL HADITHS SAY SHE WAS NINE" while completely ignoring the parts that contradict that claim.
If that’s not cherry-picking, I don’t know what is. You're projecting buddy.
@Chud: Strawman at a high level, never even mentioned "sects" or "sunnis" or "shias". Dude must be out of his mind lmao.