......( So whenever you condenm you condemn on that step and whenever sanctifify you do that only on that step. So Saahib92 we are waiting for your premise.....) _WAZIRI_ :idea:
Islam is a religion of mercy, does not permit terrorism. In the Quran, God has said:
"God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. " (Quran, 60:8)
The Prophet Muhammad used to prohibit soldiers from killing women and children,1
And he would advise them: {...Do not betray, do not be excessive, do not kill a newborn child.}2
And he also said: {Whoever has killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise, though its fragrance is found for a span of forty years.}3
Also, the Prophet Muhammad has forbidden punishment with fire.4
He once listed murder as the second of the major sins,5
And he even warned that on the Day of Judgment, {The first cases to be adjudicated between people on the Day of Judgment will be those of bloodshed.6}7
Muslims are even encouraged to be kind to animals and are forbidden to hurt them. Once the Prophet Muhammad said: {A woman was punished because she imprisoned a cat until it died. On account of this, she was doomed to Hell. While she imprisoned it, she did not give the cat food or drink, nor did she free it to eat the insects of the earth.}8
He also said that a man gave a very thirsty dog a drink, so God forgave his sins for this action. The Prophet was asked, ?Messenger of God, are we rewarded for kindness towards animals?? He said: {There is a reward for kindness to every living animal or human.}9
Additionally, while taking the life of an animal for food, Muslims are commanded to do so in a manner that causes the least amount of fright and suffering possible. The Prophet Muhammad said: {When you slaughter an animal, do so in the best way. One should sharpen his knife to reduce the suffering of the animal.}10
In light of these and other Islamic texts, the act of inciting terror in the hearts of defenseless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties, the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children are all forbidden and detestable acts according to Islam and the Muslims. Muslims follow a religion of peace, mercy, and forgiveness, and the vast majority have nothing to do with the violent events some have associated with Muslims. If an individual Muslim were to commit an act of terrorism, this person would be guilty of violating the laws of Islamic state.
ma'assalam
My good friend, your post is intelligent but if I am not mistaken, my refrence point is suicide bombing not TERRORISM.
Xank you my dear freind, i think the term suicide and terror act can be used intrchangeably,though differ in written but religiously ve ' the same effect and cause the same devastation. because all are ( fasad fil ardhi) .
to prove my views plz check the punishment of both offences, then compare n contrast the difference.
ma'assalam[/b]
Salam
All i know is terrorism in whatever form and for whatever purpose is haram.
Peace is Kosher..........
OK,
Now, who is a Terrorist? Perharps if we can get to define who a terrotist is, we can conviniently think of how Muslims suicide bombers fit into our own definition not the kind of definition being imposed on us by Western media houses.
Afterall why is it that the Basque people are not being labelled terrorist but rather separatists? Why is that when others, not Muslims act like Muslims act in warfare, are labelled freedom fighters not terrorists? Why is it that some are called rebels for what they do not terrorists and this inspite of the fact that what they do is the same as what the Muslims do?
Terrorism happened in Russia before Kerensky revolution but the perpetrators where not called terrorist but rather revolutionaries. It happenned in many African countries before independence but the perpetrators were not called terrorists but rather freedom fighters.
Now, why do we insist that our MUSLIM brothers are terrorists not freedom fighters or other good things? It is when we reflect on this carefully we will then change the subject matter to disscuss the question of whether freedom fighting is HALAL or HARAM. It is then we can understand suicide bombing to be different from Terrorism. It is then we will have clear vision of the reality of things.
Despite Waziris remarks I can assure Onliners that Basque separatists who kill and blow up innocent civilians are known as "terrorists".
Anybody who kills and maims innocent civilians is a terrorist and an evil murderer, no matter what the cause.
Lets have discussions on Kano Online based on fact and not on distortion.
That is great, the Basque also are terrorists and their like in Northern Ireland and other parts of the world, right? But why is it that the whole world is being made to understand that terrorists can only be found among Muslims? Whenever you hear any terrorists attack, it is Muslims and when it is the same kind of attack from the Israelis, the Basque or the people of Northern Ireland then it is called attack by some name not terrorism.
My plea is for all to learn to represent them as such. The, BBC, CNN, NBC and what have you. It is only when we have something like that we will be able to admit that Muslims too can be terrorists. If not, then we will continue to understand our Muslim brothers in Iraq, Palestine and anywhere in the world to be FREEDOM FIGHTERS not terrorists - which is good to be anywhere and in every religion - and always conclude with the Fatwa that they are right in what they are doing and that they will be rewarded with heaven the blessed when they died as dynamites.
The IRA has been for years refered to as a terrorist group. There are so many other groups that are non muslims that have been refered to as terrorist. It is wrong to say that only muslims are synonymous with the term. A clear distinction must be made between a terrorist and a freedom fighter, whilst a freedom fighter may fight and target military or symbolic targets and try and minimise or completely avoid civilians, terrorists on the other hand target mostly defenseless civilians for what ever reason and avoiding or leaving their real targets. That is why when freedom fighters accidentaly or delibrately target civilian targets, their acts are refered to as terror acts. Whatever the case we must be careful in trying to right one wrong by another wrong.
Mr. David I forgot actually to ask you as to when last you heard the word "terrorisms" being ascribed to those who are not Muslims. In our media houses the Basque people are known and being represented to the outside world as SEPARATISTS, that is the word of the media for them.
Also the activities of the USA in Iraq and other places, the activities of the Ashkenazi Jews in Palestine which both target civilians are never labelled "Terrorism" in our media houses.
For the same act of killing innocent civilians, America is today being projected as liberator of the opressed in many countries to the extent that Mr. David will suggest the should invade Sudan. But for the Muslims who kill civilians they are labelled as terrorists and nobody is thinking fit for them to strike at anybody anywhere.
The Western media houses give Muslims bad name because they want them hanged. They give America good name and Isreal less than bad name because they want them celebrated. They are daily suceeding in this propaganda ramming down meanings into our brains to the extent that some Muslim will write something condemning his own brothers in that name given to them by his enemies. He says they are terrorists only because his enemy thinks they are. Had the enemy believed other[wise], he wouldn't have had options to believe other[fool].
Finally, for Amin and Saahib, let us all understand that killing in Islam is not HARAM. What will make it HARAM or otherwise is the reason and the circumstances in which the killing is done. Islam does not believe you should turn the other cheek when beaten. It says ...Fa'ataduu Alaihim Kama'a taduu alaikum... , meaning, "...Act rashly on them[non-muslims], the measure of which they act rashly on you..."
Also, and exclusively to Saahib, in Islam and when it comes to determining what is HALAL and what is HARAM. You consider all the verses and Ahadith speaking about the subject in question before you make your conclusions. And when you conclude, you use the concepts of Dharurah and Maslahah, that is, avoiding the worst and attaining the best, before you assume any position. That is to say Islam is pragmatic in approach and nothing is considered abssolutely HARAM or HALAL regardless of situations and circumstances.
On Suicide Bombing, the great jurist, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi has an excellent work, peharps if you could get a collection of his fatwas you will find reasons to understand. On the subject of determining what is HALAL or HARAM you try to get the works of Imam Al-Shafi'i who dwelled alot on the sciense of Usul al Fiqh.
When I read some of the things ppl say here about the West sometimes, I wonder if its possible that we are as misinformed about them as we claim they are of us. While we demand that they go the extra mile to understand us, it seems we can't be bothered to extend the same courtesy. Maybe we believe we already know them well enough (whereas we don't), or that the West doesn't deserve our fair non-partial analysis. But if we are honest about the truth we won't peddle foolishness.
Waziri, when last have YOU heard of the IRA in the news? I doubt that you've ever heard them mentioned, or do you honestly believe that group that was responsible for the murder of Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1979 would simply be referred to as 'separatist'? If you lived in Spain, you would know that the Basque separatist movement ETA has also been known for its terrorist actions. The reason you may feel terrorism has been branded as 'islamic' is that other terrorist groups don't get half as much media attention. Why? Partly because the popularity of the palestinian movement and the recent actions of Al quaeda has 'stolen the thunder'. So while I'll readily admit that media coverage in the West leaves a lot to be desired, it is the actions of ppl who unlike their counteparts are 'acting in the name of God' that are the major problem.
I urge you to read mallamt's post. There's a lot more I have to say about your comments but that will have to wait for later.
salam
Waziri I sense a misdirection of facts in your argument. What you are saying, in essence, is that because others, in the Kerenski or IRA or the Israeli Airforce, have committed [suicide or any type of act that intentionally targets civilian] attacks and had not being condemned as terrorists, then it's OK for muslims to do the same. I think we Muslims reject that kind of argument. We Muslims stand for justice whether or not it displeases us.
And the fact is, when a person, wilfully and under non hostile and normal conditions, kills another human, then what he has done is a crime. It cannot be justified.....
As for the kerenski and IRA people, I guess what the media is guilty of is double standard which has nothing to do with the justification or lack thereof to commit murder.
Now, I agree with you that the media has done a terrible job in classifying what constitutes terrorism and by implication a terrorist. When Zarqawi's murderers kill and maim civilians by bombing a mosque, where civilians pray- in Najaf, we must call them terrorists. When the IAF bombs a refugee camp in the Gaza strip, knowing fully civilians will be caught and did nothing to ensure their safety as a result of the strike, then the IAF as a whole is commiting terrorism. When Chechen rebels storm an elementary school, with the intention of what???? i have no idea, and people got killed as a result, then we must call them terrorists. Same holds for Russian Forces in their activities in Chechnya.
The one thing that ought to be done by the citizens of the world is to recognize that there is a legitimate right to self defense if ones land is occupied (Palestine, Iraq, Chechnya etc). And with this right comes responsibility. The rsponsibility to repulse those who have wrong you and them alone. For example, only killing Soldiers or any of their supporting staff.
Also, there is a thing called terrorism that is not defined by the person commiting the act rather by what kind of action he is commiting. That is killing an Russian soldier in Moscow is legit but killing people in an apartment complex in petrovskaya is not legit.
If this is done, then it will be seen that terrorism is commited by both non-muslims and Muslims.
And no justification should given, however strong, for commiting this crime....
A very true posting from Myadudu.
If anybody should claim anywhere that my claims are not true should dare take me on that for nobody will believe him who says Waziri is just wrong by mere him saying so. If anybody should attribute ignorance of the West to me should tell me first how much he knows - more than me- of their history, philosophy, legal theory and their complete worldview.
In discussions, it is those distinguished authorities of the West about themselves and about me I take. For example I challenge Samuel Hutington for his misrepresentation of my people in his seminal work, Clash of Civilisations. He attiributed some actions to 'Yan Izalan Kano when it is true that it was not 'Yan Izala but 'Yan Shi'a. Am I not justified by my claim that he is ignorant of me? Or the account of Prof. J.P. Clark of the true scholars of USA, the torch bearer of Western Civilisation, on Africa is not revealing enough? Okay, what is it about the West that I cannot discuss with even their distinguished scholars, with some good degree of depth and brevity, more than I can discuss with their lackeys?
We only go along way ridiculing ourselves if we maintained that media houses will represent the Basques as Separatists and at the same time terrorists. The rule in journalism is to give an identity to situations, circumstances, peaple and maintain that identity for them in order not to confuse readers. So it is only Muslims that are called Terrorists in media houses. While others including USA, Israel, IRA and the Basque are called other things differently. Is it not true that people like Hosni Mubarak of Egypt among other Muslim leaders called for clear difinition of who a terrorist is after 9/11 for the fact that the term is only and only attributed to Muslims?
For Yadudu, what are the facts? How did I put them to misdirection? Or is it your misrepresentation of me? Quote me and have sufficient refrence point, not just interprete me the way you wish. The logic is simple and the tradition is for us to succumb to the powers of superior arguments even if they do not represent what we truely want. Here is the summary.
1. Others did or are doing what we do but they are not called terrorists but rather were given good names.
2. We only admit we are wrong only when we are given bad name by our enemies. Because they gave our "terrorists" brothers good name when they were fighting USSR and hardly we held sessions, then, to disscuss whether terrorism was HALAL or HARAM. But now that they are giving us bad name we hold sessions to say terrorism is HARAM which finds more reason in them comtempt of it.
3. We Muslims are for justice and justice does not say one should not go to war or kill but justice say we should look first at the reoson why we kill and in our discussion here, in examining terrorism, what we should look at is the reason not the action to be condemned. It is when the reason is not good enough we will condemn the action. This is the premise. The rule.
4. Yadudu whenever we are discussing issues of strong faith affiliation, and in Islam, we take stand on the premise of History, Law and Philosophy of Islam. And if you cannot speak on that note. You know I will never take you serious and no any good Muslim, wherever, who knows what he/she is doing will take you serious. Not Sheik Ja'afar Adam, not Auwal Albani not to speak of people like Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.
Finally I am ready to discuss this subject with any good Muslim who can speak in terms of Qur'an, Sunna and the kind of premise I elucidated above. I am ready to learn too and will surely succumb to the power of superior argument, but the argument has to be superior indeed. If not you just clear yourself of my sight, for I will not even bother enough to respond.
_waziri_
You have taken a very strong position, may I ask what is your definition of a "good muslim" does it defer from what is generally held as the definition of the term or does it have to agree with your veiw? What do you mean by superior argument and who determines that it is superior to your argument you the opposing side or the forum?The postings of SAAHIB 92 and myadudu gave references to the Qur'an and other islamic writings were they not speaking in the terms you are asking or would you only recognise them speaking in terms of the Qur'an if they subscribe to your veiws?
salam
Waziri..... nagode fa. Before I start I want to make this clear. I am not a scholar of Islam. Infact, har yanzu ban sauke Qurani in the form it is done in Hausaland. I have read all and every part of it though....
Also, I dont know any philosophy, legal theory or history of Western civilisation.
Facts you misdirected.
Fact: the IRA is a violent group that commits atrocities which, according to your take on things, should be condemmned as terrorism. I agree it should.
Fact: the Ashkenazi Jews are perpetrating crimes in Palestine/Isreal which are, by unbiased definitions, terror related in nature. I agree.
Fact: Western media is giving Muslims a bad name to discredit them and their religion. I agree.
Misdirection of the Facts: Because the points raised above all are terrorism related and are commited by non muslims, without the perpetrators being rebuked, then, when muslims commit similar actions they musn't be condemned!
Of course you can argue that is not what you meant. But anyone who really read the post with an open mind will reach the same conclusion.
My contention: Having agreed with the above 3 examples of terrorism, as related in your earlier posts, I suggest the need, on your part, to recognize that Muslims do indeed commit terrorism. But it is not only muslims that do so. Non muslim do the same.
By the way, Saudi Arabia, a country form which I can sense you draw alot of inspiration from, has since done that (Recognize that some Muslims are terrorists). They just recently killed a big terrorist named Al Muqrin in Jeddah. Did I forget to mention he was a Muslim?
Worries: That you are using an example of Hosni Mubarak in good light makes me shiver. The chap is a terrorist wanting others to ascribe to his own notion of what terrorism is. I am sure you know how many people they, the Hosni regime, have terrorised over the years for being members of Ikhwanil Muslimeen. And Hosni Mubarak is NOT a muslim leader. He is a secular Nasserite and his end might be like that of his predecessor Sadat. An example of a Muslim leader is Ayotollah Khomeini.
Ah Quotation quotation.....
Waziri I thought you were better than that. I deliberately (well may be I am lying) wrote my reply without quoting you because this is not an academic exercise. And since the guys in charge of English language do allow us, lay men, to paraphrase, I took that option. Yeah man, I took the short way out. Come to think of it, why quote you then give meaning to the quotation when I could simply paraphrase? I find this soothing......
But on a more serious note, you know very well quotation are only what we want them to be. I can quote the Quran where it says, for example, Muslims should kill non believers and then stop. But I wouldn't not be doing justice to the Holy book because the BIG picture can only be seen by collating that quotation and other relevant sections of the book that prohibit indiscriminate killing.
Final worry, One doesnt have to be an intellectual to have a good and productive debate/discussion.
I sincerely believe so.
Sleep tight mate... cause the terrorist Obasanjo might make Zaria his own little Baghdad.
Ok Aminuddeen,
Scholars are those people who engage in studying some aspects of life no matter how trivial. And I believe you engage yourself in trying to study and understand Islam as such you are a scholar in this sense. But scholars are of course of levels, as some are beginners others may have excelled. One other thing, is logic forms the bedrock of schorlarly arguments and it does not leave any body out.
Having noted the facts which you agree with me on I will go on to substantiate what you called my misdirection of them.
QuoteBecause the points raised above all are terrorism related and are commited by non muslims, without the perpetrators being rebuked, then, when muslims commit similar actions they musn't be condemned!
The logic is why must I believe myself a terrorist and believing so only when branded by others at the time they wish to brand me such but at the time they think I am not, I believe them? And suprisingly, they brand others something less than terrorists for doing what I am doing and yet I believe I should be condemned?
But for the sake of continuity lets agree that what you said is what I meant. If anybody anywhere should commit crime against me - commiting terrorism againt me, as in Isreal and America with there European backing- and be rebuked not , which indicates acceptability of his actions against me. Why should I be blamed for commiting the same kind of crime against him? You can see that those apportioning blames, ofcourse, the self styled judges, are not being guided by any good sense of justice and as such I will be justified by the same law of jungle to continue my crime until they agree to see everybody among us perpetrators under the same light. It is a warfare, a ceasefire is declared only when a common ground is reached. You can't shoot me and be right and when I shoot you back in the same sterategy be wrong. Amin, I am being pragmatic using my facts wisely, not misdirecting them.
I also noted your contention and I will not recognise that Muslims too commit terrorism until those people who label Muslims terrorists recognise that others too commit the same act. Remember terrorism is not my term not also your term. Let those saddled with the manufacturing of terms and labels recognise that it can be applied to others than Muslims, then myself and you can follow their footsteps. We can't hijack their product and use it where they do not want it used.
And for your understanding, I do not draw alot of inspiration from Saudi Arabia as a country. I draw my inspiration from distingushed scholars who argue from the point of view of reason, logic, finesse and revelation.
You can also see that to the manufacturers of the term terrorism, Iman Khomeini will not be left out of the lists of world foremost terrorists just as you can include Hosni Mubarak who is also a Muslim leader who is not good enough to be like Khomeini.
Yes, I asked for quotations to make your points sharper and precise and put me in a position I can adequately bear my cross. Charges should come with clear references. If you care to note, you will see that in my debates I do not charge but I debunk arguments. Where I charge, I site examples to appear stronger in subtance. This is the method.
You spoke about quotations which are what we want them to be which is true. But this true doe'snt hold when we put those quotations in full contexts of the debates and the circumstances they were referenced. You do not have to be an intellectual before you partake in fruitful discussions but you strive to see reason in the light of the superiority of the arguments put forward.
Finally and in the light of the many things I said above and the confusion that evolves from the representation of Khomeini as a terrorists by some people and your seeing him to mean the embodiment of Islam, and any other dispute that leads to others being labelled terorists in relative circumstances. I will conclude that no action in Islam can be labelled HARAM completely or HALAL without relating everything to condition. Thus an adulterer doing it under gun point cannot be seen as some body doing anything wrong even though adultery is wrong. So also what makes terrorism HALAL or HARAM can find meaning only in the light of the condition that gives birth to the action of TERROR. At certain conditions a terrorists also can be right just like the rich can also cry. Our task here if we identify with the true spirit of objectivity is to put the circumstances that lead to terrorism forward for proper examination before we can conclude on the HALAL
NESS or HARAM
NESS of TERRORISM.
Assalam all,
mydudu,waziri,mallamt thank u very much for your response, sharing of fact and expression of opinion base on islamic teachin.....and philosopical thought.
As we are all aware that this topic was tabled before the forum inorder to disscus,argue or condemn where neccessary on the act of suicide,terror and violence in the name of ( DINULLAH) islam. we of course must do MASLAHA to ourselves for not being deceived by the western media captions and propaganda. what i suggest was just let's puts them or level them to where they deserve or be belong to.
" they are trangressors in this world, in hereafter they belong to the hellfire"
in my view the captioned we ought to maintain our focus was" the legalty or otherwise of the act " ab initio the consequences or devastation it might caused to the integral muslim ummah.
For the west and their cohorts, we knew their zombie like characters while making news headlines, because they ve' specialise in twisting and
distortion of story.concealing of truth was their trademark.publication of lies or flawfull coverage on islam and muslim was a daily slogan .
so what ve' we loss ? absolutely nothing ! except,when we deviat from the prophet teaching,exemplary character and above all to shyaway from the truth. [/b]
Salam
Nice one Waziri. My understanding of complex arguments is very limited and as such, I will respond according to my understanding. Lets not forget my Turanchi is 'little' more than cikin chokali. How 'little' you may ask?
I summarise your arguments as follows:
You grouse is not with Muslims called terrorists but the fact that if non Muslims commits similiar or more heinous crimes, they are not called terrorists.
I think the best answer is to not despair. Or simply to stop watching CNN, BBC,SKY news and start listening to Radio Tehran!
America is todays super power. And it can, without being blamed, call anyone anything anywhere and at anytime for no reason. Why? Simply because they could. That is called injustice and has nothing to do with justifying what is terrorism or not.
The best way to combat this phenomena is by imposing our own definition of terrorism and terrorists on America up to a point where it becomes clearly clear. A challenging proposition this is.
Rejceting the truth?
You said, ".....I will not recognise that Muslims too commit terrorism until those people who label Muslims terrorists recognise that others too commit the same act"
Funny Waziri you said that. To 'quid-pro-quo' the truth does no one any good. What you are saying is that, for example, if I were to go to Kano Central mosque and bomb it killing perhaps 200 people simply because I am a member of the Izala sect, then I must not be called a terrorist because, for example, Baruch Goldstein has also bombed a Mosque in Hebron killing many, and was not called a terrorist by the western media.
Lastly you took exception to my naming Khomeini as a Muslim Leader and suggesting your scholarship is Saudi centered. On one of them I erred. That is, Khomeini is a person leading a country that has written into its constitution that Islam is the state religion. This does not necessarily translate to Khomeini being a muslim leader. May be a person leading muslims is a better description.
As for your scholarship being Saudi centered I am sure I was right.
You retinue of scholars all have one thing or the other related to Saudia (The Kingdom of fools). Albanee's books are popular there suggesting that his works are not censored by the Saudi ministries. Jaafar Adam I am not so sure but if I am not mistaken, he was educated in Saudia. Qaradawi I think is the one you are most influenced by. Based in Qatar and heavily popular in the Middle East, Qaradawi has pretty conservative views. He has said that Suicide bombing, most of which kill civilians, is a legitimate weapon of war. This proclamtion is a God sent to saudis who have this irrational and most often idiotic hatred for Jews even the unborn ones.
The liberal side of me tells me this is enough for the day may be i'll put my conservative hat tomorrow!
peace out.....
mydudu,
"The liberal side of me tells me this is enough for the day may be i'll put my conservative hat tomorrow! " :lol: :lol:
very nice , but make sure ur conservative hat contained respect to dinullah, liberty and freedom to the downtrodden,mercy and seek MASLAHA ON EVERYTHIN.
MA'ASSALAM
SAAHIB
Ofcourse. As to matters of religion(ISLAM), there is no compromise......
Aminuddeen, you should have seen that my rejection of the truth is on the premise that it is PARTIAL and I insist in saying it should be stated in FULL before I accept it. I guess putting it this way would have been fairer to me. The example of some Izala mosque ppl attacking other Muslims somewhere or whatever maybe, does not hold waters, because it is yet to happen. You know what? Have this from me today that if anybody will insist to say the truth about you, and say the truth not about himself, that person can even create lies and attribute them to you. Truth is not a one-way thing. You will see how this work in this post.
I am also impressed to note how you already hit the nail on the head, to have driven home the points yourself by suggesting to me to stop listening to CNN, BBC SKY and whatever, to be tuning to Iran only. I don't think this is the right thing to do. But I have better suggestion for you and myself. WE SHOULD all continue listening to these stations but open our eyes wider and also use what Napoleon Hill would call our sixth sense in order to achieve greater objectivity. This is the prescription of the Qur'an in this regard in Suratul Hujurat verse 6 saying:
O you who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth (verify the claims) that you may not harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what you have done.
Yes. They have strong propaganda machinery but they make mistakes and it is in those mistakes you will be able to read through, beyond the News and propaganda, extracting the real truth. Ok now lets start doing it. Lets examine the Muslims terrorists' stories using the method as prescribed above. And I believe even if anybody is not Muslim, that person will not have problem with the above logic. First we know these people are wicked and as such the verse above covers everything about them. Lets take 9/11 the foremost terrorist attack attributed to Muslims as our first premise before we come to what happened recently at Beslan, Russia.
Immediately after 9/11 if we can still remember, we witnessed serious desperation to create Islamic identities for the hijackers. A quick list was drafted telling the people of the world who these hijackers were. But only later for us to learn that many among the people identified are even dead. Some were in their respective countries engrossed in their daily businesses contributing to the welfare of their people. What is common in the list is only the fact that all of them studied piloting somewhere in USA.
The Problem: Could it be that there is no comprehensive list of those who boarded the planes at the moment? Or is it the Western media houses felt it better to go to a near by piloting school to get a quick list of Arabs that will serve as a first reference list? There were also stories of Muslims in hotels taking bear and living behind Qur'anic texts. Yes, whoever crafted this story thinks Muslims will believe that the devoted ones among them are the ones who take alcohol. Well, whatever the case maybe we will live to remember the truth that op till this day there is no clear evidence that it was Muslims that attacked twin towers. And up to this day nobody cares to come up with proofs in that regard. And that was how it was all saddled on Osama Bin Laden and Alqaeda Network. With this half-truth these people mercilessly invaded Afghanistan, killing and brutally raping innocent children and Women of Harem.
Aminuddeen he who tells truth about you but tells it not about himself can even lie against you. Do you think the blame of 9/11 can lie on the Muslim as it is said and based on the criteria as elucidated in the above verse? Do you think this news that Muslim did 9/11 from Western media IS true? Don't you think other stories of terrorists attack by Muslims could be also a fabrication? Or at least over blown and misrepresented?
Now, lets take the issue of Beslan even according to Western Media. I will rely here on BBC Hausa service to be analytic.
BBC said that these Muslims terrorists mounted a siege on a school and held women and children as hostages.
Immediate Response: Why on God's earth would these Muslims do that? I asked my self!
BBC said it was because they wanted some of their leaders, caught and detained by the (unjust) Russian Government to be released.
Immediate Response: I know Chechens want their independence they certainly have a good bargaining point in that action. Russia will then release them and they too will release the women and children. It is really a good strategy they really stand to win.
BBC said they (The so-called terrorists) held the hostages for three days no food, nothing; the people are even drinking their urine. And the government ordered for bunch of armies to circle the whole area and make sure nobody escaped.
Immeadiate Response: Ayya! These Russian leaders are not good. Since you know these subjects are dear to you, you live and die for them and now they are in danger why not just attend to the demands of the "terrorists" in order to free your ppl?
BBC submitted that after 3 days the Russian soldiers heard something cracking with a very loud noise from the inner side of the area and therefore bulldozed their ways into the building before an exchange of ammunition would begin between them and the "terrorists", the Russian soldiers killed some people of their own. Some of the terrorists were caught some died and some escaped. But still BBC said people in the town were optimistic that there was no any loud voice from the area. It was only Russian soldiers who felt it better to make their ways in.
The Analysis:
From the account of what happened from the BBC and other Western Media Outfits who also maintained that the Muslims were terrorists. If we look carefully we will see that those Muslims were not terrorists, they did not wish to harm the women and the children. We will also be able to see the Muslims were only FREEDOM FIGHTERS who only wanted to get a bargain that would guarantee the release of their leaders and liberate their people from the bondage of slavery. Because if really the Russian government cannot see a reason of attending to the wishes of a "merciless terrorists" who keep a good number of their children and women hostages how can the Russian government be good and fair to the Chechens? Can't you see that these Muslim "terrorists" were only heroes trying to salvage their people?
The mistake on the part of the Muslim "terrorists" was only their overestimation of the good sense of responsibility of the Russian government. They thought the Russians were as human as they were that they could forfeit everything of their belonging in order to save the lives of their people. No, the terrorists were wrong to have assumed the Russians see value in life as they see.
Now Aminuddeen, I want you to go to the other post and withdraw your comments, which said the Muslims, killed those children because they were not Muslim children. I believe you have seen that the Muslim terrorists did not kill those children because they were not Muslim children. But leaders of Russia created the situations that led to the death of their children. Remember in such kind of situations, the Muslim "terrorist" would only think of how best he could escape from being caught ne Kawai.
Will discuss Saudi scholarship, Qaradawi, Suicide biombing tomorrow Insha Allah.
mydudu,
it seems like u re going to be engage on turf about qardawi, and his teaching style do you apply for that? or you have applied to know more if any abt suicide bombing, that have been screened throughout last week...any way i did n't know. let me give you some clue abt the faceless person in quetion.
What is the reality? Is Qaradawi an extremist sheikh?
The fact is that in social matters he is considered among the most moderate but in relation to public political affairs he becomes a different mufti and has a well-known track record. Perhaps his links with the Muslim Brotherhood organization made him view the world from that narrow window rather than the reality, ability and needs of the Ummah.
What the Saudi minister for Islamic affairs said regarding some of the mosques? preachers applies also to Qaradawi ? that they incite young men to go and fight while they remain in their countries and don?t allow their own children to fight. Sheikh Al-Qaradawi, may God forgive him, was one of the most fervent preachers for war and confrontation, yet he continues to live in his air-conditioned house in Qatar.
so...so..mydudu this was the qardawiyya you ve apply to know abt if u......ma'assalam
Quote from: "SAAHIB 92"it seems like u re going to be engage on turf about qardawi, and his teaching style do you apply for that?
You really are misreading your pathways. The following was what Amin said and it is based on that I intend to reply him.
QuoteAs for your scholarship being Saudi centered I am sure I was right.
You retinue of scholars all have one thing or the other related to Saudia (The Kingdom of fools). Albanee's books are popular there suggesting that his works are not censored by the Saudi ministries. Jaafar Adam I am not so sure but if I am not mistaken, he was educated in Saudia. Qaradawi I think is the one you are most influenced by. Based in Qatar and heavily popular in the Middle East, Qaradawi has pretty conservative views. He has said that Suicide bombing, most of which kill civilians, is a legitimate weapon of war. This proclamtion is a God sent to saudis who have this irrational and most often idiotic hatred for Jews even the unborn ones.
i misread my pathways.......or u ve' failed to grease ur argument with specific stand, so that u could be clearly understood.cos' the tools u put in place shows that u re' neither here nor there, no everywhere.
i will tell why if u ask...........
If you own of to your claims you wouldn't have to wait for me to ask you why. Remember we are doing these things not for ourselves only. We believe others will read and benefit from this discourse so please do not reduce it to myself and you only, make your points and others will believe you if you make more sense. You may even be lucky enough to win my conviction to your side.
Terrorism is wrong, and no amount of brutality, animacity or superiority can justify it. It destroys humanity either wholly or gradually and who so ever commits, permits or supports it is comitting, permiting or supporting evil. It is what was done to the red indians of the Americas, the Black Africas of the last millennium, the Bonians, the chechnians and now prety much a good number of the world. It was here and it still is.
Muslims all over the world whether guilty or not has been tagged as terrorist, whether its media propaganda, superior governmental accusation, or lobby groups; we have been tagged...wrongfully accused.
The Islamic world is thought and known to be peace makers all over history, they were thought and preached mercy, independance and respect for even individual soveriegnty irrespect of race, culture or religion. Its a world known for its indiscrimination. The religion of islam permits peace, and its exception only when compelled, when peace itself is threatened, and suitable leaders are to justify just how compelling in a giving society at a giving time. As when a Fatwa for Jihaad is giving out, the might of Islam of the world contribute to re settle the peace.
However, in some societies of our time. The need is arrising and fast exceeding its limits for peace and order. The genocides or "muslicides" and discrimination in Bosnia and eastern Europe, the genocides of central and eastern Africa, muslicides in Kashmir, Afgan and above all the disgraceful abuse of power in the middle east. These with the help of currupt leaders have brought about people looking into themselves for answers, for fatwas roaming about the streets of every city on the planet... the decisions that should be made by authorities are in the hands of the individual man due to the reluctance of the leaders. So as worldly decisions are made by every individual, ofcause some individuals are violent and even evil. Framing one And will do just about anything to get thier goals. Them individuals, organisations and even governments.
These evil parastatals use every book they have written to justify thier selfish interests and evil doing... all of them. What irony as to who justifies the books. Evil governments destroy with thier might, evil organisations with wealth, and individuals with death. The issue of terrorism and talk less of sucide bombimg. Islam forbids to inject even the slightest amount of fear into ones neigbourhood or individual even. It even forbids making loud noises that could scare off a kitten, speaking of minute terror. Life taking is a serious and capital offence in Islam but sucide is alot worse, its an act of faithlessness and absolute disbelief in God, and there fore an act of Shirk. This is punishable by God till forever in the flames of Hell.
You dont believe in God, thats your problem! So Apparently nobody killing any nations innocent civilians at random on the streets or in thier homes or anywhere as per say can claim in anyway to be representing Islam or what Islam represents: Peace.
Islamic action is justified only when it is justified, Islamic justice cannot and does not lie in the hands of an individual rather to a governing Islamic body. Whatever happens muslims cannot take actions on thier own hands but their representing councils. If we find ourselves without the right leaders that could intelligently and rightly guide and represent us, then we have ourselves to be blamed, and we have to dal with out internal problems before the external. If you call this a war, it will neva be won without its generals and colonels...captains wont do! We cant keep risking ourselves or commiting sucide(which is out of the question) for something not genuinely just. Remember, the difference between muslims and non muslims is we blieve in a God, the God. And he has brought to us a guide so we can serve him. And in neglecting that guide, we have neglected God, and so who so ever neglects his guide is not different from any other non muslim. Let our anger and fright and sorrows not decieve us and drag us from our guide, we must keep in our faith, for worries end where faith begins.We musnt forget this!
But something much troubling, even more than the highly concentrated upon sucide bombers is evil governing, and organisations. What justifies the genocide in Afghanistan? what purpose? What justifies the war on Iraq, what justifies the divastating and diverse weapons used on them? What justifies the killings in Gaza? what even justify it as a war? this is simply a superior military killing people of a certain race;Genocide commited by the Isreali government, who justifies it? Too many questions that has no answers, or atleast thier answers dont make reason. like why can Europe use a single currency and West Africa cant. Why wont the IMF collect the loans payed back but will rather extend the slavery and still charge high interests. I dont understand why one or two nations, bandit to the United Nations decide what every nation does and how. What terror is larger than what the chief terrorists are doing, the creators of all the little terrorists all over the world, the United States and side kick, Isreal.
In as much as these great terrorists keep inducing terror in our societies and creating more terrorists, our world will never find peace. Blinded by the media, terrorised by the U.S and having no representing leaders leave the islamic world in confusion, and unless we make leaders of the faithful ones we have left, I'm afraid we'll only continue to detoriate. May Allah guide us, Ameen.
The issue of terrorism shouldnt be a tough debate here, no one can justify it, I'm afraid not even dear old legendary Waziri. But the truth still isnt hidden for terrorists are not muslims, since Islam forbids them, but the major evil doers we should watch for are the terrorists that terrorise without questions.
Quote from: "Ibro2g"
The issue of terrorism shouldnt be a tough debate here, no one can justify it, I'm afraid not even dear old legendary Waziri. But the truth still isnt hidden for terrorists are not muslims, since Islam forbids them, but the major evil doers we should watch for are the terrorists that terrorise without questions.
Ibro2g where have you been all this while? Nobody sees you.
I have noted your arguments but I think right from the outset we should have defined Terrorism, see how it is different from War. Think of what can justify War and what can justify the sitting tight of the one being fought without retaliating just for the simple reason that he will be branded a terrorist by some media outfit.
Why did the early Muslims including the Prophet went to war or unleashed "terror" on those people who "terrorised" them? I repeat nothing can be justified without considering the circumstances of its happening. As Abu Zaid would say in The Assemblies,
" You adjudge that I should be lavish and you hoard?"
Quote from: "_Waziri
I have noted your arguments but I think right from the outset we should have defined Terrorism, see how it is different from War.
I verymuch agree, and I do leave u to define but not justify... I want u to first state "the" rules of engagement in Islam before any justification could take place![/color]
Oh...and I am very much alive,yet. dear Waziri!
If it is in relation to what my muslim brothers are doing in Isreal and other places I never said it was terrorism. Read all mu arguments very well . I believed it to be freedom fighting. So Ibro I did not justify terrorism. But rather I am justifying freedom fighting!!!
Recently one of us, the most vibrant female writer in Northern Nigeria, Aisha Umar Yusuf replied Israel's ambassador in Nigeria who found reason to express concern about how Media Trust brand suicide bombers to be matyr-bombers.
So you can see how your own terrorist is my freedom fighter and your or anybody else's suicide bomber is my matyr bomber.
Everything is about label. When they call and condemn my freedom fighter to be a terrorist you believe them.
When I call him my freedom fighter you say I am wrong. And persist on your stand.
Waz, its not about the label! We have guidelines as muslims. We are guided and have rules, fixed rules if that of the western civilization is dynamic and selfish thanks to the senate, judiciary and whatever comes forth.
In order to remain muslims we have to follow our "rules of engagement" which I havent seen from u.
Killing is haram by any individual, I ask of an ISLAMIC AUTHORITY, IF THERE ISNT ANY THEN WE HAVE OURSELVES TO BLAME MY FRIEND!
Ok go back and read all I have said about nothing being Halal absolutely or Haram in Islam without conditional backing. This plus the theread on Qaradawi and Suicide bombing.
If you did not see an informed pespective in Islamic realm in that then I have nothing more to add for you. But remember you also need to give a reasonable counter to my position before you even expect any reply from me. It also has to be Islamic in the sense that it must find roots in Qur'an Hadith and Islamic methods of reason and logic. But for now I am thru' with you.