Author Topic: _WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)  (Read 11066 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SAAHIB 92

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Aug 2004
  • Location: birnin dabo
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« on: September 08, 2004, 10:05:29 AM »
......( 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
Radina billahi Rabban,
 Wa bil Islami Dinan,
 Wa bi Muhammadin Nabiyya!"

  ABBAS A YAKASAI

Offline _Waziri_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2004, 09:55:34 AM »
My good friend, your post is intelligent but if I am not mistaken, my refrence point is suicide bombing not TERRORISM.

Offline SAAHIB 92

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Aug 2004
  • Location: birnin dabo
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2004, 10:34:41 AM »
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]
Radina billahi Rabban,
 Wa bil Islami Dinan,
 Wa bi Muhammadin Nabiyya!"

  ABBAS A YAKASAI

Offline alhaji_aminu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2004, 04:26:52 PM »
Salam

All i know is terrorism in whatever form and for whatever purpose is haram.

Peace is Kosher..........

Offline _Waziri_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2004, 01:35:38 PM »
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.

Offline Dave_McEwan_Hill

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2003
  • Location: Argyll, Scotland
  • Posts: 514
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2004, 10:59:21 PM »
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.
maigemu

Offline _Waziri_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #6 on: September 14, 2004, 01:21:03 PM »
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.

Offline mallamt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Location: na
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #7 on: September 14, 2004, 07:58:14 PM »
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.

Offline _Waziri_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2004, 10:02:34 AM »
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.

Offline lionger

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2003
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2004, 01:34:38 PM »
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.

Offline alhaji_aminu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2004, 04:21:45 PM »
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....

Offline Dave_McEwan_Hill

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2003
  • Location: Argyll, Scotland
  • Posts: 514
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2004, 12:22:07 AM »
A very true posting from Myadudu.
maigemu

Offline _Waziri_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2004, 09:57:36 AM »
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.

Offline mallamt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Location: na
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2004, 01:14:52 PM »
_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?

Offline alhaji_aminu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2004
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
_WAZIRI_ ( HERE IS MY STAND ON TERRORISM)
« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2004, 12:37:30 AM »
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.

 


Powered by EzPortal