David Lock

"they all think if you kill people it will get you a gold star with allah"

Oh pleeeease realise that these terrorists are not typical muslims

These terrorists are evil b, astards with their own agenda who do not represent true muslim beliefs in any way whatsoever. DL

PG

I see from the news tonight a relation (iirc brother) of the British hostage was taken captive himself elsewhere a while back and he hoped the info he gave to him before he left will be of use to him now !!
This family has been through this before !!
How this guy could have gone there to work knowing that this could happen again (however slim a chance) I just dont get it !

Aaquil

Yes, these evil people have nothing to do with Islaam in actual fact some of the Scholars of Islaam take them out of the fold of Islaam due to their evil and the great trials and tribulations that they cause. These people are men with the hearts of devils and in reality they are only stating "Release women captives..." to gain support in Iraq as if they are with the Iraqi people. They call their group 'Tawheed and (something else)'. Well Tawheed is a one of the most noble causes that a Muslim can achieve...they are far from the name they ascribe to their evil and despicable ways.

I hope and pray their hostage is freed asap but I fear the worse...these people are scum with no value for innocent lives.

Aaquil.

moses

have a read here


Name Myoung - Korea (South)
Topic Ethics & Values
Title Beheading Civilians... Islamic?
Question Is there any rule of beheading in Qur’an? Is that a teaching which can justify beheading of foreign civilians?

I realized that Muslims are much brutal. How can Muslims cut off civilians’ necks like cutting off animals and why those Muslims shout “Allah” when they cut off neck? Is it really a great sacrifice for Allah?

Date 2004/9/22

Name of Consultant Jasser Auda
Content of Reply

Salam, Myoung.

Thank you for your question.

Since you are from South Korea, I would like to start by condoling you and your nation for the horrific tragedy that occurred to your citizen in Iraq. It saddened me personally and saddened every decent Muslim I know.

Dear Myoung, Islam has nothing to do with these beheadings, even though it is a distressing fact that some people, who said they were Muslims, carried them out. That is why I really appreciate your question, “is there any rule of beheading in Qur’an?” because, yes, the Qur’an is the criterion by which we could differentiate between Islam itself and any other actions that are not Islamic.

The Korean employee and other non-military citizens, like journalists and truck drivers, etc., are non-combatants. Allah in the Qur’an forbade Muslims from killing non-combatants, and allowed them only to fight against combatants. The Qur’an, in numerous verses, illustrated that. For example, the Qur’an says what means:
*{Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress; for Allah does not love not transgressors.}* (Al-Baqarah 2:190)

And these civilians were clearly not fighters. The Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (peace be upon him), also forbade his Companions during their battles from attacking anybody who is not armed. And when he (peace be upon him) saw a woman from the enemy, who did not look like a fighter, lying dead in the middle of a battleground, he was enraged and said in anger to his own Companions, “Why was she killed? She was not a fighter!”

And even if we agree, hypothetically, to the weak argument that says that those civilians who serve the invading troops are partners in the transgression, these hostages would then be “prisoners of war” (Arabic: asraa). And beheading is not the way that the Qur’an, to quote it again as a reference, dealt with prisoners of war. Among many verses, there are verses that virtually every Muslim memorizes in Surat Al-Insan 76, describing true believers, saying what means:
*{And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive of war,- [Saying:] “We feed you for the sake of Allah alone: no reward do we desire from you, nor thanks. We only fear a Day of distressful Wrath from the side of our Lord.” So, Allah will deliver them from the evil of that Day, and will shed over them a light of beauty and joy}* Al-Insan 76:8-11)

Therefore, it is an Islamic duty to feed the captives of war, treat them well, and to respect their humanity. Another verse that specifically talks about prisoners of war gave Muslims two alternatives: either to free them or to ransom or exchange them. The Qur’an says what means:
*{When you [Muslims] have overcome them [the fighters], then make them prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them be ransomed, until the war terminates.}* (Muhammad 47:4)

In Islam, ends do not justify means. So, although rejecting occupation is an end that Islam approves, killing of innocent people is a forbidden means that is, simply, non-Islamic, even if carried out by Muslims and even if these killers shout some “Islamic” slogans while carrying out their crimes.

I hope this clarifies matters to you. In case you need any more clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us again. Thank you and please stay in touch.

Salam.

Aaquil

The Prophet Muhammad said: "The one who kills a Non Muslim will not smell the fragrance of Paradise even though its fragrance can be smelt from such and such a distance (a very long distance)." So that is the end result for what people like this do. They believe they will be martyrs well suicide is suicide (when they blow themselves up) and that is forbidden in Islaam there is no great reward for them.

moses

i agree but when it comes to suicide bombing against armies and israeli army for talking sake it aint a suicide bros

they have apaches, f-16 and tanks , palestinian doesnt have anything and he needs to fight against the enemy and he has no weapon but his body, how is it suicide if his intention is to get killed in the battle against an enemy

Aaquil

Right...general ruling Suicide is forbidden in Islaam.
1. Unfortunately, the suicide bombers in Israel usually target civilians...women and children. Also they are fighting for the land they have made it very clear that their differences with the Israelis or Jews is regards to the land not regarding any otehr issues.
2. The suicide bombing are ordered by the Juhaal (Ignorant people who have no knowledge of Islaam) they are not scholars who are in a position to order the people to blow themselves up even if they are doing so against combatants which they are not. How can a suicide bomber blow up an apache helicopter, F-16 or even a tank rather they go and kill civilians.
3. Where did you get the understanding from that it is not suicide where is your evidence from the Qur'aan, Sunnah and understanding from the first 3 generations of Muslims. As we all know that you can quote the Qur'aan and Sunnah to our own interpretation but what did Umar or Abu Bakr say about the narrations (As taught by the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu alayhi was sallam).
4. The position and situation that the Muslims are currently in is "...what their own hands have sown." If the people return to their religion, worship Allaah Alone as He should be, establish the prayer and all the other aspects, including not to bring new things into the religion that are not from it then the situation of the Muslims will change. Bush and Blair are not gods besides Allaah. Allaah is the Most Just and the suffering of the Muslims is from Allaah as you reap what you sow. The innocents amongst the Muslims and Non-Muslims will be judged and given Justice by Allaah according to their state and their intentions.

The ends do not justify the means...

Aaquil.

moses

u know very well i didnt mean by saying suicide bombing planes etc, its silly it meant they have all those machines and they dont, except for their body

and its not suicide when u are going to go and kill the oppressors the army the enemy , no it aint, killing civilians is a crime but not the army.

lets say world war 2 and we were at war with the germans and theirs only 2 of us and together we can kill 20 soldiers at one time, it will be an awesome achievement to suicide bomb and just the 2 of us kill 20 german soldiers, same as israeli oppressors, aint that right, so how is it suicide, its martydom, its even in the christian books and praises martydom and so does the british army , aint that right.

soldiers go forth and know soon as they get out of the boat in normandy their gonna get slayed but still they get out of the boat and get slaughtered would u class that as suicide, not in my book bros, they were martyrs and went forth and got killed, same as a suicide bomber against the army who goes forth to take out his enemy.

same as a samurai warrior alone charges against the enemy rather than get killed like a dog or surrender he charges forth and knows he has no chance to live and win but goes ahead like a warrior, a lion, fecking great i say

Aaquil

First of all when it comes to Islaam and its rulings it is not based on what you feel or think is correct. Secondly don't use 'fecking great' if you are writing about Islaam it is just not good. We do not use our limited minds, feelings or emotions when it comes to deciding the specific rulings in Islaam we use the Qur'aan, Sunnah and the understanding of the people who understood the meaning and implementation of the Qur'aan and Sunnah the best. They are first and foremost the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions, then the Companions of the Companions then the Companions of the Companions of the Companions (Meaning the first 3 Generations of Muslims).

The Prophet said: The best of the people are my generation, then those that come after them then those who come after them (The first three generations of Muslims being the best in terms of their good deeds, their striving upon that and their understanding of the religion and how it should be correctly implemented).

If we use our intellects, feelings and emotions then you could possible start to justify the kind of attrocities that are going on today at the hands of so called Muslims because that is exactly what they do either intentionally (Extreme evil) or unintentionally (Still very evil because of the harm it causes).

"not in my book bros..." Means your own view or opinion. Certainly (and with all due respect) the "...book..." that you are referring to is not the QUR'AAN or SUNNAH.

What most of these Islamic groups are doing when they justify is just wrong and in many cases just plain terrorism. That does not mean I do not believe that "State terrorism is not just as bad but that is just another topic.

Aaquil.

Aaquil

You need to read what I wrote before again because I think your first statement is indicating that you misread my point 2.

gsm1

Ahem...It's because planes were sent there with cluster bombs and napalm by the Bush/Blair bullsh*t league that Iraq is now this way, FFS.

Well, the story of people being thrown into plastic shredders has been proven to be a pile of crap. The supposed torture room discovered by coalition troops was Iranian war dead being identified and returned to Iran. Supposed mass graves turned out to be war dead. Numerous human rights agencies have had to revise the figures of those killed under SH provided by American allied Kurdish groups and the INC because they were hyper inflated. Even Blair referred to 400,000 bodies found in mass graves and this was figure was a total lie.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...263899,00.html

The Shias are rising up now and being slaughtered by Americans.

Here is a text from Bush Senior's memoirs which you may find interesting:

Trying to eliminate Saddam...would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible.... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq.... there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.

Leslie

Of course the Iraqis did not enjoy Saddam's rule B2Z but my point was that I don't think they are any happier at the moment with the problems that have been caused by the destruction brought by the war and the subsequent violence which has been brought about by the allied attack.

There is an emormous power struggle going on between the various factions in Iraq and the Iraqis see themselves as an occupied country and the US as taking advantage of their oil supplies. These problems were not considered before the allied attack, crisis management rules and it is not working at the moment.

Attacking a country purely for regime change has never been acceptable and that excuse can not be used now that the WMD's are shown to be non existent. Regime change has always been down to the people of the country concerned. It has put us in the situation that we have lost face in the Arab world and we are now a prime target for attack by fundamentalist terrorists. On top of that, many thousands of Iraqis were killed in the war and are still being killed as well as the destruction of their country.

This was an illegal war and we were seriously mislead over the reasons for it. We are now reaping the rewards for it and it is likely to last for a very long time. The protagonists are scratching around for excuses now that they have been found out and not very successfully either. The whole thing is a prime example of gross error of judgement to go with the lies in the first place.

Les

Pbr

You are priceless.

gsm1

Sorry to the moderators beforehand.

I provided a link to an article which just happened to be from The Guardian online. A link that was provided from another web page. When I said I don't read The Guardian as in I don't read it regularly. Of course at some stage I suspect every person in this forum has read every major paper, FFS.

You really are a thick trolling ****. If you have something useful to say, say it.

Ted Maul

Is he dead yet?

paulr

***.

Brit_in_Japan

pc? What are you talking about? It seems that the latest way for anyone to justify their position is to claim the opposite view is pc! To suggest that anything other than carpet bombing is pc is quite simply laughable. JC, leaflet campaigns? Where did that come from? No-one has said anything of the sort, please don't misrepresent opposing views just because you don't agree with them, stick to the facts.

My position is that you do not dig yourself out of a hole by lighting a stick of dynamite and sitting on it until it explodes, it just creates a bigger and bloodier hole. The US has already shown poor judgement in their whole approach to the toppling of Saddam and what was going to happen afterwards. The professionals in their foreign office were against their military adventure, most of the senior US diplomats were against it, but George W.'s administration pushed on regardless. Heavy handed military action and the deaths of more innocent Iraqi's will only make the situation worse. Billions have been spent in Iraq, almost all on security or securing pipelines. Yet the infrastructure is in a worse state now than when Saddam was in power. Many Iraqi's quality of life is actually worse right now and the security situation seems to be slowly deteriorating.

I read newspaper articles of interviews with Iraqi's (in Iraq, not some jumped-up CIA-backed Iraqi conman like Chalabi who hadn't been there for 20 years). Did they want rid of Saddam? Yes, of course. Did they want to get rid by invasion by the US? NO! They are a proud people, they wanted to get rid of him themselves, somehow, someday. What you see in Iraq today is not just instability and violence brought about by radical terrorist groups sucked into Iraq because of the power vacuum after Saddam was overthrown (though they are a significant problem, especially with suicide bombings), you are also seeing a large number of native Iraqi people who quite simply resent US presence in their country and are resisting the occupation. The first step to improving the security situation there is to try and built trust and relationships with those people and start taking some of the heat out of the situation. Then you can devote more resources to tracking down and eliminating the terrorists.

Pbr

LOL!

I didn't think it would take long before gsm1 resorted to insults in this thread as the poor chap does appear to foam at the mouth whenever the subject of Iraq is raised. I COULD of course just respond in kind and call you a left-wing propaganda spewing c*nt but that would mean dropping to your level which I would rather not do if that's all the same.I'm still waiting for you to say something that hasn't already been said in the various left leaning daily newspapers. You seem to have a real problem taking on board other peoples points of view and instead you simply rant and rave to anybody who'll listen, well have fun, and I hope your "must have the last word-itis" condition clears up soon!

Aaquil

Why do you guys have to resort to insulting one another because you hold different opinions. Yes, I know you have strongly held views but come on everyone lets just take it easy. Do you want this thread deleted?

gsm1

The insults and baiting started from you mate and all you have done is troll with the sole intention of starting this sh*t, so pull the other one.

I've put my arguments forward against other points of view if you bother reading instead of talking sh*t. The best argument you have had is "I'm still waiting for you to say something that hasn't already been said in the various left leaning daily newspapers"?? Wow, you win mate! That's put a hole in my argument.
You can't provide an argument so you resort to cheap shots like mockery and even at that you fail miserably.
Get back under your bridge.

gsm1

Oh...and give up with the pseudo pompous 'old chap' style. It isn't fooling anyone.

Spartan

Yawn.

The simple fact is we ivaded Iraq. Whether it be for economic, military or national security reasons.

So do I agree with terrorism? No it's a form of cowardice I can't support. If they were hitting military targets then you could say they were freedom fighters (although the freedom they fight for doesn't actually exist) but they kill defenseless civilians who are helping Iraq become a better place for the general populance.

At the end of the day, a democratic modern Iraq poses the most beneifts for the Iraqi population. Better health car, better education and a better quality of life.

To the person who said they are a proud people, a people who would have been rid of Saddam their own way. When exactly? The common model for such countries is decades, look at Africa. People die of famine in their hundred of thousands and yet they do nothing.

To the person slagging off the yanks, gun ho maybe. Many people say Saddam used chemical warfare. Yes he did. Against the repressed kurdish population (a population who have been repressed for a long, long time). Well yes he did. But a similar tactic was ordered and approved by a Sir winston churchill many a year ago. The reason? tr Kurds refused to pay taxes. So who is the worst government? The yanks who have recently backed various miltary campaigns against people who were a threat to their people. Or the UK who has been very subtle, in twisting and installing puppet governments in the middle east. Including approving the use of military action against arabs fighting for their 'freedom'.

Speaking of naive. It seems many comment on such situations with no awareness of past history, its outcomes and how it could have been prevented.

The ancient Greeks, macedonians, Romans and every other army that has conquered a foreign nation had a way of dealing with terrorists, insurgents, or rebellious populations.

Would you like to know the method? It was very simple and effective. What they did was kill any man of an age to bear arms and sell all the woman and children into slavery. Less civilised nations just butchered everyone and razed their cities.

That is the only way to stop the hostage takers, or terrorists. So who fancies it now? All those people who said we should use force to sort it out. You fancy killing woman and children? No didn't think so, so shut up.

Is there away to sort it out? Probably not. Although destroying all the infrastructure put in place since the bombardments would do it. Let the Arab nation sort Iraq out. my bet is they would squabble and continue to squabble while innocents contunued to die. So not unlike Saddams rule.

Should be have left Saddam in power? Maybe. But the only good thing he did was repress the more, shall we say, enthusiastic members of the religous population over there. The main reason there is so much trouble over there is simply no one is controlling these people. Kill them, and secure the borders with Syria and other countries the insurgents come from and you have a chance to solve the problem.

Pbr

I said:
gsm1 said:Point proven. I can see the steam coming out of your ears from here. Consider yourself a source of amusement for me when I'm bored.

Leslie

Good post Brit In J, and I agree with it all as you might expect. Well Aaquil, once the insults start it means that the discussion has been weakened and the man who starts the name calling is losing the argument.

Spartan, its a bit difficult to decide what you are really saying. Do you actually think the answer is to wipe out the whole population regardless and start a new country?

Les

Spartan

No mate, that was my answer to people who would like to use force against the country in question to get rid of insurgents.



Although I'll admit I was a bit hammered when I typed that (surprised I actually found the keyboard to be honest!).



Alot of people believe carpet bombing would remove the terrorist threat against foreign nationals and indiginous people. Simply it won't work, more effort needs to be placed in rooting out these people. Also in securing the people and foreign workers safety. Iraq's borders are far too large to secure with a convential army hence why so many nutters are getting across from Syria.



Topics such as this are very difficult. The hostage takers must have known the UK and the USA will not negotiate with them. Our countries would not pull out no matter how many civilians they take. I think this makes them murderers. The problem gets compounded when the other countries got squeamish and pulled out. This gave the terrorsists the idea that their tactics would work.



I think nicking the religous leaders (the nut case ones) could work but it also might have a knock effect of more people been taken for their release.

Suresh

Could be.

Swiss media is reporting this afternoon that Kenneth Bigley's death is claimed on an islamic militant website.

http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news...nd/419495.html
In German, sorry


If this is true, it would be nice if Abu Hamza were next on the list of those due to lose their heads....

Suresh

moses

bros aaquil u understand exactly what im saying so stop being a uncle tom

suicide is haram , suicide bombing is the intention to take out an army and oppressor when your just a handful as i said and i do follow the quran and sunnah, u make yourself out to be a better muslim, in Gods book people who thing their more righteous than their bros and sisters are the worst in Gods sight and hypcrites, i dont say im a good muslim i do try my best and fall short but dont act as if im better than my bros and sisters, i know my weakness's and their are plenty, so dont go round playing games and twisting my words and act a hypocrite, i said it the way i wanted it and didnt twist my words like an uncle tom

gsm1

Cue Esther Rantzen

Aaquil

Moses...all I can advise you is go and learn your religion and do not label your 'intellect' as the Quraan and Sunnah. Also, I am not an uncle Tom, I establish my 5 daily prayers, learn my religion, have a beard (as it is obligatory for every Muslim man) and wear a thobe that is above my ankles (even at work)...I am also not upon the belief of the Kawarij, Bin Laadin, Sa'id Qutub, Muhammad Qutub, Safar al Hawali and Salman al Auwdah, Abu Hamzah, Abu Qatada, 'Snake' Faisal or anyone who has or holds that belief. They use similar arguments to you for suicide bombings so I would be very careful as these individuals (and group) are well astray.

Give me evidence from the Qur'aan and Sunnah...brother I sincerely ask you to speak about Islaam or do not speak at all. As the Prophet sallallaahu alayhi was sallam: "He who speaks a lie against me then let him take his seat in the fire." THAT ALSO APPLIES TO APPLICATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF ISLAAM. Be very careful.

I do not make myself out to be a better Muslim only Allaah Knows that but a good start is to have the correct belief and to worship Him Alone without associating any partners with Him in that worship.

I have not twisted your words if you feel that the case then I am sorry you feel that way but as for calling me a hypocrite all I have to say is what the Prophet sallallaahu alayhi was sallam said: When Muslim says to his brother 'O Kaafir' then that will fall on one of them.' YOu do not know me from Aadam and you have labelled me with one of the worst insults. My final advice is for you to Fear Allaah and not to act like this. I will not be replying to you again unless you are going to be reasonable as it will only escalate.

Aaquil.

Aaquil

MOSES WROTE "in Gods book people who thing their more righteous than their bros and sisters are the worst in Gods sight"

This is incorrect the worst people to Allaah are those who do SHIRK with Him. As Allaah will not forgive this.

Aaquil