Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page
Xris, in past threads you have been decidedly remonstrated for the way you've talked about Christians and Christianity.
I see the OP as propaganda. I don't believe any of his testaments as I am of the opinion that Sept 11th was a false flag operation. Islam does allow terrorism, or violence against non-combatants.
Well jihad is compulsory. Fighting is prescribed where fighting is necessary, i.e. when there is oppression or injustice.
As for suicidal missions, this is debateable. There is no evidence in the Qur'an to show that suicide missions are prescribed, but there are accounts of early Muslims going to fight with no intention of returning. And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) allowed this. Scholars use this as evidence to suggest that martyrdom operations are indeed allowed, because if they were not, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) would not have allowed the early Muslims to go into battle with this intention.
What is clear, however, is that suicide missions cannot be aimed at civilians. It may be acceptable for a soldier to strap a bomb to himself and detonate himself under an enemy tank, but certainly not acceptable to do the same in a nightclub.
It is interesting that you require Muslims to be more vocal in condemning terrorism. Is this guilt through association? I feel no need as a Muslim to condemn terrorism any more than my fellow non-Muslim human being, because it seems rather obvious. You do not see Muslims as victims in this, despite the majority of victims of global terrorism being Muslims themselves. Why should the victims be more vocal in condemnation of a phenomenon which is killing them the most? Seems quite strange.
When is fighting necessary? Who in Islam makes the decision as to what is just and what is injustice?
Yeah, I don't understand any of this. Any religion that teaches it's necessary to go to battle, IMHO is a bad religion and is cancerous to the entire world. Fighting is not a way to peace nor is it productive in society. Killing each other has never been a good example of ANYTHING!
You can go on a suicide mission but only against enemies. That sounds like a wonderful program to be a part of.
Where's the line drawn? Because these people that blow themselves up in night clubs view those in it as the enemy. Why does there have to be an enemy? I think maybe this is where the confusion is. It seems there's a fine line in which militants cross and that fine line seems to allow this crossing.
What I'd like to know is who or what is considered the enemy? Maybe it would help if we could identify the enemy. I know what the Qu'ran says but I'd like to hear who the enemy is from Muslims.
To raise a child in this world and teach them that there is an enemy among us sounds like bunk to me, not a peace seeking religion.
Why is it strange? If any other religion were crossing a line such as this, there would be many who would stand up against it and there have been. If a bunch of Christians decided to misinterpret something in their bible and become militant in their mission, then there would be many others who would rise up and condemn the terrorism.
All this crap is in the past as well. The prophet you speak of and and bible and all these books are HISTORY. Written for another time, written in a barbaric age, written for a lower level consciousness, these are old expired garbage that we seem to cling on to for reasons I cannot seem to understand.
Sorry, it just doesn't resonate with me. However, in all fairness I think it's important to understand who is the enemy so Muslims don't have to tackle this alone and work together in peace with other religions to nip this enemy thing in the butt before it keeps getting out of hand.
if this isn't a barbaric mindset I'm not sure what is.
OK, so what determines justice? Who is it that makes that call to judge what they perceive to be injustice? What does the old text define as injustice?
I don't buy it. Don't believe in it and it seems from your description it's a religion of judgment not justice. As far as injustice, that's the entire reason for standing up against terrorism. Isn't militant terrorism injustice?
Justice can be perceived in many ways by many people. What one sees as justice, the other sees and injustice. An eye for an eye is not what I would consider justice.
So, all that being said... I disagree. Does this make me a target of the holy Muslims? Because I disagree and will not worship your deity, am I now the enemy? Would it then be a worthy cause to come into my home and blow yourself up to die for what you believe to be protecting your loved ones?
C'mon, if this isn't a barbaric mindset I'm not sure what is.
to your question is no. Your differing opinion does not make you a target for military action. You are a civilian and so have protection under Islamic laws of engagement. However, if you decide to join your army and aggress against the Muslims then yes, you (but only you, not your family and property) are considered an enemy and are a legitimate target. This is hardly controversial.
I think its far simpler than you are thinking it is.
Jihad is only defensive, so if you are being attacked, then you can fight back.
Xris, please, just be clearer. I cant understand what you are saying 50% of the time.
Are you happy with everything the Koran commands of you and dictates your views ?
Would you support a non believer in a debate against a believer?
Would you openly befriend a non believer against scriptures advice?
I have heard the believers words and the reasons for their actions, they never condemn a brother. I had an open mind before entering a certain forum , they taught me the extreme scriptures certain muslims will turn to , to enforce their twisted views. My point is that there is justification in the scriptures that men of evil can help convert moderate disadvantaged men into blind, hate filled suicide bombers.
I have said before muslims suffer more than we from this sacred anger, why do shias and sunni continue to kill each other by suicide bombings ? It has nothing to do with the west, why the majority of victims are muslims, why is their hatred is so strong.
I wish i had met more like you on that forum as it would been of more benefit. I wont say your wrong, but its not the scriptures i was referred to that gave me these impressions.
I would like to know how you have come to the conclusion that the west has caused the conflict between muslims?
More specifically, the war economy encourages violence in the Muslim world. The reason sectarian violence never seems to stop in Iraq between Shia and Sunnis is because it is encouraged to justify a continued military presence in Iraq. And the longer the military stays there, the more the Western governments must spend on Defence contractors, thus making a few people very, very rich. Violence in Muslim countries also generates more fear of Islamic terrorism, thus allowing greater control for Western governments.
Exactly the attitude that refuses to accept that the two tribes of Islam can not live together in a balance of equality. The west has only served to either keep them apart or force unnatural union.
You know full well many classify the other as unbelievers and under Sadam many shia rituals where banned.
The influence of the west or your view that it is the wests interest to maintain these suicide bombings is bizarre. The Americans are just as big a target by Sunni insurgents as shia muslims, why should that be in our interest?
get real please, admit it muslims are killing each other for hatred and power.
Bin Laden mentioned in his 2004 tape, "this is a war [in Afghanistan] that is benefiting major companies with billions of dollars", in reference to Halliburton...which goes back to the issue being one of politics as well as religion. Look at how many billions of dollars companies like Halliburton and other war and resource exploiting companies have been making in recent years...and they are all politically connected at the highest levels in the US.