Muslims - the Day of Islam and another 911

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

xris
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 02:32 am
@Pangloss,
Pangloss;90411 wrote:
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.

I'm not sure I agree with the Islamic idea of 'justice' as it is sometimes presented, but we don't even need any teachings of Islam to be convinced of injustice taking place in the middle east. If I lived in Iraq, I would probably hate the west too. When I hear reports of halliburton or military trucks being blown away by IEDs, I wonder, "well, what do you expect when you invade someone's country?" These people have been bombed, assassinated, thrown into prison camps, had thier homes destroyed, intimidated, humiliated, shamed. Really, what the hell else do we expect as a result of this?
Whose arguing with you on these points..:perplexed:my point is that shia are suffering from these explosions not the americans not sunni.

---------- Post added 09-16-2009 at 03:59 AM ----------

The American presence in Iraq does not excuse the killings of shia civilians. Why do you think the military presence was increased? to decrease the bombings or to encourage more? If the Americans are so devious why did they not plant weapons of mass destruction ?

Shia and Sunni have been at each others throats for centuries, starting with a few massacres, it has been a history of calling each other names and minor conflicts. Tell me do you think shia are Apostates. This conflict between Sunni and Shia if not recognised as a power struggle could envelope the whole of the middle east. Yes the American invasion did spark this conflict but the underlying problem was always there.
 
josh0335
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 05:33 am
@Justin,
I've already told you why military presence was increased, and will continue to have a presence for the next decade.

You previously said this:

Quote:
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.


And now:

Quote:
Shia and Sunni have been at each others throats for centuries, starting with a few massacres, it has been a history of calling each other names and minor conflicts. Tell me do you think shia are Apostates. This conflict between Sunni and Shia if not recognised as a power struggle could envelope the whole of the middle east. Yes the American invasion did spark this conflict but the underlying problem was always there.


Funny how you've taken a step back and realised that Sunnis and Shias have not been slaughtering each other for the past 1000 years. I'm glad you've learnt something. Being at each others throats and name calling is not the same as killing each other. Republicans and Democrats have been at each others throats and name calling for years too. The violence you see is being caused and aggravated by the West.
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 06:05 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;90540 wrote:
I've already told you why military presence was increased, and will continue to have a presence for the next decade.

You previously said this:



And now:



Funny how you've taken a step back and realised that Sunnis and Shias have not been slaughtering each other for the past 1000 years. I'm glad you've learnt something. Being at each others throats and name calling is not the same as killing each other. Republicans and Democrats have been at each others throats and name calling for years too. The violence you see is being caused and aggravated by the West.
If you read my posts they don't actually say they have been fighting each other. Are you denying the friction and the animosity that has continued for centuries ? are you denying that shias are classified as apostates by Sunni clerics and that the split in the two tribes resulted in blood shed that has never been forgiven?
 
josh0335
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 06:51 am
@xris,
Will you firstly acknowledge that the violence you see in Iraq is not how Sunnis and Shias normally treat each other, as proven by the past 1000 years? Will you acknowledge that Shia and Sunni are not slaughtering one another in Iran?

Quote:
Are you denying the friction and the animosity that has continued for centuries ? are you denying that shias are classified as apostates by Sunni clerics and that the split in the two tribes resulted in blood shed that has never been forgiven?


Not at all. Friction is there and always will be. So what? This did not result in the sort of violence we see in Iraq today. Yes Shia are classed as apostates by many Sunni clerics, but there has never been the mass slaughtering and violence before the West got involved. This is my point which I want you to acknowledge. The violence you see today is a direct result of Western interference. Iraq and Iran have been Shia majorities for hundreds of years, under the Islamic rulership of the Ummayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman dynasties, respectively, without the sustained violence we see in the region today.
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 07:12 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;90563 wrote:
Will you firstly acknowledge that the violence you see in Iraq is not how Sunnis and Shias normally treat each other, as proven by the past 1000 years? Will you acknowledge that Shia and Sunni are not slaughtering one another in Iran?



Not at all. Friction is there and always will be. So what? This did not result in the sort of violence we see in Iraq today. Yes Shia are classed as apostates by many Sunni clerics, but there has never been the mass slaughtering and violence before the West got involved. This is my point which I want you to acknowledge. The violence you see today is a direct result of Western interference. Iraq and Iran have been Shia majorities for hundreds of years, under the Islamic rulership of the Ummayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman dynasties, respectively, without the sustained violence we see in the region today.
Sadam had the wests support but he did not need encouragement in waging war against Iran, did he.

When the balance of power is in favour of one tribe, we never see conflict, it is only when the two tribes are fighting for dominance that we see violence. It was an enforced alliance by Britain that these two tribes where forced into a occupying the same lands. It was the west fault that this situation became violent but not the reason why these two tribes kill each other. The Sunni cant bare to be governed by shia after so long in control, that's the problem, nothing to do with the wests influence in Iraq.
 
josh0335
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 07:30 am
@Justin,
It was the West that put Saddam there and supported him with weapons so it is their fault. I'm talking about Western inteference and you have admitted as much.

You have basically conceded that it is the actions of the West that has caused this conflict, initially through British imperialism and then through modern Western military actions. Even after conceding this, you are insistent that it is still the hatred between the Sunni and Shia which continues the violence. Seeing that you have at least acknowledged the influence of Western interests in the conflicts, I would suggest you reflect a bit longer on what I have said and consider the possibility that criminal elements in the West wish to continue the violence further. Don't simply swallow what you've been told by the TV. I'll leave this thread with the words of Malcolm X: "You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality."
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 07:49 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;90584 wrote:
It was the West that put Saddam there and supported him with weapons so it is their fault. I'm talking about Western inteference and you have admitted as much.

You have basically conceded that it is the actions of the West that has caused this conflict, initially through British imperialism and then through modern Western military actions. Even after conceding this, you are insistent that it is still the hatred between the Sunni and Shia which continues the violence. Seeing that you have at least acknowledged the influence of Western interests in the conflicts, I would suggest you reflect a bit longer on what I have said and consider the possibility that criminal elements in the West wish to continue the violence further. Don't simply swallow what you've been told by the TV. I'll leave this thread with the words of Malcolm X: "You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality."
I don't read news papers or listen to fox news and i have never excused my countries history in the ME. I think you to should consider why, with or without the west involvement in the region why Muslims should feel the need to kill each other. Germany's invasion of the UK never forced us to kill each other but other causes had that effect in northern Ireland.
 
Alan McDougall
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 08:36 am
@Justin,
Repectfully I would like to pose a question to my Muslem friends on the forum. Would the prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon him) have approved of the 911 event?
 
ahmedjbh
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 11:53 am
@xris,
xris;90555 wrote:
Are you denying the friction and the animosity that has continued for centuries ? are you denying that shias are classified as apostates by Sunni clerics and that the split in the two tribes resulted in blood shed that has never been forgiven?



Yes I am.

I find your attitude very worrying. You seem to be hell bent on trying find as many issues as possible with Islam, rather than taking a balanced approach. If someone took your way of analysing society and applied it to just about anything, you would end up commiting suicide for sure. You must remember that sound logical conclusions based an a fictious assumption will only lead to false conclusions. Each time you seem to be corrected, you come back even more angry, and with a new "theory".

Have a read of these two links, then come back and think again.

Al-Azhar Shia Fatwa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Amman Message - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---------- Post added 09-16-2009 at 06:56 PM ----------

Alan McDougall;90600 wrote:
Repectfully I would like to pose a question to my Muslem friends on the forum. Would the prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon him) have approved of the 911 event?



From what I understand, no.
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 02:14 pm
@ahmedjbh,
ahmedjbh;90666 wrote:
Yes I am.

I find your attitude very worrying. You seem to be hell bent on trying find as many issues as possible with Islam, rather than taking a balanced approach. If someone took your way of analysing society and applied it to just about anything, you would end up commiting suicide for sure. You must remember that sound logical conclusions based an a fictious assumption will only lead to false conclusions. Each time you seem to be corrected, you come back even more angry, and with a new "theory".

Have a read of these two links, then come back and think again.

Al-Azhar Shia Fatwa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Amman Message - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---------- Post added 09-16-2009 at 06:56 PM ----------




From what I understand, no.
A new theory, what theories have i applied? you worry me friend when you blame the west on an obvious problem the muslims have with killing each other by suicide bombings. I suppose the same logic applies in Pakistan when mosques are destroyed or christian churches are burnt to the ground. How many issues have I debated in this thread apart from suicide bombings. Do you want me to start posting links in support of my views?

Now tell me what fictitious claims have i made, dont make accusations without pointing my lies out to me. Come on tell me what lies have I told?
 
ahmedjbh
 
Reply Wed 16 Sep, 2009 03:20 pm
@Justin,
xris,

Try actually reading the post I have already spent my time doing, rather than ask me to again point out your "theories".

My older post above has already answered you newer post, this should never ever happen, it means something fundamentally is going wrong in your approach to this forum. This is not a one off either, you keep asking the same thing on other threads, and the same is true there.
 
xris
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 04:25 am
@ahmedjbh,
ahmedjbh;90717 wrote:
xris,

Try actually reading the post I have already spent my time doing, rather than ask me to again point out your "theories".

My older post above has already answered you newer post, this should never ever happen, it means something fundamentally is going wrong in your approach to this forum. This is not a one off either, you keep asking the same thing on other threads, and the same is true there.
You accuse me of lying and making up new theories and then tell me your posts are answering my questions, what questions prompted you to tell me i was lying. I did not give you cause to reply in the manner you did, If you call me a liar, i do act in a certain manner.

I dont care what you see as the wrong approach, if you dont like my manner dont debate with me.
 
Alan McDougall
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 04:34 am
@Justin,
xris Muslims just like Christians have their lunatic fringe but I am not suggesting that ahmedjbh belongs to a Muslim one
 
xris
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 04:47 am
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;90818 wrote:
xris Muslims just like Christians have their lunatic fringe but I am not suggesting that ahmedjbh belongs to a Muslim one
Alan we have a problem on this forum we can say what we like about the historic value of Christianity and condemn the horrors that Christians committed, without the shouts of bigot or liar, but speak of Islam and its values and the heavy mob appear with their crude attempt at censorship. If I have misrepresented their history or their values then they should speak up and point them out.
 
Alan McDougall
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 05:38 am
@xris,
xris;90825 wrote:
Alan we have a problem on this forum we can say what we like about the historic value of Christianity and condemn the horrors that Christians committed, without the shouts of bigot or liar, but speak of Islam and its values and the heavy mob appear with their crude attempt at censorship. If I have misrepresented their history or their values then they should speak up and point them out.


XRIS Christianity in the past especially the dark ages was guilty of the most appalling horrors and we talk about them and accept it as barbarism of middle ages and the awful mistake of Lunatic Chritianity, we do not shy away from the truth, like Muslims do, by saying their religion is a religion of peace when it is obvious to any moron that it is not

There have been exceptions in the past few decades, such as David Koresh of Wako Texas, but even he did not tell his brain washed followers to kill innocents for their faith

You know although Christianity "was guilty" of these crimes against humanity, "modern Christians are mostly good moral people". We no longer go to war in the name of Christianity as Muslims do in the name of their God Allah

A Muslem, like a Christian must admit appalling biblical practices such as sharia law and stoning of woman and men still happen, here in the 21st centuary
 
josh0335
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 09:06 am
@Alan McDougall,
Quote:
If I have misrepresented their history or their values then they should speak up and point them out.

I believe I have done this repeatedly.


Quote:
You know although Christianity "was guilty" of these crimes against humanity, "modern Christians are mostly good moral people". We no longer go to war in the name of Christianity as Muslims do in the name of their God Allah


Because war in any other context is haraam (forbidden) for Muslims. They cannot go to war for oil, or for war economy, or for any other worldly reason like modern Christians do. You seem to believe modern warfare, which is done in the name of democracy or economics, is somehow superior or more acceptable than Muslims who wish to fight for their religion?

Quote:
A Muslem, like a Christian must admit appalling biblical practices such as sharia law and stoning of woman and men still happen, here in the 21st centuary


I, as a Muslim, will most definitely not admit anything to be appalling in Islam. You clearly know nothing about the Shariah of Islam to make such a sweeping statement. Islam is not like Christianity.
 
xris
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 09:25 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;90883 wrote:
I believe I have done this repeatedly.




Because war in any other context is haraam (forbidden) for Muslims. They cannot go to war for oil, or for war economy, or for any other worldly reason like modern Christians do. You seem to believe modern warfare, which is done in the name of democracy or economics, is somehow superior or more acceptable than Muslims who wish to fight for their religion?



I, as a Muslim, will most definitely not admit anything to be appalling in Islam. You clearly know nothing about the Shariah of Islam to make such a sweeping statement. Islam is not like Christianity.
I admire your honesty at this late hour and as non believers should we with your views, fear Islam or condemn it, with our values, as medieval and barbaric?

If you would kill the adulterer the homosexual,the apostate and advance Islam by the sword, why should i not be able to complain. I am not a Muslim so I don't think it blasphemous to criticise any faith. Many Muslims although able to recite the Koran in Arabic have no idea of its content and when told of its details are appalled at what they are told it commands. I have every sympathy for the moderate Muslim indoctrinated from birth into faith that hides its grizzly secrets, even from its own followers.
 
josh0335
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 09:41 am
@Justin,
Late hour? You've offended me now! I've been nothing but honest with all my posts. Why should you fear Islam? Because one day a Muslim army may invade England? When an Islamic State is re-established your country only needs to enter into a peace agreement with the Muslims to live in peace. Doesn't seem so bad, does it?

Quote:
If you would kill the adulterer the homosexual,the apostate and advance Islam by the sword, why should i not be able to complain. I am not a Muslim so I don't think it blasphemous to criticise any faith. Many Muslims although able to recite the Koran in Arabic have no idea of its content and when told of its details are appalled at what they are told it commands. I have every sympathy for the moderate Muslim indoctrinated from birth into faith that hides its grizzly secrets, even from its own followers.


You can complain all you like. But before you complain too much it's worth learning more about the workings of Islam and understand why certain rules exist. Islam is a complete way of life, and encompasses both public and private matters. There is no point being disgusted at the penal system of Islam when you refuse to study the social engineering involved to prevent crime in the first place. You also under-estimate the 'moderate' Muslim, as many are fully aware of these so-called 'grizzly secrets' but do not bother trying to convince people of their worth because the typical response is the likes of your posts. If you do not want to understand you never will.
 
xris
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 09:51 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;90899 wrote:
Late hour? You've offended me now! I've been nothing but honest with all my posts. Why should you fear Islam? Because one day a Muslim army may invade England? When an Islamic State is re-established your country only needs to enter into a peace agreement with the Muslims to live in peace. Doesn't seem so bad, does it?



You can complain all you like. But before you complain too much it's worth learning more about the workings of Islam and understand why certain rules exist. Islam is a complete way of life, and encompasses both public and private matters. There is no point being disgusted at the penal system of Islam when you refuse to study the social engineering involved to prevent crime in the first place. You also under-estimate the 'moderate' Muslim, as many are fully aware of these so-called 'grizzly secrets' but do not bother trying to convince people of their worth because the typical response is the likes of your posts. If you do not want to understand you never will.
The problem is I understand only to well, that's what frightens me. I know the intrigue, the false peace agreements, the time to act peacefully, the relentless demand to expand Islam by any means possible. The trouble is the majority of moderate Muslims are themselves unaware of this master plan. Do you understand I dont want to see sharia or hear its voice when it advocates the murder of homosexuals and adulterers. This country left burning apostates a few hundred years ago, i do not want it recommended now or ever.
 
Pangloss
 
Reply Thu 17 Sep, 2009 10:22 am
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;90834 wrote:

You know although Christianity "was guilty" of these crimes against humanity, "modern Christians are mostly good moral people". We no longer go to war in the name of Christianity as Muslims do in the name of their God Allah


Right, we go to war in the name of "WMDs", oil, power, politics...everything BUT religion. What makes this better than going to war for religion? War is war...it is perpetrated by aggressors, fought necessarily by defenders, and does not depend on one reason or another for it to be justified or acceptable.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/27/2023 at 06:23:30