[quote]lixy wrote:
will to power wrote:
Many countries, including Arab countries, have put plenty of opposition against groups like Al Qaeda. I don’t know what makes you think they just get a free ride everywhere.
According to the theory supported by some here, all Muslims sympathize with Al-Qaeda, and those who say they don’t are called liars and presented with the same indoctrination material of Al-Qaeda to “prove” that Islam is behind it all.
Did I get that right?[/quote]
What does the 'Umdat al-Salik say? Violence against unbelievers, according to Al-Azhar University and every other representative school of Sunni jurisprudence, is a good thing. The example set by Mohammed is pretty clear.
Now, I’m sure plenty of Muslims ignore the mandates for jihad because they violate both conscience and natural law. But then why belong to such a religion? If one doesn’t agree with the tenants of one’s faith because they are repulsive to one’s conscience, why continue adhering to the faith? Mohammed was not a good man. He was a murderer, a robber, a rapist, and a pedophile. He had sex with a nine year old girl after marrying her at six. He was a polygamist. He was a slave owner.
He wasn’t all bad. He did good things as well. But he is your prophet, and he is the example these jihadists follow, and your Ulema have never condemned them.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
The more car bombs that go off in Iraqi markets, the more Iraqi who are killed by militia death squads only makes this film’s message more important.
And what about the Iraqis who rightly conclude that America brought these “terrorists” to Iraq?
[/quote]
We went to foreign countries and brought the jihadists to Iraq?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
The more car bombs that go off in Iraqi markets, the more Iraqi who are killed by militia death squads only makes this film’s message more important.
And what about the Iraqis who rightly conclude that America brought these “terrorists” to Iraq?
We went to foreign countries and brought the jihadists to Iraq? [/quote]
We went to foreign countries and they followed us there.
Actions have consequences. To deny this or overlook the possible consequences of any actions shows lack of understanding.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
The more car bombs that go off in Iraqi markets, the more Iraqi who are killed by militia death squads only makes this film’s message more important.
And what about the Iraqis who rightly conclude that America brought these “terrorists” to Iraq?
We went to foreign countries and brought the jihadists to Iraq?
We went to foreign countries and they followed us there.
Actions have consequences. To deny this or overlook the possible consequences of any actions shows lack of understanding.[/quote]
There were unintended consequences, no doubt. But “consequences” are not the same as “responsibility,” right? If someone else goes to Iraq to fight of their own free will, the US is not responsible. The jihadist is, because the US did not bring the guy there against his will.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
There were unintended consequences, no doubt. But “consequences” are not the same as “responsibility,” right? If someone else goes to Iraq to fight of their own free will, the US is not responsible. The jihadist is, because the US did not bring the guy there against his will.[/quote]
Well, we must ask ourselves what might have happened if the US had not entered in the first place? I am not seeing jihadists entering Saddam’s country in my crystal ball…but then again, it’s not always accurate.
The US may not have used force to bring jihadists into Iraq but it is still responsible for anything that happens after the fact that it invaded. Having responsibility does not imply being on the wrong side of a moral argument though I do believe we are.
It’s like saying a banker isn’t at responsible because he lent to people who couldn’t repay their loans. Realistically, he cannot control the actions of other people but does he have no responsibility to his bank?
We can be fairly certain that foreign jihadists would not be entering Iraq to wage jihad.
We left Vietnam and millions died. If we leave Iraq, millions might die. But I’m not sure that, no matter how long we stay there, we will ever get those people to work together as a country. There’s a lot of tribalism and Islam.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Well, we must ask ourselves what might have happened if the US had not entered in the first place? I am not seeing jihadists entering Saddam’s country in my crystal ball…but then again, it’s not always accurate.
We can be fairly certain that foreign jihadists would not be entering Iraq to wage jihad.
The US may not have used force to bring jihadists into Iraq but it is still responsible for anything that happens after the fact that it invaded.
We left Vietnam and millions died. If we leave Iraq, millions might die. But I’m not sure that, no matter how long we stay there, we will ever get those people to work together as a country. There’s a lot of tribalism and Islam.
Too bad we can’t turn back the clock. [/quote]
Iraq and Israel have nothing to do with the violence and hatred perpetrated by people in the name of islam. That is excusism and passing the buck. Do anybody really think that if the U.S. left the ME all together and Israel were wiped off the map that these people would suddenly be sugar and spice? If you think that then your head is irreparably shoved up your ass.
It’s real simple, until these assholes take responsibility for themselves and quit blaming everybody else for what ever predicaments they get themselves into, then nothing will change.
It’s always somebody elses fault. Right…It’s horseshit. If they spent as much time bettering their lives as they did attempting to kill and destroy other lives, they’d be doing just peachy.
I am tired of the excusism, oh it’s Iraq or it’s Israel so we have to hate, kill, and destroy. Fuck off.
[quote]Iraq and Israel have nothing to do with the violence and hatred perpetrated by people in the name of islam. That is excusism and passing the buck. Do anybody really think that if the U.S. left the ME all together and Israel were wiped off the map that these people would suddenly be sugar and spice? If you think that then your head is irreparably shoved up your ass.
It’s real simple, until these assholes take responsibility for themselves and quit blaming everybody else for what ever predicaments they get themselves into, then nothing will change.
[/quote]
They can’t unless they get rid of Islam in their societies. That may be happening.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
The more car bombs that go off in Iraqi markets, the more Iraqi who are killed by militia death squads only makes this film’s message more important.
And what about the Iraqis who rightly conclude that America brought these “terrorists” to Iraq?
[/quote]
They made the choice to attack American troops. Why blame it on us? Did we bring these “terrorists” to Somalia, Tanzania, Algeria, Uzbegistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Kenya, India ect, as well? Their jihad against us was going on well before the Iraq war, we just opened another theater for them to attack us in.
Will the Muslim apologists here please explain why the “true” Islam is not taught in Al-Azhar University? When have the Ulema ever said that Osama Bin Laden is not a genuine mujahid? All they ever do is condemn “terrorism,” but terrorism is defined differently in the Qur’an. Terrorism applies only to harming other Muslims if they haven’t been declared apostates. Mohammed himself said to strike terror into the hearts of infidels (Surah 8:60) and “I am made victorious through terror” (Bukhari, Bk 52, 220).
Tantawi also condemned the 9/11 attacks, but I can’t find the news articles right now, though there are references to his remarks a plenty around.[/quote]
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
will to power wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Will the Muslim apologists here please explain why the “true” Islam is not taught in Al-Azhar University?
[quote]will to power wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
will to power wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Will the Muslim apologists here please explain why the “true” Islam is not taught in Al-Azhar University?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Tantawi is also the author of the 700 page “Banu Isra�??il fi al-Qur�??an wa al-Sunna,” which justifies Muslim hatred of Jews.
None of the links I provided went to shopping sites. [/quote]
No, they provided sources that used sources that were very weird advertising sites. I’m not going to go through the links to find whatever it might be you’re talking about. Link to it directly here, I went through enough of them that I’m not wasting more time on looking.
From that site ‘Tantawi was apparently rewarded for this scholarly effort by being named Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in 1996’
Meaning what they’re talking about is before he was in Imam of the university. How does that make it relevant to this current discussion? As a representative of the uni I have so far only seen him denounce the killing of civilians, except from your hate filled blogs.
From that source ‘He stressed, however, that Islam did not allow the killing of innocent
civilians and children but only invaders and aggressors.’
Why does this make the university evil? I disagree with the Imam saying they should be brought to trial, but what’s the big deal?
None of which apparently have real sources. Do you not check your sources PR, or do you just hope others won’t?
For the lazy:
"Shaykh Tantawi has stated that the Koran “specifically forbids the kinds of things the Taliban and al-Qaida are guilty of,” Pitts said.
Shaykh Tantawi, Pitts continued, has said that the “jihad” Usama bin Laden has called for against America “is invalid and not binding on Muslims.”
Pitts quoted the Grand Shaykh as saying, “Islam rejects all of these acts.” The Shaykh added that terrorism is un-Islamic, Pitts said.
“Killing innocent civilians is a horrific, hideous act that no religion can approve,” Pitts quoted the religious leader as saying."
And hey, I found an article on the 9/11 attacks, and it’s from the BBC rather than some random hate filled blog. Notice the difference?
From that article, Tantawi on the attacks ‘It’s not courage in any way to kill an innocent person, or to kill thousands of people, including men and women and children’
[quote]From that source ‘He stressed, however, that Islam did not allow the killing of innocent
civilians and children but only invaders and aggressors.’
[/quote]
“Hate filled.” Now I’m 100% certain you’re a Muslim yourself.
“Innocent” is defined differently in Islam than it is in the West. Only Muslims are innocent in Islam. Everyone in Dar al-Harb is guilty. This is what Tantawi is saying. He’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth.