Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
Absolutely correctEnemy_Of_Mad_Mullah wrote:RuralMan08 wrote:Any individual who is fighting occupations is a Mujahid. However just fighting with no clear plan is not Jihad. Jihad must be fought with the intention to establish Islamic Law or else its no different than a communist or a Jew fighting
Intention is the most important thing, and if ur fighting for a flag and "ogadenia" and not for Islam fee sabililah then this is dieing for Asabiyyah which is like dieing the death of Jahiliya
as a muslim if you are fighting for the right and just cause then your fight makes a jihad, even if your not fighting to establish sharica. this because islam gives you the right to defend your life, property, country and your religion. defending your life and property from an aggressor is lawful under islam, thus it becames a jihad (which what the ONLF is doing). some of you seem to think the can ONLY fight a jihad to establish a islamic state. so doest that mean oppressed people who are being perscuted in the own land cannot fight a jihad. of course it doesnt, because such claim would be absurd. FIGHTING A JIHAD MEANS FIGHTING OPPRESSION.And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter
in not a islamic scholar but i believe fighting for the right cause is a jihad.Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not do aggression, for Allah loves not the aggressors. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers." (Al-Baqarah 190-194)
I believe in a religion that believes in freedom. Any time I have to accept a religion that won't let me fight a battle for my people, I say to hell with that religion.
Malcolm X
you're quoting a hadithsRuralMan08 wrote:^^ What you think matters not. Somebody asked the Prophet (saw) what is the right Jihad? And he (saw) replied: "THose who fight to make the Word of Allah uppermost" (Bukhari).
If the ONLF are fighting for a nationalistic cause then it is NOT Jihad and there is NO blessign in it. However if they are fighting to establish Islam and make the Word of Allah uppermost then they shall be victorious even if it takes a 100 years.
seemeyer wrote:THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN WHAT IS HAPPENINNG IN THE OGADEN
TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN CHECHNYA,PALESTINE, SOUTH PHILPINES, IRAQ OR AFGHANISTAN.
WHY PEOPLE ARE ASKING THE OGADEN PEOPLE IF IT'S NATIONALISNM OR NOT. NOBODY ASKS ANY OF THE OTHER NATIONS I'VE MENTIONED IT JUST A GIVEN, WELL IT'S THE SAME IN OGADENIA
The article I posted discusses the background and posits federalism as a way out or around.... No my friend the problem is your taking the verse of the Qur'an OUT of context. The verse you quoted was regarding the Polytheists of Quraish who evicted the Muslims out of Makkah and Allah was GIVING the Muslims permission to defend themselves and slaughter the enemy if they initiated war. So HENCE they were FIGHTING for Islam. According to your logic your telling me that if a Hindu fights to protect his country from Christian colonialists, the Hindu is doing Jihad and he will go to Heaven LOL. Your claims are laughable.you're quoting a hadiths
but can you explain to me what this ayad says
And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter
the problem with you people you dont really understand the meaning of jihad and the subject is too complex for some of u. most of you think, jihad means you have to for islam........but no body fights for religion sake. you cant just go to war for islam if you have no cause.. if do you will be an aggressor. in order to fight a jihad u have to have a right and just cause. there is no greater cause worth of jihad than perscution. the onlf is fighting occuption and perscution of muslim people by a chrithian oppressor, thus their fight becames a jihad under islamic law. the fact that they choose express their cause in a nationalistic language doesnt mean it is no longer a jiahd. ok lets look at it this why....... let say a muslim nation (group of people) are being oppressed and occupied by non muslsims. under islamic law the muslims have the right to fight liberate their land and people, thus their fight is a jihad.....so far soo good.. ok now does make a difference what language those people express the cause in, doesnt matter whether they expressed in a nationalistc or religous way, since the cause is right and just
what a fool we are talking about muslims u idiot.RuralMan08 wrote:No my friend the problem is your taking the verse of the Qur'an OUT of context. The verse you quoted was regarding the Polytheists of Quraish who evicted the Muslims out of Makkah and Allah was GIVING the Muslims permission to defend themselves and slaughter the enemy if they initiated war. So HENCE they were FIGHTING for Islam. According to your logic your telling me that if a Hindu fights to protect his country from Christian colonialists, the Hindu is doing Jihad and he will go to Heaven LOL. Your claims are laughable.you're quoting a hadiths
but can you explain to me what this ayad says
And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter
the problem with you people you dont really understand the meaning of jihad and the subject is too complex for some of u. most of you think, jihad means you have to for islam........but no body fights for religion sake. you cant just go to war for islam if you have no cause.. if do you will be an aggressor. in order to fight a jihad u have to have a right and just cause. there is no greater cause worth of jihad than perscution. the onlf is fighting occuption and perscution of muslim people by a chrithian oppressor, thus their fight becames a jihad under islamic law. the fact that they choose express their cause in a nationalistic language doesnt mean it is no longer a jiahd. ok lets look at it this why....... let say a muslim nation (group of people) are being oppressed and occupied by non muslsims. under islamic law the muslims have the right to fight liberate their land and people, thus their fight is a jihad.....so far soo good.. ok now does make a difference what language those people express the cause in, doesnt matter whether they expressed in a nationalistc or religous way, since the cause is right and just
Mashallah well saidpeace- wrote:the people of the ogadenia or somali galbeed have been under a brutal occupation for over century.for over a 100 years it has been little short of hell on earth for our fellow somalis in the ogedan.they have lived under a repressive and muderous ethiopian regimes that use torture, rape and scorch earth policy against innocent and defenseless people. under these circumstance people have the right to resistence under every law unknow to man. the holy qu'ran makes obligatory for muslims to defend their life, property and religion.
as a muslim if you are fighting for the right and just cause then your fight makes a jihad, even if your not fighting to establish sharica. this because islam gives you the right to defend your life, property, country and your religion. defending your life and property from an aggressor is lawful under islam, thus it becames a jihad (which what the ONLF is doing). some of you seem to think the can ONLY fight a jihad to establish a islamic state. so doest that mean oppressed people who are being perscuted in the own land cannot fight a jihad. of course it doesnt, because such claim would be absurd. FIGHTING A JIHAD MEANS FIGHTING OPPRESSION.And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter
"in not a islamic scholar but i believe fighting for the right cause is a jihad.Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not do aggression, for Allah loves not the aggressors. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers." (Al-Baqarah 190-194)
I believe in a religion that believes in freedom. Any time I have to accept a religion that won't let me fight a battle for my people, I say to hell with that religion.
Malcolm X
Cusmano don't ruin my thread, discuss this in the Pland sectionAbdi-Halim wrote:Peace your disgrace to puntland, i have you many times dismiss the great state and it's role to cement federalism as the policy of somaliya. You ignore that a majority of your isimo signed the puntland charter in 1998, you don't even have a wacad. Even the hutus sacad knows how to keep their wacad.
Puntland is in the interest of every darod, it cements federalism to keep the nation united. We can't allow for dhulbante and warsangeli be in somaliland border and be a minority and majerten and marehan be in a somalia border and be a minority. Yet u seem to have no issue with that, why really makes m doubt your even dhulbahante.
Know 1 thing, do u see habar jeclo leaving somaliland because they have never ruled? wa may. Marka why are u the doqon leaving puntland? it is a time of war in somaliya and u know it and for survival sake we all need to stick together and not have enemies take advantage of it.
Wake up. Even if midgan ruled puntland for 50 years i would support it, because the state policy is in my interest and keeps d-block united. If we are divided we will just become tea boys on both side of the border.
So you are disgrace to darod if you are one to begin with!!!!
