Blowing up Danish Embassies!! is that enough?

[Homer Simpso]

Yeah Law.. I cannot contribute that much to anything nowadays.. i am an executive you know.. I finished school and got a job in a prestigious company in attempt to jumpstart my career... I cannot spent that much of time in internet.. anyway, I bet it was awesome to live in Asia.. Im planning to visit Asia for 8th time with my gurlfriend this summer...

lets go back to the topic.. everyone is trying to make sense here and I do have to admit that you guyz all have good points but at the end of the day this issue doesnot need that much of discussion.. it needs action.. this is the only time our Prophet (pbh) needs us big time.. someone has badly hurt'd his dignity and integrity and we need to retaliate... the retlaition shouldnt be just that we hate the Danis but to show the world that this kinds stupidity is and wont be accepted by Islam period!!! now my question to all of you guyz (young somali fella's) is, what have u done to contribute to this cause? or have u just been sittting before the tv and holding a flad in hand indoors?

[The Law26]

Homer

Good luck with work and enjoy your life the way you see fit. What sort of action?

SomaliSiz

All of what you said is a half-baked beat up truths, and amazingly, that is what Islam phoebes like Galol aka Dalol always use to attack the character of prophet Mohamed pbuh. Maybe, that is why he admitted you to be a more credible Muslim than others and me. Not that your version is correct, but he can shred it easily into pieces, based on its lack of foundation and truthfulness and your inability to defend a fallacy. Let me sum it up for you, given that prophet Mohamed pbuh was a leader of a new State at that time in Medina that had a deal/treaty with the Jewish people, many of the cases that you mentioned were cases of treason rather than blasphemy based on that Treaty. Anyway what has it got to do with present Denmark and Muslims who come from many dozens of nation-states?

Historically, present day Madinah (Yathrib), and its suburbs, after the ratification of this treaty below, turned into a coalition state, with Madinah officially became as capital and prophet Mohamed pbuh as it’s leader; authority laid mainly in the hand of the Muslims, and consequently it was a real capital of Islam. To expand the zone of peace and security the Prophet pbuh started to enter into similar treaties with other tribes living around ‘his state’. How did you not mention like Galol and co. that they SIGNED a treaty with Muslims and within there was a clause of committing treason. Without seeing the treaty, one cannot make any judgements on this issue.

A COOPEARATION AND NON-AGGRESSION PACT WITH THE JEWS


"The most important provisions of the treaty are the following:


1. The Jews of Bani ‘Awf are one community with the believers. The Jews will profess their religion, and the Muslims theirs.

2. The Jews shall be responsible for their expenditure, and the Muslims for theirs.

3. If attacked by a third party, each shall come to the assistance of the other.

4. Each party shall hold counsel with the other. Mutual relation shall be founded on righteousness; sin is totally excluded.

5. Neither shall commit sins to the prejudice of the other.

6. The wronged party shall be aided.

7. The Jews shall contribute to the cost of war so long as they are fighting alongside the believers.

8. Madinah shall remain sacred and inviolable for all that join this treaty.

9. Should any disagreement arise between the signatories to this treaty, then Allâh, the All-High and His Messenger shall settle the dispute.

10. The signatories to this treaty shall boycott Quraish commercially; they shall also abstain from extending any support to them.

11. Each shall contribute to defending Madinah, in case of a foreign attack, in its respective area.

12. This treaty shall not hinder either party from seeking lawful revenge.

["The Sealed Nectar", page 197-198,English version]

SomaliSiz, You talk about Asmaa Bint Marwaan, (there are serious doubts about the validty of this story based on Isnad) however you forgot to mention that prophet Mohamed pbuh forgave all those Meccans who
wanted to kill him and his followers for years. After he came back to Mecca, he forgave his enemies. He forgave "Hind bint utbah" who plotted killing of his favourite uncle Hamza. She even dishonoured (Chewed his liver) the dead body. Our prophet pbuh forgave that sick lady. Wahshi the actual murderer of Hamza was forgiven. He was slave of Hind. The master of "Evil Quraish" Abu Sufyan was forgiven. Although Abu Sufyan was one of those character who tried to kill our prophet pbuh for long time.

The story of the killing of Asma' bint Marwan is mentioned by Ibn Sa'd in Kitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, and by the author of Kinz-ul-'Ummal under number 44131 who attributes it to Ibn Sa'd, Ibn 'Adiyy and Ibn 'Asaker. What is interesting is that Ibn 'Adiyy mentions it in his book Al-Kamel on the authority of Ja'far Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn As-Sabah on authority of Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ash-Shami on authority of Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Lakhmi on authority of Mujalid on authority of Ash-Shu'abi on authority of Ibn 'Abbas, and added that

...this isnad (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid but by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj and they all (other reporters in the chain) accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it. It is also reported by Ibn al-Gawzi in Al-'Ilal and is listed among other flawed reports. So according to its isnad, the report is forged - because one of its reporters is notorious for fabricating hadîth. Hence, such a story is rejected and is better off being put into the trash-can.

[Source: The Sealed Nectar, English version]

An authentic Sunnah of the Prophet prohibits the killing of women in war.
Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewish woman brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No." I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of God’s Apostle.

Our prophet pbuh refused to kill a female, who intentionally tried to poison him, but others like you would like to use a fabricated semi-cooked stories, and wants us to believe that he ordered the killing of a woman who only abused him verbally? Amazing indeed!!!

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Messenger of God (peace be upon him) saw the corpse of a woman who had been slain in one of the raids, and he disapproved of it and forbade the killing of women and children.

Sources:

Sahih al-Bukhârî, Vol. 3, Bk. 47, No. 786

Ibid. Vol. 4, Bk. 52, No. 257 & 258. Also see Mutta Malik, Book 21, Section 3, and Number 9

Since prophet Mohamed pbuh was a kind person who forgave the very people who wanted to destroy him, why would he go after some "poet" for vengence? The logic does not support your fabricated "Story". Was he a vengeful person like Galol wants to portray him? Make up your mind!!!! You can't have it both ways.

NO book in Islam besides the Qur'an is 100% trustworthy.

[Mowhawk]

Thankx Law for countering such a crazy call, and did you watch Dateline on SBS (special Broadcasting Corporaton in Australia) last night? They had Professor Tariq Ramadan (the grandson of the founder of the Egyptian Brotherhood) and this is what he had to say of the issue;

"..........Professor Tariq Ramadan, a prominent Islamic scholar and thinker, is no stranger to controversy. He's an outspoken critic of the Bush Administration's policies in Iraq and the Middle East and he also rejects Muslim terrorism, condemning it as 'anti-Islam'. A Swiss citizen, he has been banned from the US under the Contentious Patriot Act but after the London bombings last year Tony Blair invited him to participate in a task force to counter terrorism. Earlier today George Negus talked with Professor Ramadan from Geneva."


GEORGE NEGUS: Professor, you were actually in Copenhagen in October when the cartoons provoked the first demonstrations. But three months later why do you think this has burst into a "global crisis", as the Danish Prime Minister describes it?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN, ISLAMIC SCHOLAR: What happened in Denmark in October was quite OK and, you know, I met Muslims asking me what was my advice and I told them to not demonstrated just make your point heard, that it is hurtful and you don't think it is wise to do this and it was OK.

Three months later you had a group of Muslims going to the Middle East and they used photographs and cartoons and other things just to show this to the people and you got there Governments very happy just to show to their own population that they're the great champion of Islam and the Islamic tradition so I think that three months later it was instrumentalised by some governments to let the Muslims express their anger against the West. It's not by accident that it started in Syria and that are now we have Saudi Arabia behind the whole thing. On the other side we have also far-right parties very happy just to show to the people. "Look we told you, these Muslims are not ready to integrate and they're not respecting our values and the first of values is freedom of speech."

GEORGE NEGUS: You have said that the world has at a crossroads. Do you believe the situation will get worse before it gets better?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: I think it is already very, very bad and very, very negative and we know that some people on both sides are ready to instrumentalise everything which can just remote binary vision and us versus them theory or the class of civilisations. Let us say to the Muslims, OK this is against our religion, we are not used to laughing at religion or to make fun out of religion. And we have just to say this to the people. On other side it's really important that our fellow European, Australian, Canadian citizens understand that, yes, we cherish freedom of speech, but we also need our fellow citizens to understand that it is a question of respect, it is a question of a civic sense of responsibility.
We are not asking for more censorship, we are asking for more respect, but we all understand that now we're dealing with very sensitive issues and if we are not cautious with this we are nurturing emotions and polarisation in our world and the extremists are going to use it.

GEORGE NEGUS: Professor, in Western countries there is a feeling that the Muslim reaction has fuelled the situation, actually worsened it. What can be done to calm things down now?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: I think first Muslims should say, "We have to stop," and we have to condemn this called the boycott, killing people - this is not acceptable. Even the Prophet of Islam himself, when he was attacked, he was patient and he was reacting with the wisdom and we have to say to the Muslims, "This is not the way to react, we have to stop." So Muslim voices should be heard saying that. At the same time don't continue to provoke - and I think that the newspapers who just published it afterwards, it was not wise. We are now not in a debate, it is something which is a power struggle. We all - and you in Australia, as us in Europe, in the States, in Canada - we have to understand something. For the last decade I was saying, what is going on in the Western countries will have a tremendous impact on what is going on in the Muslim-majority countries. And this is exactly a signal for us.

GEORGE NEGUS: If reason and sanity don't prevail what do you think is the worst-case scenario?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: It is a war - psychological and religious and civilisations. You know, against two civilisations, just death to each other, so we are not listening, so the worst-case scenario is to continue in that way and just to make the people understand it is the West against Islam and it could lead to something which is a real fracture between two worlds.

GEORGE NEGUS: Are we really talking about mutual ignorance here? Is that what we need to break through?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: This is what I am asking for - national movements of local initiatives in the Western societies to let the people know each other better and when you work with people, when you are partners at the grassroots level you know each other and you respect each other but let us not be naive - there is a political aspect of the whole question so here we are also dealing with geo-strategic interest, political instrumentalisation and it is not a question of ignorance here, it is a question that some political parties, the far right parties and even what we have now with neo-con in the States using the whole idea that the other is a threat, that there is a war on terrorism, the global ideology of fear, using this.

GEORGE NEGUS: What is your assessment of the impact of this crisis over cartoons on the fragile situations in Iraq and Afghanistan, on the Palestinians-Israeli conflict, on terrorism and even the war on terrorism?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: I don't think that the cartoons just make it, they are just revealing the state of affairs. It is really bad, you know? Iraq and Palestine and all these issues just are nurturing this sense of victim-hood - us versus them. We want democracy in our societies but we also want democracy for other societies and we have to respect the rights of the people.

GEORGE NEGUS: Are you referring to the complaint of the Palestinians that the West won't recognise their democratic choice, that the militant Hamas is now actually the governing authority there?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: You know, the feeling today is that the West has double standards. We speak about democracy but when they are winning the elections the perception is you are not accepting this. They will use the cartoons to express their frustration and their frustrations are legitimate.

GEORGE NEGUS: Professor, you're admired in the Islamic world and in the West but you have also been accused of supporting suicide bombing. Does this undermine your authority to speak out on this issue?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: I never supported suicide bombings and there is not in my work. As I am critical towards the policy of the state of Israel, the government of Israel, of course some people don't like that so they are confusing the whole picture because they don't want my words to be heard. But let me tell you something - from the very beginning I knew that my project was controversial because I'm speaking to two worlds. I was raised in the West, I am just rooted in Islamic tradition and I am building bridges, and when you build bridges you're just disappointing the people on both sides.

GEORGE NEGUS: So are you saying, Professor, that ironically, something like this, as awful as it seems, could be a wake-up call for all of us?

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: It is, it is, exactly. You know, the fact that you're inviting me, that we have this program tonight is just exact evidence that this is what is needed and it could be a wake-up call and it is. I really think that if we are passive and we're looking at what the extremists on both sides are ready to do we all lost so it's a wake-up call, yes.

GEORGE NEGUS: Professor, thank you very much for time. Salaam.

PROFESSOR TARIQ RAMADAN: Thank you for the invitation.

http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/index.p ... 006-02-08#

[The Law26]

Mohawk

Yes, I saw that interview but would have appreciated if George Negus (the interviewer) drilled Tariq more about the intentions of that Danish Imam. This what I wrote few days ago;

"I asked that question in relation of to Imam Abu Laban a Danish resident. The whole issue came up when he recently visited Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, it was alleged that three of the worst offending cartoons in his possession (published by him) were not the works of the Danish Newspaper and were fakes. I don't know wether it is true, or not, but I'm only trying to gather all the facts and piece the dots to the best of my knowledge and ability."

Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-P ... d_cartoons

It is hard to explain complex issues to simple minded people, while others believe that their sect leaders to be infallible. It is hard to convince a parrot.

[SomaliLight]

[quote=law26]NO book in Islam besides the Qur'an is 100% trustworthy.[/quote]

Law26, this point you made above is fundamentally important for those who believe in the quran and this god Allah. Honestly speaking, as former muslim I found that many of the contradictions in this faith come from the hearsay works of Bukhari and friends. I once held the prophet as one of the humblest and greatest of men, well that was until someone gave me a copy of Bukhari's complete works and that changed everything. So I am quite surprised and pleased to see you admit that for once. with that said, i think your statement has something to do with the fact that many times in this forum and perhaps in real life your good efforts to defend this faith has been derailed by a Bukhari hadith.

anyway...I am just saying it is nice to see someone not relying secondary sources for once

[Gacalisa]

somalilight, lack of knowledge and understanding of the diin is what causes many issues and confrentations to occur in islam, and with ur lack of knowledge u could not have made a worst dicision.

[SomaliLight]

[quoteGacalisa]somalilight, lack of knowledge and understanding of the diin is what causes many issues and confrentations to occur in islam, and with ur lack of knowledge u could not have made a worst dicision.[/quote]

Gacalisa hun,, what is your point here?....should muslims really take Bukhari's works as something akin the quran as they have been doing for the past 1200 years?...i think Law will agree that Bukhari does more damage than good.

[Gacalisa]

somalilight, until u understand and comprehend with the Quran u cannot judge, one must know the tafsiir fully to have a knowledgable comment on it, as for Bukhari, his work is even praised by non-muslim scholars, such as Hitti, who study Islam. if non-muslim talk of islam in a good light, how can former muslim oppose it?

[The Law26]

Somalilight

"....i think Law will agree that Bukhari does more damage than good."

If you have spoken from your mouth rather than from your ass, I would have been interested in engaging you. Leave those good Muslims alone, and out of the reach of your stench. If you are a "former Muslim", why can't you be happy with your current status, and leave Muslims deal with their own issues?

[SomaliLight]

[quote=Gacalisa]somalilight, until u understand and comprehend with the Quran u cannot judge, one must know the tafsiir fully to have a knowledgable comment on it, as for Bukhari, his work is even praised by non-muslim scholars, such as Hitti, who study Islam. if non-muslim talk of islam in a good light, how can former muslim oppose it?
[/quote]

Yes, i Agree comprehension of all things is necessary before one makes any hasty judgement. However, at the end of the day the tafisiir is one man's understanding against another. It is basically commentary on very difficult and purposely vague statements in the quran. and your point that non- muslims have praised Bukhari, but why would they not praise the man who managed to collect thousands of hearsay tales and compiled them to become one of the most the cited men in human history. In fact, Buhkari 's works should be hailed as the greatest social research on arab customs/traditions, He has even replaced the quran as one of the most authentic resources in Islam.

The quran in particular places is vague about certain things, and in many of these caeses Bukhari is supplemented as the clarifying source, but usaully the Bukhari supplement is damaging, for example;

Slavery: sex with female prisoners is mentioned in the quran vaguely, but Allah demands some sort of marriage contract ...sometimes. But Bukhari has about 4 hadiths where that is contradicted, infact reselling of slaves is the more important point being addressed rather than the human integrity in most of these hadiths.

stoning in adultry cases, no where in the quran do we see stoning mentioned, but this jewish custom creeps into Bukhari's works, and muslim have overidded the Quran in such matters.


....there are more but i don't have time get into them now...but my point is Bhukari has been damaging in some cases.

[SomaliLight]

[quote=lLaw26]If you have spoken from your mouth rather than from your ass, I would have been interested in engaging you. Leave those good Muslims alone, and out of the reach of your stench. If you are a "former Muslim", why can't you be happy with your current status, and leave Muslims deal with their own issues?[/quote]

wow, sounds like you would be one of those ignorant fools burning down buildings to show your dispute with a couple of drunk danish cartoonists. But serlously Law, i am quite very happy with my current status, but Just as I would not stop you from making commentary on the subject of non-believers, then its fair to say anyone can engage in conversations about islamic sources of faith regardless of whether they believe or not. We live in our world where nothing is exempted from public discussions.


[quote=law26]The logic does not support your fabricated "Story". Was he a vengeful person like Galol wants to portray him? Make up your mind!!!! You can't have it both ways[/quote]

Now I don't know why you are just so upset today, is it cause Bukhari 's hadiths have become compulsory articles of faith and you can't justify their legitmacy to yourself?....if that is it , well thats your problem buddy. "You can't have it both ways" you say, but thats exactly what you have been doing all along. You and your little islamic friends have been filtering hadiths accepting the good ones and dismissing the damaging ones. Honestly, sometimes i wonder how someone like yourself with all that education is so self-defeating...look man i understand you have to defend your faith, but don't try shove two contradicting values down our throats. The fact of the matter is, the hadiths are damaging and you yourself have proved that countlessly in your efforts to defend this faith.

bwt..there is no need to pretend like you are guardian angel of meritless islamic pieces of hearsay..and just because a few people give non islamic opinions does not mean that everyone on this forum is under attack....i think we are all old enough and independently aware to think for ourselves.. so just relax with your anger.

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="Gacalisa"]somalilight, until u understand and comprehend with the Quran u cannot judge, one must know the tafsiir fully to have a knowledgable comment on it, [/quote]

In other words you need a HUMAN to tell you what Allah himself couldn't (you can't just read the Quran and take a message from it, you need some1 to explain it to you)?

[Gacalisa]

are there other things in the world other than humans, excluding animals, just makes ur statment vague. u need humans who are far more knowledgabe than u to make something more understandable, as for something, that God could not tell u himself, how can a human know more than God, and have more capabililty than God, and God has told us every thing he wants to tell us and every thing he wanted us to know.

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="Gacalisa"]are there other things in the world other than humans, excluding animals, just makes ur statment vague. u need humans who are far more knowledgabe than u to make something more understandable, as for something, that God could not tell u himself, how can a human know more than God, and have more capabililty than God, and God has told us every thing he wants to tell us and every thing he wanted us to know.[/quote]

If you NEED humans to tell what to worship, you'll be worshiping what humans tell and not what Allah/God tells you.

[Gacalisa]

i am not saying i "need" humans to" tel"l me what to believe but i need humans to interebt and explain the quran, if we did not need humans, you would make the prophet seem un-human and make him seem more than human, we are going in the same path as the christians, u know.