*Irans Little Hitler Sounding Shaken: Wonders Now If USA Will Attack?* [Archive] - Debate Policy

View Full Version : *Irans Little Hitler Sounding Shaken: Wonders Now If USA Will Attack?*

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 09:09 AM

Sorry bout that,

1. But, *Iran's Midget Hitler Ahmadinejad* is starting to wonder if we will or will not attack???
2. France is already saying they might even go along with USA in an effort to stop *Little Two Eyes Too Close Together*.
3. If France's leaders are making noise to that effect, then so is everyone else.
4. Can Ahmadinejad, hold up to this kind of pressure?
5. Will he be able to hold off *The Americans* with a slide rule?
6. All this and a bag of chips right here on DebatePolicy.
7. Read this:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070903081020.uzkadmfq&show_article=1

"

Iran's Ahmadinejad has 'proof' US won't attack

Sep 3 04:10 AM US/Eastern

View larger image

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has sought to justify his confidence the United States will not attack Iran, saying the proof comes from his mathematical skills as an engineer and faith in God, the press reported on Monday.
Ahmadinejad told academics in a speech that elements inside Iran were pressing for compromise in the nuclear standoff with the West over fears the United States could launch a military strike.

"In some discussions I told them 'I am an engineer and I am examining the issue. They do not dare wage war against us and I base this on a double proof'," he said in the speech on Sunday, reported by the reformist Etemad Melli and Kargozaran newspapers.

"I tell them: 'I am an engineer and I am a master in calculation and tabulation.

"I draw up tables. For hours, I write out different hypotheses. I reject, I reason. I reason with planning and I make a conclusion. They cannot make problems for Iran.'"

Ahmadinejad has long expressed pride in his academic prowess. He holds a PhD on transport engineering and planning from Tehran's Science and Technology University and is the author several of scientific papers.

The deeply religious president said his second reason was: "I believe in what God says."

"God says that those who walk in the path of righteousness will be victorious. What reason can you have for believing God will not keep this promise."

Washington has never ruled out taking military action against Tehran, and its tone has sharpened again over the past week with President George W. Bush warning that Iran's nuclear programme could lead to a "nuclear holocaust."

Ahmadinejad said that "God willing" one day he would write his memoirs to put the record straight.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has already warned that Iran risks being bombed if the nuclear crisis is not resolved. Ahmadinejad last week brushed off the comments which he said were due to his French counterpart's inexperience.

"
8. I think we are starting to see the end of this *Little Hitler*.
9. And I think we need to document all the Iranian attacks in Iraq, in order to justify blasting Iran.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 09:21 AM

I think we need to hit Iran with everything we've got. I also think were are really close to that no matter what the Liberal Pinkos in the Congress and the Senate say.

jafar00

09-03-2007, 10:53 AM

An attack on Iran would require some proof of wrong doing. Since the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has been, shall we say, a little hard to come by a new lie had to be concocted to somehow justify a new war.

So far though, the reasons such as Iran (Shiite and an enemy of Al Qaeda) has been supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq(think Shia are unbelievers and the second enemy after the US) are somewhat amusing.

You can try and hit them with everything you've got, but apart from some missiles against which they have defences you haven't really got much to spare since you are bogged down in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Remember, Iran has a strong, modern defence force. It's not like Iraq's where they were first weakened by decades of crippling sanctions. You will have your work cut out for you. Not to mention the rest of the world that isn't already against you turning against you too.

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 10:58 AM

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 11:02 AM

Sorry bout that,

1. But the rest of the world eats at our table.
2. If they are unhappy with American efforts against Islam, let them eat else where.
3. American Allies support the war effort.
4. If indeed they are an allie.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

jafar00

09-03-2007, 11:43 AM

Ahmalittlehitler in iran is nothing more than the mouth piece for the clerics that actually rule the country. He's the fall guy if things go wrong. Everything he does has to be approved by them.

He isn't perfect. Your point is?

The un will go through the motions with their usual endless string of resolutions and sanctions, but even france sees the danger from iran and france is within range of their medium rockets.

Actually Iran is cooperating with the UN at this time although they could be doing a little more. They were far more open not so long ago until the sabre rattling and propaganda campaign by the US made them decide that they didn't have to continue with the voluntary extra inspections over and above that which was required of them by the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.

Tsarkhozy is nothing more than a puppet for his Zionist masters How else can you explain the 360 degree shift in French foreign policy with regards to Iran?

Taking down iran will end its support of all the terror groups and really hurt their recruiting efforts because it will show they are not righteous and blessed and god is not on their side.

Can you name the terrorist groups Iran is supposed to be supporting, and in what way they are supporting them?

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 12:09 PM

He isn't perfect. Your point is?

My point is he's a puppet.

Actually Iran is cooperating with the UN at this time although they could be doing a little more. They were far more open not so long ago until the sabre rattling and propaganda campaign by the US made them decide that they didn't have to continue with the voluntary extra inspections over and above that which was required of them by the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.

They have never cooperated with the un. They learned from saddam how to draw these things out. All they need is a couple of more years.

Tsarkhozy is nothing more than a puppet for his Zionist masters How else can you explain the 360 degree shift in French foreign policy with regards to Iran?

ahhh the true muslim comes out. Someone stands beside America in facing down the islamists and he's a zionist puppet.

Can you name the terrorist groups Iran is supposed to be supporting, and in what way they are supporting them?

Sure I can. hizbollah, hamas, mahdi army, muslim brotherhood, plo, al queda, taliban. Just to name a few. They are providing material and money support. And in some cases manpower from Quds force. There are 50,000 quds force agents operating in the region outside of iran. They have their fingers in every pie.

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 12:40 PM

An attack on Iran would require some proof of wrong doing. Since the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has been, shall we say, a little hard to come by a new lie had to be concocted to somehow justify a new war.

So far though, the reasons such as Iran (Shiite and an enemy of Al Qaeda) has been supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq(think Shia are unbelievers and the second enemy after the US) are somewhat amusing.

You can try and hit them with everything you've got, but apart from some missiles against which they have defences you haven't really got much to spare since you are bogged down in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Remember, Iran has a strong, modern defence force. It's not like Iraq's where they were first weakened by decades of crippling sanctions. You will have your work cut out for you. Not to mention the rest of the world that isn't already against you turning against you too.

How about violating just about everything in the Geniva Convenction.

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 01:31 PM

An attack on Iran would require some proof of wrong doing. Since the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has been, shall we say, a little hard to come by a new lie had to be concocted to somehow justify a new war.

All the proof is already there. It's just a matter of getting on board to do it. Their nuclear program is in full swing to produce nuclear weapons.

So far though, the reasons such as Iran (Shiite and an enemy of Al Qaeda) has been supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq(think Shia are unbelievers and the second enemy after the US) are somewhat amusing.

They are not only supporting AQI, they are also supporting the taliban in Afghanistan, another sunni group. They also support hamas as well. As long as these groups are fighting the US they will get support. The enemy of my enemy is my friend way of thinking.

You can try and hit them with everything you've got, but apart from some missiles against which they have defences you haven't really got much to spare since you are bogged down in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lets see. We have 150,000 troops in iraq, which can be added too. And the additions can come from other countries as well. There are three carrier groups in the gulf and two amphibious assault groups. A french carrier group and two British amphibious assault groups. Not to mention subs and ground based air units from all over the globe. Most of which are stealth. Other than the size difference I think the out come would be much the same as iraq's.

Remember, Iran has a strong, modern defence force. It's not like Iraq's where they were first weakened by decades of crippling sanctions. You will have your work cut out for you. Not to mention the rest of the world that isn't already against you turning against you too.

The only real defense iran has is missiles. And you can bet they will be the first things targeted. Their air force consists of old US built F4's and F5's which they don't have spare parts for. The few that might get off the ground would not last five minutes. Ahmalittlehitler has practically bankrupt the country to by military equipment mostly from the russians and chinese and has proved to be far inferior to US weapons systems. And there's nothing like a good old fashion B-52 carpet bombing run to really decimate a huge area.

I figure iran will last about 3 weeks. With luck syria will jump into things and we can take down that terrorist haven as well.

jafar00

09-03-2007, 01:44 PM

Sure I can. hizbollah, hamas, mahdi army, muslim brotherhood, plo, al queda, taliban. Just to name a few. They are providing material and money support. And in some cases manpower from Quds force. There are 50,000 quds force agents operating in the region outside of iran. They have their fingers in every pie.

Hizbullah is a political party as well as the people's resistance of Lebanon. They only exist to counter Israeli aggression against Israel. If Israel didn't attack Lebanon, Hizbullah would not exist. They are not a terrorist organisation. Since they only retaliate against Israeli attacks, they are a legitimate resistance organisation. Their political aims in Lebanon are met by being elected into parliament, not by bombing the public into submission.

Hamas also grew from small roots as resistance against Israeli Aggression(There is a pattern here) against Palestine. What they are now I don't know. Since the press is banned from reporting what is really going on in Palestine, we can only guess.

Mahdi Army are a resistance group that grew from the US attack on Iraq. By the UN definition, they are a legitimate resistance against foreign invaders.

The above 3 may be helped by Iran being Shiite organisations. No proof of exactly what support they get beyond moral support has been produced to my knowledge.

The thought that the following SUNNI groups are supported by Iran is laughable.

The "Muslim" Brotherhood I can agree are terrorists. Their attacks on innocent civilians of all faiths including Muslims are nothing short of disgusting. Their ideology comes from the Wahhabi cult promoted by the Saudi Regime. Wahhabis attempt to twist Islamic scripture to their own gain. Fortunately the efforts of Islamic leaders has limited their influence among Muslims.

PLO for all intensive purposes no longer exists since Arafat was disappeared. Their support came mostly from the Saudi regime.

Al Qaeda is supported by Iran??? They are both enemies of each other. The Wahhabi creed that Al Qaeda follow accuses the Shia of Shirk (Worshipping other than God) which basically puts them in the same boat as the unbelievers.
Even recent press reports show up the supposed Al Qaeda/Iran link to be a complete fantasy.
Al Qaeda Front Group in Iraq Threatens to Go to War With Iran (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288600,00.html)

Taliban supported by Iran? Are we talking about the same Taliban? The one following the same twisted wahhabi cult teachings as Al Qaeda?

As for Iranian forces actually operating in Iraq, has anyone actually provided proof beyond propaganda and hot air?

Every claim against Iran is pure BS. Propaganda without a shred of evidence.

jafar00

09-03-2007, 02:02 PM

An attack on Iran would require some proof of wrong doing. Since the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has been, shall we say, a little hard to come by a new lie had to be concocted to somehow justify a new war.

All the proof is already there. It's just a matter of getting on board to do it. Their nuclear program is in full swing to produce nuclear weapons.

What proof? The same proof put forward as the excuse to invade Iraq?
The IAEA disagrees with your assessment that Iran has a Nuclear Weapons program ans that it is in full swing..

VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran's uranium enrichment program is operating well below capacity and is far from producing nuclear fuel in significant amounts, according to a confidential U.N. nuclear watchdog report obtained by Reuters. (http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-08-30T140728Z_01_BLA046366_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAN-NUCLEAR-COL.XML&archived=False)

So far though, the reasons such as Iran (Shiite and an enemy of Al Qaeda) has been supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq(think Shia are unbelievers and the second enemy after the US) are somewhat amusing.

They are not only supporting AQI, they are also supporting the taliban in Afghanistan, another sunni group. They also support hamas as well. As long as these groups are fighting the US they will get support. The enemy of my enemy is my friend way of thinking.

If you think Iran is openly supporting Sunni groups you are sorely mistaken and show a great misunderstanding of the relationship between Arabs and Persians, let alone the Sunni/Shia divide.

You can try and hit them with everything you've got, but apart from some missiles against which they have defences you haven't really got much to spare since you are bogged down in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lets see. We have 150,000 troops in iraq, which can be added too. And the additions can come from other countries as well. There are three carrier groups in the gulf and two amphibious assault groups. A french carrier group and two British amphibious assault groups. Not to mention subs and ground based air units from all over the globe. Most of which are stealth. Other than the size difference I think the out come would be much the same as iraq's.

Attack Iran and say goodbye to your navy in the Gulf which is targeted with Sunburn missiles against which there is no defence.
If you pull your troops out of Iraq, what, it will mean admitting defeat there. Can you see that happening? Attacking Iran will also mean any support the US had with the Shia will evaporate overnight.
You think Iran will be a pushover compared to Iraq? As I mentioned before, Iraq suffered under huge sanctions for over a decade before it was invaded. Iran hasn't suffered the same. It's armed forces are at full strength. Attacking them, especially with your armed forces bogged down in two other wars would be foolish to the extreme.

truthmatters

09-03-2007, 02:28 PM

What proof? The same proof put forward as the excuse to invade Iraq?
The IAEA disagrees with your assessment that Iran has a Nuclear Weapons program ans that it is in full swing..

VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran's uranium enrichment program is operating well below capacity and is far from producing nuclear fuel in significant amounts, according to a confidential U.N. nuclear watchdog report obtained by Reuters. (http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-08-30T140728Z_01_BLA046366_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAN-NUCLEAR-COL.XML&archived=False)

If you think Iran is openly supporting Sunni groups you are sorely mistaken and show a great misunderstanding of the relationship between Arabs and Persians, let alone the Sunni/Shia divide.

Attack Iran and say goodbye to your navy in the Gulf which is targeted with Sunburn missiles against which there is no defence.
If you pull your troops out of Iraq, what, it will mean admitting defeat there. Can you see that happening? Attacking Iran will also mean any support the US had with the Shia will evaporate overnight.
You think Iran will be a pushover compared to Iraq? As I mentioned before, Iraq suffered under huge sanctions for over a decade before it was invaded. Iran hasn't suffered the same. It's armed forces are at full strength. Attacking them, especially with your armed forces bogged down in two other wars would be foolish to the extreme.

I dont know where you are from but I assure you the vast majority of Americans DO NOT WANT BUSH TO ATTACK IRAN.

This person is just a religious zellot who thinks this is a was between christianity and Islam.

Some people have allowed themselves to be drug arround by there church's clergy and they are a minority.

If Bush attacks Iraq America will be even more against him and ready to dump him. I just hope Bush is not this insane.

manu1959

09-03-2007, 02:41 PM

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 02:42 PM

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 02:53 PM

I dont know where you are from but I assure you the vast majority of Americans DO NOT WANT BUSH TO ATTACK IRAN.

This person is just a religious zellot who thinks this is a was between christianity and Islam.

Some people have allowed themselves to be drug arround by there church's clergy and they are a minority.

If Bush attacks Iraq America will be even more against him and ready to dump him. I just hope Bush is not this insane.

You calling me a religious zealot? You need to get your facts straight.

You definately need to change your name. I think dhimmimatters is more suited for you.

For your information this is a war between islam and the west. Not between islam and christianity. isalm is against ALL other religions and even atheists. There is no tolerance in islam.

If Bush attacks iran what are you gonna do. Not vote for him? I'll bet Bush doesn't get a single vote in the next election.

Trinity

09-03-2007, 03:06 PM

You calling me a religious zealot? You need to get your facts straight.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:You religious, that's funny! ok so what are you sneaking off to church on Sunday morning when we are sleeping and just not telling us?

manu1959

09-03-2007, 03:07 PM

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:You religious, that's funny! ok so what are you sneaking off to church on Sunday morning when we are sleeping and just not telling us?

church = footbal game?!:poke:

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 03:09 PM

church = footbal game?!:poke:

Naaa for Gaffer I think Church=Strip Club :laugh2:

manu1959

09-03-2007, 03:17 PM

Naaa for Gaffer I think Church=Strip Club :laugh2:

gods beautiful creations need worship too.......

Trinity

09-03-2007, 03:18 PM

church = footbal game?!:poke:

football game huh :link::laugh2:

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 03:18 PM

Naaa for Gaffer I think Church=Strip Club :laugh2:

I don't go to strip clubs but you would definitely find me there over church.

My sundays are spent on the computer. Online when the server cooperates which it usually doesn't on sundays. That's the only day they have no one there to fix it when it goes down. So naturally, every sunday morning...

Trinity

09-03-2007, 03:18 PM

Naaa for Gaffer I think Church=Strip Club :laugh2:

ok hold on I just don't need to know that! NO:link::laugh2:

truthmatters

09-03-2007, 03:22 PM

You calling me a religious zealot? You need to get your facts straight.

You definately need to change your name. I think dhimmimatters is more suited for you.

For your information this is a war between islam and the west. Not between islam and christianity. isalm is against ALL other religions and even atheists. There is no tolerance in islam.

If Bush attacks iran what are you gonna do. Not vote for him? I'll bet Bush doesn't get a single vote in the next election.

Gaffer you your self in another thread told me this was a war on Islam.
You talk about religion as part of this war.This country is a secular country and is NOT fighting to protect your religion from Islam.

http://debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=6631&page=7

you say in this post that this is a war on Islam

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 03:23 PM

ok hold on I just don't need to know that! NO:link::laugh2:

You don't need to know about your dad plaing the motorboat? :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 03:38 PM

Gaffer you your self in another thread told me this was a war on Islam.
You talk about religion as part of this war.This country is a secular country and is NOT fighting to protect your religion from Islam.

It's a religious war alright. It's islam versus all the other religions and secularists in the world. It's not just the christians. It involves you and me and everyone else.

We are fighting to protect my lack of religion from islam. My nonreligion is just as threatened as CP's christianity. Your beliefs are just as threatened.

truthmatters

09-03-2007, 03:43 PM

So you are not a christian Gaffer?

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 03:44 PM

So you are not a christian Gaffer?

Nope

Sitarro

09-03-2007, 03:46 PM

You calling me a religious zealot? You need to get your facts straight.

You definately need to change your name. I think dhimmimatters is more suited for you.

For your information this is a war between islam and the west. Not between islam and christianity. isalm is against ALL other religions and even atheists. There is no tolerance in islam.

If Bush attacks iran what are you gonna do. Not vote for him? I'll bet Bush doesn't get a single vote in the next election.

I might write him in if he goes after that little beady-eyed nut case from Iran.

Hey Jafar, are you going to tell us about what super great guys Chavez and Castro really are.

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 03:47 PM

So you are not a christian Gaffer?

Neither are you, Liberals are against God.

truthmatters

09-03-2007, 03:51 PM

Nope

Do you believe in God?

Trinity

09-03-2007, 04:03 PM

Do you believe in God?

Objection! Off topic! :laugh2:

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 04:14 PM

Sorry bout that,

You calling me a religious zealot? You need to get your facts straight.

You definately need to change your name. I think dhimmimatters is more suited for you.

For your information this is a war between islam and the west. Not between islam and christianity. isalm is against ALL other religions and even atheists. There is no tolerance in islam.

If Bush attacks iran what are you gonna do. Not vote for him? I'll bet Bush doesn't get a single vote in the next election.

1. AGREED!!!!!:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 04:20 PM

Do you believe in God?

what I believe is irrelevant. I do believe islam is a threat to the world and especially to western civilization.

jafar00

09-03-2007, 04:50 PM

Hizbullah is a political party as well as the people's resistance of Lebanon. They only exist to counter Israeli aggression against Israel. If Israel didn't attack Lebanon, Hizbullah would not exist. They are not a terrorist organisation. Since they only retaliate against Israeli attacks, they are a legitimate resistance organisation. Their political aims in Lebanon are met by being elected into parliament, not by bombing the public into submission.

hizbollah may have a political arm, but they are still a terrorist organization supported by iran, They have attacked Isreal and the US. Can we say Marine Barracks. They are trying to make Lebanon into a puppet state of iran. This is their stated goal. Isreali "aggression" has only been in response to hizbollah attacks.
Under direct orders from iran. Their roots go back to the muslim brotherhood, to
which almost all the organizations in the region are affiliated.

Which Hizbullah attacks has Israeli "retaliated against?". To my knowledge it is the other way around. As is the stipulation in Islamic law that allows only retaliation in self defence, not pre-emptive attack.
You are wrong about their Muslim Brotherhood links. It was formed by Lebanese Shiites who followed the leadership of Ayatullah Khomeini.

Hamas also grew from small roots as resistance against Israeli Aggression(There is a pattern here) against Palestine. What they are now I don't know. Since the press is banned from reporting what is really going on in Palestine, we can only guess.

hamas is also heavily financed and supplied by iran. They too spring from the ranks of the mulsim brotherhood, see a pattern here? The press is not banned from reporting on hamas, they can't because western journalists are not safe there.

Hamas is a Shiite group. The Muslim Brotherhood had nothing to do with them either. and you are wrong about the journalism. The Israeli Military simply deny them access especially during their incursions so that truthful reporting of their crimes cannot get out.

Mahdi Army are a resistance group that grew from the US attack on Iraq. By the UN definition, they are a legitimate resistance against foreign invaders.

mahdi army is sadr's personal militia which should have been wiped out years ago. Bush really screwed up on that one. They are not a resistance, they are thugs and murderers. Most of their victims are iraqi's. They are heavily financed and supported by iran. when word of the surge first started sadr ran off to....iran to hide. This cost him and iran dearly in the iraqi parliament.

To be fair, the mahdi army was only formed and only attacked the US troops in Iraq when they tried to arrest Moqtada Al Sadr, their leader. The US did try to wipe them out, but failed.

The above 3 may be helped by Iran being Shiite organisations. No proof of exactly what support they get beyond moral support has been produced to my knowledge.

iranian agents have been captured in iraq. They were helping AQI and the mahdi army by supplying money, weapons, IED's and training. It's no secret iran is causing most of the problems in baghdad.

Which Iranian agents supplying what exactly? The only "Iranian" weapons produced by the US army as evidence were some shells set up as IEDs. The problem with their evidence was the shells had english writing and Western style dates of manufacture rather than persian script and islamic dates. They were also of a type Iran doesn't make. That unfortunate error of propaganda was quickly swept aside though.

The thought that the following SUNNI groups are supported by Iran is laughable.

The "Muslim" Brotherhood I can agree are terrorists. Their attacks on innocent civilians of all faiths including Muslims are nothing short of disgusting. Their ideology comes from the Wahhabi cult promoted by the Saudi Regime. Wahhabis attempt to twist Islamic scripture to their own gain. Fortunately the efforts of Islamic leaders has limited their influence among Muslims.

As I said before, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.I'm sure both are using the other and plan to deal with each other when its all over. But the west is their mutual enemy and they will join together when necessary. If America and russia can be allies in WW2 then sunni and shea can be allies in this war.

You really misunderstand the deep divisions between Sunni and Shia don't you. It's not that simple.

PLO for all intensive purposes no longer exists since Arafat was disappeared. Their support came mostly from the Saudi regime.

They just split into hamas and fawta. It's ironic that Isreal is supporting fawta and the people in gaza wish the Israelis would come back now.

You mean Fatah. The US and Israel really messed up before the Palestinian elections by arming and supporting Fatah. That caused Hamas to be swept into power when the Palestinians found out.

Al Qaeda is supported by Iran??? They are both enemies of each other. The Wahhabi creed that Al Qaeda follow accuses the Shia of Shirk (Worshipping other than God) which basically puts them in the same boat as the unbelievers.
Even recent press reports show up the supposed Al Qaeda/Iran link to be a complete fantasy.
Al Qaeda Front Group in Iraq Threatens to Go to War With Iran

al queda and the taliban are receiving aid from iran. Truck convoys from iran to the taliban have been captured in Afghanistan. AQI gets there IED's directly from iran. Along with advisors to help them put them together and how to place them.

As with the Sunni Shia divide and in particular how the Wahhabis view Shia, that is ridiculous.

The groups in iraq threatening iran are the same ones going after the AQI. They are fed up with the brutality that iran is supporting. They know who is behind it all, they were initially a part of it.

Actually it is Iraqi Sunni resistance who are going after Al Qaeda because of their brutality. Al Qaeda are self professed Sunnis following the Wahhabi creed. Again, to suggest links with Shia Iran is preposterous.

Taliban supported by Iran? Are we talking about the same Taliban? The one following the same twisted wahhabi cult teachings as Al Qaeda?

Yes, the same taliban.

Shia + Wahhabi = them trying to kill each other. It's not going to happen.

As for Iranian forces actually operating in Iraq, has anyone actually provided proof beyond propaganda and hot air?

Yes, the US military. They have caught a number of qods operatives, mostly in the north. There are other reports from various other sources as well but I don't have the links handy. Eight agents were detained just this past weekend.

You mean the low level Iranian consular staff kidnapped from their embassy? Even the Iraqi locals know they aren't Al Quds agents.

Sounds like something an iranian propagandist would say. Your from where?

I was wondering if you were shea or sunni. You made it quite clear your shea.

Sunni actually and I'm from Australia ;)
You are buying into the US government propaganda hook line and sinker.

You clearly need some education about the creed followed by Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

The following is the Wahhabi teachings about the Shia.

The site linked below is full of hate, extremist dogma and the total twisting of Islam into a hateful ideology which it is not. This is not an Islamic Website. It is a Wahhabi/Salafi propaganda tool.

http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/index.htm

I hope, reading how much Al Qaeda and the Taliban hate the Shia will make you think that perhaps the US govt isn't being totally truthful about what they tell you.

jafar00

09-03-2007, 04:53 PM

Hey Jafar, are you going to tell us about what super great guys Chavez and Castro really are.

Lol. No. :laugh2:

jafar00

09-03-2007, 04:54 PM

what I believe is irrelevant. I do believe islam is a threat to the world and especially to western civilization.

In what way?

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:00 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. AGREED!!!!!:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Why are you sorry about that if you agree with him? :poke:

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:03 PM

In what way?

CAN A MUSLIM BE A GOOD AMERICAN?

This is something I've wondered about for some time now: How & why do the Muslims hate us & everyone else so much? Doesn't their God teach them to love?

Can a good Muslim be a good American?

I sent that question to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for
20 years.

The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia.

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2: 256)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars ; of Islam and the Quran (Koran).

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and Destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do &g t; not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names .

Therefore after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Muslims and good Americans.

Call it what you wish....it's still the truth.

If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above statements, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country a nd our future.

Pass it on, Fellow Americans.

The war is bigger than we know or understand

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 05:05 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. But the way I remember it, Hezbo's came into Israel and took some of its military men as hostages.
2. Israel, said, " Eat Some Weapons"
3. Which is what started that war.
4. Hezbo's got their asses handed to them.
5. And had the gaul to come out after Israel stopped bombing them to hell, and say, "We Won!*.
6. That was freaken icing on the cake, for me, seeing what kind of destruction Israel dealt out to them in Lebanon, and they claimed they won,..Hehehehehehehe,.........
7. Islam provoked Israel into a war, Israel provided the bombs.
8. You are a liar if you think the Hezbo's were in the right when the most recent conflict was started jafar.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 05:11 PM

Sorry bout that,

Why are you sorry about that if you agree with him? :poke:

1. Its kind of a signature nevadamedic.
2. Its what I do.
3. Been doing it for years, search out the other sites I been a part of, same ol same ol, for years, I guess its my habit now.
4. Sorry bout that.
:laugh2:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:12 PM

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:13 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. Its kind of a signature nevadamedic.
2. Its what I do.
3. Been doing it for years, search out the other sites I been a part of, same ol same ol, for years, I guess its my habit now.
4. Sorry bout that.
:laugh2:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

:laugh2: No need to be sorry :laugh2:

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 05:20 PM

Sorry bout that,

Im still wondering why he followed you over here.................. It's kinda of funny as soon as you get active here he all the sudden pops up. Don't get me wrong I have nothing against Jafar, I think he's a cool guy but I think he may be here to rattle you a little bit.

1. ( I ) *The Great CWN* made that site, and now that I am gone, its dieing a slow and painful death.
2. He was apart of those who so loved to see what I was going to write next.
3. And discredit me some way.
4. He heard I was here so he followed on over to try to keep me straightened out I suppose.
5. Seems most of the members stopped posting over there.
6. They chose jafar over *The Great CWN*, and I left.
7. But so did most of the players over there.
8. Anyway, he is a decent debater on the most part, and try's to be civil when posting, he's not all bad as far as posting threads and responses, etc.
9. I think he is abandoning ship over on DF, its just about dead anyways , go see for yourself.
10. Islam is a complicated group, and it must take years to understand where you stand in it, if your ever in it, I think Islam isn't worth it, anyhow., its like, *Who do I kill, and who's my enemy within Islam and without?*

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:29 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. ( I ) *The Great CWN* made that site, and now that I am gone, its dieing a slow and painful death.
2. He was apart of those who so loved to see what I was going to write next.
3. And discredit me some way.
4. He heard I was here so he followed on over to try to keep me straightened out I suppose.
5. Seems most of the members stopped posting over there.
6. They chose jafar over *The Great CWN*, and I left.
7. But so did most of the players over there.
8. Anyway, he is a decent debater on the most part, and try's to be civil when posting, he's not all bad as far as posting threads and responses, etc.
9. I think he is abandoning ship over on DF, its just about dead anyways , go see for yourself.
10. Islam is a complicated group, and it must take years to understand where you stand in it, if your ever in it, I think Islam isn't worth it, anyhow., its like, *Who do I kill, and who's my enemy within Islam and without?*

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

:laugh2: I can't wait to see what you post next either, your posts are usually really entertaining and really funny. :laugh2:

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 05:36 PM

Sorry bout that,

CAN A MUSLIM BE A GOOD AMERICAN?

This is something I've wondered about for some time now: How & why do the Muslims hate us & everyone else so much? Doesn't their God teach them to love?

Can a good Muslim be a good American?

I sent that question to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for
20 years.

The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia.

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2: 256)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars ; of Islam and the Quran (Koran).

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and Destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do &g t; not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names .

Therefore after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Muslims and good Americans.

Call it what you wish....it's still the truth.

If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above statements, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country a nd our future.

Pass it on, Fellow Americans.

The war is bigger than we know or understand

1. This guy is a Genius!
2. Every word is truth itself.
3. This friend of yours must be a *Great Guy!*
4. I agree with every word, and it should go to print somewhere.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 05:45 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. This guy is a Genius!
2. Every word is truth itself.
3. This friend of yours must be a *Great Guy!*
4. I agree with every word, and it should go to print somewhere.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Actually a friend forwarded it to me. I try to post it everywhere I can as it makes a lot of sense. I didn't post it on DF as they would have gone apeshit overthere since they have biased staff(with the exception of a couple) that are on a power trip and send you warnings because you defend yourself against their friends*cough* Viola *cough* and we all know who protects Viola and comes to her aid like Wonder Woman.

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 05:56 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. ( I ) *The Great CWN* made that site, and now that I am gone, its dieing a slow and painful death.
2. He was apart of those who so loved to see what I was going to write next.
3. And discredit me some way.
4. He heard I was here so he followed on over to try to keep me straightened out I suppose.
5. Seems most of the members stopped posting over there.
6. They chose jafar over *The Great CWN*, and I left.
7. But so did most of the players over there.
8. Anyway, he is a decent debater on the most part, and try's to be civil when posting, he's not all bad as far as posting threads and responses, etc.
9. I think he is abandoning ship over on DF, its just about dead anyways , go see for yourself.
10. Islam is a complicated group, and it must take years to understand where you stand in it, if your ever in it, I think Islam isn't worth it, anyhow., its like, *Who do I kill, and who's my enemy within Islam and without?*

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

So you have an islamic stalker. Somehow I don't think he's going to feel real welcome here. will be interesting to see what he has to say. I already have a suspicion of his purpose here and its not to follow you. And has nothing to do with a board war.

nevadamedic

09-03-2007, 06:07 PM

So you have an islamic stalker. Somehow I don't think he's going to feel real welcome here. will be interesting to see what he has to say. I already have a suspicion of his purpose here and its not to follow you. And has nothing to do with a board war.

What is it then?

Yurt

09-03-2007, 07:12 PM

How is one a "sir" Texas?

actsnoblemartin

09-03-2007, 07:15 PM

what the hell are you talking about gaf?

Islamic stalker :coffee:, are you making up words now?

So you have an islamic stalker. Somehow I don't think he's going to feel real welcome here. will be interesting to see what he has to say. I already have a suspicion of his purpose here and its not to follow you. And has nothing to do with a board war.

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 07:56 PM

what the hell are you talking about gaf?

Islamic stalker :coffee:, are you making up words now?

He said the guy followed him over here. Sounds like a stalker to me. And he's muslim. islamic stalker. have I coined a phrase here?

actsnoblemartin

09-03-2007, 09:42 PM

Sorry, I completely Mis-read your thread. The term sounds actually quite appropriate. :coffee: Sorry again , here ill do it for you. :slap: bad martin lol

He said the guy followed him over here. Sounds like a stalker to me. And he's muslim. islamic stalker. have I coined a phrase here?

chesswarsnow

09-03-2007, 09:48 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. But in *Two Eyes Too Close Togethers*, mind, he thinks that seeing he was an engineer or something, that seeing he has sat down and did some figuring, and used some sort of fuzzy math America won't come over there and put a big ol Army boot up his ass.
2. This guy is *The Leader* of a Islamic Nation?
3. Did he use a weegie board or what?
4. There has to be a mental problem if you ask, *The Great CWN*.
5. Either he is *Verifiably Insane, or has some sort of real formula that he uses to come to this conclusion.
6. Which is it?
7. I'm going for the *Verifiably Insane*.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Gaffer

09-03-2007, 10:28 PM

waterrescuedude2000

09-03-2007, 11:44 PM

An attack on Iran would require some proof of wrong doing. Since the evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has been, shall we say, a little hard to come by a new lie had to be concocted to somehow justify a new war.

So far though, the reasons such as Iran (Shiite and an enemy of Al Qaeda) has been supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq(think Shia are unbelievers and the second enemy after the US) are somewhat amusing.

You can try and hit them with everything you've got, but apart from some missiles against which they have defences you haven't really got much to spare since you are bogged down in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Remember, Iran has a strong, modern defence force. It's not like Iraq's where they were first weakened by decades of crippling sanctions. You will have your work cut out for you. Not to mention the rest of the world that isn't already against you turning against you too.

But if they do get attacked and come onto our soil they can remember that there 50% of homes have guns. And they can only count the guns that have been registered. So I would say that that is a conservative estimate. And I am a veteran so I know if someone comes and attacks here we may be spread thin but that doesn't mean we won't fight!!!

diuretic

09-03-2007, 11:56 PM

jafar00

09-04-2007, 01:03 AM

CAN A MUSLIM BE A GOOD AMERICAN?

This is something I've wondered about for some time now: How & why do the Muslims hate us & everyone else so much? Doesn't their God teach them to love?

Can a good Muslim be a good American?

I sent that question to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for
20 years.

The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia.

Wrong

And among His signs are the night and the day and the sun and the moon; do not prostrate to the sun nor to the moon; and prostrate to Allah Who created them, if Him it is that you serve. Qur'aan 41:37

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2: 256)

I don't see that in that verse.

There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. Qur'aan 2:256

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars ; of Islam and the Quran (Koran).

Doesn't America have a freedom of religion policy? The US Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. US Constitution, 1st amendment

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

There is no allegiance to Mecca. It's just a direction to pray in.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Wrong. There is nothing in Islamic scripture to that effect.

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and Destruction of America, the great Satan.

Wrong. Muslims even just by definition submit to God alone. I've not heard anyone in any Mosque teach annihilation if Israel or America, let alone even give them a single mention.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).

In the Qur'aan, the part that allows marriage to more than one woman, relates to the care of Orphans...

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one Qur'aan 4:3

Islam does not instruct men to beat their wives.

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Wrong, the constitution is a secular, non religious document. Even I, a non American learned that in high school in my Social Studies class.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do &g t; not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic

Wrong

There is no compulsion in religion; Qur'aan 2:256

You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion. Qur'aan 109:6

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names .

Al-Wadud - "The loving one" is one of his attributes in the 99 names. This guy never read them obviously

Therefore after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Muslims and good Americans.

Have I not just argued otherwise?

Call it what you wish....it's still the truth.

Wherever you cut and pasted that from, they have a clear agenda to spread lies and call them truth.

If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above statements, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country a nd our future.

Pass it on, Fellow Americans.

The war is bigger than we know or understand

OMG, you tried to argue your point with a chain mail? :laugh2:

Sorry bout that,

1. But the way I remember it, Hezbo's came into Israel and took some of its military men as hostages.
2. Israel, said, " Eat Some Weapons"
3. Which is what started that war.

The Israelis were capture inside Lebanon. It was the Israelis who came into Lebanon. All Hizbullah did was capture invaders on Lebanese soil as is their right. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html)

KarlMarx

09-04-2007, 02:14 AM

The Israelis were capture inside Lebanon. It was the Israelis who came into Lebanon. All Hizbullah did was capture invaders on Lebanese soil as is their right. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html)

Isn't that odd. I didn't realize that Hezboallah was a sovereign nation! It thought Lebanon was the country that was being invaded by these Israelis. Isn't it stranger still, that Hezbollah gets its orders from Syria.

Silly me, I was under the impression that Syria was occupying Lebanon and using Hezboallah to do their dirty work for them.

nevadamedic

09-04-2007, 02:37 AM

Wrong

And among His signs are the night and the day and the sun and the moon; do not prostrate to the sun nor to the moon; and prostrate to Allah Who created them, if Him it is that you serve. Qur'aan 41:37

I don't see that in that verse.

There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. Qur'aan 2:256

Doesn't America have a freedom of religion policy? The US Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. US Constitution, 1st amendment

There is no allegiance to Mecca. It's just a direction to pray in.

Wrong. There is nothing in Islamic scripture to that effect.

Wrong. Muslims even just by definition submit to God alone. I've not heard anyone in any Mosque teach annihilation if Israel or America, let alone even give them a single mention.

In the Qur'aan, the part that allows marriage to more than one woman, relates to the care of Orphans...

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one Qur'aan 4:3

Islam does not instruct men to beat their wives.

Wrong, the constitution is a secular, non religious document. Even I, a non American learned that in high school in my Social Studies class.

Wrong

There is no compulsion in religion; Qur'aan 2:256

You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion. Qur'aan 109:6

Al-Wadud - "The loving one" is one of his attributes in the 99 names. This guy never read them obviously

Have I not just argued otherwise?

Wherever you cut and pasted that from, they have a clear agenda to spread lies and call them truth.

OMG, you tried to argue your point with a chain mail? :laugh2:

The Israelis were capture inside Lebanon. It was the Israelis who came into Lebanon. All Hizbullah did was capture invaders on Lebanese soil as is their right. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html)

And your saying you don't have an agenda to spread lies? YEA RIGHT

nevadamedic

09-04-2007, 02:40 AM

[/B]

But if they do get attacked and come onto our soil they can remember that there 50% of homes have guns. And they can only count the guns that have been registered. So I would say that that is a conservative estimate. And I am a veteran so I know if someone comes and attacks here we may be spreak thin but that doesn't mean we won't fight!!!

Iran wouldn't have the balls to come onto our soil. If they hit us(which they will) it will be with a nuclear weapon. Somehow I don't think a gun would work when your getting BBQ'd in less then a second.

Your pretty insane with this gun stuff and it's pretty scary. First you want to issue hunting licenses on illegals then you want to shoot frozen painballs at their demonstrations. Your answer to everything is a gun, let me clue you in 99.9% of the time the answer is not a gun.

jafar00

09-04-2007, 06:22 AM

Isn't that odd. I didn't realize that Hezboallah was a sovereign nation! It thought Lebanon was the country that was being invaded by these Israelis. Isn't it stranger still, that Hezbollah gets its orders from Syria.

Silly me, I was under the impression that Syria was occupying Lebanon and using Hezboallah to do their dirty work for them.

Hizbullah is a Lebanese resistance movement. Under International law, an organised Militia is entitled to take matters into their own hands in order to defend their country.

Iran wouldn't have the balls to come onto our soil. If they hit us(which they will) it will be with a nuclear weapon.

That's not going to happen.

1. They don't have a Nuclear Weapons Program
2. Ayatullah Khomeini forbade Iran from obtaining or developing nuclear weapons through a fatwa
3. Islamic Law doesn't permit the use of Weapons of Mass destruction for the simple reason that they can indiscriminately kill the innocent.

Nukeman

09-04-2007, 07:23 AM

Hizbullah is a Lebanese resistance movement. Under International law, an organised Militia is entitled to take matters into their own hands in order to defend their country.

That's not going to happen.

1. They don't have a Nuclear Weapons Program
2. Ayatullah Khomeini forbade Iran from obtaining or developing nuclear weapons through a fatwa
3. Islamic Law doesn't permit the use of Weapons of Mass destruction for the simple reason that they can indiscriminately kill the innocent.

Really??? I guess they just gloss over this part in a lot of the Mosque's around the world than dont they.

What the hell is a suicide bomber in the streets if not a weapon of mass distruction and killin innocents (ohh wait all Israelies are enemies so its okay to kill even the little children). What are 3 planes full of innocent people plunged into the side of buildings if not weapons of mass distruction. Osama Bin laden makes no secret of trying to locate a "small" nuclear device or other means of mass distruction to use against the US and Isreal. You know take off yoru rose colored glasses and realize your religion has way more than its share of fanatics that are more than willing to kill in its name..

You can preach the BS line of how peace loving Islam is yet the actions of the faitful are sorely lacking in "their undrestanding"

Maybe you should spend a little more time at Shiachat.com and other Islamic sights telling all of them to follow this path of peace, because they sure as hell dont get it.....

diuretic

09-04-2007, 08:03 AM

3. Islamic Law doesn't permit the use of Weapons of Mass destruction for the simple reason that they can indiscriminately kill the innocent.

Really??? I guess they just gloss over this part in a lot of the Mosque's around the world than dont they.

What the hell is a suicide bomber in the streets if not a weapon of mass distruction and killin innocents (ohh wait all Israelies are enemies so its okay to kill even the little children). What are 3 planes full of innocent people plunged into the side of buildings if not weapons of mass distruction. Osama Bin laden makes no secret of trying to locate a "small" nuclear device or other means of mass distruction to use against the US and Isreal. You know take off yoru rose colored glasses and realize your religion has way more than its share of fanatics that are more than willing to kill in its name..

You can preach the BS line of how peace loving Islam is yet the actions of the faitful are sorely lacking in "their undrestanding"

Maybe you should spend a little more time at Shiachat.com and other Islamic sights telling all of them to follow this path of peace, because they sure as hell dont get it.....

Ah, secular laws in the west forbid murder. Christianity and Judaism forbid murder. Secular humanists, Christians and Jews commit murder occasionally.

What part of Islamic Law doesn't permit the use of Weapons of Mass destruction for the simple reason that they can indiscriminately kill the innocent did you misunderstand?

jafar00

09-04-2007, 08:20 AM

Really??? I guess they just gloss over this part in a lot of the Mosque's around the world than dont they.

How many Mosques do you know of that have WMDs inside? In fact I have witnessed discussions of this matter with my Sheikh in the Mosque when the subject has been brought up and the answers are the same. Killing innocent people, Muslim or not is forbidden. Suicide not matter the reason, is forbidden.

What the hell is a suicide bomber in the streets if not a weapon of mass distruction and killin innocents (ohh wait all Israelies are enemies so its okay to kill even the little children). What are 3 planes full of innocent people plunged into the side of buildings if not weapons of mass distruction. Osama Bin laden makes no secret of trying to locate a "small" nuclear device or other means of mass distruction to use against the US and Isreal. You know take off yoru rose colored glasses and realize your religion has way more than its share of fanatics that are more than willing to kill in its name..

Fanatic Fa*nat"ic, n.
A person affected by excessive enthusiasm, particularly on
religious subjects; one who indulges wild and extravagant
notions of religion.
[1913 Webster]

An Islamic "fanatic" would by definition follow his religion as carefully as possible and follow it to the letter correct?

And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. Qur'aan 2:190

We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land. Qur'aan 5:32

Only fight those who are actually engaged in combat with you. Do not kill anyone unjustly ie.. 9/11 was wrong, suicide bombs are wrong, nuclear bombs are wrong.
If you are killing innocent people, you are going against the command of almighty God, and are going straight to hell.

theHawk

09-04-2007, 08:23 AM

It doesn't matter what laws permit or forbid the use of such tactics. The point is they are doing it.

theHawk

09-04-2007, 08:26 AM

If you are killing innocent people, you are going against the command of almighty God, and are going straight to hell.

Marrying and having sex with 9 year old girls is wrong too. It didn't stop your great pedophile...opps, I mean 'prophet'.

jimnyc

09-04-2007, 08:30 AM

Only fight those who are actually engaged in combat with you. Do not kill anyone unjustly ie.. 9/11 was wrong, suicide bombs are wrong, nuclear bombs are wrong.
If you are killing innocent people, you are going against the command of almighty God, and are going straight to hell.

Hey, jafar, how's it going?

What are your thoughts on those that supposedly kill for "martyrdom"? I've heard many a discussion where these people think they are going to a special place in heaven for their efforts. I'm not speaking of a resistance where a Muslim fights the enemy with a rifle but rather the stories we read about those that strap bombs to themselves, car bombs and other means of giving your life to kill the "enemy" on a large scale - even if it means innocent people die to make their point.

What are your thoughts about Bin Laden being an idol to so many? And Zarqawi?

I'm not trying to be confrontational, it just seems that the main leaders we here about here in the States are those that command or ask fellow Muslims to engage in "jihad" with reckless regard for life. There are suicide bombings almost daily in Iraq where they aren't even targeting the so called enemy (US) but rather innocent civilians.

If these people aren't true Muslims, and are not truly acting out for Allah as they say, why are there SO MANY of them? I know there are a lot of decent Muslim folk out there, and the bad guys don't speak for the lot, but there's just too many incidents happening to where it can be ignored. Where is this "fanaticism" stemming from? How come major media outlets and the highest of Muslim leaders are not going out to speak internationally against these events? I would think that those with the most power and respect would go completely out of their way to make the world understand that these guys don't represent all Muslims, but I just don't see that happening.

glockmail

09-04-2007, 08:35 AM

How many Mosques do you know of that have WMDs inside? In fact I have witnessed discussions of this matter with my Sheikh in the Mosque when the subject has been brought up and the answers are the same. Killing innocent people, Muslim or not is forbidden. Suicide not matter the reason, is forbidden.

Fanatic Fa*nat"ic, n.
A person affected by excessive enthusiasm, particularly on
religious subjects; one who indulges wild and extravagant
notions of religion.
[1913 Webster]

An Islamic "fanatic" would by definition follow his religion as carefully as possible and follow it to the letter correct?

And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. Qur'aan 2:190

We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land. Qur'aan 5:32

Only fight those who are actually engaged in combat with you. Do not kill anyone unjustly ie.. 9/11 was wrong, suicide bombs are wrong, nuclear bombs are wrong.
If you are killing innocent people, you are going against the command of almighty God, and are going straight to hell.
Lookie here. Our very own muzzy!:poke:

What's with that crappy avatar?

Nukeman

09-04-2007, 08:38 AM

Ah, secular laws in the west forbid murder. Christianity and Judaism forbid murder. Secular humanists, Christians and Jews commit murder occasionally.

What part of Islamic Law doesn't permit the use of Weapons of Mass destruction for the simple reason that they can indiscriminately kill the innocent did you misunderstand?

When was the last time you heard of a group of Christians blowing themselves up for martyrdom, when was the last time you heard of Christians, Jews, Budhist, ets... blow themselves up in a plane slamming into a public building full of innocents.

You know damn good and well that there will always be "LAW BREAKERS" but in most societies it is the exception not the RULE.

You can spin what ever you want but Jimmy makes vary valid points in his post just above this one and they need to be addressed

If Islamic laws doesn't permit the killing of innocents and indiscriminate killing than why is it defended in the Islamic circles of the world instead of being vilified and condemned???????????

Nukeman

09-04-2007, 08:39 AM

Lookie here. Our very own muzzy!:poke:

What's with that crappy avatar?

Dontcha know its a Muslim killing an infidel!!!!!!!!!! watch closely!!!!!!!

glockmail

09-04-2007, 08:45 AM

Dontcha know its a Muslim killing an infidel!!!!!!!!!! watch closely!!!!!!! Couldn't help noticing the muzzy started it, and the infadel is black. Very telling.

Nukeman

09-04-2007, 08:50 AM

Couldn't help noticing the muzzy started it, and the infadel is black. Very telling.Continues to beat and mutilate him when hes down as well... What happened to that mercy and peace of their religion...

glockmail

09-04-2007, 08:58 AM

Continues to beat and mutilate him when hes down as well... What happened to that mercy and peace of their religion... Obviously that's a bunch of bullshit. Islam was created in order to institutionalize hatred of Jews, Christians, and anyone else smart enough to see Mohamed for what he was: a power-hungry, lying, blasphemous, murdering child molester.

jafar00

09-04-2007, 11:35 AM

Marrying and having sex with 9 year old girls is wrong too. It didn't stop your great pedophile...opps, I mean 'prophet'.

You think you are clever, but you might like to research the marriage customs of that era, and find out the commonly accepted age of marriage, for that era.
Marrying 9-12 year olds was common. You can't test the customs of 1400 years ago using the customs of now. It just doesn't work.

Hey, jafar, how's it going?

What are your thoughts on those that supposedly kill for "martyrdom"? I've heard many a discussion where these people think they are going to a special place in heaven for their efforts. I'm not speaking of a resistance where a Muslim fights the enemy with a rifle but rather the stories we read about those that strap bombs to themselves, car bombs and other means of giving your life to kill the "enemy" on a large scale - even if it means innocent people die to make their point.

Hi Jimnyc

A Martyr is someone who dies defending their country or their cause right? Martyrdom only applies to those who die by the hand of the enemy who is fighting them. Perhaps if the suicide bomber could find an enemy willing to press the button for them, they might get away with it.

The last line in the above quote is what says it all. Terrorists do what they do to make a point. The bottom line is, if the bomber, in their final moment rejects God's command and does the very things that God forbids, it doesn't matter how good and pious his life was, he is dying as an unbeliever and going straight to hell.

You may say, ok, but look at what "they" do, but who are they? Terrorists? Or Muslims. I think I've made it clear using both scripture and my explanation that those who reject God are no longer Muslims, so they must be terrorists.

What are your thoughts about Bin Laden being an idol to so many? And Zarqawi?

I've not looked into what Zarqawi did before he was killed (Any of the 5 or so times it was announced), but Osama Bin Laden I know about from my Sheikh.

Osama has not done any of the required years of study and training required of those who make religious rulings, nor has he obtained Ijaza (Permission) to make any rulings or fatwas pertaining to Islam. He is therefore unqualified to make the speeches he makes. He is a self taught, and self appointed "scholar" who is wrong on so many things, he is talking about a different religion to Islam. That's about as far as my Sheikh went as far as describing him stopping short of describing him as a non muslim though his lecture mentioning him and his ideology that I attended a few years ago alluded to that quite clearly.

I'm not trying to be confrontational, it just seems that the main leaders we here about here in the States are those that command or ask fellow Muslims to engage in "jihad" with reckless regard for life. There are suicide bombings almost daily in Iraq where they aren't even targeting the so called enemy (US) but rather innocent civilians.

I am also asked to do jihad all the time. That jihad is of a personal kind though. The struggle with the inner self and ego.
What the suicide bombers are doing is evil and the Al Qaeda operative carrying them out are hated by the Muslims. At first the Sunni side of the Iraqi resistance was duped into believing Al Qaeda was there to help them against the Americans, but they soon found out, Al Qaeda, was there to also stab them in the back. That is why you find the Sunni resistance in Iraq now turning their guns on Al Qaeda. It may have been late, but thank God those believing Muslims saw through their false mask of Islam to see what they really are. Terrorists in a cult of evil.

If these people aren't true Muslims, and are not truly acting out for Allah as they say, why are there SO MANY of them? I know there are a lot of decent Muslim folk out there, and the bad guys don't speak for the lot, but there's just too many incidents happening to where it can be ignored.

I hope you have noticed, millions are living in warzones for no fault of their own. Some are fighting for their homes. Others fighting for their lives. Unfortunately, the media we have doesn't discriminate between bona fide terrorists and legitimate freedom fighters. To them someone who explodes a bomb in a Mosque (attacking places of worship is also a grave sin in Islam) and someone who explodes a bomb under an invading army tank is the same thing, when it clearly isn't. You are hearing about so many "incidents" because 1) There are millions of people affected and 2) The media like to sensationalise to sell the story. (Or "catapult the Propaganda" if you are GW Bush ;) )

Where is this "fanaticism" stemming from? How come major media outlets and the highest of Muslim leaders are not going out to speak internationally against these events? I would think that those with the most power and respect would go completely out of their way to make the world understand that these guys don't represent all Muslims, but I just don't see that happening.

Where are the condemnations of terrorism from Muslims and their leaders??

Islamic Statements Against Terrorism

Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS - Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:
“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur'an: 'No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another' (Surah al-Isra 17:15).”
MSANews, September 14, 2001, http://msanews.mynet.net/MSANEWS/200109/20010917.15.html;
Arabic original in al-Quds al-Arabi (London), September 14, 2001, p. 2, http://www.alquds.co.uk/Alquds/2001/09Sep/14%20Sep%20Fri/Quds02.pdf

Shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi, Qatar; Tariq Bishri, Egypt; Muhammad S. Awwa, Egypt; Fahmi Huwaydi, Egypt; Haytham Khayyat, Syria; Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani, U.S.:
“All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason. Islam has declared the spilling of blood and the destruction of property as absolute prohibitions until the Day of Judgment. ... [It is] necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and [punished] appropriately. ... [It is] a duty of Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means.”
Statement of September 27, 2001. The Washington Post, October 11, 2001, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40545-2001Oct10.html
Full text of this fatwa in English and Arabic.

Shaykh Muhammed Sayyid al-Tantawi, imam of al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, Egypt:
“Attacking innocent people is not courageous, it is stupid and will be punished on the day of judgement. ... It’s not courageous to attack innocent children, women and civilians. It is courageous to protect freedom, it is courageous to defend oneself and not to attack.”
Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001

Abdel-Mo'tei Bayyoumi, al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy, Cairo, Egypt:
“There is no terrorism or a threat to civilians in jihad [religious struggle].”
Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 20 - 26 September 2001, http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/552/p4fall3.htm

Muslim Brotherhood, an opposition Islamist group in Egypt, said it was “horrified” by the attack and expressed “condolences and sadness”:
“[We] strongly condemn such activities that are against all humanist and Islamic morals. ... [We] condemn and oppose all aggression on human life, freedom and dignity anywhere in the world.”
Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 13 - 19 September 2001, http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/551/fo2.htm

Shaykh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, spiritual guide of Shi‘i Muslim radicals in Lebanon, said he was “horrified” by these “barbaric ... crimes”:
“Beside the fact that they are forbidden by Islam, these acts do not serve those who carried them out but their victims, who will reap the sympathy of the whole world. ... Islamists who live according to the human values of Islam could not commit such crimes.”
Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001

‘Abdulaziz bin ‘Abdallah Al-Ashaykh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia:
“Firstly: the recent developments in the United States including hijacking planes, terrorizing innocent people and shedding blood, constitute a form of injustice that cannot be tolerated by Islam, which views them as gross crimes and sinful acts. Secondly: any Muslim who is aware of the teachings of his religion and who adheres to the directives of the Holy Qur'an and the sunnah (the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad) will never involve himself in such acts, because they will invoke the anger of God Almighty and lead to harm and corruption on earth.”
Statement of September 15, 2001, http://saudiembassy.net/press_release/01-spa/09-15-Islam.htm

‘Abdulaziz bin ‘Abdallah Al-Ashaykh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia:
"You must know Islam’s firm position against all these terrible crimes. The world must know that Islam is a religion of peace and mercy and goodness; it is a religion of justice and guidance…Islam has forbidden violence in all its forms. It forbids the hijacking airplanes, ships and other means of transport, and it forbids all acts that undermine the security of the innocent."
Hajj sermon of February 2, 2004, in "Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation," May 2004, http://www.saudiembassy.net/ReportLink/Report_Extremism_May04.pdf, page 10

Shaikh Saleh Al-Luheidan, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, Saudi Arabia:
"As a human community we must be vigilant and careful to oppose these pernicious and shameless evils, which are not justified by any sane logic, nor by the religion of Islam."
Statement of September 14, 2001, in "Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation," May 2004, http://www.saudiembassy.net/ReportLink/Report_Extremism_May04.pdf, page 6

Shaikh Saleh Al-Luheidan, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, Saudi Arabia:
"And I repeat once again: that this act that the United states was afflicted with, with this vulgarity and barbarism, and which is even more barbaric than terrorist acts, I say that these acts are from the depths of depravity and the worst of evils."
Televised statement of September 2001, in Muhammad ibn Hussin Al-Qahtani, editor, The Position of Saudi Muslim Scholars Regarding Terrorism in the Name of Islam (Saudi Arabia, 2004), pages 27-28.

Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abdallah al-Sabil, member of the Council of Senior Religious Scholars, Saudi Arabia:
“Any attack on innocent people is unlawful and contrary to shari'a (Islamic law). ... Muslims must safeguard the lives, honor and property of Christians and Jews. Attacking them contradicts shari'a.”
Agence France Presse, December 4, 2001

Council of Saudi ‘Ulama', fatwa of February 2003:
"What is happening in some countries from the shedding of the innocent blood and the bombing of buildings and ships and the destruction of public and private installations is a criminal act against Islam. ... Those who carry out such acts have the deviant beliefs and misleading ideologies and are responsible for the crime. Islam and Muslims should not be held responsible for such actions."
The Dawn newspaper, Karachi, Pakistan, February 8, 2003, http://www.dawn.com/2003/02/08/top17.htm; also in "Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation," May 2004, http://www.saudiembassy.net/ReportLink/Report_Extremism_May04.pdf, page 10

Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, chairman of the Sunna and Sira Council, Qatar:
"Our hearts bleed for the attacks that has targeted the World Trade Center [WTC], as well as other institutions in the United States despite our strong oppositions to the American biased policy towards Israel on the military, political and economic fronts. Islam, the religion of tolerance, holds the human soul in high esteem, and considers the attack against innocent human beings a grave sin, this is backed by the Qur’anic verse which reads: ‘Who so ever kills a human being [as punishment] for [crimes] other than manslaughter or [sowing] corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and who so ever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind’ (Al-Ma’idah:32)."
Statement of September 13, 2001. http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article25.shtml. Arabic original at http://www.qaradawi.net/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=1665&version=1&template_id=130&parent_id=17

Tahirul Qadri, head of the Awami Tehrik Party, Pakistan:
"Bombing embassies or destroying non-military installations like the World Trade Center is no jihad. ... "[T]hose who launched the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks not only killed thousands of innocent people in the United States but also put the lives of millions of Muslims across the world at risk. ... Bin Laden is not a prophet that we should put thousands of lives at risk for."
United Press International, October 18, 2001, http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/17/195606.shtml

Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i, supreme jurist-ruler of Iran:
“Killing of people, in any place and with any kind of weapons, including atomic bombs, long-range missiles, biological or chemical weopons, passenger or war planes, carried out by any organization, country or individuals is condemned. ... It makes no difference whether such massacres happen in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Qana, Sabra, Shatila, Deir Yassin, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq or in New York and Washington.”
Islamic Republic News Agency, September 16, 2001, http://www.irna.com/en/hphoto/010916000000.ehp.shtml

President Muhammad Khatami of Iran:
“[T]he September 11 terrorist blasts in America can only be the job of a group that have voluntarily severed their own ears and tongues, so that the only language with which they could communicate would be destroying and spreading death.”
Address to the United Nations General Assembly, November 9, 2001, http://www.president.ir/cronicnews/1380/8008/800818/800818.htm#b3

League of Arab States:
“The General-Secretariat of the League of Arab States shares with the people and government of the United States of America the feelings of revulsion, horror and shock over the terrorist attacks that ripped through the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, inflicting heavy damage and killing and wounding thousands of many nationalities. These terrorist crimes have been viewed by the League as inadmissible and deserving all condemnation. Divergence of views between the Arabs and the United States over the latter’s foreign policy on the Middle East crisis does in no way adversely affect the common Arab attitude of compassion with the people and government of the United States at such moments of facing the menace and ruthlessness of international terrorism. In more than one statement released since the horrendous attacks, the League has also expressed deep sympathy with the families of the victims. In remarks to newsmen immediately following the tragic events, Arab League Secretary-General Amre Moussa described the feelings of the Arab world as demonstrably sympathetic with the American people, particularly with families and individuals who lost their loved ones. “It is indeed tormenting that any country or people or city anywhere in the world be the scene of such disastrous attacks,” he added. While convinced that it is both inconceivable and lamentable that such a large-scale, organised terrorist campaign take place anywhere, anytime, the League believes that the dreadful attacks against WTC and the Pentagon unveil, time and again, that the cancer of terrorism can be extensively damaging if left unchecked. It follows that there is a pressing and urgent need to combat world terrorism. In this context, an earlier call by [Egyptian] President Hosni Mubarak for convening an international conference to draw up universal accord on ways and means to eradicate this phenomenon and demonstrate international solidarity is worthy of active consideration. The Arabs have walked a large distancein the fight against cross-border terrorism by concluding in April 1998 the Arab Agreement on Combating Terrorism.”
September 17, 2001, http://www.leagueofarabstates.org/E_Perspectives_17_09_01.asp

Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference:
“Following the bloody attacks against major buildings and installations in the United States yesterday, Tuesday, September 11, 2001, Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, secretary-general of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), stated that he was shocked and deeply saddened when he heard of those attacks which led to the death and injury of a very large number of innocent American citizens. Dr. Belkeziz said he was denouncing and condemning those criminal and brutal acts that ran counter to all covenants, humanitarian values and divine religions foremost among which was Islam.”
Press Release, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, September 12, 2001, http://www.oic-oci.org/press/english/september%202001/america%20on%20attack.htm

Organization of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers:
“The Conference strongly condemned the brutal terror acts that befell the United States, caused huge losses in human lives from various nationalities and wreaked tremendous destruction and damage in New York and Washington. It further reaffirmed that these terror acts ran counter to the teachings of the divine religions as well as ethical and human values, stressed the necessity of tracking down the perpetrators of these acts in the light of the results of investigations and bringing them to justice to inflict on them the penalty they deserve, and underscored its support of this effort. In this respect, the Conference expressed its condolences to and sympathy with the people and government of the United States and the families of the victims in these mournful and tragic circumstances.”
Final Communique of the Ninth Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, October 10, 2001, http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/All%20Download/frmex9.htm

Organization of the Islamic Conference, Summit Conference:
"We are determined to fight terrorism in all its forms. ... Islam is the religion of moderation. It rejects extremism and isolation. There is a need to confront deviant ideology where it appears, including in school curricula. Islam is the religion of diversity and tolerance."
Daily Star (Beirut, Lebanon), December 9, 2005, http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=20641

Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, Head of the Directorate of Religious Affairs of Turkey:
“Any human being, regardless of his ethnic and religious origin, will never think of carrying out such a violent, evil attack. Whatever its purpose is, this action cannot be justified and tolerated.”
Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, “A Message on Ragaib Night and Terrorism,” September 21, 2001, http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/duyurular/regaibing.htm

Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar), Turkish author:
“Islam does not encourage any kind of terrorism; in fact, it denounces it. Those who use terrorism in the name of Islam, in fact, have no other faculty except ignorance and hatred.”
Harun Yahya, “Islam Denounces Terrorism,” http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com

Shaikh Muhammad Yusuf Islahi, Pakistani-American Muslim leader:
“The sudden barbaric attack on innocent citizens living in peace is extremely distressing and deplorable. Every gentle human heart goes out to the victims of this attack and as humans we are ashamed at the barbarism perpetrated by a few people. Islam, which is a religion of peace and tolerance, condemns this act and sees this is as a wounding scar on the face of humanity. I appeal to Muslims to strongly condemn this act, express unity with the victims' relatives, donate blood, money and do whatever it takes to help the affected people.”
“Messages From Shaikh Muhammad Yusuf Islahi,” http://www.icna.org/wtc_islahi.htm

Abdal-Hakim Murad, British Muslim author:
“Targeting civilians is a negation of every possible school of Sunni Islam. Suicide bombing is so foreign to the Quranic ethos that the Prophet Samson is entirely absent from our scriptures.”
“The Hijackers Were Not Muslims After All: Recapturing Islam From the Terrorists,” http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/masud/ISLAM/ahm/recapturing.htm

Syed Mumtaz Ali, President of the Canadian Society of Muslims:
“We condemn in the strongest terms possible what are apparently vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Canadians in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts.”
Canadian Society of Muslims, Media Release, September 12, 2001, http://muslim-canada.org/news09112001.html

15 American Muslim organizations:
“We reiterate our unequivocal condemnation of the crime committed on September 11, 2001 and join our fellow Americans in mourning the loss of up to 6000 innocent civilians.”
Muslim American Society (MAS), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), Muslim Student Association (MSA), Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), Solidarity International, American Muslims for Global Peace and Justice (AMGPJ), American Muslim Alliance (AMA), United Muslim Americans Association (UMAA), Islamic Media Foundation (IMF), American Muslim Foundation (AMF), Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO), American Muslims for Jerusalem (AMJ), Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA), October 22, 2001, http://www.icna.org/wtc_pr.htm

57 leaders of North American Islamic organizations, 77 intellectuals, and dozens of concerned citizens:
“As American Muslims and scholars of Islam, we wish to restate our conviction that peace and justice constitute the basic principles of the Muslim faith. We wish again to state unequivocally that neither the al-Qaeda organization nor Usama bin Laden represents Islam or reflects Muslim beliefs and practice. Rather, groups like al-Qaeda have misused and abused Islam in order to fit their own radical and indeed anti-Islamic agenda. Usama bin Laden and al-Qaeda's actions are criminal, misguided and counter to the true teachings of Islam.”
Statement Rejecting Terrorism, September 9, 2002, http://www.islam-democracy.org/terrorism_statement.asp

American Muslim Political Coordination Council:
“American Muslims utterly condemn what are apparently vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Americans in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts.”
http://capwiz.com/cair/issues/alert/?alertid=49818&type=CU&azip=

Dr. Agha Saeed, National Chair of the American Muslim Alliance:
“These attacks are against both divine and human laws and we condemn them in the strongest terms. The Muslim Americans join the nation in calling for swift apprehension and stiff punishment of the perpetrators, and offer our sympathies to the victims and their families.”
http://www.amaweb.org/AMA%20Condemns.html

Hamza Yusuf, American Muslim leader:
“Religious zealots of any creed are defeated people who lash out in desperation, and they often do horrific things. And if these people [who committed murder on September 11] indeed are Arabs, Muslims, they're obviously very sick people and I can't even look at it in religious terms. It's politics, tragic politics. There's no Islamic justification for any of it. ... You can't kill innocent people. There's no Islamic declaration of war against the United States. I think every Muslim country except Afghanistan has an embassy in this country. And in Islam, a country where you have embassies is not considered a belligerent country. In Islam, the only wars that are permitted are between armies and they should engage on battlefields and engage nobly. The Prophet Muhammad said, ``Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or religious people,'' and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, ``Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.'' The Hadith, the sayings of the Prophet, say that no one can punish with fire except the lord of fire. It's prohibited to burn anyone in Islam as a punishment. No one can grant these attackers any legitimacy. It was evil.”
San Jose Mercury News, September 15, 2001, http://www0.mercurycenter.com/local/center/isl0916.htm

Nuh Ha Mim Keller, American Muslim author:
“Muslims have nothing to be ashamed of, and nothing to hide, and should simply tell people what their scholars and religious leaders have always said: first, that the Wahhabi sect has nothing to do with orthodox Islam, for its lack of tolerance is a perversion of traditional values; and second, that killing civilians is wrong and immoral.”
“Making the World Safe for Terrorism,” September 30, 2001, http://66.34.131.5/ISLAM/nuh/terrorism.htm

Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens), prominent British Muslim:
"I wish to express my heartfelt horror at the indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed against innocent people of the United States yesterday. While it is still not clear who carried out the attack, it must be stated that no right thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action: the Qur'an equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity. We pray for the families of all those who lost their lives in this unthinkable act of violence as well as all those injured; I hope to reflect the feelings of all Muslims and people around the world whose sympathies go out to the victims at this sorrowful moment."
[On singing an a cappella version of "Peace Train" for the Concert for New York City:] "After the tragedy, my heart was heavy with sadness and shock, and I was determined to help in some way. Organizers asked me to take part in a message for tolerance and sing 'Peace Train.' Of course, I agreed. ... As a Muslim from the West, it is important to me to let people know that these acts of mass murder have nothing to do with Islam and the beliefs of Muslims."
Press release of September 13, 2001, and PR Newswire, October 22, 2001, both at http://www.mountainoflight.co.uk/pages/news/2001.html

Muslims Against Terrorism, a U.S.-based organization:
“As Muslims, we condemn terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. Ours is a religion of peace. We are sick and tired of extremists dictating the public face of Islam.”
http://www.muslimsagainstterrorism.org/aboutus.html. This statement has been replaced by a new statement in favor of peace by the group's successor organization, Muslim Voices for Peace, http://www.mvp-us.org.

Abdulaziz Sachedina, professor of religious studies, University of Virginia:
“New York was grieving. Sorrow covered the horizons. The pain of separation and of missing family members, neighbors, citizens, humans could be felt in every corner of the country. That day was my personal day of “jihad” (“struggle”) - jihad with my pride and my identity as a Muslim. This is the true meaning of jihad – “struggle with one’s own ego and false pride.” I don’t ever recall that I had prayed so earnestly to God to spare attribution of such madness that was unleashed upon New York and Washington to the Muslims. I felt the pain and, perhaps for the first time in my entire life, I felt embarrassed at the thought that it could very well be my fellow Muslims who had committed this horrendous act of terrorism. How could these terrorists invoke God’s mercifulness and compassion when they had, through their evil act, put to shame the entire history of this great religion and its culture of toleration?”
“Where Was God on September 11?," http://www.virginia.edu/~soasia/newsletter/Fall01/God.html

Ali Khan, professor of law, Washburn University School of Law:
“To the most learned in the text of the Quran, these verses must be read in the context of many other verses that stipulate the Islamic law of war---a war that the Islamic leader must declare after due consultation with advisers. For the less learned, however, these verses may provide the motivation and even the plot for a merciless strike against a self-chosen enemy.”
“Attack on America: An Islamic Perspective, September 17, 2001, http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew29.htm

Muqtedar Khan, assistant professor of political science, Adrian College, Michigan, USA:
“What happened on September 11th in New York and Washington DC will forever remain a horrible scar on the history of Islam and humanity. No matter how much we condemn it, and point to the Quran and the Sunnah to argue that Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the fact remains that the perpetrators of this crime against humanity have indicated that their actions are sanctioned by Islamic values. The fact that even now several Muslim scholars and thousands of Muslims defend the accused is indicative that not all Muslims believe that the attacks are unIslamic. This is truly sad. ... If anywhere in your hearts there is any sympathy or understanding with those who committed this act, I invite you to ask yourself this question, would Muhammad (pbuh) sanction such an act? While encouraging Muslims to struggle against injustice (Al Quran 4:135), Allah also imposes strict rules of engagement. He says in unequivocal terms that to kill an innocent being is like killing entire humanity (Al Quran 5:32). He also encourages Muslims to forgive Jews and Christians if they have committed injustices against us (Al Quran 2:109, 3:159, 5:85).”
“Memo to American Muslims,” October 5, 2001, http://www.ijtihad.org/memo.htm

Dr. Alaa Al-Yousuf, Bahraini economist and political activist:
“On Friday, 14 September [the first Friday prayers after 11 September], almost the whole world expressed its condemnation of the crime and its grief for the bereaved families of the victims. Those who abstained or, even worse, rejoiced, will have joined the terrorists, not in the murder, but in adding to the incalculable damage on the other victims of the atrocity, namely, Islam as a faith, Muslims and Arabs as peoples, and possibly the Palestinian cause. The terrorists and their apologists managed to sully Islam as a faith both in the eyes of many Muslims and non-Muslims alike.”
Interview with the International Forum for Islamic Dialogue, London, http://www.islam21.net/pages/keyissues/key7-6.htm

Dr. S. Parvez Manzoor, Swedish-based Muslim author:
“If these acts of terror indeed have been perpetrated by Muslim radicals or fundamentalists, they have reaped nothing but eternal damnation, shame and ignominy. For nothing, absolutely nothing, could remotely be advanced as an excuse for these barbaric acts. They represent a total negation of Islamic values, an utter disregard of our fiqhi tradition, and a slap in the face of the Ummah. They are in total contrast to what Islamic reason, compassion and faith stand for. Even from the more mundane criteria of common good, the maslaha of the jurists, these acts are treasonous and suicidal. Islamic faith has been so callously and casually sacrificed at the altar of politics, a home-grown politics of parochial causes, primeval passions, self-endorsing piety and messianic terror.”
Interview with the International Forum for Islamic Dialogue, London, http://www.islam21.net/pages/keyissues/key7-6.htm

Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Islamic activist and former deputy prime minister:
“Never in Islam's entire history has the action of so few of its followers caused the religion and its community of believers to be such an abomination in the eyes of others. Millions of Muslims who fled to North America and Europe to escape poverty and persecution at home have become the object of hatred and are now profiled as potential terrorists. And the nascent democratic movements in Muslim countries will regress for a few decades as ruling autocrats use their participation in the global war against terrorism to terrorize their critics and dissenters. This is what Mohammed Atta and his fellow terrorists and sponsors have done to Islam and its community worldwide by their murder of innocents at the World Trade Center in New York and the Defense Depart-ment in Washington. The attack must be condemned, and the condemnation must be without reservation.”
Anwar Ibrahim, “Growth of Democracy Is the Answer to Terrorism,” International Herald Tribune, October 11, 2001, http://www.iht.com/articles/35281.htm

Ziauddin Sardar, British Muslim author:
“The failure of Islamic movements is their inability to come to terms with modernity, to give modernity a sustainable home-grown expression. Instead of engaging with the abundant problems that bedevil Muslim lives, the Islamic prescription consists of blind following of narrow pieties and slavish submission to inept obscurantists. Instead of engagement with the wider world, they have made Islam into an ethic of separation, separate under-development, and negation of the rest of the world.”
Ziauddin Sardar, “Islam has become its own enemy,” The Observer, October 21, 2001, http://www.observer.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,577942,00.html

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Kuwaiti-Egyptian-American legal scholar:
“It would be disingenuous to deny that the Qur'an and other Islamic sources offer possibilities of intolerant interpretation. Clearly these possibilities are exploited by the contemporary puritans and supremacists. But the text does not command such intolerant readings. Historically, Islamic civilization has displayed a remarkable ability to recognize possibilities of tolerance, and to act upon these possibilities.”
Khaled Abou El Fadl, “The Place of Tolerance in Islam: On Reading the Qur'an -- and Misreading It,” Boston Review, December 2001/January 2002, http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR26.6/elfadl.html

Sheikh Muhammad Ali Al-Hanooti, Palestinian-American mufti and member of the North American Fiqh Council:
“The people who attacked the WTC and Pentagon and hijacked the forth plane that crashed in Pennsylvania are criminal who deserve the severest punishment as the Quran elaborates. They are murderers and terrorists. If there were any person who felt happy for that incident we would not be able to equate them with those criminals, but we can say no one with faith and ethics would accept anything of that murder and targeting of innocent people.”
Sheikh Muhammad Ali Al-Hanooti, "Fatwa Session on Latest Tragic Events," IslamOnline, September 20, 2001, http://www.islamonline.net/livefatwa/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=pdwD2E

Syed Shahabuddin, Indian Muslim author:
“Islam prohibits terrorism as well as suicide. Jihad is neither and has no place for taking innocent lives or one’s own life. No cause, howsoever noble or just, can justify terrorism. So while one may sympathize with the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and support their claim to a state of their own, while one may appreciate the democratic awakening among the people of many Muslim states and uphold their demand for withdrawal of foreign presence from their soil and support their struggle for revision of the terms of trade for their natural resources, no thinking Muslim can go along with the use of terrorism for securing political goals.”
Syed Shahabuddin, "Global war against terrorism – the Islamic dimension," Milli Gazette newspaper, New Delhi, India, November 1, 2001, http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01112001/34.htm

Dr. M. A. Zaki Badawi, principal of the Muslim College, London, England:
“Neither the law of Islam nor its ethical system justify such a crime.”
Dr. M. A. Zaki Badawi, "Terrorism has no place in Islam," Arab News, Jiddah-Riyadh-Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, September 28, 2001, http://www.arabnews.com/?page=5&section=0&article=9314&d=28&m=9&y=2001

Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, head mufti at Jamiat-ul-Uloom-ul-Islamia seminary, Binori Town, Pakistan and a leader of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) party, Pakistan:
“It's wrong to kill innocent people. ... It's also wrong to praise those who kill innocent people.”
The New York Times, September 28, 2001, p. B3

Shaykh Omar Bakri, leader of al-Muhajirun, a radical Islamist movement based in London, England:
“If Islamists did it -- and most likely it is Islamists, because of the nature of what happened -- then they have fully misunderstood the teachings of Islam. ... Even the most radical of us have condemned this. I am always considered to be a radical in the Islamic world and even I condemn it.”
The Gazette (Montreal, Quebec, Canada), September 13, 2001, p. B6

Zuhair Qudah, a preacher at al-Lawzieen mosque, Amman, Jordan:
"We stand by our Palestinian brothers in their struggle to end the occupation, but we don't condone violence, ugly crimes and the killing of innocent people."
Associated Press, September 14, 2001
Salih bin Muhammad Lahidan, chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, Saudi Arabia:
“Killing the weak, infants, women, and the elderly, and destroying property, are considered serious crimes in Islam. . . . Viewing on the TV networks what happened to the twin towers . . . was like watching doomsday. Those who commit such crimes are the worst of people. Anyone who thinks that any Islamic scholar will condone such acts is totally wrong. . . . This barbaric act is not justified by any sane mind-set. . . . This act is pernicious and shameless and evil in the extreme.”
The Washington Post, October 13, 2001, p. B9

Shaykh Rached Ghannouchi, chairman of Tunisia's an-Nahda Movement, in exile in London, England:
“Such destruction can only be condemned by any Muslim, however resentful one may be of America's biased policies supporting occupation in Palestine, as an unacceptable attack on thousands of innocent people having no relation to American policies. Anyone familiar with Islam has no doubt about its rejection of collective punishment, based on the well-known Quranic principle that 'no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another.'”
The Washington Post, October 13, 2001, p. B9

Shaykh Salih al-Suhaymi, religious scholar, Saudi Arabia:
“Based upon what has preceded, then we say that that which we believe and hold as our religion concerning what happened to the World Trade Centre in America – and in Allaah lies success – that the terrorist attacks that took place and what occurred of general (mass) killing, then it is not permissible and Islaam does not allow it in any form whatsoever.”
"Shaykh Saalih as-Suhaymee speaks about current affairs...," October 18, 2001, translated by Abu 'Iyaad, http://www.fatwaonline.com/news/0011018.htm

Dr. Sayed G. Safavi, Iranian religious scholar and director of the Institute of Islamic Studies, London, England:
“The targeting of innocent persons cannot be allowed. Islam is against any form of terrorism, whether it be carried out by an individual, a group or a state. ... For Muslims to kill civilians unconnected with any attack on them is a crime. The principal law of Islam is: don't attack civilians. This includes civilians of any faith, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian. According to Islam, all people are the family of God. The target of religion is peace.”
Letter to the Editor, The Daily Telegraph, London, England, June 30, 2003, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/06/30/dt3001.xml

Iqbal Siddiqui, editor of Crescent International, London, England:
“History also teaches us that the only effective way of challenging oppression and the only effective way of fighting injustice is through force; that is simply the way of the world. Pacifism is all too often a weapon of the status quo.... When Islamic movements in the world do need to resort to the use of force, that force must be used morally. When extreme fringes of those movements are pushed to use force indiscriminately, immorally, wrongly against illegitimate targets, and using illegitimate weapons (such [as] hijacked jumbo jets), those are crimes for which the people who share their cause, who share their view of the world, their understanding of the need to use force, must also criticise them, turn against them, isolate them. Our standards must be higher than those of the people whom we are fighting, because if we descend to their standards then there is no difference between us.”
Iqbal Siddiqui, "Terrorism and political violence in contemporary history," Conference on Terrorism, Institute of Islamic Studies, London, England, November 13, 2001, published in Muslimedia International, February 16-28, 2002, http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/movement02/terror-hist.htm. Earlier version on-line at http://www.islamic-studies.org/terrorconfer.pro.htm

Islamway website:
"In light of these and other Islamic texts, the act of inciting terror in the hearts of defenseless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties, the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children are all forbidden and detestable acts according to Islam and the Muslims."
"What Does Islam Say About Terrorism?" http://english.islamway.com/bindex.php?section=article&id=126

Islamic Commission of Spain:
"Muslims, therefore, are not only forbidden from committing crimes against innocent people, but are responsible before God to stop those people who have the intention to do so, since these people 'are planting the seeds of corruption on Earth'.... The perpetration of terrorist acts supposes a rupture of such magnitude with Islamic teaching that it allows to affirm that the individuals or groups who have perpetrated them have stopped being Muslim and have put themselves outside the sphere of Islam."
"Text of the Fatwa Declared Against Osama Bin Laden by the Islamic Commission of Spain," March 17, 2005, http://webislam.com/?idn=537; original Spanish version: "La Comisión Islámica de España emite una fatua condenando el terrorismo y al grupo Al Qaida," March 10, 2005, http://www.webislam.com/?idn=399.

Fatwa signed by more than 500 British Muslim scholars, clerics, and imams:
"Islam strictly, strongly and severely condemns the use of violence and the destruction of innocent lives. There is neither place nor justification in Islam for extremism, fanaticism or terrorism. Suicide bombings, which killed and injured innocent people in London, are HARAAM - vehemently prohibited in Islam, and those who committed these barbaric acts in London [on July 7, 2005] are criminals not martyrs. Such acts, as perpetrated in London, are crimes against all of humanity and contrary to the teachings of Islam. ... The Holy Quran declares: 'Whoever kills a human being… then it is as though he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a human life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.' (Quran, Surah al-Maidah (5), verse 32) Islam’s position is clear and unequivocal: Murder of one soul is the murder of the whole of humanity; he who shows no respect for human life is an enemy of humanity."
British Muslim Forum, press release of July 18, 2005, http://www.britishmuslimforum.org/view_press_release.php?id=26.

Fiqh Council of North America, an association of 18 Muslim legal scholars, fatwa endorsed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Association of Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS), the Association of Muslim Scientists and Engineers (AMSE), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), and more than 130 Muslim organizations, mosques and leaders in the United States:
"We have consistently condemned terrorism and extremism in all forms and under all circumstances, and we reiterate this unequivocal position. Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives. There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism. Targeting civilians' life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram - prohibited in Islam - and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not 'martyrs.'"
"Fatwa by U.S. Muslims Against Religious Extremism," July 25, 2005, http://www.mpac.org/bucket_downloads/fatwa-on-terrorism.pdf.

Islamic Society of North America, Anti-Terrrorism Anti-Extremism Committee:
"Humanity lives today in an interdependent and interconnected world where peaceful and fair interaction, including interfaith and intra-faith dialogue, is imperative. A grave threat to all of us nowadays is the scourge of religious and political extremism that manifests itself in various forms of violence, including terrorism. In the absence of a universally agreed upon definition of terrorism, it may be defined as any act of indiscriminate violence that targets innocent people, whether committed by individuals, groups or states. As Muslims, we must face up to our responsibility to clarify and advocate a faith-based, righteous and moral position with regard to this problem, especially when terrorist acts are perpetrated in the name of Islam. The purpose of this brochure is to clarify a few key issues relating to this topic, not because of external pressures or for the sake of “political correctness”, but out of our sincere conviction of what Islam stands for."
Islamic Society of North America, "Against Terrorism and Religious Extremism: Muslim Position and Responsibilities," 2005, http://www.balancedislam.org/ATAECbrochure.pdf.

Shaykh Abdulaziz Al-Asheikh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia:
The London attacks, "targeting peaceful people, are not condoned by Islam, and are indeed prohibited by our religion. ... Attributing to Islam acts of individual or collective killings, bombings, destruction of properties and the terrorizing of peaceful people is unfair, because they are alien to the divine religion."
Fatwa-Online, July 9, 2005, http://www.fatwa-online.com/news/0050709.htm

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhaab al-'Aqeel, professor of creed ('aqeedah) at the College of Proselytising (da'wah), Islamic University of Madinah, Saudi Arabia:
"Terrorism is the terror that is caused by those groups or individuals who resort to killing and wreaking havoc and destruction. Terrorism is therefore, according to the contemporary compilers of modern Arabic dictionaries, killing akin to the riotous killing that is mentioned within the texts of Shar'eeah. As the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wassallam) mentioned with regards to the signs of the end of time, the spread of 'al-Harj' (riotous killing). The meaning of 'al-Harj' is killing and the increase of the spilling blood, which is all from the signs of the end of time. To the extent that the one killing will not know why he is killing and the one that was killed will not know why he/she was killed. Islam is free from this riotous killing, free from this terrorism and free from this kind of corruption. Terrorism is established upon destruction of properties such as factories, farms, places of worship, train stations, airports and the likes; Islam is clearly free from such actions that are based upon corruption and not upon rectification. Terrorists usually say that they are going against the state in which they are based within. This is like the mafia or other criminal organisations that are based on killing people, causing fear and taking their monies. Such criminal organisations have leaders, deputies and individuals that are responsible for establishing regulations for the organisation and individuals responsible for carrying out attacks, and all of them are terrorists causing corruption on the earth. However the ugliest face of terrorism is that which is established in the name of religion, all of the religions from the Prophets (peace be upon them) are free from such terrorism, even if some of the followers of the Prophets participated in such terrorist activities, but the Prophets are free from such corruptions."
Lecture on "The Evils of Terrorism," August 20, 2005, translated in Islam Against Terrorism - v1.20, September 17, 2005, http://www.fatwa-online.com/downloads/dow004/islamagainstterrorism.chm

Shaykh Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti, Malaysian Muslim scholar and research fellow in Islamic philosophy and theology, Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, U.K.:
"If you still insist that your [religious or civil] authority should declare war with the non-Muslim state upon which you wish war to be declared, then the most you could do in this capacity is to lobby your authority for it. However, if your anger is so unrestrained that its fire brings out the worst in you to the point that your disagreement with your Muslim authority leads you to declare war on those you want your authority to declare war on, and you end up resorting to violence, then know with certainty that you have violated our own religious Laws. For then you will have taken the Shari'a into your own hands."
Shaykh Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti, Defending the Transgressed by Censuring the Reckless against the Killing of Civilians, Germany: Warda Publications, and United Kingdom: Aqsa Press, 2005, p.49, http://www.warda.info/fatwa.pdf

Abd al-Hakim Murad, British Muslim scholar:
"This is a decadence that is profound. And that it happens in the holy land is particularly worrying. Near the muqadsāt, where we are particularly required to conform entirely to the adāb of the Shari’ah. This is a deep subversion. And as for those who think that for reasons of masfahah that the door can be opened there, but somehow that door will remain closed elsewhere in the world, that this door can be opened because the Palestinians are so oppressed and somehow it’s going to help them, but of course we keep it closed in Chechnya and Kahsmir and certainly in London, that logic doesn’t seem to have worked too well. That rage, that desire to self annihilation, to lash out and the men, women and children, whoever in the vicinity, is now becoming a global epidemic. And the ‘ulama who opened the little door now see these legions rushing through it in every place don’t know what to do about it. That door has to be closed. Islam is too good for such practices, for such baseness, for such wild expression of futility and despair and vindictiveness."
Interview, December 16-18, 2005, London-Leeds-Manchester, http://www.radicalmiddleway.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=45

Islamic Society of North America:
"The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) condemns in the strongest terms the recent acts of terrorism in Glasgow, London and Yemen. We reaffirm our long-standing, unqualified condemnation of all acts of terrorism and all acts of violence committed against the innocent, and our denunciation of religious extremism and particularly the use of Islam to justify terrorism in any of its forms*. We sympathize with the victims of these senseless attacks and offer our heart-felt condolences to the families who have lost their dear ones."
Islamic Society of North America Statement in Response to Recent Bombings, July 10, 2007, http://www.isna.net/index.php?id=35&backPID=1&tt_news=884

See also:

Bernard Haykel, assistant professor of Islamic law at New York University:
"According to Islamic law there are at least six reasons why Bin Laden's barbaric violence cannot fall under the rubric of jihad: 1) Individuals and organizations cannot declare a jihad, only states can; 2) One cannot kill innocent women and children when conducting a jihad; 3) One cannot kill Muslims in a jihad; 4) One cannot fight a jihad against a country in which Muslims can freely practise their religion and proselytize Islam; 5) Prominent Muslim jurists around the world have condemned these attacks and their condemnation forms a juristic consensus (ijma') against Bin Laden's actions (This consensus renders his actions un-Islamic); 6) The welfare and interest of the Muslim community (maslaha) is being harmed by Bin Laden's actions and this equally makes them un-Islamic."
The Dawn newspaper, Karachi, Pakistan, October 8, 2001, http://www.dawn.com/2001/10/08/op.htm#2
http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm

That lot should keep you busy for a while. Want to read some more?

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

Do you still believe Muslims are not speaking out against terrorism?

truthmatters

09-04-2007, 11:41 AM

What are you guys doing here?

Winning hearts and minds over for American?

theHawk

09-04-2007, 11:54 AM

You think you are clever, but you might like to research the marriage customs of that era, and find out the commonly accepted age of marriage, for that era.
Marrying 9-12 year olds was common. You can't test the customs of 1400 years ago using the customs of now. It just doesn't work.

It has nothing to do with being 'clever', its stating the cold hard facts.
Actually, Muhammed married a 6 year old. And "consummated" the marriage when she was 9. No normal society would ever condone that. You may tell yourself it was normal 'for that era', but the rest of us know that is a lie.

Now maybe the whole of Arab society did condone pedophila, which I doubt. But when has any Prophet of God married such a young female? None, but I guess this particular one had special permission from God to be a pedophile. You sir, are a sick bastard if you can honestly sit here and defend such vile behaviour. When are you going to realize that all Islam is deeply rooted in such perverse foundations?

glockmail

09-04-2007, 11:59 AM

It has nothing to do with being 'clever', its stated the cold hard facts.
Actually, Muhammed married a 6 year old. And "consummated" the marriage when she was 9. No normal society would ever condone that. You may tell yourself it was normal 'for that era', but the rest of us know that is a lie.

Now maybe the whole of Arab society did condone pedophila, which I doubt. But when has any Prophet of God married such a young female? None, but I guess this particular one had special permission from God to be a pedophile. You sir, are a sick bastard if you can honestly sit here and defend such vile behaviour. When are you going to realize that all Islam is deeply rooted in such perverse foundations? Before he "consummated" he used to get his rocks off by "thighing" her. Now that's one sick puppy!

jimnyc

09-04-2007, 06:16 PM

Where are the condemnations of terrorism from Muslims and their leaders??

Thanks, Jafar, I appreciate you taking the time to post so many stories and links. I honestly did read each and every one. I remember reading several of those shortly after 9/11 as well.

I'm not saying those weren't well stated, or well intentioned, but 90% of those were in response to the attacks of 9/11 in the United States and very few as a result of the continued suicide attacks in the years following.

As you know, The USA is the largest opponent in the war on terror right now followed by the UK. We have both taken heavy casualties at the hands of fanatics who committed unspeakable acts, supposedly in the name of Allah. I think the Muslim leaders should be specifically reaching out to those countries most effected to show their stance, while making sure their own people get the message as well. If I were them, I would ensure the message gets broadcast nationally in both places to make both Britain and America aware that true Islam does not condone or support such activities.

This isn't to say their words are completely lost because they were spoken in more remote places but I feel they can speak out a little louder and farther. When a cartoon appeared in a Swedish newspaper about Mohammed, the Muslim community was outraged and their condemnations reached national headlines overnight. From what I saw, in my opinion, there was far more outrage waged over a cartoon than there is against suicide attackers going after Britain and the USA.

trobinett

09-04-2007, 06:29 PM

Nice post Jimmy, but we'll wait till hell freezes over for any real response from the slime balls that call themselves Muslims.

Sorry, just the way I see it..............:lame2:

jafar00

09-05-2007, 05:08 AM

Thanks, Jafar, I appreciate you taking the time to post so many stories and links. I honestly did read each and every one. I remember reading several of those shortly after 9/11 as well.

I'm not saying those weren't well stated, or well intentioned, but 90% of those were in response to the attacks of 9/11 in the United States and very few as a result of the continued suicide attacks in the years following.

They were just examples. There have been plenty more in the years since condemning some other incident or another, and as a Muslim, I've listened to countless lectures about how terrorism is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Islam. Ongoing condemnations of terrorism do come out of the Islamic community. Not being reported on FOX news every 4 hours doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

As you know, The USA is the largest opponent in the war on terror right now followed by the UK. We have both taken heavy casualties at the hands of fanatics who committed unspeakable acts, supposedly in the name of Allah.

That's funny. I thought you were taking heavy casualties due to the fact that you invaded and occupied several countries. Most of your casualties come from the indigenous resistance of the countries involved. You haven't had to suffer that many attacks from the likes of Al Qaeda since they seem to be concentrating their efforts against Muslims, not the US Army.

I think the Muslim leaders should be specifically reaching out to those countries most effected to show their stance, while making sure their own people get the message as well. If I were them, I would ensure the message gets broadcast nationally in both places to make both Britain and America aware that true Islam does not condone or support such activities.

Send a letter to Rupert Murdoch and ask him to give us a voice in his media empire? :poke:

This isn't to say their words are completely lost because they were spoken in more remote places but I feel they can speak out a little louder and farther. When a cartoon appeared in a Swedish newspaper about Mohammed, the Muslim community was outraged and their condemnations reached national headlines overnight. From what I saw, in my opinion, there was far more outrage waged over a cartoon than there is against suicide attackers going after Britain and the USA.

Some of the reactions against the cartoon were indeed stupid. I can't say otherwise. But you can't on the other hand support the actions of those who insult the Prophet of Islam knowing fully that the reaction from insulting Muslims who's ire has already been raised by their countries being bombed to the ground, and the constant demonisation of us in the Media. Talk about lighting a match and dropping it in the tinderbox.

jimnyc

09-05-2007, 05:41 AM

They were just examples. There have been plenty more in the years since condemning some other incident or another, and as a Muslim, I've listened to countless lectures about how terrorism is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Islam. Ongoing condemnations of terrorism do come out of the Islamic community. Not being reported on FOX news every 4 hours doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Jafar, are you telling me that the powers and major leaders in the Muslim community have been reaching out internationally over the past 6 years, and that the American and British media have just failed to report it? Can you give me examples of where these leaders have reached out to major media organizations, and their words were not sent out internationally? If they have attempted so, and it wasn't reported, did they complain within the Muslim community that the media has failed to do so? Your first mistake is "assuming" that I only get my information from FOX news, and you couldn't be further off base. I follow news stories not only from all major media outlets in the USA, but internationally as well. So please save your sarcasm about FOX for those more deserving.

That's funny. I thought you were taking heavy casualties due to the fact that you invaded and occupied several countries. Most of your casualties come from the indigenous resistance of the countries involved. You haven't had to suffer that many attacks from the likes of Al Qaeda since they seem to be concentrating their efforts against Muslims, not the US Army.I don't recall mentioning WHY we were being attacked, just simply that fanatics were in fact committing unspeakable acts against our military, as well as innocent civilians - intentionally. And 99 times out of 100 the attackers are claiming to be doing so in the name of Allah. They either record the events claiming such, or their organizations come out after the fact and make such claims.

Send a letter to Rupert Murdoch and ask him to give us a voice in his media empire? :poke:So, are you saying it's only Rupert Murdoch related media that is not reporting what the Muslim leaders are speaking out against? Again, can you please show me where these leaders have reached out internationally and have been denied. Surely if they attempted such, and were denied, they would have then spoken out within the Muslim community about said denial.

Some of the reactions against the cartoon were indeed stupid. I can't say otherwise. But you can't on the other hand support the actions of those who insult the Prophet of Islam knowing fully that the reaction from insulting Muslims who's ire has already been raised by their countries being bombed to the ground, and the constant demonisation of us in the Media. Talk about lighting a match and dropping it in the tinderbox.Can you please show me where I stated I supported those insulting the Prophet of Islam? You shouldn't assume so much, or just plain out make things up!

Sadly, nothing you said has lessened my wonder as to why the Muslim leaders and community were heard so loudly about cartoons, but fall eerily silent about non-stop suicide attacks that are killing innocent civilians.

KarlMarx

09-05-2007, 05:54 AM

Hizbullah is a Lebanese resistance movement. Under International law, an organised Militia is entitled to take matters into their own hands in order to defend their country.

Baloney. Hezzballah is a terrorist organization that is supported by Syria and perhaps Iran.

If there actually was a Lebanese resistance movement, it would be fighting the Syrians not the Israelis. The Syrians have an occupying army in Lebanon and have for several decades.

Here is something for you out of the Bible (the other book that Moslems consider as revealed of God), it is from Isaiah Chapter 5

20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.

diuretic

09-05-2007, 06:24 AM

When was the last time you heard of a group of Christians blowing themselves up for martyrdom, when was the last time you heard of Christians, Jews, Budhist, ets... blow themselves up in a plane slamming into a public building full of innocents.

Christians dropped atomic bombs in Japan. Christians bombed Dresden. Christians bombed London and Coventry. Casualties....very high.

You know damn good and well that there will always be "LAW BREAKERS" but in most societies it is the exception not the RULE.

That's so, by definition and it applies in any culture that has law.

You can spin what ever you want but Jimmy makes vary valid points in his post just above this one and they need to be addressed

I don't need to "spin", I just point out the obvious and let everyone draw their own conclusions.

If Islamic laws doesn't permit the killing of innocents and indiscriminate killing than why is it defended in the Islamic circles of the world instead of being vilified and condemned???????????

Exactly where/in what circles is this being defended? In mosques where extremists preach? What else would you expect? Where is it being condemned?

http://www.mcb.org.uk/ <--- obviously I missed jafar's demolition of this point, but I'll leave this anyway as it's an interesting link.

And there are others. Can you get it into your head that these people are extremists? And that by that very definition they are a tiny minority? Can you also understand that every time you or anyone else makes a swingeing statement about Muslims being terrorists or supporting terrorists or delighting in acts of atrocity that you destroy a potential ally?

Nukeman

09-05-2007, 06:38 AM

Christians dropped atomic bombs in Japan. Christians bombed Dresden. Christians bombed London and Coventry. Casualties....very high.

Christians didn't drop the bombs, the Government did. this was a government at war with another country that attacked the US unproveked what is your point. Because the president may have been a Christian it was Christians that bombed these sights. It wasn't done in the name of religion as soo many suicide bombings and terrorist activities are today in the name of Islam

If Islamic laws doesn't permit the killing of innocents and indiscriminate killing than why is it defended in the Islamic circles of the world instead of being vilified and condemned???????????[/QUOTE]

Exactly where/in what circles is this being defended? In mosques where extremists preach? What else would you expect? Where is it being condemned? Great you have found a sight but I dont see where they are forcefully decrying the terorist activities..
http://www.mcb.org.uk/

And there are others. Can you get it into your head that these people are extremists? And that by that very definition they are a tiny minority? Can you also understand that every time you or anyone else makes a swingeing statement about Muslims being terrorists or supporting terrorists or delighting in acts of atrocity that you destroy a potential ally?

You do realize that Muslims have more than their fair share of EXTREMISTS that is the problem thes are not reigned in at any rate. They need to police their own so others dont have to.. When they commit an act of terrorism, dance in the streets after an unprovoked attack on innocents, and commit atrocities inthe name of their religion they also destroy potential ally's DONT YAA THINK......

diuretic

09-05-2007, 07:51 AM

Christians didn't drop the bombs, the Government did. this was a government at war with another country that attacked the US unproveked what is your point. Because the president may have been a Christian it was Christians that bombed these sights. It wasn't done in the name of religion as soo many suicide bombings and terrorist activities are today in the name of Islam

Christians dropped the bombs. Governments gave orders but Christians dropped the bombs. It's okay though, Christianity has a concept of "just war", you can find it in St Augustine and also later in St Thomas Aquinas. I don't know if either Augustine or Aquinas would have approved of Dresden but it didn't worry Bomber Harris. To be fair the Church of England wasn't happy with his efforts and came right out and said so. But still it went on. The need for a war victory transcended the quite reasonable advice of two Saints.

My point is that you have argued that suicide bombings, the atrocities of 9/11 and the continuing actions of what can only be called "resistance" fighters is all about Islam. Patently it's not. As has been pointed out, a number of Islamist, extremist nutters perpetrated the events leading up to and including the 9/11 atrocities. If it was "Islam" doing this then how come Indonesia hasn't invaded my country with suicide bombers and commandeered aircraft?
They haven't because they are a moderate Muslim nation with a rational government. Because a bunch of nutters invoke their religion and their deity to justify their actions there's absolutely no need to smear the whole of the religion.

If Islamic laws doesn't permit the killing of innocents and indiscriminate killing than why is it defended in the Islamic circles of the world instead of being vilified and condemned???????????

? Great you have found a sight but I dont see where they are forcefully decrying the terorist activities..
http://www.mcb.org.uk/

Well my effort was a bit weak. jafar blew you away there.

You do realize that Muslims have more than their fair share of EXTREMISTS that is the problem thes are not reigned in at any rate. They need to police their own so others dont have to.. When they commit an act of terrorism, dance in the streets after an unprovoked attack on innocents, and commit atrocities inthe name of their religion they also destroy potential ally's DONT YAA THINK......

Gawd. Blame the bloody Wahabbist Saudis if you want to blame anyone. Oh, sorry, can't do that, great and faithful allies of the West. Bullshit they are. Muslims are followers of Islam, they aren't a country or a state. If you look at states which have significant populations of Muslims (Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc) you'll see that those states are indeed reining in their Islamicist extremists. Heck half of those countries have provided the torture facilities for CIA rendition flights. Islam isn't driving these terrorists, they're using their religion as a justification and in so doing are traducing their own religion.

Nukeman

09-05-2007, 08:02 AM

Gawd. Blame the bloody Wahabbist Saudis if you want to blame anyone. Oh, sorry, can't do that, great and faithful allies of the West. Bullshit they are. Muslims are followers of Islam, they aren't a country or a state. If you look at states which have significant populations of Muslims (Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc) you'll see that those states are indeed reining in their Islamicist extremists. Heck half of those countries have provided the torture facilities for CIA rendition flights. Islam isn't driving these terrorists, they're using their religion as a justification and in so doing are traducing their own religion.
I agree totaly with you on this!!! I do believe that the terrorist are USING Islam as a shield for their activities I know that some of the countries are attempting to reign in this ellement but more needs to be done thats the point. There are so many people that have heard for years the "Great Satan" that is the US so its no wonder they hav mre than fair share willing to hit at us. I personaly think a little isolation would go a long way in the world. Sometimes I feel we should seel our borders and let the world figure out what it wants to do and than see if anyone wants to tallk to us... If anyone is left...

diuretic

09-05-2007, 08:55 AM

Gaffer

09-05-2007, 12:15 PM

I think most people know the "Great Satan" thing is bullshit. I can't point you to this because there's no online version but I was reading an article about young people in Iran. The general impression I got was that they didn't like Ahmadinejad, they didn't like the Mullahs running the country but they were too scared to make too much of a fuss about it but they were also not anti-West.

Poor sods are under the hammer of theocratic government. They don't want to be there. I think they would love to have a constitution that protected the separation of religion and state instead of the Islamic Republic that they have.

One of the problems for iranians is that they are terrorized. Recently 150,000 women were arrested for various charges mostly involving the islamic dress code. People are disappeared into the night for speaking out against the mullahs. Besides the main prison which is described as a hell hole, there are many other prisons throughout iran that are known locally, but nothing said about them, where people are tortured and killed.

The people are not happy but can't do anything about it. I suspect if we do invade iran it will be like Afghanistan. The people will rise up and take back their country.

PostmodernProphet

09-05-2007, 12:42 PM

Governments gave orders but Christians dropped the bombs.

it's sure going to fuck up your theory if one of the bomber pilots was Jewish....or, God forbid, an agnostic!.....

PostmodernProphet

09-05-2007, 12:45 PM

the continuing actions of what can only be called "resistance" fighters

the last thing they should be called is 'resistance' fighters.....at best they are revolutionaries, seeking to overturn the Iraqi government, at worst, they are merely blood sucking, murdering terrorists......

chesswarsnow

09-06-2007, 08:31 AM

glockmail

09-06-2007, 08:35 AM

Sorry bout that,

1. But Iran's *Littleman* is going down.
2. His days are numbered.
3. Everyone who is in *Reality*, knows he is capable to do what he has been saying.
4. And we knowing Islam is chucked full of blood thirsty killers, we have to react, before they act.
5. Blast the bloody buggers!

Regards,
SiramesofTexas

It will never happen, since America doesn't have the political will. It will take a nuke on US soil to get Liberals to agree to cruise-missle an aspirin factory or two.

diuretic

09-06-2007, 08:59 AM

One of the problems for iranians is that they are terrorized. Recently 150,000 women were arrested for various charges mostly involving the islamic dress code. People are disappeared into the night for speaking out against the mullahs. Besides the main prison which is described as a hell hole, there are many other prisons throughout iran that are known locally, but nothing said about them, where people are tortured and killed.

The people are not happy but can't do anything about it. I suspect if we do invade iran it will be like Afghanistan. The people will rise up and take back their country.

I hate to sound really difficult but unless they themselves do something about it, leave them be is my view. That sounds very heartless I know but we know democracy can't be imposed.

diuretic

09-06-2007, 09:00 AM

it's sure going to fuck up your theory if one of the bomber pilots was Jewish....or, God forbid, an agnostic!.....

It's only illustrative. I have no doubt that there were many people with different religions and no religions pulling the levers and flying the aircraft.

diuretic

09-06-2007, 09:01 AM

the last thing they should be called is 'resistance' fighters.....at best they are revolutionaries, seeking to overturn the Iraqi government, at worst, they are merely blood sucking, murdering terrorists......

It's about perspective, that's all. Some will see them as resistance fighters, some as insurgents. We can label them how we wish, it doesn't change what they do, why they do it and what effect it has.

jafar00

09-07-2007, 01:51 PM

The people are not happy but can't do anything about it. I suspect if we do invade iran it will be like Afghanistan. The people will rise up and take back their country.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the present government they have, a result of their last uprising against the installed Shah Pahlevi who terrorised them with an Iron Fist?

Don't make the mistake of comparing Iran to the other two countries you attacked. Invading them would only cause the Iranians to rally around their president and the Ayatullahs. Not the other way around.

jimnyc

09-07-2007, 02:20 PM

I sometimes wonder if my posts are invisible to others, or if they just choose to cherry pick their responses and maybe my questions are too hard. :)

glockmail

09-07-2007, 03:04 PM

I sometimes wonder if my posts are invisible to others, or if they just choose to cherry pick their responses and maybe my questions are too hard. :) Stop asking libs substantiative questions then. They routinely deflect or ignore, and it shouldn't surprise you.

jimnyc

09-08-2007, 06:40 AM

Stop asking libs substantiative questions then. They routinely deflect or ignore, and it shouldn't surprise you.

Jafar has read this thread a few times since my last reply to him but has continued to ignore it. That's ok though as I already knew the answers to my questions, I was just hoping to hear some more lies an innuendo to brighten my day along with my morning coffee. :coffee:

Gaffer

09-11-2007, 08:00 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the present government they have, a result of their last uprising against the installed Shah Pahlevi who terrorised them with an Iron Fist?

Don't make the mistake of comparing Iran to the other two countries you attacked. Invading them would only cause the Iranians to rally around their president and the Ayatullahs. Not the other way around.

The present government is a direct result of the mullahs taking over after the ouster of the shah by soviet supported upraising and carter backing. There was no terrorizing under the shah to the extent you claim. About 3000 people, mostly communists were arrested by him. In 1981 those 3000 and 30000 others were executed by the mullahs. The iranians learned all about the real iron fist when the mullahs took over.

The other two countries are being influenced by iran. al queda, the taliban, mahadi army are all supported by iran. iran wants control of the entire area. If we invade iran with an all out effort, the iranian military will be wiped out in three days. And the population will rise up to take their country back. There will then be a democracy or a Marxist government established.