Which leads me to another issue I have a problem with. From posts like Woodrow's, and many others, it seems that when Al-Qaeda or terrorism is brought up many Muslims will automatically throw themselves in the same boat with them. Not by saying "I support them" obviously, but by this moral relativism. Woodrow mentions that to "some" the U.K. is seen as the #1 aggressor. What exactly does that mean in the context of this conversation? Is that supposed to be a defense for people who WANT to blow up women and children? I know Woodrow doesn't mean it in that way, but what other way can I look at a statement like that? Because the U.K. has trust issues with the Muslim community they are being aggressive? Again, a cause and effect in play there. I'm not trying to offend anyone, and I hopefully I was able to make my point in the right way.

^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get

Originally Posted by Mazed

^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get

lol I know how you feel. My dad starts growling at the TV everytime she comes on.

I really hate the way people feel Islam teaches such horiffic acts. It's disgusting.

Originally Posted by Mazed

^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get

"We don't defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning"?

Interesting statement. I'm not sure what the rest of the post is getting at however.

Basically 2 wrongs don't make a right. At least thats what I got from the post.

Originally Posted by DeepOcean

Basically 2 wrongs don't make a right. At least thats what I got from the post.

jazakAllah khair. I dont see what was so hard to understand

BarakAllahfee.

Originally Posted by DeepOcean

Basically 2 wrongs don't make a right. At least thats what I got from the post.

Since a person isn't "happy" with the U.S. and U.K and they don't like Condaleeza Rice that offsets whatever blame extremists have for blowing up people? That is basically saying "I don't defend terrorists but since I don't like Condaleeza Rice I can just blame her." This inability some have to be critical of people who proclaim to have the same faith is very troubling to me, but by now it is hardly a surprise.

Originally Posted by Keltoi

Since a person isn't "happy" with the U.S. and U.K and they don't like Condaleeza Rice that offsets whatever blame extremists have for blowing up people? That is basically saying "I don't defend terrorists but since I don't like Condaleeza Rice I can just blame her." This inability some have to be critical of people who proclaim to have the same faith is very troubling to me, but by now it is hardly a surprise.

Hi keltoi.


It's not really that. The real reason we don't like people like her is due to the fact that they go to the muslim land's and kill our brothers and sisters. It's got nothing to do with what the "terrorists" are doing in these lands, both are totally different topics.

The American government is justifying what their doing by going to the muslim lands and causing corruption there, while they use "terrorists" as a form of side track to keep the people thinking that what their doing is justified.



Allaah Almighty knows best.



Peace.

Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah

Hi keltoi.


It's not really that. The real reason we don't like people like her is due to the fact that they go to the muslim land's and kill our brothers and sisters. It's got nothing to do with what the "terrorists" are doing in these lands, both are totally different topics.

The American government is justifying what their doing by going to the muslim lands and causing corruption there, while they use "terrorists" as a form of side track to keep the people thinking that what their doing is justified.



Allaah Almighty knows best.



Peace.

It would be nice to believe that terrorism is a "side" issue, but unfortunately it is not. At least not to me and not the majority of U.S. and British citizens. Not to mention the Spanish. Religious extremists who are willing to kill themselves and as many people as they can take with them are not a side issue to "trick" the poor dumb citizens of the West. I know it would be comforting for some people to believe that.

Originally Posted by Keltoi

It would be nice to believe that terrorism is a "side" issue, but unfortunately it is not. At least not to me and not the majority of U.S. and British citizens. Not to mention the Spanish. Religious extremists who are willing to kill themselves and as many people as they can take with them are not a side issue to "trick" the poor dumb citizens of the West. I know it would be comforting for some people to believe that.

where do u get this from keltoi?

as you will no, no man of religious islamic understanding would simply and stupidly blow a portion of a city up. there is no point to that at all. It is simply not strategic !

Originally Posted by Mazed

where do u get this from keltoi?

as you will no, no man of religious islamic understanding would simply and stupidly blow a portion of a city up. there is no point to that at all. It is simply not strategic !

Maybe they lack "religious islamic understanding".
I think we all assume that.

Originally Posted by Keltoi

It would be nice to believe that terrorism is a "side" issue, but unfortunately it is not. At least not to me and not the majority of U.S. and British citizens. Not to mention the Spanish. Religious extremists who are willing to kill themselves and as many people as they can take with them are not a side issue to "trick" the poor dumb citizens of the West. I know it would be comforting for some people to believe that.

I know it doesn't seem like that to the majority of the west, but remember when bush said "you're either with us or against us" - i wonder why he said that. It's obvious that anyone who is against the wars is supposedly on the opposition. Which mean's the person isn't on the side of the US.

Now the irony is that we already know this, there are two parties [even though now is the grey area] - a party of pure belief and a party of total disbelief. Allaah Almighty know's best, but these event's may even lead upto the time of ad-dajaal, the anti christ.


You might have realised that islaam is being attacked from all sides; kashmir, iraq, palestine, chechnya, bosnia, afghanistan, muslims in the west etc. Why is this? It's because the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) told us that Allaah would humiliate us, until we returned back to our religion. And what time are people more likely to turn to Allaah? It's when they are getting harmed. This global scale is what may lead to the final event's, and Allaah the Exalted knows best.



Peace.

You might have realised that islaam is being attacked from all sides

There is war in every corner of the world. So People are being attacked from all sides.

Originally Posted by wilberhum

There is war in every corner of the world. So People are being attacked from all sides.

yes but if you take a look around at france, at london, at canada etc etc we hear many stories of masjids being raided, sisters being victimised, brothers being accused of terrorism, we even see cab drivers appear on the headlines of mainstream newspapers just for refusing to let a guide dog in. We are most certainly todays focus!