The demand that more Muslims ‘must condemn ISIS’ is racist and ridiculous

[Hulk]

"Let’s get two caveats out of the way first: I’m neither a Muslim and nor am I religious in any sense (I come from a Sikh family). Secondly, anyone who’s read my work knows I have zero sympathy for religiously motivated terrorists. In fact I even supported the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 to take out the Taliban.

Yesterday the Evening Standard said in its Editorial Comment: “Muslim communities must be far more outspoken about this: we look to them, for instance, to organise protests against the Islamic State.”

I’ve also seen various tweets by people asking why more Muslims aren’t speaking out against ISIS, or condemning it.."

Full article

[سيف الله]

Salaam

This is relevant

When government war policies go wrong, blame the Muslims

Muslims who are facing abuse, racism and discrimination should not have to apologise for opposing their government's foreign policy, just as millions of non-Muslims do.

Blame the Muslims. If all else fails in the defence of a foreign policy which is so bankrupt that even the envoy for peace in the Middle East Tony Blair has gone quiet, then start talking about the domestic threat, and the need for increased surveillance of Muslims.

The hideous beheading of James Foley, apparently by a British member of ISIS, and the government claim that hundreds of British citizens are fighting in Syria and now Iraq, has brought a whole new raft of demands. Ranging from the Nigel Farage cry that their passports should be confiscated to the return of control orders which effectively mean house arrest for individuals, these are all more about political posturing than dealing with the problem of ISIS.

The government’s Prevent strategy, involving high levels of surveillance and the involvement of mosques and community organisations in controlling and monitoring young Muslims who might be thought to be under the influence of ‘extremism’ has hardly been a success in its own terms. Indeed if it is true that several hundred young people have left to fight in the Middle east, it suggest that Prevent isn’t preventing the thing it purports to.

Maybe that’s because the whole approach is wrong. Firstly, the problem here isn’t surveillance, of which there is a huge amount in and around Muslim communities. It isn’t the lack of police, where it is now not uncommon (unlike ten years ago) to see a couple of community policemen at the back of a packed meeting.

It isn’t that the security services don’t know anything about some of the people who decide to take this route. Indeed, the three British men who are supposedly holding the hostages for ISIS are almost certainly known to the secret services, as were for example the killers of Lee Rigby.

In Britain as a whole, alongside this remarkably high level of surveillance, there are more anti terror laws and a level of security in public buildings which is far in excess of anything from the 1970s and 80s where the IRA had a much more extensive bombing campaign.

It isn’t working. And it isn’t working because it does not address the political problems that have helped feed the terrorist groups. When al Qaeda attacked the twin towers on 9/11 their grievances were as follows: they wanted an end to US troops on Saudi soil, the end of sanctions on Iraq, and justice for the Palestinians.

If these were grievances 13 years ago, how much more have they become so after disastrous interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, the treatment of the Palestinians and the death and destruction wrought on the people of the Middle East?

These grievances have over the years mobilised huge numbers of people on mass protests and actions in opposition to them. Most recently, the huge demos in support of Gaza show people from across all communities, races and religions united in opposition to government foreign policy.

If any one group of people in this country had the right to feel aggrieved over the lack of government recognition of these movements, it is the Muslim community. It has turned out on protests in huge numbers to try to bring about change by peaceful protest. It has done so not because it is any more ‘extremist’ than anyone else, but because it doesn’t like government policy.

It has been ignored, demonised and attacked, subject to racist accusations and demands that it desist from extremism. Most Muslims in this country do not support ISIS or anything like it, and are as horrified as anyone else by the sights of James Foley being beheaded.

But they should not have to apologise for opposing their government, just as millions of non-Muslims do.

Nor should they be singled out for the level of abuse, racism and discrimination that they are facing. The latest developments with ISIS will lead to more of a crackdown on young people in the Muslim community, but will also raise the general level of racism and Islamophobia in Britain and elsewhere in Europe.

We are locked in a vicious circle where wars and invasions create opposition and in some cases terrorism, both in the countries that are attacked or here in Britain. Then the opposition is denounced as terrorism, there are more crackdowns and this creates more people who support the terrorists.

The everyday Islamophobia (which is by far the most extensive level of racism in Europe) again helps alienate young Muslims especially. Governments then demand more of the same and continue the exact policies that caused the trouble in the first place.

The importance of involving Muslims in campaigns that can challenge the deadly stream of wars and interventions, while at the same time rejecting the ISIS reactionaries, has never been greater.

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/news/when-government-war-policies-go-wrong-blame-the-muslims#.U_h9jvldV8E

[Scimitar]

this is weird, every Muslim i've come across on the web condemns the actions of IS-IS or whatever they are calling themselves right now. Why don;t they just do a "search" ??? :D

google is their friend, after all.

[Pygoscelis]

Indeed. Intelligent people will go look into it themselves, such as speaking with some Muslims (if they know any) or coming to places like this one. That's how I wound up here in the first place, following 9/11 in the wake of all the islamophibia it evoked.

I can't say I agree with Islam on much at all whatsoever, but I can say that I am less myopic than many in the west who don't bother to investigate, and realize that just like with Christians, Jews, Atheists, or any other group, you've got individual Muslims who vary widely in views, and will use/stretch their religion or ideology to fit them.

I know you folks here like to say that there is "only one Islam", just like the Christians I talk to tell me they are the "only true Christians", but I have met people calling themselves muslims who vary from those who want to hunt down and kill homosexuals to those who are ok with gay marriage, and from those who hate non-muslims to those who have intermarried with them, and from those who won't listen to any sort of music to those who go to dance clubs, and from those who celebrate the deaths of kafirs to those who are pacifists, and from those who wear niqab to those who wear bathing suits in public, and so on and so on.

Seeing a group like Isis and assuming that this is representative of all the billions of muslims on the planet it just ridiculous. But humans are tribal, and we are prone to doing this. The same can be seen in regard to other groups. Just look at how Jews or Black people are depicted in some circles.

I suppose Islam may be a bit of a special case, since Muslims have a notable tendency to prefer other muslims over non-muslims (I see it in pretty much all discussions here from charitable giving to who to have as friends), but people fail to realize that Muslims need only see Isis as not following Islam to get by that issue.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Pygoscelis]

So Ya, I can see how other Muslims would benefit from differentiating from and condemning Isis, but I don't see any requirement or responsibility for them to do so.

PS - Why can't I edit posts? The board just locks up when I try to.

[ardianto]

What is ISIS and the Muslim haters have in common?. Both of them say that ISIS represent the true teaching of Islam.

ISIS claim themselves as the only right Muslims and accuse other Muslims who do not support them as apostates. It can be seen in their statements, although many other Muslims say that what ISIS do are against the teaching of Islam itself. And in another side, there are people outside Islam who try to convince other people that ISIS represent the true teaching of Islam, while other Muslims who do not support ISIS actually are Muslims who have been poisoned by secularism.

Nowadays, the main problem that faced by Muslim world is radicalism. It's very dangerous because it's threaten not only non-Muslims, but also threaten Muslims. Now many Muslims are busy to eradicate radicalism through remind other Muslims that radicalism is not taught by Islam. But unfortunately, there are people outside Islam who still provoke Muslims through saying that Islam teaches hatred. It can make Muslims who still learn about Islam be provoked and turn into radical. Of course it can make the effort of Muslims to save the world from radicalism becoming useless.

[ardianto]

So Ya, I can see how other Muslims would benefit from differentiating from and condemning Isis, but I don't see any requirement or responsibility for them to do so.

If you don't see that, it's because you look at the wrong side, Pygo. :)

You don't know that behind you many Muslims have condemn ISIS and remind the other to not deceived by ISIS. However, they don't do protest on the street like expected by some people in the West.

[Scimitar]

Indeed. Intelligent people will go look into it themselves, such as speaking with some Muslims (if they know any) or coming to places like this one. That's how I wound up here in the first place, following 9/11 in the wake of all the islamophibia it evoked.

I can't say I agree with Islam on much at all whatsoever, but I can say that I am less myopic than many in the west who don't bother to investigate, and realize that just like with Christians, Jews, Atheists, or any other group, you've got individual Muslims who vary widely in views, and will use/stretch their religion or ideology to fit them.

I know you folks here like to say that there is "only one Islam", just like the Christians I talk to tell me they are the "only true Christians", but I have met people calling themselves muslims who vary from those who want to hunt down and kill homosexuals to those who are ok with gay marriage, and from those who hate non-muslims to those who have intermarried with them, and from those who won't listen to any sort of music to those who go to dance clubs, and from those who celebrate the deaths of kafirs to those who are pacifists, and from those who wear niqab to those who wear bathing suits in public, and so on and so on.

Seeing a group like Isis and assuming that this is representative of all the billions of muslims on the planet it just ridiculous. But humans are tribal, and we are prone to doing this. The same can be seen in regard to other groups. Just look at how Jews or Black people are depicted in some circles.

I suppose Islam may be a bit of a special case, since Muslims have a notable tendency to prefer other muslims over non-muslims (I see it in pretty much all discussions here from charitable giving to who to have as friends), but people fail to realize that Muslims need only see Isis as not following Islam to get by that issue.

Bloomin' heck batman, that was good *slaps fist*.

I have to admit, you've managed to sum it up nicely. In all ages, men have abused the scripture to further their own ends...

...and this age we live in today, is no different.

All I can say is, I hope and pray that God have mercy on those who twist the truth, and enlighten them to be better examples of Muslims in this modern age.

We are reflective of those who lead us - problem is, no one is leading us today, no khilafa that is legitimised according to shariah.

So it's a free for all, and that's when the rats crawl out of the woodworks, being a pragmatic bunch, it's the element they thrive in.

Good day to you pygo,

Scimi

EDIT:

So Ya, I can see how other Muslims would benefit from differentiating from and condemning Isis, but I don't see any requirement or responsibility for them to do so.

PS - Why can't I edit posts? The board just locks up when I try to.

try right clicking the edit button and "opening in a new tab" - that works for us all... the forum is still a little buggy buddy

[سيف الله]

I can't say I agree with Islam on much at all whatsoever, but I can say that I am less myopic than many in the west who don't bother to investigate, and realize that just like with Christians, Jews, Atheists, or any other group, you've got individual Muslims who vary widely in views, and will use/stretch their religion or ideology to fit them.

Questionable, after all these years you still dont get the basics of the Islamic faith, continually distorting Islam to fit your secular liberal world view, observe

I know you folks here like to say that there is "only one Islam", just like the Christians I talk to tell me they are the "only true Christians", but I have met people calling themselves muslims who vary from those who want to hunt down and kill homosexuals to those who are ok with gay marriage, and from those who hate non-muslims to those who have intermarried with them, and from those who won't listen to any sort of music to those who go to dance clubs, and from those who celebrate the deaths of kafirs to those who are pacifists, and from those who wear niqab to those who wear bathing suits in public, and so on and so on.

Such drivel.

Gay marriage has no place in Islam (does not make sense).

There are strict guidelines on who Muslims can and cannot marry (for good reason, to maintain the integrity of the faith).

There is debate on the Music question but dance clubs are a no no.

Pacifism (as much as I respect this idea) has no place in Islam.

Bathing suits are the height of immodesty, again unislamic. (duh)

There have always been disagreements and disputes within the faith but there are certain non negotiable's. Your going to have to accept that Islam is not a 'liberal' faith and no amount of mental gymnastics on your part is going to change that. Were not going to end up a happy clappy, meek and mild, wishy washy, believe whatever you like faith. Christians have tried this approach and it hasn't worked out to well for them.

Former archbishop of Canterbury: We are a post-Christian nation

http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/134323244-former-archbishop-canterbury-post-christian-nation.html

If Christianity dies, who benefits?

http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/134319949-christianity-dies-benefits.html?highlight=Christianity+dies

I can't say I agree with Islam on much at all whatsoever.

There would be something wrong if a secular liberal had much in common with Islamic ideals.

[Samiun]

:sl: I still have no idea who's ISIS, who are they? CIA? ??? Allegations being thrown left and right, I'm not even sure if the people defending them or taking a blow at them even know they exist or not and who is their leader. It all seems anonymous and Allah knows best who's playing this game. Here's a great article by Uthman Badar.

Five points on ‪#‎ISIS‬ and developments in ‪#‎Iraq‬

1. Many objectionable actions have been reported as having been carried out by ISIS in recent weeks, such as forcing Christians and others to flee their villages and starve on mountaintops, summary executions, and killing journalists. If true, these actions are wrong and not condoned Islamically.

2. The reality is, however, that mainstream and online media is not a reliable source on these sorts of reports and many false reports are circulating. It is plain that the media is treating ISIS (as with al-Qaeda, Taliban and many others before) as an enemy force (even though in theory they are meant to only be reporting events) and any impartial person will accept that reports about forces you deem belligerent are not objective.

Thus, it should suffice us to clarify that a particular act x is wrong and unIslamic, without us attacking or condemning a particular act x from particular person or group y. The former is a judgment about an ethical question. The latter is that plus a judgment about a matter of fact.

There’s also many wacky conspiracy theories about ISIS being a creation of the US, Israel, Mossad, CIA, Assad, the Free Masons, the Illuminati and Mr. Squiggle the man on the moon. Please respect your own rationality and stop sharing these. It’s stupid and it’s wrong Islamically.

3. One thing these developments do re-iterate, irrespective of what there reality is, is that ISIS is not a state at all, let alone the Khilafah. This is *one* aspect that shows this.

With all the propaganda against them, with all the backlash Muslims are facing around the world because of actions reported about them, with all the further targeting of Muslims around the world being done on pretext of these actions, ISIS leadership is nowhere to be seen in the propaganda war. Where is the Khilafah? Where is his spokesperson? His media people? Why isn’t he coming out to clarify what is true and what is not?

This is not some simple matter. The blowtorch is being applied to Muslims globally and the person who claims to lead them all is silent? He can’t even come out to deny all that is wrongly being ascribed to them? Or if it’s true to provide the Islamic justification?
It’s a really odd thing when something major is being reported and even those who want to give ISIS a fair hearing want to know the reality they have no means to do so. The best you can do is ask some supporters – who have no official standing with the group – who themselves have to rely on people they know, who themselves may or may not know anything of the incident. There’s the odd twitter account whose authenticity as official is not certain, or the odd video that gives part of the picture but that’s it!

Where is the Khilafah’s version of events? Where is its role in the propaganda war and battle for hearts and mind? Silence is not an option in this. The Prophet (saw) was never silent with the like of this. He would engage, respond, negate, and counter the false narrative of the enemy (mostly by offense, not defensively). He ascribed significant importance to public opinion. Recall, as but one example, that one of the reasons he gave for not killing the hypocrites in Madinah in spite of their constantly undermining him was that, “People would say Muhammad kills his companions.”

It’s now a case of individuals and groups having to do what little they can to counter the ‘war on terror’ narrative and demonisation of Islam. The Khilafah should be leading the way in this!

I know that the response of ISIS supporters to this is, essentially, that it is are unable to do this yet. But that is the point. It is unable to do things that are so basic because it does not have even the basic elements of a state (by today’s standards), whether it be sufficient security that allows the leadership to move around normally and carry out the tasks as any other political leadership today or sufficient infrastructure and technological capability to engage in the propaganda war.

4. Some Muslims are going out of their way to condemn ISIS and in very strong language. Frankly, it is difficult to take these people seriously. Most of them are the same people who never spoke a word against far worse crimes committed by western powers or the regimes in the Muslim word, and if they did once in a while it was like a murmur compared to their roar against ISIS now. They’ve finally found a political roar!

Seriously, how does one come out with descriptions like, “lunatics”, “barbaric”, “bloodthirsty”, “deranged”, “savages”, having not once used anything like for those whose violence and crimes outdo anything ISIS has done by incomparable proportions?

How does one come out with concerted social media commentary, blog posts, opinion pieces, media interviews against ISIS having done nothing comparable to this against the US through a decade of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or through years of brutal oppression by the dictators that rule in the Muslim world?
Do you realise that your hyperbole against ISIS only reinforces the ‘war on terror’ narrative, part of which is the idea that the civilized western savior is rescuing the world from the radical Islamist barbarian?

Please, stop playing for the dominant opinion and stop being played. ISIS is not the issue in Syria or Iraq. There are much bigger issues that have been there long before ISIS and continue today. If you can provide direction on these, please do. If not, do us all a favour and keep silent.

And let me be clear – preemptively tackling the strawmen that will be erected by some – that this is not to say “they're bad as well” or to in anyway justify Muslim wrongs on count of western wrongs. Rather, the issue is consistency and basis.

If your basis is that Islam is against oppression and unjust violence and requires us to speak out against the same, than western states are far worse in this respect than any militant group, Muslim or non. Same applies to the regimes in the Muslim world.

Yet we see no concerted effort (as opposed mere footnote acknowledgment) to confront these parties, nor the same strong language (e.g. referring to Obama as a terrorist or the US govt. as a terrorist entity or to his troops as lunatics or savages).
Not only is western violence worse in magnitude and effect but it is also the provocation that creates the conditions which give rise to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. How does that figure into your “we should condemn both equally” excuse?

If the basis is that these groups claim to be Islamic and are tarnishing the image of Islam, hence we need to confront them and push the correct image of Islam, this applies as much to the regimes in the Muslim world, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, and others. There oppression is worse and they even have the rubber-stamp approval of big muftis and scholars. Where is your concerted effort to counter these regimes save the image of Islam?

5. ISIS is the new al-Qaeda. The pretext, the excuse, by which western states seek further intervention in the Muslim world and in Muslim communities locally, through both hard-power and soft-power measures. We need to do our level best to resist this, to speak out with the truth, with a counter-narrative to their lies. We may not be able to stop them, but we cannot in any way facilitate the path for them, whether by reinforcing the narrative on which the policies rest, or by assisting them in their introduction or implementation.

source: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...38728026193251

[daveyats]

have muslims ever entertained the thought that not all media outlets are biased against islam and what they are portraying is the real situation?

have muslims who accuse the non-muslims of islamophobia ever tried to take the perspective of a non-muslim and ask themselves what would their reaction be when they see that almost all terrorist acts are carried out by muslims?

No, not all muslims are terrorists but it so happens that many terrorists groups adhere to an islamic jihadist ideology. The common retort to this is that the US or Israel or whoever are terrorists as well, but please recognize the big difference - only muslim terrorists are carrying out acts of violence in the name of Allah and justifying it with the name of Allah. The problem is not that there are terrorists, the problem is that terrorist are claiming that Islam commands them to be terrorists.

Again, I'm not saying all muslims support terrorism or are violent people themselves. I googled to try to find out what islamic authorities are doing to combat the jihadist ideology - I found none. I can draw a few logical conclusions:

1. No one is really doing anything beyond saying "ISIS does not represent Islam"
2. No one is able to refute the jihadist theology. The jihadist has a very strong case for their violence in Islam.
3. Alternatively, they are able to refute the jihadist theology but don't think its important enough to make their material available online.

and Hulk is right, where are the protests for muslim action against ISIS?

[daveyats]

Facepalm... Ignore that last bit. I thought those words were from hulk until I clicked not the link.

[syed_z]

Greetings ...

The common retort to this is that the US or Israel or whoever are terrorists as well, but please recognize the big difference - only muslim terrorists are carrying out acts of violence in the name of Allah and justifying it with the name of Allah. The problem is not that there are terrorists, the problem is that terrorist are claiming that Islam commands them to be terrorists.

It is incorrect to say only misguided Muslims are carrying acts of Terror in the name of God. Israel believes their right to have the Holy land in the name of God either by hook or crook and Secular West (which claims to have entered Renaissance era by abandoning religion) occupying Muslim lands to facilitate that Biblical 'Holy' Goal of theirs is strangely assisting them, and so all attacks by NATO F-16s and Drones and CIA are indirectly being perpetrated in the name of God.

The issue here is that Muslim Rulers and blocs such as Saudi/Qatar/Kuwait i.e. The Sheikhdoms etc are engaged in proxy wars against Iran and Syria, Hezbollah and these misguided groups are being funded by them who carry out terrorist attacks inside the Muslim world and abroad. US and Israel have funded and supported and even trained such Groups with help of Saudis and Turkey operating inside Syria and Libya and other places. It is a great game and it is not as simple as you think it is!

[daveyats]

I believe its not as simple as it looks but just to clarify - are you saying they were paid to do acts of violence in the name of Islam? or the muslim rulers themselves are the one propagating jihadist ideologies and suppressing voices that go against terrorist teachings?

[syed_z]

I believe its not as simple as it looks but just to clarify - are you saying they were paid to do acts of violence in the name of Islam? or the muslim rulers themselves are the one propagating jihadist ideologies and suppressing voices that go against terrorist teachings?

Money could also be a factor, but the fact is that these groups were created by regional countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar in coordination with US/Israel to overthrow regimes of Gaddafi and Bashar Al Assad. For this the funding, logistics and weapons and even extremist ideology is being used by these same countries by hiring Agent Mullas.

For example the leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi was a prisoner at Camp Bucca, run by US Military in Iraq, from 2004 - 2009 and then came out to become a leader of the rebels whom US and its allies supported against Bashar Al assad to overthrow him.

If your someone who is in the Western Part of the world and only reply on BBC and CNN for the news, then you are mistaken as they would hid the facts which Media Houses like RT.com and Presstv.Ir would inform their viewers, the dirty game that US and its allies are playing in the region.

A good example is that Al Qaeda never existed in Iraq before US invaded it, after their invasion it popped up and started killing Shias and whole country got engulfed in Sectarian Violence which a weak Iraq, benefited Israel just how a weak Syria is benefiting Israel now and a weak Libya. Not ignoring the fact that Majority of Muslims that are Sunni are taught by Takfiri Mullas (who get mostly their funding from Saudi) that Shias are Kafirs (disbelievers) and killing them is Jihad.

[Pygoscelis]

Questionable, after all these years you still dont get the basics of the Islamic faith, continually distorting Islam to fit your secular liberal world view, observe

Reading comprehension fail. I was not defining what Islam is. That isn't for me to do. I merely said that I have met people who call themselves muslims who take each of those positions. Like it or not, there are some fairly liberal people out there who call themselves muslims. You, of course, won't agree that they are, but then they probably won't agree you are. That's how these things tend to work.

[Pygoscelis]

A good example is that Al Qaeda never existed in Iraq before US invaded it, after their invasion it popped up and started killing Shias and whole country got engulfed in Sectarian Violence which a weak Iraq, benefited Israel just how a weak Syria is benefiting Israel now and a weak Libya. Not ignoring the fact that Majority of Muslims that are Sunni are taught by Takfiri Mullas (who get mostly their funding from Saudi) that Shias are Kafirs (disbelievers) and killing them is Jihad.

I was of the impression that sectarian conflict always existed in Iraq, but was subdued by the brutal iron fist of Sadam Hussein. Is that true or is that western propaganda?

[ardianto]

Again, I'm not saying all muslims support terrorism or are violent people themselves. I googled to try to find out what islamic authorities are doing to combat the jihadist ideology - I found none. I can draw a few logical conclusions:

1. No one is really doing anything beyond saying "ISIS does not represent Islam"
2. No one is able to refute the jihadist theology. The jihadist has a very strong case for their violence in Islam.
3. Alternatively, they are able to refute the jihadist theology but don't think its important enough to make their material available online.

ISIS jihadists are known as takfiri, or Muslims who easy to declare kuffar (infidel) toward other Muslims. This attitude that supported by their high skill in mass communication become their power in influence Muslims and recruit new fighters. They send many messages to Muslims world that Muslims are obligated to fight the kuffar (infidel), and if there are Muslims who refuse this call, it's because they already apostate and become allies of kuffar.

It makes the effort to counter ISIS influence is not easy and should be done carefully. If Muslim governments and organisations make a mistake in this effort, it can make the youth who become target of ISIS recruitment believe that Muslims govts and organisations already apostate. And it makes the effort to save the youth from ISIS becoming harder.

So, daveyats, it's not true that Muslims govt and other Muslims don't do anything to counter ISIS. They are in effort, but they must do this effort carefully that make them seem like don't do anything.

[daveyats]

(noted Ardi)
this just came in:

STOCKHOLM (AP) — Norway's prime minister and other politicians have joined Muslim leaders and thousands of other people for a demonstration in Oslo against radical Islamists.

Monday's rally was an initiative by young Norwegian Muslims who wanted to show a united front against Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq and their sympathizers in Norway.
Mehtab Afshar, head of the Islamic Council in Norway, told the crowd: "They stand for terrorism, they stand for terror ... and we condemn that in the strongest terms."
A small radical group in Norway has expressed support for Islamic State militants, angering moderate Muslims in immigrant communities in the country.
According to the Norwegian security service at least 50 people have left Norway to become foreign fighters for militant groups in Syria.

[hedron]

I was raised Catholic and having a Pope is convenient. While he doesn't speak for individual Catholics, he speaks for Catholics as a whole. It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends. I know that I am nobody to tell Muslims what they should or shouldn't do, but it seems that in situations like this it would be convenient to have an Islamic "Pope" to excommunicate those who stray, as it seems is the case with ISIL.

[syed_z]

I was of the impression that sectarian conflict always existed in Iraq, but was subdued by the brutal iron fist of Sadam Hussein. Is that true or is that western propaganda?

Greetings Pygoscelis,

The sectarian violence never existed, rather Saddam's (A Sunni Ruler) armed forces had a large number of Shias serving and they even fought against Iran, a Shia country during the Iran-Iraq 8 year war, so you can imagine how much nationalist all Muslims in Iraq from different ethnic groups were.

Not after US invaded, these Shia mosques then had bombings, Al Qaeda videos started to surface on the Media in and outside of Iraq claiming those attacks and Al Qaeda members inviting the Iraqi Sunnis in those videos to wage 'Jihad' against Shias, whom US installed in Baghdad as they are majority in Iraq (60%), sectarian minded rulers like Al Maliki who started oppressing other groups such as Sunnis, Kurds etc.

[Jedi_Mindset]

Correction, it was the iraq shia government that immediately started to displace sunnis out of baghdad, first ex-army officers of saddam's army were hunted and assasinated.
Neverthless, if we keep pointing fingers at each other these wars wouldnt get solved.

[Muhaba]

IS executes 'dozens' of Syria troops in new atrocity

Islamic State jihadists have executed "dozens" of fleeing Syrian soldiers, a monitor said Thursday, the latest in a string of brutal abuses alarming Western powers who fear a global spread of the terror.

News of the killings comes as US President Barack Obama is reportedly weighing air strikes on IS positions in Syria and coming closer to greenlighting a mission to aid Shiite Turkmen trapped in an Iraqi town by the jihadists.

French President Francois Hollande on Thursday added his voice to the disquiet that has been growing since the jihadists marauded through Iraq and beheaded US journalist James Foley.

The latest killings took place during the night in the northern province of Raqa, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said, adding that the victims were soldiers fleeing towards government-held territory to the west after the jihadists overran their air base at Tabqa.

The jihadists boasted on Twitter that they had killed 200 defeated troops and posted video of what they said was the garrison in headlong flight.

"Dozens of Syrian soldiers captured while fleeing... after the IS overran Tabqa airbase were executed by the jihadists during the night," said Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The jihadists seized the airport on Sunday after weeks of bitter fighting with loyalist forces, cementing their control over Raqa province, capital of their self-declared Islamic "caliphate".

Abdel Rahman said the defeated garrison comprised 1,400 soldiers, 200 of whom were killed and 700 of whom managed to escape.

The other 500 remain on the run. Dozens were captured on Wednesday night as they attempted to cross the desert to government-held territory in the Orontes Valley to the west.

https://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/ex...125414119.html

Syrian troops are war criminals who have collectively killed, tortured, raped, bombed, burnt, and dismembered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians as well as caused millions to become refugees and caused millions to go into starvation and malnutrition. Syrian people will be happy if someone comes to their rescue and saves them from these horrible war criminals. While I don't agree with the extremist things that ISIL is being accused of, I also don't believe the media 100% and can't say that ISIL is truly the bad guy and doing all the bad things it is being accused of. What is life like in the areas controlled by ISIL? Is there peace there? Are innocent people in constant fear like under Syrian regime and Iraqi regime (bomb blasts going off anywhere, people being kidnapped and murdered, etc.) or is it safe to go about doing one's business? It's true that in any revolution, there will be some insecurity but things like this should let one know whether ISIL is truly committing atrocities or is it trying to save the innocent people from atrocities being committed by the likes of Bashar Al Assad's army.

[Jedi_Mindset]

There is so much deception out here...i rather stay away from politics.
Btw, if one caliphate is to be declared the ummah needs to be consulted right? if so, then this is the first point that this caliphate is invalid.

But on the other hand, i know that the hanbali fiqh allows the muslims to estabilish a caliphate with force (this is what ISIS is doing now).

I need to be more aware of this, and maybe u can answer me bro dreamin:

Who funds ISIS?
What is its goals?
If the lies about ISIS are untrue, where are the rebuttals?

[Pygoscelis]

Isis shares a name with a pagan Egyptian God. I'd think Allah would not approve.

When Isis is no more, will we call them Waswas?

[ardianto]

Isis shares a name with a pagan Egyptian God. I'd think Allah would not approve.

When Isis is no more, will we call them Waswas?

Actually ISIS was not the original name which in Arabic. In the beginning they just operated in Iraq. Later they cross the border to Syria with purpose to include Syria in their Islamic state. This was the time when they began to called ISIS or Islamic State Iraqi Sham (Syria) which was translation of their group name in Arabic.

But now they have changed their name into just Daulah Islamiyah (Islamic State) after they proclaimed their leader as the leader (caliph) of the whole Muslims in the world which all Muslims are obligated to pledge allegiance to him. It caused controversy because actually they don't have a right to order Muslims to obey their caliph. But they respond other Muslims protest with statement that, any Muslim who does not pledge allegiance to their caliph is apostate (murtadin).

Do you know Pygo, they challenge Muslims with "If you do not accept Ibrahim as caliph, then you are obligated to behead him". I found this statement in their supporter website which I often observe. Clearly, they declare war to Muslims who do not support them.

About their brutality which they kill not only non-Muslims but also Muslims, they respond with "It's justified and does not make Ibrahim position as caliph becomes illegitimate". They also say that what the caliph Yazid had done with ordered his men to kill Husein (grandson of prophet Muhammad) did not make Yazid position as caliph became illegitimate.

[daveyats]

Syrian troops are war criminals who have collectively killed, tortured, raped, bombed, burnt, and dismembered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians as well as caused millions to become refugees and caused millions to go into starvation and malnutrition. Syrian people will be happy if someone comes to their rescue and saves them from these horrible war criminals. While I don't agree with the extremist things that ISIL is being accused of, I also don't believe the media 100% and can't say that ISIL is truly the bad guy and doing all the bad things it is being accused of. What is life like in the areas controlled by ISIL? Is there peace there? Are innocent people in constant fear like under Syrian regime and Iraqi regime (bomb blasts going off anywhere, people being kidnapped and murdered, etc.) or is it safe to go about doing one's business? It's true that in any revolution, there will be some insecurity but things like this should let one know whether ISIL is truly committing atrocities or is it trying to save the innocent people from atrocities being committed by the likes of Bashar Al Assad's army.

read the news my friend. Mosul has been emptied of christians and other minority sects. if ISIS is so kind and peaceful why are people risking their lives to escape through mountains and other hazardous conditions. its on al jezreel news so no way you can accuse that media outlet of any bias against muslims

[ardianto]

If Crusaders came to my city and told me that I should convert to Christianity or die, would I convert to Christianity?. I prefer to die or escape before they arrest me. And if they gave me second choice that I still could practice my Islamic belief and even they would protect me if I pay a tax that not much and only if I have sufficient income, would I accept this offer?.

It's depend on those Crusaders reputation. If they had reputation as fighter who treat those who surrender respectfully, I would choose to surrender and pay tax. But if those Crusaders had reputation as fighters who behead the defeated enemies, how could I trust them?.

This is why Christians and Yezidis prefer to risk their life with escape to mountain than surrender and pay jizyah which actually only in small amount.

read the news my friend. Mosul has been emptied of christians and other minority sects. if ISIS is so kind and peaceful why are people risking their lives to escape through mountains and other hazardous conditions. its on al jezreel news so no way you can accuse that media outlet of any bias against muslims

ISIS treat Sunni Muslims who live in their area very well and respectfully. But it cause bias that ISIS created to defend Sunni. It's not true, they protect Sunni only if these Sunni pledge allegiance to 'caliph' Ibrahim (abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi). ISIS have killed many Sunni who refuse to accept Ibrahim as their caliph.

Another bias is there are media that accuse ISIS as perpetrator for action that done by other group. Like in case which Fijian troop from UN peace keeping force in Golan detained. There are few medias that accuse ISIS as perpetrator although the perpetrator is Jabah Nushra (JN), a Sunni militia group that in war against ISIS and Bashar Al-Asad force at once. ISIS fight JN because JN refuse to pledge allegiance to Ibrahim, although JN are Sunni and even affiliate of Al-Qaeda.

[daveyats]

If Crusaders came to my city and told me that I should convert to Christianity or die, would I convert to Christianity?. I prefer to die or escape before they arrest me. And if they gave me second choice that I still could practice my Islamic belief and even they would protect me if I pay a tax that not much and only if I have sufficient income, would I accept this offer?.

It's depend on those Crusaders reputation. If they had reputation as fighter who treat those who surrender respectfully, I would choose to surrender and pay tax. But if those Crusaders had reputation as fighters who behead the defeated enemies, how could I trust them?.

This is why Christians and Yezidis prefer to risk their life with escape to mountain than surrender and pay jizyah which actually only in small amount.


ISIS treat Sunni Muslims who live in their area very well and respectfully. But it cause bias that ISIS created to defend Sunni. It's not true, they protect Sunni only if these Sunni pledge allegiance to 'caliph' Ibrahim (abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi). ISIS have killed many Sunni who refuse to accept Ibrahim as their caliph.

Another bias is there are media that accuse ISIS as perpetrator for action that done by other group. Like in case which Fijian troop from UN peace keeping force in Golan detained. There are few medias that accuse ISIS as perpetrator although the perpetrator is Jabah Nushra (JN), a Sunni militia group that in war against ISIS and Bashar Al-Asad force at once. ISIS fight JN because JN refuse to pledge allegiance to Ibrahim, although JN are Sunni and even affiliate of Al-Qaeda.

Ardi all i can say is, christians are being killed and forced out of iraq. the jizya is not a small amount and there are reports that christian properties are forcibly confiscated by ISIS. you don't have to believe me. the information is all on the internet. I believe most of these reports are true.

[cogito ergo sum]

I was raised Catholic and having a Pope is convenient. While he doesn't speak for individual Catholics, he speaks for Catholics as a whole. It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends. I know that I am nobody to tell Muslims what they should or shouldn't do, but it seems that in situations like this it would be convenient to have an Islamic "Pope" to excommunicate those who stray, as it seems is the case with ISIL.

The thing is, the global Muslim community is a mess. Bunch of corrupt rulers, various dictators and oligarchs who are loyal only to their interests, making Islamic scholars silent and invisible.


(I am a Muslim)...:phew

[ardianto]

Ardi all i can say is, christians are being killed and forced out of iraq. the jizya is not a small amount and there are reports that christian properties are forcibly confiscated by ISIS. you don't have to believe me. the information is all on the internet. I believe most of these reports are true.

There's no minimum or maximum amount of jizya, and actually it should not burdensome, and in amount that not different than zakat to make a fairness between non-Muslims and Muslims. But if ISIS demanding high amount, I am not surprised. They commit many action that against Islamic teaching itself like execute prisoners.

I know that Christians are being killed and forced out from their cities and villages. Yes, Christian and other minority sects forced out from Mosul too. Now Mosul is under ISIS. I think you know that Al-Baghdadi appeared in a Sunni mosque in Mosul. But do you know what happened to the previous mosque imam?. He was executed because refuse to pledge allegiance to Al-Baghdadi. ISIS kill not only non-Muslims and Shia Muslims, but also Sunni Muslims who against them.

I follow news from Iraq and Syria from various sources. And yes, I found many bias which one source and another source can contradict each other.

In Indonesia ISIS issue has become serious issue. Now ministry of religion and Muslims scholars are trying to prevent people influenced by ISIS propaganda. In few place Muslims people securing mosques that identified as place for spreading ISIS propaganda. But, do people in the West know it?.

[Frazer]

I don't totally disagree with the original post but I thought it was worth pointing out that the original post mentions a number of times the racism aimed at Muslims receive, even stating that is 'by far the most extensive level of racism in Europe'.

It's worth pointing out that Islam/Muslim by definition is not a race, it's a religion, religion and race are two different things.
I understand that many Muslims may see themselves as a collective people but it is not a race.
You can choose to become a Muslim and choose to leave, you can't choose to become a different race.
Many Muslims are victimised based on their religion and/or race but the two are not to be confused.

[Pygoscelis]

I can only imagine what it would be like to try to survive as an atheist in Isis controlled territory. If they slaughter not only Christians, but the "wrong" sort of Muslims, imagine if you told them you didn't believe any gods exist.

[h-n]

Indeed. Intelligent people will go look into it themselves, such as speaking with some Muslims (if they know any) or coming to places like this one. That's how I wound up here in the first place, following 9/11 in the wake of all the islamophibia it evoked.

I can't say I agree with Islam on much at all whatsoever, but I can say that I am less myopic than many in the west who don't bother to investigate, and realize that just like with Christians, Jews, Atheists, or any other group, you've got individual Muslims who vary widely in views, and will use/stretch their religion or ideology to fit them.

I know you folks here like to say that there is "only one Islam", just like the Christians I talk to tell me they are the "only true Christians", but I have met people calling themselves muslims who vary from those who want to hunt down and kill homosexuals to those who are ok with gay marriage, and from those who hate non-muslims to those who have intermarried with them, and from those who won't listen to any sort of music to those who go to dance clubs, and from those who celebrate the deaths of kafirs to those who are pacifists, and from those who wear niqab to those who wear bathing suits in public, and so on and so on.

Seeing a group like Isis and assuming that this is representative of all the billions of muslims on the planet it just ridiculous. But humans are tribal, and we are prone to doing this. The same can be seen in regard to other groups. Just look at how Jews or Black people are depicted in some circles.

I suppose Islam may be a bit of a special case, since Muslims have a notable tendency to prefer other muslims over non-muslims (I see it in pretty much all discussions here from charitable giving to who to have as friends), but people fail to realize that Muslims need only see Isis as not following Islam to get by that issue.

What is ridiculous here on this forum, is that your you think your going to teach people how to think, and that from you Muslims don't seem to understand the basic understandings of how human beings behave.


You complain that Muslims don't care, when ie Muslim men spend time taking care of their parents more, looking after their sisters, and other extended families. Not only that buy by also looking after neighbours who are non-Muslim. If your society is so intelligent, then why does it not take care of the elderly more???

So as above the idea that your going to talk to Muslims as if they know nothing of the ways of people is pathetic.

You and no one else, are more intelligent then;-

Prophet Jesus peace be upon him,
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him,
Prophet Moses peace be upon him,
Prophet Job peace be upon him,
Prophet Noah peace be upon him.

You listen to what you wish to follow of your own desires for the life of this world, and even go as so far to quote being "liberal" as if its an intelligent thing to do.

A recent survey was taken in the UK, it stated that atheist give less to charity then anyone else.
You use pathetic examples which are so far apart, ie to accept homosexuality or not.

God punishes people in the fire, as they refused to repent, and rejected the truth-not because they didn't know. For example when the Prophets ie like Prophet Noah peace be upon him came and told people to repent, he didn't say the truth was far from them to understand, it was something beyond them. The Prophets didn't set out tables and chairs and have seminars, they told people to repent on as soon as they were giving the message of God. I will wait and see you on the Day of Judgement, and it is no hard thing for God to make you stand with homosexuals etc.

Allah Akbar!

[h-n]

Ardi all i can say is, christians are being killed and forced out of iraq. the jizya is not a small amount and there are reports that christian properties are forcibly confiscated by ISIS. you don't have to believe me. the information is all on the internet. I believe most of these reports are true.

Do you think that non-Muslims are going to benefit for free when Muslims, God's servants fight and when they do, they protect the non-Muslims, as no one is going to think of attacking the Christians etc when they go to a Muslim majority land. It is not the money that was wanted, obviously why bother when they are only a minority? It is an obvious thing that a believer, a servant of God does not fight and willing to die to benefit idol worshippers.

Of course we wouldn't expect the Christians to understand, as they do not care about following religion, but their own wants, this is why its not surprising that when Christians question Muslims, they ask questions befitting an atheists. Do you think an idol worshipper should have the support of God and all his angels?? It is no different to people.

On another note, you say its all over the internet??? Even I couldn't say what is happening, but we do know from their own admission that the US for example have supported the rebels in Syria, its a complete mess what is going on, I think the only way to know for sure is if the masses went over there instead of relying on media.

[h-n]

What you need to worry about is not what is happening in another country-where even we majority Muslims don't get involved in, and carry on our day to day activities. But that when you reject God, there is everlasting punishment in the next world for anyone who rejects God.

[Pygoscelis]

That is one hefty strawman there h-n. You seem to see me typing a lot of things I didn't know I typed. And you seem to have a lot of ire. All I can really do is smile and pat you on the head. Have a great night.

[Futuwwa]

Again, I'm not saying all muslims support terrorism or are violent people themselves. I googled to try to find out what islamic authorities are doing to combat the jihadist ideology - I found none. I can draw a few logical conclusions:

1. No one is really doing anything beyond saying "ISIS does not represent Islam"
2. No one is able to refute the jihadist theology. The jihadist has a very strong case for their violence in Islam.
3. Alternatively, they are able to refute the jihadist theology but don't think its important enough to make their material available online.

And why should they have to publicly refute ISIS's claim that their actions are righteous? Does ISIS have the benefit of assumption and anyone who disagrees with them the burden of proof? Why does any of it matter to you, or any other non-Muslim. If you don't think Islam is the true religion in the first place, there is no such thing as "true authentic" Islam in the first place, it is for all purposes that actually matter exactly what Muslims make of it.

When was the last time a Christian leader made that kind of academical, theological refutation of abortion clinic bombing, similar to what you're demanding from Muslims?

Also, have you actually tried to search for any material online by any prominent Islamic clerics or clerical institutions of the kind that you are demanding, or are you just assuming it doesn't exist because you personally haven't heard about it? Just curious.

This is why it's so exasperating to try to live up to the incessant, never-ending demands that we "condemn the extremists". When we do (which we pretty much do all the time), those who do the demand either pretend we don't exist, don't bother to find out whether we do, or keep constantly moving the goalposts.

[Taha110]

:sl:

I shouldn't have to justify my faith by constantly condemning everything bad done in it's glorious name. How often do you see Christians being super outspoken about how the KKK, Westboro Baptist Church, Timothy McVeigh, etc don't represent authentic Christianity? Hardly ever. Does that mean that those groups/people represent Christianity? Not at all. It is just not an absolute necessity for somebody to go out of their way to condemn others.

That being said, I do wholeheartedly and publicly condemn ISIS. I do this, not out of obligation, but because I want to. I want people to realize that ISIS does not represent Muslims or the interests of Muslims.

I was really disturbed when Anjem Choudary went on Fox News and defended ISIS by saying that they were doing everything for the sake of Muslims. Nonsense. The majority of the victims of ISIS are Muslims.

I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

:wa:

[daveyats]

:sl:

I shouldn't have to justify my faith by constantly condemning everything bad done in it's glorious name. How often do you see Christians being super outspoken about how the KKK, Westboro Baptist Church, Timothy McVeigh, etc don't represent authentic Christianity? Hardly ever. Does that mean that those groups/people represent Christianity? Not at all. It is just not an absolute necessity for somebody to go out of their way to condemn others.

That being said, I do wholeheartedly and publicly condemn ISIS. I do this, not out of obligation, but because I want to. I want people to realize that ISIS does not represent Muslims or the interests of Muslims.

I was really disturbed when Anjem Choudary went on Fox News and defended ISIS by saying that they were doing everything for the sake of Muslims. Nonsense. The majority of the victims of ISIS are Muslims.

I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

:wa:

exactly my point, you wont merely feel obligated to, you should WANT to condemn them because they are supposedly misrepresenting islam.
the thing about KKK, westboro and timothy veigh... these are truly the minority but all over the world, there are groups of terrorists who claim to be carrying out acts of violence in the name of Islam. their teachings have proliferated in many places. shouldn't someone in authority be concerned enough to counter the teachings of these terrorists?

i learnt something on this forum called a "fatwa". can a fatwa be issued to stop muslims from joining ISIL?

[Pygoscelis]

i learnt something on this forum called a "fatwa". can a fatwa be issued to stop muslims from joining ISIL?

A simple Google of " fatwa isis" shows that this was already happening when they still called themselves that.

[daveyats]

A simple Google of " fatwa isis" shows that this was already happening when they still called themselves that.

splendid

[.muslim girl.]

i'm an arab , and muslim
but i hate ISIS so much !
cause this is not islam
they killed muslims and christians in syria & iraq
so yeah they are terrorists
they loves bomb and rockets
that's why i hate them

[saif-uddin]

I was raised Catholic and having a Pope is convenient. While he doesn't speak for individual Catholics, he speaks for Catholics as a whole. It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends. I know that I am nobody to tell Muslims what they should or shouldn't do, but it seems that in situations like this it would be convenient to have an Islamic "Pope" to excommunicate those who stray, as it seems is the case with ISIL.

We have a Concept of a Khalifa in Islam, who would rule the Muslimeen,

unfortunately the disease of Nationalism has divided every nation,

as for the Pope, he is a corrupt fellow, and Christians do not unanimously owe allegiance to him or agree with him anyway,

regards

[InToTheRain]

I was raised Catholic and having a Pope is convenient. While he doesn't speak for individual Catholics, he speaks for Catholics as a whole. It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends. I know that I am nobody to tell Muslims what they should or shouldn't do, but it seems that in situations like this it would be convenient to have an Islamic "Pope" to excommunicate those who stray, as it seems is the case with ISIL.

Thats a good point Hedron. The Scholars have already issues fatwas against ISIS:
​British Muslim leaders issue fatwa against ISIS — RT UK

Fatwa Against ISIS by the Syrian Islamic Council | Free Halab

However it's not going to stop ISIS. Basically ISIS are to Muslim what LRA is to Christians. However ISIS get more coverage because it's Mid East and there is a lot of political interest in those lands.

[Snow]

There are some news coming out that IS is banning teaching math.
If the news are true, how stupid is that?
Throughout history muslims have been very active in math, and all kinds of science.

Really odd.

[ardianto]

There are some news coming out that IS is banning teaching math.
If the news are true, how stupid is that?
Throughout history muslims have been very active in math, and all kinds of science.

Really odd.

From what I know IS doesn't ban math, but they ban teaching art and music in school, also ban school teaches history of Iraq and Syria.

[Pygoscelis]

There are some news coming out that IS is banning teaching math.
If the news are true, how stupid is that?
Throughout history muslims have been very active in math, and all kinds of science.

Really odd.

In the golden era of Islam (for lack of a better term) the major centres of learning were pretty much all in Islamic lands, as the Christian lands were stuck in the Dark Ages and burning witches at the stake. Tons of progress in math and science was made in Islamic lands back then. Something changed after that. I am curious what the Muslims here would say that was.

[BilalKid]

I hear they have quran institutions too isnt that a positive? ^o) What makes them bad people

[InToTheRain]

I hear they have quran institutions too isnt that a positive? ^o) What makes them bad people

:sl:

If you read the details of the link I provided above you will see a detailed response of why they are deviants with many reasons given. I will give link below as well for your convenience :)

Fatwa Against ISIS by the Syrian Islamic Council | Free Halab

[Pygoscelis]

I hear they have quran institutions too isnt that a positive? ^o) What makes them bad people

They are killing lots of people and mounting their severed heads on sticks, just because they don't worship the same. Do you really need a Muslim scholar to tell you they are bad guys?

[Abz2000]

I was raised Catholic and having a Pope is convenient. While he doesn't speak for individual Catholics, he speaks for Catholics as a whole. It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends. I know that I am nobody to tell Muslims what they should or shouldn't do, but it seems that in situations like this it would be convenient to have an Islamic "Pope" to excommunicate those who stray, as it seems is the case with ISIL.

Lol the pope is a liar who deceives people about God - or he's just senile and forgot there's such a thing as the bible (unlikely).

Pope Francis spoke out Sunday*.......

...."All those forms which present a distorted use of religion, must be firmly refuted as false since they are unworthy of God or humanity," he said. "No one must use the name of God to commit violence. To kill in the name of God is a grave sacrilege. To discriminate in the name of God is inhuman."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/09/21/pope-denounces-perversion-of-religion-for-violence/16001425/

The day before amerikka invaded syria coincidental timing no doubt (irony).

Maybe he forgets how Moses pbuh is reported to have stoned a man to death for collecting food on the sabbath - and all those other wars conducted by Prophets in God's way mentioned over and over in the bible.

Jonah (Yūnus):10: 17 -
And Who does greater wrong than he who invents a lie concerning Allah and denies His Signs/Verses? Verily the criminals never are successful.

People used to say "u got more chance of getting a pound of clap off of the pope than achieving such and such".
Well I tell you: You got more chance of getting a pound of clap off of him than an honest religious verdict.
What a brazen, bald faced liar crusader puppet!!!

If he speaks for Catholics as a whole, No wonder he has you deluded into thinking it's ok to discriminate based on colonial borders (racism/nationalism based laws rather than God's laws), that three "gods" =1, that graven images should be bowed down to and that unitarians and Aryans were rightly suppressed (and slaughtered) by his predecessors for believing that there's only One God and that Jesus of Nazareth was a man approved of God.

The Pilgrimage (Al-Ĥaj)22:3 -4

Among mankind is he who disputeth concerning Allah without knowledge, and followeth each froward devil;

For him it is decreed that whoso takes him for friend, he verily will mislead him and will guide him to the punishment of the Flame.

The Quran of course only supports the Nazarenes (Nasarah) and condemns the 3=1 falsehood.

Bible:
5But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,*6And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,

.... 13But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men:
for ye neither go in*yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.*
14Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater ****ation.

Regarding the Christian tribe of Banu Taghlib, Ali, Radi-May God be pleased with him, ruled the following:
“Hafiz ibn Jawzi (RA) has narrated with his Sanad (chain of narrators) from Ali, Radi-Allahu anhu,
'Do not consume the slaughter of the Christians of Banu Taghlib since they have not held to any more of Christianity than their drinking of wine.'”
(Ibid pg.460 - from Tafseer Mazhari)

He (mr pontiff) must've been at the bottle heavily to have said that religion doesn't condone violence- especially since he was speaking while guarded by gun toting thugs, of course they can't have been loaded with slugs....(irony). And doesn't the vatican have it's own army trained in combat???


His speech came amid tightened security for the trip........lol

It seems Islam is lacking in such a figure. The Pope has the power to excommunicate those who do not follow Church doctrine, which means they are condemned to hell if they do not make amends.

Yup it lacks liars like the pope, we have someone called Caliph, who has the power to excommunicate (pronounce takfeer on) deviants/breakaway factions who don't follow the laws of the Islamic State, which keeps asking them to REPENT - for the Kingdom and Rule of God IS HERE!
Seems the crusader pope and his athiest friends don't like the Caliph for pronouncing takfeer on rebels in the Kingdom of God and are dismayed at the fact that he flogs and stones adulterers and punishes thieves and sodomites.

[Abz2000]

:sl:

If you read the details of the link I provided above you will see a detailed response of why they are deviants with many reasons given. I will give link below as well for your convenience :)

Fatwa Against ISIS by the Syrian Islamic Council | Free Halab

Lol with the "syrian islamic council" i'm sure they get good seats in the alawite councils too.
You can get "islamic councils" a penny for a dozen to support usury, war against Islam and even gay marriage.
The fact that they don't get harassed by the satanists is evidence of their complacency.

There was a blessed man who once singled out a polythiest who had blasphemed God and harmed His Messenger: qaddim hu yaa 'aasim wa-dhrib 'unuqah.
Bring him forward O 'Aasim and strike his neck
He wasn't the Gandhi colonialist agent type.
His name was Muhammad pbuh.

The fact that they make amerikkka and it's traitorous allies desperate is a good indication of their steadfastness since the way of God and the way of Satan always clash.
But of course, God knows best.

[introspective]

Double standards: Obama says Muslims bear responsibility to counter radical Islam (so are Jews responsible for Israeli violence?) – Mondoweiss

What about the social elites and their thoughts of radical capitalism or psychopathic entrepreneurship?

[Abz2000]

Double standards: Obama says Muslims bear responsibility to counter radical Islam (so are Jews responsible for Israeli violence?) – Mondoweiss

What about the social elites and their thoughts of radical capitalism or psychopathic entrepreneurship?

We need EXTREMELY GOOD Muslims to counter those watered down "moderates" that are as worthless as propped up pieces of hollow timber.
Muslims who become furious when the truth is violated, who know the codes of conduct of war and retaliation in Islamic Shariah and are ready to respond when necessary.
Who are sympathetic towards believers in Allah
And don't find every possible excuse against the people who establish Islamic Shariah despite seeing and remaining complacent at the debauchery and sins of the enemies of Allah to which they cling so tightly.

[InToTheRain]

Lol with the "syrian islamic council" i'm sure they get good seats in the alawite councils too.
You can get "islamic councils" a penny for a dozen to support usury, war against Islam and even gay marriage.
The fact that they don't get harassed by the satanists is evidence of their complacency.

:salam: Bro,

You have seen my link on a previous thread where the Imam of AL-Aqsa Masjid condemns ISIS. Will you too label him with the same brush you just did to the Syrian council? I believe I also provided a link where Sunni Ulema of Lebanon condemned ISIS and it mentions in there their unjust killing of Muslims and Non-Muslims; whats your view on this?

You would be wrong to assume I support the corrupt leaders of America; UK; Israil/zionists etc because I condemn ISIS; I do this in light of the evidence provided to me. Please do feel free to go over the Syrian councils Fatwa and tell us how that Fatwa is wrong or incorrectly applied in this case. I believe this would be more constructive.

The fact that they make amerikkka and it's traitorous allies desperate is a good indication of their steadfastness since the way of God and the way of Satan always clash.
But of course, God knows best.

Interesting... Please do tell me who the army of God was and the army of Satan in the following wars:

1) When Aus And Khazraj fought before the arrival of Mohammad(SAW) in Madina.
2) When the Romans and Persians fought during the persecution phase of Mohammad(SAW) in Mecca and the Muslims wanted the Romans to Win.
3) When Ali(RA)'s army fought the army of Muaiyah(RA) during the battle of Camel

:)

[Abz2000]

My dear sister and everyone else, Wa'alaikumussalaam wr wb.

I don't believe i am able to make it black and white since there are many layers of deception and hidden motives in the projected opinions we see today. I'll try to explain it this way:

Every time a Prophet or group has tried to establish Allah's law, the forces of evil have made common cause to attack it. Studying the life of Prophet Jesus pbuh should give one an idea of the level of co-operation the Roman occupiers of Quds were able to achieve with the Chief Priest, scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem - who had usurped the positions of the ultimate Muslim authority at the time. They would follow and hound him and find every excuse to accuse him of every evil in Jewish Law and cause of woe on the people - it is also recorded that (despite the softie image portrayed by popes and governments) Jesus pbuh hung around with "zealots" (militant revolutionaries) despite the political scrutiny and close observation he was subjected to and references have also been made to a particularly vicious type of militant company - the sicarii (assassin types) who spared no efforts to brutalize Roman colonialist soldiery and Jewish traitor agents.


The Muslims with the Prophet Muhammad pbuh were also put in the worst light despite having been non-militant for the first 13 years of the call. They did however commit acts considered crimes in Islam and arab nationalism afterwards which were condemned as terrorism of the worst order by those commiting crimes with no end. One example is the attack on Quraishi caravans in the sacred months. After all the hulabaloo God revealed the verses : they ask you about the sacred months, fighting therein.... Ila aakhiril ayah. The Prophet pbuh himself is reported to have taken his cut from the booty afterwards. If i wanted to, i myself could bring forth instances to unfairly claim that the Prophet pbuh himself was unislamic - that is - out of context.

This doesn't prove anything or absolve anyone, it is however something to keep in mind.

What is more pin-pointable is the fact that Islamic State enemies have on record carried out false flag attacks and blamed them on osama, al qaeda, saddam etc and are also guilty of carrying out covert operations to which no reference has been made.

With I.S and A.Q however, they are quick and eager to accept responsibility for their operations and have even given out compensation in certain cases despite being underground organizations. It is an indication of fidelity and sincerity. I.S also release annual "accounts" of operations with estimated body counts so as to leave no confusion.

Thirdly, i noticed al maqdisi, mufti of jordan etc were quick to condemn the Caliphate at instance one, on the grounds of lack of consultation and wider consensus. This despite the fact that even milder organizations are criminalized and sought out for attempting to establish a united ummah state and the impracticality of an ummah vote. Plus the fact that the first four Caliphs of Islam were all elected to position using different methods according to circumstances.

The main aim was to get a practical consensus from the active members within the establishment and demand allegiance from all other groups and citizens, with the case of abu bakr assiddeeq (ra) he had to take the sword against so called Muslims who had taken shahadah, , fought jihad, prayed and fasted but refused to submit to the State and pay zakat. He pronounced takfir on them and slew many - even 'Umar (ra) questioned his stance.

The baya' to the Prophet pbuh himself was conducted in secret and then implemented in stages.

And finally, my questioning of the motives of maqdisi etc were confirmed when he demanded that I.S hand over the hostage which western media claimed was just a food deliverer and others who were claimed to be reporters, simply based on western kafir lying government claims.

The Islamic way of doing such would have been to ask them to release them on the condition that media claims were true, since it's unlawful to kill someobe who's handing out food. However it was an accusatory unconditional demand with no basis.

After looking into the history of one of the reporters, i found that Israeli spies had worked around the clock to hide any reference to his zionist background and suspicious motives.

That gave me an indication that mr al maqdisi (who is praised by the jordanian government) is engaged in a warped propaganda battle and not a sincere Islamic quest to make the Word of God highest.

And Allah knows best.

Deconstruct lies, reconstruct Decency

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: STEVEN SOTLOFF’S LINKS TO MOSSAD & CIA

Sotloff’s close links to Israeli counter-intelligence, emergence from same stable as Foley, and equally amazing ability to be ‘on the spot’ to cover Black Arts events in Middle East

That Steven Sotloff is Jewish isn’t exactly a secret. But what many media titles this morning have glossed over is that he studied at Tel Aviv’s Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya (IDC) before beginning his career. Located on the same campus at the core of of IDCs philosophy is the International Institute for Counter Terrorism. Its links to Mossad are well known. The Slog tries to join up some dots.

Just because I.S don't fear the blame of blamers and don't always bend over backwards responding to every accusation to explain themselves, it doesn't mean we shouldn't do our own research despite a 1984 style memory hole in action - they turned him into an "unperson"....

Michael Bassin, 28, looking at Twitter posts from the extremist group ISIS. Bassin monitored the posts as part of a volunteer effort to ensure there were no mentions online of captured American journalist Steven Sotloff's Jewish and Israeli identity.

.When the Islamist militia ISIS posted a video last month threatening to kill captive American journalist Steven Sotloff, the situation was dire enough. But there was one secret that could potentially have made things even worse: Sotloff was Jewish and a dual citizen of Israel and the US.

To hide that fact from his ISIS captors, who call themselves the Islamic State, a group of Sotloff's friends and volunteers worked around the clock to keep the captors from discovering his secret.
Sotloff captivity itself was also largely a secret. ISIS held Sotloff for a year, but even many of his friends didn’t know he'd been abducted.*But then, the extremist group posted a video of journalist James Foley’s beheading, during which Sotloff appeared. They threatened to kill him next.

.His friend, Gregg Roman, called Sotloff’s father to offer any assistance.*“He said, 'Do what you can do to help our son,'” says Roman, who went to college in Israel with Sotloff. “I said, 'I’m going to make sure that no harm comes to Steven because of his identity.'” * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **Roman, who directs the Jewish Community Relations Council in Pittsburgh, assembled a group of friends and various web experts for one mission: To clean the Internet of*any mention that Sotloff was Jewish*or Israeli.

One man recruited for the task was Michael Bassin, an American Jew based in Tel Aviv who travels throughout the Arab Middle East as a trade consultant.“In the Arab world, they’ve been taught very little about what Jewish people are actually like,” Bassin says. “They are taught they are sinister, they have really poor intentions. Being a Jewish person and being a nice guy do not go hand in hand.
So if they found out he was Jewish and Israeli, that means he was a spy and it would have expedited his murder. That was the belief.”Bassin monitored mostly Arabic media and ISIS' Twitter posts. He didn’t find anything that revealed Sotloff’s secret, but he heard a journalist in Israel was writing a story on Sotloff’s Israeli identity. Bassin pushed the journalist to hold the story.

.Roman says volunteers worked in shifts to monitor the Internet around the clock, and his group swiftly contacted American media outlets to remove any reference to Sotloff’s Jewish background.That included one piece in The New York Times, which was*swiftly edited to remove mention of Sotloff's Jewish background. “The New York Times article, with the reference, was removed in 27 minutes,” Roman says.

.The effort also went far beyond media accounts. The volunteer group asked friends of Sotloff to remove tags of him in Facebook photos, and it successfully petitioned Facebook to remove Sotloff’s profile, Roman said. It persuaded a rabbi in Los Angeles to remove a sermon online about Sotloff’s Jewish background, and even contacted members of the synagogue to ask them to keep quiet.

One volunteer even went to Sotloff’s old college campus in Israel and removed a graduation photo of him from the wall, Roman said.

.All in all, Roman says, there were some 4,000 online mentions of Sotloff’s Jewish and Israeli identity the group worked to remove.“Maybe we overreacted in some cases,” Roman says. “But whatever it was that we did, it worked.”A security expert familiar with the Sotloff case says he believes*the volunteers had good intentions, but that their efforts were pointless.*ISIS held Sotloff for a year, he says, and his captors could have seen whatever was online about Sotloff during that time. The expert is speaking on condition of anonymity because he is not permitted to discuss the matter publically.Bassin, the volunteer in Israel, says the fact that Sotloff was kept alive for a year gave his fellow volunteers the feeling that they could still do something even after his captivity was made public.Sotloff’s captors may not have known about his Jewish and Israeli identity.*An Israeli news channel aired a taped conversation with a man it identified as a recently released French captive held along with Sotloff. The man said Sotloff’s Jewish identity was secret during their time in captivity together.And on Sept. 2, when ISIS released a video of Sotloff's beheading, his executioner made clear that his death was in response to US strikes on Islamic State militants — there was no mention of Sotloff's religion or Israeli citizenship.In the end, Bassin believes his group spared Sotloff from being killed for his religion.“Steven was brutally executed, but at the very least he was not executed because he was a Jew,” Bassin says. “We can take some measure of pride that we could stem that flow of information. I think Steven’s memory will be a blessing.”A previous version of this story included a headline stating that no one had found out about Sotloff's Jewish and Israeli identity. While the group of volunteers petitioned many news outlets to remove mention of Sotloff's background, some news outlets had already been withholding the information.

I'm pretty certain that most would agree - Such lengths and backing is not afforded to the average joe - whatever the situation, and that there is a strong reason to suspect that he was more than just a journalist. But regardless, I.S was just blankly accused by many Muslim leaders for beheading innocent journalists based on western media tales.

Does anyone else see a concerted effort to discredit I.S without any unbiased effort to delve deeper?

Peace be upon you.

[Abz2000]

Some words of wisdom from a concerned brother (may Allah accept his sincere efforts inshaAllah)


The Romans, Syria, Khilafah Islamiyah NATO

The Romans, Syria, Khilafah Islamiyah NATO - YouTube

And some indication of motive and "cui bono" from discrediting the Islamic State.

One may be enlightened as to whether this is concern about I.S "crimes" or an*attempted attack on Islam, since we know that the Romans would form a coalition to attack the assisted sect in Syria with the aim of stifling a resurgent Islamic unification.

POLITICAL COMMENTS

Tony Blair, [B]In a speech at Labour Party National Conference, stated:*“What we are confronting here is an evil ideology......They demand the elimination of Israel; the withdrawal of all Westerners from Muslim countries, irrespective of the wishes of people and government; the establishment of effectively Taliban states and Shariah law in the Arab world en route to one caliphate of all Muslim nations


.”Charles Clarke,*In a speech on Counter Terrorism at The Heritage Foundation (a neoconservative think tank, Washington DC) stated:

“What drives these people on is ideas. And unlike the liberation movements of the post World War II era in many parts of the world, these are not in pursuit of political ideas like national independence from colonial rule, or equality for all citizens without regard for race or creed, or freedom of expression without totalitarian repression. Such ambitions are, at least in principle, negotiable and in many cases have actually been negotiated. However there can be no negotiation about the re-creation of the Caliphate; there can be no negotiation about the imposition of Shariah law; there can be no negotiation about the suppression of equality between the sexes; there can be no negotiation about the ending of free speech. These values are fundamental to our civilization and are simply not up for negotiation.”


[B]Lord Curzon, [B]After the termination of Khilafat, the secretary expressed his views, in the following words:

"The point at issue is that Turkey has been destroyed and shall never rise again, because we have destroyed her spiritual power: the Caliphate and Islam."

Lord Curzon, the British Foreign Minister at the time of the Caliphate's end, appear to have best caught the Caliphate's significance when he announced to the House of Commons:
"The situation now is that Turkey is dead and will never rise again, because we have destroyed its moral strength, the Caliphate and Islam"."We must put an end to anything which brings about any Islamic unity between the sons of the Muslims. As we have already succeeded in finishing off the Caliphate, so we must ensure that there will never arise again unity for the Muslims, whether it be intellectual or cultural unity"


Sir Campbell Bannerman, [Prime Minister of Britain (1905-08)]“
There are people who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another ... if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state, it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.” -

1902*Lord Zetland [March 24, 1940, British Secretary of State for the colonial India]

“[T]he call of Islam is one which transcends the bounds of country. It may have lost some force as a result of the abolition of Caliphate by Mustafa Kamal Pasha, but it still has a very considerable appeal as witness for example Jinnah’s insistence on our giving undertaking that Indian troops should never be employed against any Muslim state, and the solicitude which he has constantly expressed for the Arabs of Palestine.


”President Bush
*“The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia
"“The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet, in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century."***


* Cheney [Vice President, Speech in Sydney, Australia February 2007]" ...
And it is they, the terrorists, who have ambitions of empire. Their
goal in the broader Middle East is to seize control of a country, so they have a base from which they can launch attacks against governments that refuse to meet their demands. Their ultimate aim -- and one they boldly proclaim -- is to establish a caliphate covering a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way to Indonesia. And it wouldn't stop there.*...The war on terror is more than a contest of arms, and more than a test of will. It is a battle of ideas...


."Donald Rumsfeld [US Secretary of Defense, December 5 2005]

]In a speech at the Paul Nitze School of Advanced Studies at Johns Hopkins:"..

.Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East and which would threaten the legitimate governments in Europe, Africa, and Asia. This is their plan. They have said so. We make a terrible mistake if we fail to listen and learn...


."Eric Edelman [Undersecretary of Defense for Policy]December 1, 2005, Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC*"

...So I think we need to be very clear. Iraq's future will either embolden terrorists and expand their reach and ability to establish a — reestablish a caliphate, or it will deal them a crippling blow. For us, failure in Iraq is just not an option


..."General John Abizaid, [Chief of US Central Command, 29th Sept. 2005]In a speech to US law makers said:

:"Al Qaeda terrorists hope to drive American influence from the Middle East and install a global Muslim leader in Saudi Arabia.....If al Qaeda terrorists manage to take control of Saudi Arabia, they will try to create and expand their influence in the region and establish a caliphate."Abizaid said al Qaeda would subsequently move on to apply a "very narrow, strict interpretation of Shariah, Islamic law, not believed in or practiced anywhere else in the world today.......The next goal would be to expand into non-Arab Islamic countries. This would include the middle of Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia".*

At another occasion,Gen. John Abizaid said:

: “We are fighting the most despicable enemy ... who uses the 21st century-technology to spread their vision of a 7th-century paradise (and) try to re-create what they imagine was the pure and perfect Islamic government of the era of the prophet Muhammad


.”Gen. Richard Myers, [The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff]While addressing a Pentagon news conference stressed:

:“If the Zarqawis of the world were allowed to be successful in Iraq in their view, and that would be the start of the caliphate that they envision, the stakes would be huge for the region,


"Henry Kissinger, [Nov 2004]Asked in an interview “What in your opinion are the principal threats of the age?

” He answered - “First, is what we call terrorism in the United States, but which is really the uprising of radical Islam against the secular world, and against the democratic world, on behalf of re-establishing a sort of Caliphate. That is directed as much against moderate Islam, than it is against non-Islamic societies.


.”Patrick J. Buchanan, [June 23, 2006. Founder of magazine


‘The American Conservative’. Has served three presidents in the White House]


“If Islamic rule is an idea taking hold among the Islamic masses, how does even the best army on earth stop it? Do we not need a new policy?”

President Vladimir PutinThe Russian leader said at a European Union summit in Brussels that western civilisation faced a mortal threat from Muslim terrorists, and claimed that they had plans to create a "worldwide caliphate"."…The creation of a caliphate on the territory of the Russian Federation is only part one of their plan. In fact, if you are following the situation, you surely know that the radicals are pursuing a larger goal: They are talking about the creation of a world caliphate…

”The Washington Post [January 14, 2006]The Washington Post headed an article with the title " Reunified Islam: Unlikely but Not Entirely Radical, Restoration of Caliphate, Attacked by Bush, Resonates With Mainstream Muslims", arguing that such a call is not radical nor only resonant with Islamic guerrilla movementsTerrorism - From a War on Terror to a War of Ideasby David Lazarus"..

.The underlying belief of the jihadists appears to be that the re-establishment and enforcement of strict Islamic law in these territories will bring about an almost mystical rebirth of a just, pure and perfect society for all true Muslims. The appeal of such a vision is potent within the Middle East in particular and can be easily understood when one examines the general failure of modernity that prevails in most sectors of Arab society. 7 Any Islamist revolution throughout the entire Middle East has, however, been thwarted by authoritarian dictatorships within the region, such as those of Egypt and Saudi Arabia..

."Peter Costello (Ex Australian Treasurer), 2006, Australian Christian Lobby:

:“There are countries that claim to be theocratic Islamic States, for example, The Islamic Republic of Iran, The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, The Islamic Republic of Mauritania. There are other countries that enforce religious or Sharia Law – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. But for the radical Islamists even this is not enough. They have a vision of a Caliphate stretching across the Middle East toppling what they see as corrupt nation states and enforcing a more “pure” version of Islam. In our own region the ambitions of Jemaah Islamiyah is to create a Pan-Islamic State stretching down and encompassing the southern Philippines, Malaya and Indonesia.


.”Alexander Downer, 2005, Centre for Muslim States and Societies (UWA):

“Let's be crystal clear about what the terrorists are seeking. Let's strip away the rhetoric and focus on the type of world they want to create. Their goal is to create a new extremist Caliphate in the Muslim world - a Taliban style theocracy. In South-East Asia they want to drive out western influence and establish a fundamentalist regime across Indonesia, Malaysia, Southern Thailand and Southern Philippines. The same for the Middle-East - a Caliphate stretching from the Caucuses to North Africa. They want to get rid of democracy in these countries and replace it with a puritanical regime that denies individual freedoms. Nothing complicated about that ideology. A perverted interpretation of Islamic law, no tolerance of diversity.”

Whoever should think that Allah will not support [Prophet Muhammad] in this world and the Hereafter - let him extend a rope to the ceiling, then cut off [his breath], and let him see: will his effort remove that which enrages [him]?

Quran (The Pilgrimage) 22:15

[InToTheRain]

:salam:

Abz I agree with you that the reporter is most likely was a Mosad agent and there are layers of deception. I also agree ZOG will stop at nothing to stop Muslims from getting what they want in their own nation and I support Hamaz, Taliban (the founders anyway) and supported Sadam in his stance against ZOG.

However ISIS is a botched operation to overthrow Asad. Make no mistake; ISIS are not in it for Islam; as the Imam of Al-Aqsa Masjid said they want the "dirty chair" (Political power).

The facts are here:
“ISIS –An American-CIA-Mossad-Saudi Intel Covert Operation”
“ISIS –An American-CIA-Mossad-Saudi Intel Covert Operation” By Feroze Mithiborwala

ISIS leader is a Jew:
NEWS DIGEST: ISIS Leader Al-Baghdadi = Jewish Mossad Agent!

[Abz2000]

Wa'alaikumussalam wr wb
I don't pretend to know the unseen so i won't claim that i am certain of their validity or invalidity,
But i am careful since last time i fell into the trap of assuming OBL was a western intel asset.
And since i know their accusers are liars, i would tend to give I.S the benefit of the doubt.

Bear in mind that even 'Umar (ra) developed suspicions about the Prophet pbuh when he (pbuh) caved to demands at hudaybiyyah.
It was Abu Bakr Assiddeeq (ra) who brought him back to his senses.
So we know there will only be grey areas until the picture is clear.

Best we can do is follow Quran and sunnah and judge in that light, and yes, there are valid reasons for suapicion but it may be due to false flags or mistakes too, since it is a certainty that the Mujahideen on the front lines are mostly there for genuine purposes and have only joined groups for the purpose of co-ordination.

God knows best but i'll keep a good opinion of them until proven otherwise - since they are portrayed as monsters by the western kuffar media-
and I don't want to give them a green light to kill mujahideen fi sabeelillah.

[InToTheRain]

Wa'alaikumussalam wr wb
I don't pretend to know the unseenso i won't pretend i am certain of their validity or invalidity,
But i am careful since last time i fell into the trap of assuming OBL was a western intel asset.
And since i know their accusers are liars, i would tend to give I.S the benefit of the doubt.

Bear in mind that even 'Umar (ra) developed suspicions about the Prophet pbuh when he (pbuh) caved to demands at hudaybiyyah.
It was Abu Bakr Assiddeeq (ra) who brought him back to his senses.
So we know there will only be grey areas until the picture is clear.

Best we can do is follow Quran and sunnah and judge in that light, and yes, there are valid reasons for suapicion but it may be due to false flags or mistakes too.
God knows best but i'll keep a good opinion of them until proven otherwise - since they are portrayed as monsters by the western crusaders.

I don't really care for what the corrupt leaders of the west say either but I do give credit to what other Muslims say especially the Imam of Al Aqsa Mosque :)

:wa:

[Abz2000]

I don't really care for what the corrupt leaders of the west say either but I do give credit to what other Muslims say especially the Imam of Al Aqsa Mosque :)

:wa:

Always bearing in mind that the christians have a wolf shepherd "pope" / clueless actor in robes who insults their intelligence and tells them that religion doesn't allow violence lol.

Not to be mistaken that i suspect or know of the imam of al aqsa, just that the zionists work hard to groom leaders from a young age.
Same could apply to I.S head.
Allah A'lam.

The only hope is to continue learning Islam and follow events and be certain that all trust should be placed on Allah, not groups or people, and that all claimants and leaders must be scrutinized in light of Islamic shariah.

[InToTheRain]

Always bearing in mind that the christians have a wolf shepherd "pope" / clueless actor in robes who insults their intelligence and tells them that religion doesn't allow violence lol.

Not to be mistaken that i suspect or know of the imam of al aqsa, just that the zionists work hard to groom leaders from a young age.
Same could apply to I.S head.
Allah A'lam.

That defenitley does happen; Allah Most High protect us.

A friend of mine was telling me some years back he read an article in a newspaper in his country. It was regarding an imam in an institute they had who was initially a revert and reached high status to the extent he lead them in prayer for years and went to important meetings. Suddenly this Imam left... and the only contact they got from the Imam some months later was a letter stating they need to re-do all the prayers he led over the years as he was never a Muslim! Not sure why he gave the letter but it happened.

But the People around Masjid Al Aqsa are not people who will be duped so easily. Some Hadiths on them:

Masjid Al-Aqsa - The place of Mujahideen
25, Umamah Al-Bahili (ra) reports that the Prophet (saw) said, "A group of my Ummah will remain on truth, they will vanquish their enemy and those who disagree with them will not be able to harm them until Allah commands". "Where are these people"? The Companions (ra) asked. The Prophet (saw) said, "In and around Al-Quds (Jerusalem). (Ahmad)

26, Muawiyah Ibn Sufyan (ra) relates that the Prophet (saw) said, "There is a group among my followers who will continue to be openly on the truth. No one who opposes them can harm them until the coming of the Hour". The Companions (ra) asked, "Where will they be"? The Messenger of Allah said, "They will be in and around Bayt Al-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem)". (Ahmad)

27, Abu Hurayrah (ra) relates that the Prophet (saw) said, "A group of my Ummah will not cease to fight at the gates of Damascus and at the gates of Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and its surroundings. The betrayal or desertion of whoever deserts them will not harm them in the least. They will remain victorious, standing for the truth, until the Final Hour rises". (Tabarani)

:wa:

[Muhaba]

There is no extremism in Islam. The killing of civilians is unjustified and not allowed in Islam. Furthermore, emissaries /ambassadors are also not allowed to be killed even in time of war. We have two precedents from the History of Islam as evidence for this. One is that Abu Sufyan came to Madina after the treaty was broken by the unbelievers and, while none of the Muslims were willing to talk to him, yet Abu Sufyan was not harmed, though he was in Muslim land and he had always fought against the Muslims in battle. The second is the the verse of Surah Al-Tawbah, amidst verses declaring war: And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah . Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know. (9:6)

Note that in this verse it doesn't say that the unbeliever should convert but rather only that he/she seeks the protection of the Muslims. (This could be verbal or even implied, for example when an aid worker enters Muslim territory.) This verse has two injunctions: 1. Grant the unbeliever protection. 2. Deliver the unbeliever to his place of safety. Note that the word is "deliver" meaning that authorized persons should actually make sure that the unbeliever has reached safe territory. There may be two reasons for this: 1. That a misguided person doesn't harm the unbeliever unknowingly. 2. That an enemy of Islam doesn't harm the unbeliever on purpose in order to defame Islam or that group of Muslims.

Islam does not allow that an unbeliever be killed on the basis of being an unbeliever. Islam also doesn't allow forced conversions.

Since it's proven that neither killing civilians nor forced conversions are allowed in Islam, therefore I agree that all Muslims need to speak against this when given a chance, even if only to clear Islam from blame. As for the accusation that IS engages in these activities, it is hardly believable. I find it strange that IS would behead a Western journalist around the same time that America was saying it was considering acting against IS. What was it trying to accomplish? Get America to attack it or what?

[Pygoscelis]

As for the accusation that IS engages in these activities, it is hardly believable. I find it strange that IS would behead a Western journalist around the same time that America was saying it was considering acting against IS. What was it trying to accomplish? Get America to attack it or what?

Do you think it was staged by the US as a false flag operation to give them an excuse to attack?

[Abz2000]

IF it was a false flag, it would more likely be a method of chasing reporters away from the region before a bloody bombing campaign which would weaken backing for the war (which had already been initiated before the executions) - and also turning them against Islamic fighters.

Similar method has been used previously in iraq to coerce journalists into embedding with military units out of fear and thereby getting "friendly" (unjustly biased) reporting.

But the deceptions are so twisted that it's difficult to make sense of.

[Muhaba]

Do you think it was staged by the US as a false flag operation to give them an excuse to attack?

It is highly likely, especially in the case of the beheading of a French journalist in Algeria. Such acts are both unislamic and do not help the Muslims.

There are a lot of false accusations being thrown. For example, in one CNN report, IS is accused of engaging in drug trade (and using that to fund its activities). But how can that be when another CNN video shows that IS has banned cigarettes and alcohol in its areas? In the video IS is shown to burn lots of cigarette packets and a man states that if someone is seen with a cigarette, then he/she is given a few lashes. So how can a group not allow cigarettes and alcohol and still engage in drug trade?

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...ef=videosearch

[InToTheRain]

Do you think it was staged by the US as a false flag operation to give them an excuse to attack?

Just my opinion on this:

I have a friend who did Humanitarian work in Iraq for some years. He is actually a socialist Shia though he doesn't adhere to Shia beliefs or practices. I have known for some time whats happening there.

He mentioned the Shia and Sunni who were residents of Iraq were caught in the power struggle between Saudi and Iran over Iraq; naturally the ZOG too wanted their share who are allied to Saudi. ISIS was created to overthrow Asad. but the disgruntled Sunnis who were abused and ousted from authority due to Americas meddling in Iraq, this being putting Shia in power, went to ISIS to convince them to change their target and look at the riches to be plundered in Iraq. With the west "staging" its exit it was the perfect time; though ZOG never had any intention to let the people of Iraq run their own affairs or keep the riches of the land to themselves; meaning they wouldn't exit without putting measures in place to ensure control over their keys interests. ISIS has now become a threat because no longer complies with it's founders demands due to the riches they have amassed and has the potential power to turn on its founders. They also have the know-how on how to do this as they have been trained to do so.

So ISIS is a result of a botched covert operation and now a serious threat as the plan has backfired leaving a lot of mess to be cleaned up.

[Muhammad]

:salamext:

I haven't been following this thread, nor do I know much about this topic. But I noticed this statement:

Thirdly, i noticed al maqdisi, mufti of jordan etc were quick to condemn the Caliphate at instance one, on the grounds of lack of consultation and wider consensus. This despite the fact that even milder organizations are criminalized and sought out for attempting to establish a united ummah state and the impracticality of an ummah vote. Plus the fact that the first four Caliphs of Islam were all elected to position using different methods according to circumstances.

The main aim was to get a practical consensus from the active members within the establishment and demand allegiance from all other groups and citizens, with the case of abu bakr assiddeeq (ra) he had to take the sword against so called Muslims who had taken shahadah, , fought jihad, prayed and fasted but refused to submit to the State and pay zakat. He pronounced takfir on them and slew many - even 'Umar (ra) questioned his stance.

The baya' to the Prophet pbuh himself was conducted in secret and then implemented in stages.

Dear brother, what about the statement of numerous other scholars condemning the actions of ISIS? See here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...ml#post2832408

Moreover, the example you gave of the bay'ah and the 4 khaleefahs seems totally misplaced. As the above link says: 'For those who opted to join ISIS, on what basis and through what justification are they willing meet Allāh when this faction has shed the blood of thousands unjustly? The question remains, did these individuals refer to the Book of Allāh, the injunctions of the Messenger salla Allāhu ‘alayh wasalam and the guidance of our leaders in understanding and faith, the recognised scholars of Islam, before embarking on this ākhirah-focused risk?'

The Companions, radhiyallahu 'anhum, referred to the Qur'an and Sunnah and consulted each other when making decisions. Abubakr :ra: did not fight anyone to become the khaleefah. As far as I recall, he was already a khaleefah when the issue of those who refused to pay Zakah arose. Although Umar :ra: initially questioned him, he agreed to Abubakr's view in the end. A Caliph of Muslims is the one who all Muslims or most of them agreed upon and accepted him as their leader. All these characteristics were certainly met by Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar, then ‘Uthmaan and then ‘Ali

.

[DeenTight]

It is highly likely, especially in the case of the beheading of a French journalist in Algeria. Such acts are both unislamic and do not help the Muslims.

There are a lot of false accusations being thrown. For example, in one CNN report, IS is accused of engaging in drug trade (and using that to fund its activities). But how can that be when another CNN video shows that IS has banned cigarettes and alcohol in its areas? In the video IS is shown to burn lots of cigarette packets and a man states that if someone is seen with a cigarette, then he/she is given a few lashes. So how can a group not allow cigarettes and alcohol and still engage in drug trade?

Sister, the link between opium trade in Afghanistan and al-Qaeda has been well-documented. On the one hand, al-Qaeda is publicly lashing Yemenis for drinking alcohol in 2012, and yet, on the other hand, they use opium to finance their operations.

The point I'm trying to make is that groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda love to present a righteous image to the Muslim world, and in public. However, behind the scenes, things are very different. I'm not saying for sure that ISIS is trading in drugs, but I will never believe anything that a group like this has to say.

[InToTheRain]

haram kingship of the corrupt saudi family is being threatened with the uprise of ISIS. as if having their king clinically dead wasn't enough escalating problems internally and externally.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alasta...b_5748744.html

Question now is how long will they be doing this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIF8-JREtwQ

[truthseeker63]

I don't agree with this article because Muslims/Islam are not a Race it is not Racist or Racism but Muslims can condemn ISIS if they choose or support it it is just a personal opinion.



New York Imams Repudiate Violent Extremism.


http://singularvoice.wordpress.com/2...ent-extremism/