PDA

View Full Version : Shocking poll by The Sun: 1 in 5 Muslims show sympathy for Jihadis



farhan
11-23-2015, 02:37 AM
Deceptive media.

Where do they get these fake figures from?

Why weren't the Muslims all over the world at 1.7 billion invited to take part?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...s-in-poll.html

Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Search
11-23-2015, 03:32 AM
Originally Posted by فرحان
Deceptive media.

Where do they get these fake figures from?

Why weren't the Muslims all over the world at 1.7 billion invited to take part?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...s-in-poll.html

:bism:

:sl:

In the above poll, I voted no: Terrorists and extremists are evil, misguided, and pervert Islam. Obviously.

However, I think the article might be misrepresenting the position of Muslims who voted yes. For example, a person can, say, feel sympathy for the lost man in James Holmes, the perpetrator of Colorado shooting, because of a) his lost bright future (as obviously he was extremely intelligent as it was widely publicized that he had undergraduate degree in neurosciences and graduated with highest honors) and b) his lost humanity. Maybe the Muslims who voted yes in the poll voted yes for the same reason? Maybe they felt that the Muslims going to join ISIS are losing their bright futures and will suffer terrible fates and terrible suffering? So, for example, someone can feel bad for the deranged James Holmes without believing that what the deranged James Holmes did is right. So, I'd like to know what "sympathy" here connotes? Make sense, people?

Also, I mistrust polls in general because I took a course in critical analysis of statistics or polls or some such thing in college (sorry, forgot the course name/title), and I realized how easy it is to misrepresent data. For example, to determine the reliability of the poll, I'd like to know whether the poll was scientific, who was conducting the poll, exactly what questions were asked, how the respondents to the polls were selected, etc. For example, pharmaceutical companies often misrepresent the data, for example, on effectiveness of their medicines/medication in easily much the same way, and therefore I think a healthy skepticism is necessary.

So, in summary: For Muslims, I wouldn't worry about what this poll says. For the non-Muslim, I wouldn't worry about what the poll says either.

:wa:
Reply

TMGuide
11-23-2015, 03:41 AM
I always wondered where they get their statistics from, until I discovered online surveys. They give incentive, gift cards, money and what not to get as many poeple to participate. So anyone can complete these surveys, they ask random questions and conclude random stastistics from them.
Reply

Pygoscelis
11-23-2015, 04:05 AM
Originally Posted by Search
In the above poll, I voted no: Terrorists and extremists are evil, misguided, and pervert Islam. Obviously.
You voted in this poll? Or do you mean you would have voted no has they asked you?

As far as internet polls, I would take this site, even though it is probably a biased sample (at the very least you have to have a computer etc) over an internet poll, and it is clear here that such a poll wouldn't agree with those numbers. We do have a few who do feel obvious sympathy for the jihadis and a few more who even outright support them, but they are the exception, not the rule. I look forward to hearing what they have to say on this poll and if they agree the numbers are overestimated.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
Search
11-23-2015, 04:13 AM
Hi.

Nope, I'm an American. And I believe this poll was conducted in the U.K. So, I couldn't vote, even if I'd been so inclined. It doesn't matter: I'd still have voted no.

Hey, that is why I used the example of James Holmes, the guy who went up and shot the movie cheater in Colorado, creating mayhem for people who had gone to watch the movie Dark Knight. Most of my examples will revolve around my experience, which is based in the U.S.

As for the exceptions voting in the above Islamic Board poll, yes, I know exactly who is going to vote yes - lol. Like you, I think they are the exception and not the norm. Unfortunately though, in my experience, the exceptions are mostly the vocal type; I know this because Islamic Board is not my first stint on the Internet.

Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
You voted in this poll? Or do you mean you would have voted no has they asked you?

As far as internet polls, I would take this site, even though it is probably a biased sample (at the very least you have to have a computer etc) over an internet poll, and it is clear here that such a poll wouldn't agree with those numbers. We do have a few who do feel obvious sympathy for the jihadis and a few more who even outright support them, but they are the exception, not the rule. I look forward to hearing what they have to say on this poll and if they agree the numbers are overestimated.
Reply

Search
11-23-2015, 04:55 AM
I don't know the discussion this thread will evolve: However, since I know at least one person on IB will vote yes, I should also mention here that from my experience, Internet Muslim extremists have myriad ways of shutting down majority Muslim voices who oppose extremism: They say that if you're (the Muslim, that is) not going to physically do anything to stop the atrocities in the Muslim world, then at least "shut up" and sit down while those who are not pusillanimous do "do" something about it. Also, the other way is by shaming the Muslim or labeling the Muslim in some way to show that the person is not "Muslim enough" or loves Allah (God) enough or loves Prophet Muhammad sallalahu alayhi wasallam (peace and blessings be upon him) enough or the ummah (Muslims as a unit) enough. Ordinary everyday Muslims generally are non-confrontational people (at least from my experience), and therefore it is easier for the vocal Internet Muslim extremist to use that to his/her advantage in Internet-based discussions. After all, most people (Muslim and non-Muslim) use the Internet as a form of leisure activity and not to incur a headache.

I'm just again throwing that out there for information purposes!
Reply

Muslim Woman
11-23-2015, 07:48 AM
:sl:



there is a difference between Jihadis and terrorists . Jihad is fard for Muslim when terrorism is forbidden.
Reply

Mr.President
11-23-2015, 08:53 AM
Jihad - Yes
Terrorism - No
Reply

sister herb
11-23-2015, 09:35 AM
Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
:sl:



there is a difference between Jihadis and terrorists . Jihad is fard for Muslim when terrorism is forbidden.
To the Westeners (and surely to the readers of this newspaper) it´s one and same - jihad and terrorism. It would take a lifetime to explain the difference to them and part of them still would understand or wouldn´t want to understand.
Reply

Pygoscelis
11-23-2015, 10:18 AM
Originally Posted by Search
Hi.

Nope, I'm an American. And I believe this poll was conducted in the U.K. So, I couldn't vote, even if I'd been so inclined. It doesn't matter: I'd still have voted no.

Hey, that is why I used the example of James Holmes, the guy who went up and shot the movie cheater in Colorado, creating mayhem for people who had gone to watch the movie Dark Knight. Most of my examples will revolve around my experience, which is based in the U.S.

As for the exceptions voting in the above Islamic Board poll, yes, I know exactly who is going to vote yes - lol. Like you, I think they are the exception and not the norm. Unfortunately though, in my experience, the exceptions are mostly the vocal type; I know this because Islamic Board is not my first stint on the Internet.
I sometimes wonder just how friendly should I be towards Muslims regarding this perception war within Islam. I mean, you and I being friends and supporting one another, kind of puts your Muslim credibility in question to some of these people, yes? They paint you as a .. what was that word? "Crypto"? lol It seems you can't win no matter what.
Reply

ardianto
11-23-2015, 01:48 PM
Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
:sl:



there is a difference between Jihadis and terrorists . Jihad is fard for Muslim when terrorism is forbidden.
:wa:

Actually the word "jihadis" does not refer to ordinary mujahideen, but refer to people who hold ideology which they believe that the glory of Islam can be reached only through jihad in the battlefield.
Reply

Insaanah
11-23-2015, 02:39 PM
The Sun is the widely acknowledged crappiest so-called "news"paper, gutter press, whose stories are sensationalistic and certainly not reliable. In fact in most cases, not even worth giving them the dignity of even mentioning or discussing.

Originally Posted by Search
However, I think the article might be misrepresenting the position of Muslims who voted yes.
Exactly.

Here The independent explains how the "poll" is very misleading:

No, one in five Muslims don't support Isis
Reply

ardianto
11-23-2015, 02:40 PM
Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
I sometimes wonder just how friendly should I be towards Muslims regarding this perception war within Islam.
What I expect from non-Muslims is, do not judge a Muslim by his/her religion, but judge a Muslim by his/her attitude and behavior. Notice, is he tolerant to the others, or intolerant?. Is he always kind to others, or always cause trouble?.

One thing that make Muslims in difficult situation nowadays is generalization and stereotyping toward Muslims. Many non-Muslims in the West still generalize that every Muslim must be like this, every Muslim must like that, without they realize that as human, Muslims consist of various characters and personalities too. There are extremist Muslims, but also there are moderate Muslims, there are intolerant Muslims, but also there are tolerant Muslims, there are criminal among Muslims, but also there are Muslims who always kind to the others.

But I am sure, you have ability to see someone on his/her attitude and behavior without trapped into generalization.

:)
Reply

ardianto
11-23-2015, 02:50 PM
Originally Posted by Insaanah
No, one in five Muslims don't support Isis
But, the title in Independent is misleading too. It can cause impression for people who only read the title that "four in five Muslims support ISIS".
Reply

sfontel
11-23-2015, 02:59 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
To the Westeners (and surely to the readers of this newspaper) it´s one and same - jihad and terrorism. It would take a lifetime to explain the difference to them and part of them still would understand or wouldn´t want to understand.
That is a wrong assumption....I do want to understand....and becouse of that I got to ask

How can I understand if the thread that I was in the process was deleted?

What am I supposed to think?

Even if takes a life time or a cofe table....would you want to try and explain the diference?

The deletetion os beyond my understand...

God bless
Reply

Abz2000
11-23-2015, 03:29 PM
The question is, which jihadis do they mean? The parents who do jihad against their children in order to turn them from monotheism? (jaahadooka)
The wrongdoers of whom Allah tells His Messenger: it is not you they deny, it is the ayaat of Allah against which the unjust do jihad? (yajhadoon)

The believers who do jihaad in Allah's way when the shaytaan whispers evil and they try to walk aright and gain Allah's mercy and good pleasure, and do jihad in Allah's way when they see injustice in their families and communities in order to make the justice and truth of the righteous way of life which Allah has enjoined to be uppermost?

Or maybe these brave souls:







You can easily get a faster download by saving a less data consuming format instead of downloading to the cache by adding "ss" after the www. Like so:

https://m.ssyoutube.com/watch?v=OYHT3eEBXFI

Then choosing the format quality you need.


You'll also notice that the original intro to the closing credits of Rambo III read:

"This film is dedicated to the brave Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan."



Of course, that was when the u.s government was basking in the glory of having assisted in removing Assad er... The Soviets (was that on purpose?) the mujahideen were later contained via infighting, then when afghanistan was united under the taliban and it banned opium, and the u.s government wanted to start a propaganda war and attack them after staging a whopper false flag, the card was changed to:

"This film is dedicated to the gallant people of Afghanistan."



http://rambo.wikia.com/wiki/Mujahideen











From orwell's 1984 review:
That alliance ends and Oceania, allied with Eurasia, fights Eastasia,
a change which occurred during Hate Week, dedicated to creating patriotic fervour for the Party's perpetual war.
The public are blind to the change;
in mid-sentence an orator changes the name of the enemy from "Eurasia" to "Eastasia" without pause.
When the public are enraged at noticing that the wrong flags and posters are displayed, they tear them down—thus the origin of the*idiom*"We've always been at war with Eastasia";
later the Party claims to have captured Africa.
......
Now he's (stallone) making a new movie about fighting isis........
Reply

sister herb
11-23-2015, 04:14 PM
Originally Posted by sfontel
That is a wrong assumption....I do want to understand....and becouse of that I got to ask

How can I understand if the thread that I was in the process was deleted?

What am I supposed to think?

Even if takes a life time or a cofe table....would you want to try and explain the diference?

The deletetion os beyond my understand...

God bless
Sorry I didn´t meant to mean anyone personal here but people in general.

What I meant that in general the most of non-Muslims in the West don´t see the difference between jihad and terrorism because to their vocabularity the term "jihad" has already meant same as "terrorism" or "killing the infidels" for decades. I have tried to tell to others in here that they understand this term wrong. Result: a) they don´t believe me or b) they don´t listen me.
Reply

sister herb
11-23-2015, 04:24 PM
About jihad:

http://islamqa.info/en/21961

http://islamqa.info/en/20214

As you see, this term "jihad" isn´t so simple than those western newspapers try to make it look. But how to explain this clearly here to people whose don´t want to understand it, they just want to keep their old opinions (and use them as excuses for they racist acts and views). And this was again in general.
Reply

sfontel
11-23-2015, 04:58 PM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
The question is, which jihadis do they mean? The parents who do jihad against their children in order to turn them from monotheism? (jaahadooka)
The wrongdoers of whom Allah tells His Messenger: it is not you they deny, it is the ayaat of Allah against which the unjust do jihad? (yajhadoon)

The believers who do jihaad in Allah's way when the shaytaan whispers evil and they try to walk aright and gain Allah's mercy and good pleasure, and do jihad in Allah's way when they see injustice in their families and communities in order to make the justice and truth of the righteousness way of life which Allah has enjoined to be uppermost?

Or maybe these brave souls:







You can easily get a faster download by saving a less data consuming format instead of downloading to the cache by adding "ss" after the www. Like so:

https://m.ssyoutube.com/watch?v=OYHT3eEBXFI

Then choosing the format quality you need.


You'll also notice that the original intro to the closing credits of Rambo III read:

"This film is dedicated to the brave Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan."

Of course, that was when the u.s government was basking in the glory of having assisted in removing Assad er... The Soviets (was that on purpose?) the mujahideen were later contained via infighting, then when afghanistan was united under the taliban and it banned opium, and the u.s government wanted to start a propaganda war and attack them after staging a whopper false flag, the card was changed to:

"This film is dedicated to the gallant people of Afghanistan."

http://rambo.wikia.com/wiki/Mujahideen



......
Now he's (stallone) making a new movie about fighting isis........
For my curiosity....Do you like Regan? Is he right on the issue?

I watch most of the long video up until it froze....

So the USA backed the right muhajadim? Against soviets?

USA did not fight themselfes...but insted...equiped as best they could tha muhajadim...

To the point the minute 26:35....the soviets are running away!

So, the situation in Sirya....do ISIS represent the Soviets or Russia represent Soviets?

Who is who? USA is the Soviets?

Can you paint a clear picture?

God bless
Reply

IslamicRevival
11-23-2015, 04:59 PM
A disgusting poll from a a volatile gutter media outlet. I sympathise with the true mujahideen, IE the ordinary man fighting for their people, land and rights which are trampled on year after year. May Allah preserve and grant them success. What's shocking or wrong with that?
Reply

farhan
11-23-2015, 05:18 PM
Demand The Sun Apologise For Disgraceful Inflammatory Headline About Muslims!

https://www.change.org/p/rupert-murd...edium=copyLink

:ia: share this petition around.
Reply

farhan
11-23-2015, 06:43 PM
Article by Islam21c on the issue.

‘7 out of 5 stats reported by The Sun are made up’: http://www.islam21c.com/special/web-...n-are-made-up/

Many have mocked the ridiculous front page of The Sun today bearing the completely made up and misleading statistic, ‘1 in 5 Brit Muslims’ sympathy for jihadis.’ Various news sites have exposed the misrepresentation and methodological flaws in the Sun’s survey, some with quite hilarious consequences.
Reply

Search
11-23-2015, 06:54 PM
Hi Pygoscelis!

Lol - don't be concerned, just be yourself: It's not going to be about how friendly you are or not, bud. In this matter, extremists (and not your everyday ordinary Muslim, to clarify) will question the credibility of posters not supporting the likes of ISIS with or without you.

Meh - "crypto" here is probably the better word I've been called here on IB: I've been also called "munafiq" here, which translates as "hypocrite" and theologically-speaking is one of the worst things that any believer can be called due to the inner corruption that is said to reside in the heart of the munafiq. In the end, it doesn't matter, because I know I speak things out of a) knowledge, b) conviction, and c) conscience.

Hey, lol, it's probably gonna be the same for you: For example, say, you have a chance to talk to a Republican American, k? Well, a significant percentage of Republicans in America believe that President Barack Obama is a "secret Muslim," a supporter of Muslim causes, and also believe that ISIS has great support among ordinary everyday ordinary Muslims. Now, if you were to take the position that one or more of those things are not true, guess what you're going to be seen as? You're going to be seen as a "crypto," or a betrayer of your race or a "Judas" to Judeo-Christian values and Christians (notwithstanding the fact that you're an atheist), or a liberal idiot or some other version that. It's not going to be pretty for you either in this scenario, but in the end, I can't imagine you backing down from your position either.

Yup, the irony of that it seems at least that Muslims who take this or similar positions can't win no matter what. But honestly? Who cares. Standing up for what is right is not about being popular with everybody or even some specific persons.

Also, I should mention that you and I, we're not always going to see eye to eye, ya know. That said, yes, in the matter of terrorism and extremism, I am with every single Muslim and non-Muslim on earth who opposes both.

Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
I sometimes wonder just how friendly should I be towards Muslims regarding this perception war within Islam. I mean, you and I being friends and supporting one another, kind of puts your Muslim credibility in question to some of these people, yes? They paint you as a .. what was that word? "Crypto"? lol It seems you can't win no matter what.
Reply

Abz2000
11-23-2015, 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by sfontel
For my curiosity....Do you like Regan? Is he right on the issue?

I watch most of the long video up until it froze....

So the USA backed the right muhajadim? Against soviets?

USA did not fight themselfes...but insted...equiped as best they could tha muhajadim...

To the point the minute 26:35....the soviets are running away!

So, the situation in Sirya....do ISIS represent the Soviets or Russia represent Soviets?

Who is who? USA is the Soviets?

Can you paint a clear picture?

God bless
9“Who is it he is trying to teach?
To whom is he explaining his message?
To children weaned from their milk, to those just taken from the breast?
10For it is: Do this, do that,a rule for this, a rule for that*; a little here, a little there.”

11Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tonguesGod will speak to this people,12 to whom he said, “This is the resting place, let the weary rest”; and, “This is the place of repose”—but they would not listen.
13So then, the word of the*Lord*to them will become:

Do this, do that, a rule for this, a rule for that; a little here, a little there—so that as they go they will fall backward; they will be injured and snared and captured.
14Therefore hear the word of the*Lord, you scoffers who rule this people in Jerusalem.
15You boast, “We have entered into a covenant with death,with the realm of the dead we have made an agreement.When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by,it cannot touch us,for we have made a lie our refugeand falsehoodb*our hiding place.”
16So this is what the Sovereign*Lord*says:“See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone,? a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic.

17I will make justice the measuring line and righteousness the plumb line;

hail will sweep away your refuge, the lie, and water will overflow your hiding place.
18Your covenant with death will be annulled; your agreement with the realm of the dead will not stand.
When the overwhelming scourge sweeps by, you will be beaten down by it.
19As often as it comes it will carry you away; morning after morning, by day and by night, it will sweep through.”

The understanding of this message will bring sheer terror.

20The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you.

21The Lord will rise up as he did at Mount Perazim,he will rouse himself as in the Valley of Gibeon—to do his work, his strange work, and perform his task, his alien task.
22Now stop your mocking, or your chains will become heavier; the Lord, the Lord Almighty, has told me of the destruction decreed against the whole land.

23Listen and hear my voice; pay attention and hear what I say.
24When a farmer plows for planting, does he plow continually?

Does he keep on breaking up and working the soil?

25When he has leveled the surface,does he not sow caraway and scatter cumin?
Does he not plant wheat in its place, barley in its plot, and spelt in its field?
26His God instructs him and teaches him the right way.
27Caraway is not threshed with a sledge, nor is the wheel of a cart rolled over cumin;
caraway is beaten out with a rod, and cumin with a stick.

28Grain must be ground to make bread; so one does not go on threshing it forever.

The wheels of a threshing cart may be rolled over it, but one does not use horses to grind grain.
29All this also comes from the Lord Almighty, whose plan is wonderful, whose wisdom is magnificent.
Isaiah 28

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4

13.*The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him).
14.*And they became divided only after Knowledge reached them,- through selfish envy as between themselves. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord, (tending) to a Term appointed, the matter would have been settled between them: But truly those who have inherited the Book after them are in suspicious (disquieting) doubt concerning it.
15.*Now then, for that (reason), call (them to the Faith), and stand steadfast as thou art commanded, nor follow thou their vain desires; but say: "I believe in the Book which Allah has sent down; and I am commanded to judge justly between you. Allah is our Lord and your Lord: for us (is the responsibility for) our deeds, and for you for your deeds. There is no contention between us and you. Allah will bring us together, and to Him is (our) Final Goal.
16.*But those who dispute concerning Allah after He has been accepted,- futile is their dispute in the Sight of their Lord: on them is wrath, and for them will be a powerful chastisement.
17.*It is Allah Who has sent down the Book in Truth, and the Balance (by which to weigh conduct). And what will make thee realise that perhaps the Hour is close at hand?
18.*Only those wish to hasten it who believe not in it: those who believe hold it in awe, and know that it is the Truth. Behold, verily those that dispute concerning the Hour are far astray.
19.*Gracious is Allah to His servants: He gives Sustenance to whom He pleases: and He is The Strong, The mighty.
Quran, Consultation 14-16
Reply

Abz2000
11-24-2015, 02:03 AM
Dunno if i came across a little flustered back there, may Allah increase us in patience and wisdom.
I was just praying fajr and i subconsciously chose surah 'Abasa, and when i got to the "let who wills remember part, i kept thinking of your inquisitive post and my reply, must've been for a good reason.

Originally Posted by sfontel
For my curiosity....Do you like Regan? Is he right on the issue?
I personally don't trust that any recent u.s president since the establishment of the u.s federal reserve has been free from corporate (especially usurious banking) control, kennedy is a slight exception in the he was a little more independent and it appears that he assumed he had a right to do or not do some things because he thought they were unwise. Reagan almost got shot dead or at least threatened when ex OSS chief bush was his insider, and since it's highly unlikely that a shooter will get close and have the time to draw his gun on a u.s president - given the sophistication of the science of surveillance and armed escort training, it appears that he wasn't doing too well in his cia relations.
With all that said, the question regarding right and wrong goes back to the guidance of God, and the sincerety of the human being in interpreting it, the fact is that Jihad in the way of Allah is recommended and even commanded at times depending upon the situation, there are also situations where jihad in the way of Allah is patience, trying to be righteous despite the difficulties, preventing munkar (deeds despised by Allah) with the strength of position, when unable to use strength of position, explaining speaking out, when unable to speak out, rejecting munkar with the heart.

Whether or not reagan's purpose was to spitefully use the mujahideen for haram ends, and their purpose was sincerely to do good and please Allah, each will be judged according to his endeavour without a single aspect or circumstance ommitted and rewarded accordingly - every event in their lifetimes will be enquired into including the most minor of flutters of the heart.



Originally Posted by sfontel
I watch most of the long video up until it froze....
So the USA backed the right muhajadim? Against soviets?
God knows, this is exactly what appears to have been the case to me, it has also been admitted by the pakistani dictator and never denied. It also appears to be the case, judging from track record and observation of the methods of the cia and zbignew brzezinski (obama's current mentor) that once the soviets withdrew, the mujahideen were set against each other so that the country could remain in a state of anarchy while the opium industry was massively expanded - and if it was the case, it doesn't appear to have been for the sake of Allah even though Allah's overall plan encompasses all plans.

Originally Posted by sfontel
USA did not fight themselfes...but insted...equiped as best they could tha muhajadim...
To the point the minute 26:35....the soviets are running away!
A deed is normally not evil in and of itself, sometimes a good thing done with a wider bad intention can blow back as bad, and a normally perceived as evil thing done while in submission to Allah with the ultimate aim of sincerely pleasing Allah and elevating His way can blow back as a virtue, we can see this from reading previous scripture, the Quran and Ibrahim (pbuh), the seerah of the final prophet pbuh where he tells the man near badr "we are from water", and when the nu'aim ibn mas'ud (ra) assisted in breaking the unlawful siege of medina through his speech to huyayy ibn akhtab and abu sufyan.


Originally Posted by sfontel
So, the situation in Sirya....do ISIS represent the Soviets or Russia represent Soviets? Who is who? USA is the Soviets?

Can you paint a clear picture?

God bless

If i knew the answer to that i'd have to tell you :)

It is obvious to any observer that the situation is very tangled for a reason and Allah is allowing the whole planet to come out of their false, mentally and physically unstable allegiances and stand firmly upon the word of truth.
We see a leader claiming to act on our behalf and later we realise the perceived enemy might be the friend and the leader might be the enemy, or that both might be the enemy, or that one might be the enemy of themself, it is a time where kingdoms are divided, tribes are divided, houses are divided, families and friends betray - then we realise that we need to turn to a solid foundation, the word of truth, the roots of which dig deep and branches which reach the heavens, and measure with the straight plumbline that is extended from heaven - the higher you strech your hand, the more easily the flaw or straightness is visible, you hold it an inch above the place you wanna check, it appears straight - until you check properly - or it falls.
We have satellites orbiting the sky and debri littering the belts, we have a law preventing torture in america and the government of america as the biggest violator of it in america itself, and requirements and standards in america and american prisons in cuba.
You have false cries of indignation in britain, and british police training dictatorship soldiery in bangladesh.
Think, can any human being give you a just and worthy standard other than that of God?

How can one expect me to say that a person is good when his premise is infidelity to God and therefore a confusion of injustices not only in God's sight but that of a neighbouring country with a law stating the opposite? And not only of a neighbouring country but of the people of the same country a few years later, and not only a few years later but during one presidency (as seen with obama and the mujahideen?


What i do know for certain is that those who use their intelligence and knowledge with sincerity and to the best of their ability will inevitably come to the guidance of Allah and will seek to please Him since it is to Him that we all return in the end.
Whoever is working sincerely for the sake of Allah will soon receive powerful assistance.
Others who have gone wrong or mixed an act that was evil with one that was good have the opportunity to repent and sincerely submit to Allah - otherwise a tragic fate awaits.
And if i see even an infidel giving an orphan good and lawful food, am i to say it's wrong because he's an infidel?
And since it's good to feed an orphan, how do i know that it's not the infidel who kilked the orphan's parents and seeks to befriend the orphan and usurp his wealth?
Dunno if you see what i'm seeing but be sure that the only way to achieve peace up to the highest standard possible in this flawed world is through united acceptance of God's guidance.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,
It was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness,
It was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity,
It was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness,
It was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair,
we had everything before us, we had nothing before us….
In short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.*

There were a king with a large jaw and a queen with a plain face, on the throne of England;
There were a king with a large jaw and a queen with a fair face, on the throne of France.
In both countries it was clearer than crystal to the lords of the State preserves of loaves and fishes, that things in general were settled for ever.


A tale of two cities book 1 chapter 1
Charles dickens.

But are they settled?
What i also found interesting was the court trial of the young man (the language dickens used to mimick the words of the prosecutor when referring to the king was funnnnyyyyy).
Reply

MuslimInshallah
11-24-2015, 11:14 AM
Assalaamu alaikum,


(smile) As others have pointed out, surveys can be manipulated to make things seem what they are not. For anyone wanting to better understand how statistics can be manipulated, I would suggest the following small, but very well-written book:

How to Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff
http://www.thriftbooks.com/w/how-to-...sbn=0393310728

(smile) My homeschooled children have read this, and it really helps them to be better able to critically assess various kinds of information they come across. (smile) We have some interesting discussions at home.


May God, the One, Help us to work together to encourage good and discourage wrong.
Reply

Abz2000
11-24-2015, 01:39 PM
The stats don't appear to be for the sake of the stats though, it appears more geared towards manufacturing a debate based on emotional string-pulls.
In order to consider oneself Muslim one must accept the Quran as their main foundation of critereon, and the term jihad fi sabeel Allah internal and external is clearly mentioned numerous times as a continuous requirement through life, although less than the number of times war is mentioned by the corporate mass media.
The headline itself being false, tempts a person to say "no, you're wrong" and therefore get them to argue that it's not the case so that people end up imagining that the number is even less and that.
And also allows other newspapers to say, "how ignorant of the sun to accuse such good people of such a henious act!"

A bit like the part in the short documentary "reel bad arabs" where the guy says he was at a talk and one guy accused another of being a muslim or arab or something like that and another came to the defence of the accused and said "no he's not, he's a good man".

They do that with obama too, some accuse him of being a Muslim and others defend him from the slanderous accusation.
I recall that before his first election, fox news accused him of having been to a madrasah when he was little and others came to his defence and i think they proved fox as liars due to the fact that obama's dad was a murtad and his mother was not muslim, then i think fox apologized for the false and hurtful accusation. (can't fully remember the details but it's orwellian psychology anyway).


The following excerpts are from a fictional biography by orwell and are not presented as fact or for the sake of derivation of conclusions, some points can get the wandering mind wondering if one wants to:


What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the pneumatic tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of the*Times*had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead.
This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs — to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.
Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct, nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary. In no case would it have been possible, once the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place.
The largest section of the Records Department, far larger than the one on which Winston worked, consisted simply of persons whose duty it was to track down and collect all copies of books, newspapers, and other documents which had been superseded and were due for destruction.
A number of the*Times which might, because of changes in political alignment, or mistaken prophecies uttered by Big Brother, have been rewritten a dozen times still stood on the files bearing its original date, and no other copy existed to contradict it.
Books, also, were recalled and rewritten again and again, and were invariably reissued without any admission that any alteration had been made. Even the written instructions which Winston received, and which he invariably got rid of as soon as he had dealt with them, never stated or implied that an act of forgery was to be committed:

always the reference was to slips, errors, misprints, or misquotations which it was necessary to put right in the interests of accuracy.

But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty's figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another.

Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie.

Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version.

A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at 145 million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled.

In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than 145 millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot.

And so it was with every class of recorded fact, great or small. Everything faded away into a shadow-world in which, finally, even the date of the year had become uncertain.......


........ And the Records Department, after all, was itself only a single branch of the Ministry of Truth, whose primary job was not to reconstruct the past but to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels — with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. And the Ministry had not only to supply the multifarious needs of the party, but also to repeat the whole operation at a lower level for the benefit of the proletariat.

There was a whole chain of separate departments dealing with proletarian literature, music, drama, and entertainment generally.

Here were produced rubbishy newspapers containing almost nothing except sport, crime and astrology, sensational five-cent novelettes, films oozing with sex, and sentimental songs which were composed entirely by mechanical means on a special kind of kaleidoscope known as a versificator.
There was even a whole sub-section —*Pornosec, it was called in Newspeak — engaged in producing the lowest kind of pornography, which was sent out in sealed packets and which no Party member, other than those who worked on it, was permitted to look at.

Three messages had slid out of the pneumatic tube while Winston was working, but they were simple matters, and he had disposed of them before the Two Minutes Hate interrupted him. When the Hate was over he returned to his cubicle, took the Newspeak dictionary from the shelf, pushed the speakwrite to one side, cleaned his spectacles, and settled down to his main job of the morning.Winston's greatest pleasure in life was in his work. Most of it was a tedious routine, but included in it there were also jobs so difficult and intricate that you could lose yourself in them as in the depths of a mathematical problem — delicate pieces of forgery in which you had nothing to guide you except your knowledge of the principles of Ingsoc and your estimate of what the Party wanted you to say. Winston was good at this kind of thing. On occasion he had even been entrusted with the rectification of the*Times*leading articles, which were written entirely in Newspeak. He unrolled the message that he had set aside earlier.

It ran:
times 3.12.83 reporting bb dayorder doubleplusungood refs unpersons rewrite fullwise upsub antefilingIn Oldspeak (or standard English) this might be rendered:
The reporting of Big Brother's Order for the Day in the*Times*of December 3rd 1983 is extremely unsatisfactory and makes references to non-existent persons. Rewrite it in full and submit your draft to higher authority before filing........



....... In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to Party propaganda. Once when he happened in some connexion to mention the war against Eurasia, she startled him by saying casually that in her opinion the war was not happening. The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, ‘just to keep people frightened’. This was an idea that had literally never occurred to him. She also stirred a sort of envy in him by telling him that during the Two Minutes Hate her great difficulty was to avoid bursting out laughing. But she only questioned the teachings of the Party when they in some way touched upon her own life. Often she was ready to accept the official mythology, simply because the difference between truth and falsehood did not seem important to her. She believed, for instance, having learnt it at school, that the Party had invented aeroplanes. (In his own schooldays, Winston remembered, in the late fifties, it was only the helicopter that the Party claimed to have invented; a dozen years later, when Julia was at school, it was already claiming the aeroplane; one generation more, and it would be claiming the steam engine.) And when he told her that aeroplanes had been in existence before he was born and long before the Revolution, the fact struck her as totally uninteresting. After all, what did it matter who had invented aeroplanes?

It was rather more of a shock to him when he discovered from some chance remark that she did not remember that Oceania, four years ago, had been at war with Eastasia and at peace with Eurasia.

It was true that she regarded the whole war as a sham: but apparently she had not even noticed that the name of the enemy had changed. ‘I thought we'd always been at war with Eurasia,’ she said vaguely. It frightened him a little. The invention of aeroplanes dated from long before her birth, but the switchover in the war had happened only four years ago, well after she was grown up. He argued with her about it for perhaps a quarter of an hour. In the end he succeeded in forcing her memory back until she did dimly recall that at one time Eastasia and not Eurasia had been the enemy. But the issue still struck her as unimportant.
‘Who cares?’ she said impatiently. ‘It's always one bloody war after another, and one knows the news is all lies anyway.’Sometimes he talked to her of the Records Department and the impudent forgeries that he committed there. Such things did not appear to horrify her. She did not feel the abyss opening beneath her feet at the thought of lies becoming truths. He told her the story of Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford and the momentous slip of paper which he had once held between his fingers. It did not make much impression on her. At first, indeed, she failed to grasp the point of the story.‘Were they friends of yours?’ she said.‘No, I never knew them. They were Inner Party members. Besides, they were far older men than I was. They belonged to the old days, before the Revolution. I barely knew them by sight.’‘Then what was there to worry about? People are being killed off all the time, aren't they?’......


......
In the correctional facility

.......‘I am taking trouble with you, Winston,’ he said, ‘because you are worth trouble. You know perfectly well what is the matter with you. You have known it for years, though you have fought against the knowledge. You are mentally deranged. You suffer from a defective memory. You are unable to remember real events and you persuade yourself that you remember other events which never happened. Fortunately it is curable. You have never cured yourself of it, because you did not choose to. There was a small effort of the will that you were not ready to make. Even now, I am well aware, you are clinging to your disease under the impression that it is a virtue. Now we will take an example.

At this moment, which power is Oceania at war with?’‘
When I was arrested, Oceania was at war with Eastasia.’
‘With Eastasia. Good. And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, has it not?’
Winston drew in his breath. He opened his mouth to speak and then did not speak. He could not take his eyes away from the dial.
‘The truth, please, Winston.*Your*truth. Tell me what you think you remember.’
‘I remember that until only a week before I was arrested, we were not at war with Eastasia at all. We were in alliance with them. The war was against Eurasia. That had lasted for four years. Before that—’

O'Brien stopped him with a movement of the hand.‘Another example,’ he said.
‘Some years ago you had a very serious delusion indeed. You believed that three men, three one-time Party members named Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford men who were executed for treachery and sabotage after making the fullest possible confession — were not guilty of the crimes they were charged with. You believed that you had seen unmistakable documentary evidence proving that their confessions were false. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.’An oblong slip of newspaper had appeared between O'Brien's fingers. For perhaps five seconds it was within the angle of Winston's vision. It was a photograph, and there was no question of its identity. It was THE photograph. It was another copy of the photograph of Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford at the party function in New York, which he had chanced upon eleven years ago and promptly destroyed. For only an instant it was before his eyes, then it was out of sight again. But he had seen it, unquestionably he had seen it! He made a desperate, agonizing effort to wrench the top half of his body free. It was impossible to move so much as a centimetre in any direction. For the moment he had even forgotten the dial. All he wanted was to hold the photograph in his fingers again, or at least to see it.‘It exists!’ he cried.‘No,’ said O'Brien.He stepped across the room. There was a memory hole in the opposite wall. O'Brien lifted the grating. Unseen, the frail slip of paper was whirling away on the current of warm air; it was vanishing in a flash of flame. O'Brien turned away from the wall.‘Ashes,’ he said. ‘Not even identifiable ashes. Dust. It does not exist. It never existed.’‘But it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it.’‘I do not remember it,’ said O'Brien.Winston's heart sank. That was doublethink. He had a feeling of deadly helplessness. If he could have been certain that O'Brien was lying, it would not have seemed to matter. But it was perfectly possible that O'Brien had really forgotten the photograph. And if so, then already he would have forgotten his denial of remembering it, and forgotten the act of forgetting. How could one be sure that it was simple trickery? Perhaps that lunatic dislocation in the mind could really happen: that was the thought that defeated him.O'Brien was looking down at him speculatively. More than ever he had the air of a teacher taking pains with a wayward but promising child.‘There is a Party slogan dealing with the control of the past,’ he said. ‘Repeat it, if you please.’‘“Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past,”’ repeated Winston obediently.“‘Who controls the present controls the past,”’ said O'Brien, nodding his head with slow approval. ‘Is it your opinion, Winston, that the past has real existence?’Again the feeling of helplessness descended upon Winston. His eyes flitted towards the dial. He not only did not know whether ‘yes’ or ‘no’ was the answer that would save him from pain; he did not even know which answer he believed to be the true one.O'Brien smiled faintly. ‘You are no metaphysician, Winston,’ he said. ‘Until this moment you had never considered what is meant by existence. I will put it more precisely.

Does the past exist concretely, in space? Is there somewhere or other a place, a world of solid objects, where the past is still happening?’‘No.’‘Then where does the past exist, if at all?’

‘In records. It is written down.’
‘In records. And—?’
‘In the mind. In human memories.’
‘In memory. Very well, then. We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not?’‘But how can you stop people remembering things?’ cried Winston again momentarily forgetting the dial. ‘It is involuntary. It is outside oneself. How can you control memory? You have not controlled mine!’
O'Brien's manner grew stern again. He laid his hand on the dial.‘On the contrary,’ he said, ‘you*have not controlled it. That is what has brought you here. You are here because you have failed in humility, in self-discipline. You would not make the act of submission which is the price of sanity. You preferred to be a lunatic, a minority of one. Only the disciplined mind can see reality, Winston. You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also believe that the nature of reality is self-evident. When you delude yourself into thinking that you see something, you assume that everyone else sees the same thing as you. But I tell you, Winston, that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else.

Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be the truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party. That is the fact that you have got to relearn, Winston. It needs an act of self-destruction, an effort of the will. You must humble yourself before you can become sane.’

He paused for a few moments, as though to allow what he had been saying to sink in.......

Afterwards

......Besides, the Party was in the right. It must be so; how could the immortal, collective brain be mistaken?

By what external standard could you check its judgements?

Sanity was statistical.

It was merely a question of learning to think as they thought. Only—!
The pencil felt thick and awkward in his fingers. He began to write down the thoughts that came into his head. He wrote first in large clumsy capitals:
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
Then almost without a pause he wrote beneath it:
TWO AND TWO MAKE FIVE
But then there came a sort of check. His mind, as though shying away from something, seemed unable to concentrate. He knew that he knew what came next, but for the moment he could not recall it. When he did recall it, it was only by consciously reasoning out what it must be: it did not come of its own accord. He wrote:
GOD IS POWER
He accepted everything. The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford were guilty of the crimes they were charged with. He had never seen the photograph that disproved their guilt. It had never existed, he had invented it. He remembered remembering contrary things, but those were false memories, products of self-deception. How easy it all was! Only surrender, and everything else followed. It was like swimming against a current that swept you backwards however hard you struggled, and then suddenly deciding to turn round and go with the current instead of opposing it. Nothing had changed except your own attitude: the predestined thing happened in any case. He hardly knew why he had ever rebelled. Everything was easy, except—! Anything could be true. The so-called laws of Nature were nonsense. The law of gravity was nonsense. ‘If I wished,’ O'Brien had said, ‘I could float off this floor like a soap bubble.’ Winston worked it out. ‘If he*thinks*he floats off the floor, and if I simultaneously*think*I see him do it, then the thing happens.’ Suddenly, like a lump of submerged wreckage breaking the surface of water, the thought burst into his mind: ‘It doesn't really happen. We imagine it. It is hallucination.’ He pushed the thought under instantly. The fallacy was obvious. It presupposed that somewhere or other, outside oneself, there was a ‘real’ world where ‘real’ things happened. But how could there be such a world? What knowledge have we of anything, save through our own minds? All happenings are in the mind. Whatever happens in all minds, truly happens.He had no difficulty in disposing of the fallacy, and he was in no danger of succumbing to it. He realized, nevertheless, that it ought never to have occurred to him. The mind should develop a blind spot whenever a dangerous thought presented itself. The process should be automatic, instinctive.*Crimestop, they called it in Newspeak.
He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions — ‘the Party says the earth is flat’, ‘the party says that ice is heavier than water’ — and trained himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them. It was not easy. It needed great powers of reasoning and improvisation. The arithmetical problems raised, for instance, by such a statement as ‘two and two make five’ were beyond his intellectual grasp. It needed also a sort of athleticism of mind, an ability at one moment to make the most delicate use of logic and at the next to be unconscious of the crudest logical errors. Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain.

.......

Reply

Scimitar
11-24-2015, 03:07 PM
Originally Posted by ardianto
:wa:

Actually the word "jihadis" does not refer to ordinary mujahideen, but refer to people who hold ideology which they believe that the glory of Islam can be reached only through jihad in the battlefield.
I was wondering about this... how does The Sun, Englands trashiest tabloid - define a Jihadist?

I'm sure it's not as hardline as what you've written brother Ardianto. For The Sun, you just have to believe in One God and Muhammad (pbuh) as the Messenger to be a Jihadi I am thinking. Seriously - taking what The Sun has to say to heart is a waste of time.

Scimi
Reply

ardianto
11-24-2015, 03:23 PM
Originally Posted by Scimitar
I was wondering about this... how does The Sun, Englands trashiest tabloid - define a Jihadist?

I'm sure it's not as hardline as what you've written brother Ardianto. For The Sun, you just have to believe in One God and Muhammad (pbuh) as the Messenger to be a Jihadi I am thinking. Seriously - taking what The Sun has to say to heart is a waste of time.

Scimi
Few other medias use dual term "jihadist" and "fighter" when refer to Muslim militias that depend of which group those militias are fighting. But yeah, I often heard about The Sun reputation.
Reply

Free_Syria
11-26-2015, 10:03 PM
The question was something like: do you feel sympathy for people who travel to fight in Syria? it didn't even specify for which group they were fighting. So one may have answered "yes" because had sympathies for those who travel to Syria to fight ISIS, and those were counted as people who had sympathies for jihadists. This article is pure deception.
Reply

al_Hind
11-26-2015, 10:30 PM
Though the poll is obviously inaccurate, I don't see what is so outrageous about that result anyway. Showing sympathy doesn't necessarily mean they support what they're doing. Most Muslims do all share the same frustration to what is happening in the Muslim world at the hands of the West, and they do all want to see justice. Obviously ISIS ( if you follow the official story) are violent extremists, and are taking the wrong course of action which is not sanctioned in Islam at all. But it stems from the same frustration to what is currently happening in the Muslim world that all Muslims share.
Reply

LaSorcia
11-27-2015, 01:32 AM
I have heard that 2 in 5 Muslims supports football! 4 in 5 in Pakistan alone! Beware!
Reply

Scimitar
11-27-2015, 11:31 PM
that's because Pakistan manufactures more footballs than all other nations combined :D you heard correctly - what's your source? :D

Scimi
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 58
    Last Post: 07-26-2010, 11:27 PM
  2. Replies: 110
    Last Post: 01-13-2008, 10:01 PM
  3. Replies: 53
    Last Post: 05-02-2007, 02:28 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 11:16 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!