PDA

View Full Version : The Taliban Discussion Thread



Bittersteel
07-07-2007, 08:04 PM
From my experience in interaction with both Muslims(mostly Bangladeshi ignorant ones) and Non-Muslims(Indians,Israelis,westerners,etc) ,I have found out that the Taliban type of a government is regarded by most a perfect example of Islamic governance.so I am starting this thread in order to understand how perfect were they.

Taliban ideology and its application

The Taliban's extremely strict and anti-modern ideology has been described as an "innovative form of sharia combining Pashtun tribal codes", or Pashtunwali, with radical Deobandi interpretations of Islam favored by members of the Pakistani fundamentalist Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) organization and its splinter groups. Also contributing to the admixture was the *******sm of their Saudi financial benefactors, and the jihadism and pan-Islamism of sometime comrade-in-arms Osama bin Laden. Their ideology was a departure from the Islamism of the anti-Soviet mujahideen rulers they replaced who tended to be mystical Sufis, traditionalists, or radical Islamicists inspired by the Ikhwan.

Sharia law was interpreted to ban a wide variety of activities hitherto lawful in Afghanistan: employment and education for women, movies, television, videos, music, dancing, hanging pictures in homes, clapping during sports events. Also new were the "religious police" for enforcing these bans, a concept thought to be borrowed from the *******s. In newly conquered towns hundreds of religious police beat offenders -- typically men who shaved and women who were not wearing their burqa properly -- with long sticks. Critics complained that most Afghans were non-Pashtuns who followed a different, less strict and less intrusive interpretation of Islam.

Taliban relationship with ethnicity was mixed. Following Deobandi and Islamist anti-nationalist belief, they opposed "tribal and feudal structures," and eliminated from "leadership roles" traditional tribal or feudal leaders. On the other hand, since they were very reluctant to share power and their ranks were overwhelmingly Pashtuns, their rule meant ethnic Pashtuns controlled multi-ethnic Afghanistan, where Pashtuns made up only 42% of the population . At the national level, "all senior Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara bureaucrats" were replaced "with Pashtuns, whether qualified or not. As a result of this loss of expertise, the ministries by and large ceased to function." In local units of government like city councils of Kabul or Herat, Taliban loyalists, not locals, dominated, even when the Pashto-speaking Taliban could not communicate with the local Dari Persian language-speaking Afghans. (Roughly half of the population of Afghanistan spoke Dari or other non-Pashtun tongues). Critics complained this "lack of local representation in urban administration made the Taliban appear as an occupying force."

Like ******* and other Deobandis, the Taliban strongly opposed the Shia branch of Islam. The Taliban declared the Hazara ethnic group, which totaled almost 10% of Afghanistan's population, "not Muslims."

Along with being very strict, the Taliban were adverse to debate on doctrine with other Muslims. "The Taliban did not allow even Muslim reporters to question [their] edicts or to discuss interpretations of the Qur'an."

As they established their power the Taliban created a new form of Islamic radicalism that spread beyond the borders of Afghanistan, mostly to Pakistan. By 1998-9 Taliban-style groups in the Pashtun belt, and to an extent in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, "were banning TV and videos .... and forcing people, particularly women to adapt to the Taliban dress code and way of life."

Governance

The Taliban did not hold elections, as their spokesman explained:

The Sharia does not allow politics or political parties. That is why we give no salaries to officials or soldiers, just food, clothes, shoes and weapons. We want to live a life like the Prophet lived 1400 years ago and jihad is our right. We want to recreate the time of the Prophet and we are only carrying out what the Afghan people have wanted for the past 14 years.

Instead of an election, their leader's legitimacy came from "Bay'ah" or oath of allegiance in imitation of the Prophet and early Muslims. On 4 April 1996, Mullah Omar had the "the Cloak of the Prophet Mohammed", taken from its shrine "for the first time in 60 years." Wrapping himself in the relic, he appeared on the roof of a building in the centre of Kandahar while hundreds of Pashtun mullahs below shouted `Amir al-Mu'minin`! (Commander of the Faithful), in a defacto pledge of support.

Also in keeping with the governance of early Muslims was a lack of state institutions or "a methodology for command and control," standard today internationally even among non-Westernized states. The Taliban didn't issue "press releases, policy statements or hold regular press conferences," and of course the outside world and most Afghans didn't even know what they looked like since photography was banned. [31] Their regular army resembled "a lashkar or traditional tribal militia force" with only 25,000 to 30,000 men, these being added to as the need arose. Cabinet ministers and deputies were mullahs with a "madrassa education." Several of them, such as the Minister of Health and Governor of the State bank, were primarily military commanders who left their administrative posts to fight when needed. If and when military reverses trapped them behind lines or led to their death, this created "even greater chaos" in the national administration.[32] In the Ministry of Finance there was no budget or "qualified economist or banker." Cash to finance Taliban war effort was collected and dispersed by Mullah Omar without book-keeping.

Consistency

The Taliban ideology was not static. Before its capture of Kabul it talked not of ruling, but of restoring law and order and stepping aside once a government of `good Muslims` took power. Its decision making process in Kandahar resembled the Pashtun tribal jirga or council, and/or what the Taliban believed was the early Islamic model. Discussion was followed by a building of a consensus by the believers.

As its power grew decisions were made by Mullah Omar without the old consultation

Decisions are based on the advice of the Amir-ul Momineen. For us consultation is not necessary. We believe that this is in line with the Sharia. We abide by the Amir's view even if he alone takes this view. There will not be a head of state. Instead there will be an Amir al-Mu'minin. Mullah Omar will be the highest authority and the government will not be able to implement any decision to which he does not agree. General elections are incompatible with Sharia and therefore we reject them.

and without Omar's visiting other parts of the country. He visited the Capital Kabul only twice while in power.

In 1999, Omar issued a decree stating the Buddha statues at Bamyan would be protected because Afghanistan had no Buddhists, implying idolatry would not be a problem. But in March 2001 this decision was reversed with a decree stating "all the statues around Afghanistan must be destroyed." [35]

Criticism of ideology

The Taliban were criticised not only for their strictness but also for innovation (Bid‘ah). Some Muslims complained many Taliban prohibitions such as the ban on clapping during sports events, kite flying, beard trimming, or sports for women, had no validity in the Qur'an or sharia; that the Taliban called their 20% tax on truckloads of opium "zakat," when zakat is limited to 2.5% of the zakat-payers' disposable income.

The bestowing of the title of Amir al-Mu'minin on Muhammad Omar was criticized on the grounds that he lacked scholarly learning, tribal pedigree, or connections to the Prophet's family. Sanction for the title required the support of all of the country's ulema, whereas only some 1200 Pashtun Taliban-supporting Mullahs had declared Omar the Amir. [36] "No Afghan had adopted the title since 1834, when King Dost Mohammed Khan assumed the title before he declared jihad against the Sikh kingdom in Peshwar. But Dost Mohammed was fighting foreigners, while Omar had declared jihad against" other Afghans.

Explanation of ideology

Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) was important to the Taliban because the "vast majority" of its rank and file and most of the leadership, (though not Mullah Omar), were Koranic students who had studied at madrassas set up for Afghan refugees, usually by the JUI. The leader of JUI, Maulana Fazl ur-Rahman, was a political ally of Benazir Bhutto. After Bhutto became prime minister, Rehman "had access to the government, the army and the ISI" whom he influenced to help the Taliban. [38]

Journalist Ahmed Rashid suggests that the devastation and hardship of the war against the Soviet Union and the civil war that followed, was another factor influencing the ideology of the Taliban. The young rank and file Taliban were Koranic students in Afghan refugee camps whose teachers were often "barely literate," let alone scholars learned in the finer points of Islamic law and history. The refugee students brought up in a totally male society, not only had no education in maths, science, history or geography, they had no traditional skills of farming, herding or handicraft-making, nor even knowledge of their tribal and clan lineages.

In such an environment peace meant unemployment, domination of women was an affirmation of manhood. Rigid fundamentalism was a matter of political survival, not just principle, Taliban leaders "repeatedly told" Rashid "that if they gave women greater freedom or a chance to go to school, they would lose the support of their rank and file."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban...ts_application
discuss.I want to know how Islamic were they.They seem more extreme than the Saudis.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Sinbad
07-07-2007, 09:35 PM
LOL! People remember what you type, this is a very active islamic forum Im sure the CIA/brittish intelligence are watching:)

The Taleban are more conservative than the saudis. The Saudis are rich and they arent very religous, they often visit the sinfull dubai.

The Talebans are poor and uneducated, poverty is the fertile soile for extremism.
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-07-2007, 09:59 PM
Iam English so i probabley wont be respected or listened to but i have been reading up on the Taliban and iam sad that they are not still in power they ruled Afghanistan well after the bloody war with the Soviets if women wore nail vanish there hands would be chopped off and if anyone stole anything there hands would be chopped off i just hope one day the Taliban come back to power again in Afghnaistan because they ran the country well before.
Reply

Bittersteel
07-09-2007, 09:01 AM
why would wearing nail varnish lead to chopping off fingers?
stealing is one thing,the hudood ruling applies for both men and women.
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
Dawud_uk
07-09-2007, 09:18 AM
Originally Posted by Aziz
why would wearing nail varnish lead to chopping off fingers?
stealing is one thing,the hudood ruling applies for both men and women.
that is exactly what i was thinking, sounds the usual anti-taliban propoganda, throw enough mud and some of it will stick.

Assalaamu Alaykum,
Abu Abdullah

ps... already started a simular thread a few months ago, when get time will link it back to this one so we dont end up all repeating ourselves or maybe the mods can merge threads or something.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
07-09-2007, 09:45 AM
lol i cant help but see them as heroes. and when the west bashes them it only increases my longing to see what their like lol kinda funny
Reply

wilberhum
07-09-2007, 03:57 PM
Originally Posted by Aziz
why would wearing nail varnish lead to chopping off fingers?stealing is one thing,the hudood ruling applies for both men and women.
It is called intollorance.
Reply

- Qatada -
07-09-2007, 04:34 PM
:salamext:



Bro Aziz, is wikipedia even a reliable source? Subhaan Allaah it's amazing, doesn't Allaah say (translation of the meaning):


O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done. [Qur'an 49: 6]

I really feel like deleting the quote which is in your post, and if the article's going to have such biased views right from the beginning - then is it even worthy of a discussion at all?



We don't know their activities, nor do we have any solid authentic evidences for what the people on wikipedia claim. So what kind of discussion would this be anyway? If we can't get any reliable info about them?


If this thread leads to someone insulting our brothers (yes they are muslims, no matter what is said about them) - then it will lead to the thread being closed.


So anyone who gets involved, should know that if this thread turns into something evil. Insha Allaah it will be closed.
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-10-2007, 06:58 PM
Iam not saying anti Taliban propoganda iam a admirer of the resistence they are putting up in Afghanistan.
Reply

wilberhum
07-10-2007, 07:10 PM
Originally Posted by ISLAMASWEENEY
Iam not saying anti Taliban propoganda iam a admirer of the resistence they are putting up in Afghanistan.
Do you admire how they blow up market places filled with fellow Afgans?
Or is it the way they blow up schools because girls go there? :?
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-10-2007, 07:14 PM
No i admire the way they are holding out against Nato forces that market place bomb today was a war crime no doubt about that but Nato and the Afghan army and police have commited more.
Reply

Bittersteel
07-10-2007, 07:18 PM
ps... already started a simular thread a few months ago, when get time will link it back to this one so we dont end up all repeating ourselves or maybe the mods can merge threads or something.
I did open one weeks ago.
anyways I don't regard the Taliban as the perfect example of enforcers of Islamic laws.nor do I regard them as defenders of anything since they are associated with people like Bin Laden who have been responsible for so much negative stuff that has happened to Muslims.The guy got blood on his hands ,yes,just like some other world leaders.
KSA comes close and is quite perfect but there are still some issues they haven't resolved yet like honour killings( I am not sure whether if they still occur),forced marriages,bad treatment for foreign workers,exploitation of foreign women workers,racism,the list goes on quite a bit.
Reply

wilberhum
07-10-2007, 07:20 PM
Originally Posted by ISLAMASWEENEY
No i admire the way they are holding out against Nato forces that market place bomb today was a war crime no doubt about that but Nato and the Afghan army and police have commited more.
So war crimes are ok as long as the other side commits more? :playing:
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-10-2007, 07:46 PM
They are national Afghan resistence.
Reply

wilberhum
07-10-2007, 07:51 PM
Originally Posted by ISLAMASWEENEY
They are national Afghan resistence.
Is that why they kill Afghans? Why are they resisting Afghanis?
You seam to have the ability of ignore the obvious. :hiding:
Reply

queefer
07-10-2007, 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
lol i cant help but see them as heroes. and when the west bashes them it only increases my longing to see what their like lol kinda funny
So what is stopping you from going to Afghanistan and 'signing up' ? It doesn't seem too hard to do.
Reply

snakelegs
07-10-2007, 08:54 PM
they are getting more and more control on the pakistan side of the border too - in the tribal areas and in frontier province.
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-10-2007, 09:03 PM
Yes but you could say the Viet Cong killed Vietnamese people you could say the Mujahaden in Afghanistan killed Afghans AND also Iraqi resistence is killing innocent Iraqis.
Reply

Sinbad
07-10-2007, 09:24 PM
I dont care what they do with the pashtun parts. Herat and the western parts they shoildnt touch. Its Khorassan, Im from Iranian Khorassan. But the brittish invaded and took it. Its like if mexico and America split up Texas, its still one Texas.
Reply

snakelegs
07-10-2007, 09:28 PM
the borders drawn by the british also split baluchistan, no? or is this what you were talking about?
Reply

wilberhum
07-10-2007, 09:40 PM
Civilians among Afghan blast dead
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...CDCFE05C07.htm

A suicide car bomb, targeting a Nato patrol in a crowded marketplace in southern Afghanistan, has killed 17 people and wounded 30, officials have said.
At least six civilians were killed in the attack and 13 others, including children, were wounded.
[MAD]I guess the children were resisting too.[/MAD]
Reply

Sinbad
07-10-2007, 11:04 PM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
the borders drawn by the british also split baluchistan, no? or is this what you were talking about?
baluchistan, Dubai, Oman, Bahrain, azerbaijan, uzbekistan, tajikistan et c.

In the 1830s the brittish and Russians invaded Iran, Tajikistan is the only nation except for Iran where the majority speaks persian. azerbaijan is divided in north and south, north was stolen by the russians, south is still in Iranian hands.

After the russian invasion armenians and azeris rebelled to be with Iran again. Stalin gave azeris armenian parts, hence the war after the fall of soviet between armenians and azaris.

After that the brittish left the middle east they refused to give Iran back its terretories, they created fake states like UAE, by merging tribes and giving them poliical power just so Iran woudlnt get it back.
Reply

snakelegs
07-10-2007, 11:12 PM
Originally Posted by Sinbad
baluchistan, Dubai, Oman, Bahrain, azerbaijan, uzbekistan, tajikistan et c.

In the 1830s the brittish and Russians invaded Iran, Tajikistan is the only nation except for Iran where the majority speaks persian. azerbaijan is divided in north and south, north was stolen by the russians, south is still in Iranian hands.

After the russian invasion armenians and azeris rebelled to be with Iran again. Stalin gave azeris armenian parts, hence the war after the fall of soviet between armenians and azaris.

After that the brittish left the middle east they refused to give Iran back its terretories, they created fake states like UAE, by merging tribes and giving them poliical power just so Iran woudlnt get it back.
i didn't know all those places were turkish speaking - i assume you are talking about part of afghanistan as well?
the british left behind many "gifts that keep on giving" (sarcasm). there should be an icon for sarcasm!
Reply

Sinbad
07-10-2007, 11:27 PM
Turkish speaking/persian speaking, its no diffrence. Azerbaijan is turkish speaking, Uzbekistan is turkish speaking, but there are still persians. Samarkand is a 90% persian speaking city. The president of turkmenistan is 50% persian and 50% turkish.

Iran is 51% persian, 25% turkish, the turks are the most patriotic, they where the most eager to enlist in the Iran iraq war.

Even the arab states have persians, Baharin is 30% persian.

UAE was mostly persian, the arabs where nomadic tribes, in the 70s, the arab that got the power from the brittish forced the arabs to leave the dessert and take persian homes by the coast and citys.
Reply

Al_Imaan
07-10-2007, 11:42 PM
employment and education for women
how is that haram?...i guess i shouldn't go to school anymore and all sisters on the forum should neither work or study...:mmokay:

Like ******* and other Deobandis, the Taliban strongly opposed the Shia branch of Islam. The Taliban declared the Hazara ethnic group, which totaled almost 10% of Afghanistan's population, "not Muslims."
they believe in Allah and his Messenger, why are they called "not muslim"?...that is just...astaghfirullah for calling their muslim brothers "kaafirs"...

In 1999, Omar issued a decree stating the Buddha statues at Bamyan would be protected because Afghanistan had no Buddhists, implying idolatry would not be a problem. But in March 2001 this decision was reversed with a decree stating "all the statues around Afghanistan must be destroyed." [35]
and y is that? the majority of afghans are muslims and even if the majority of the afghans were buddhists, the taliban had no right in destroying the buddha. they could have left it alone and followed surah kaafirun..this is quite wrong, almost everyone who is replying to this thread is defending the taliban cause they are "muslims"...hearing is not the same as seeing...if u haven't seen the taliban doing what they have done, then don't state it...i don't think torture is a part of islamic shariah...
Reply

islamirama
07-10-2007, 11:49 PM
There's nothing i hate more them ignorant threads started with nothing but lies about others. I bet more than half the peeps here don't even know jack about talibans except what their little ears heard from CNN and other propaganda machines.
Reply

islamirama
07-10-2007, 11:50 PM
From another forum......

------------------------------------


Assalam Alaikam Rahmatullah Wabaraktu,

Again, it seems that some muslims and non-muslims have accused the taliban of massacres and other baseless propaganda the taliban have been accused of. Surely, as usual falsehood is bound to perish.

Also, before you post on this thread, please no comments that are opinions. Just ask questions, and if anyone is knowledgeable about Afghanistan, and its history then they may respond. If not, do not post opinions of what do you think, if you disagree with my information, then ask a question. Do not give me baseless comments and opinions without applying the question in a just manner. If you agree, JazakAllah khair, May Allah swt reward you.

Three Qualifications before you ask a Question"

1) You have visited Afghanistan before, during and after the Taliban rule
2) You must at least provide sources for what you accuse the Taliban of
3) If you are neither the two, then its best to just be quiet and do not comment. If you want, you may private message.

The Taliban

1) Accusation of not Allowing women in Schools-

Schools were established in Afghanistan for women and men, both alike. It was separate in different facilities due to Sharia law being implemented. The accusation stands that the Taliban did not allow women to attend educational institutions.

A- 10 years of war, 4 years of civil war, the only books left were communist books being imposed
B- 90 Percent of the infrastructure of Afghanistan was destroyed due to Russian invasion and civil war
C- Most of the educational systems were destroyed
D- Sanctions and other governments did not care about Afghanistan, therefore where are the Taliban going to build an educational system, when no one in the world cares?

If these still does not convince you.

The Taliban, Education and Health Policy Toward Girls. (untold Truth)

"According to a survey by the Swedish Comittie for Afghanistan (SCA), 80% of girls schools were located in rural afghanistan and under the Taliban were operating in full swing. Ms Pia Karlsson, education advisor at the SCA, said 85% of girls were stil in schools. In KunduzProvince, under the Taliban, 122 girls schools were operating, with 390 registered female teachers!"

The Taliban were the prime target in an Anti-Islamic drive in the media, to prepare the public for war against them.

All the women who shrill at the burqa, were silent when 2 million afghans died from Russian bombs, they were silent went 500'000 afghans were maimed by mines, and were silent about thousands of women who were raped before the Taliban came to power.
General Hamid who lived under the Taliban for several years.

There has been no campaign aimed at beating women in public, and there has been no ban on education for women. Only a restriction on co-education.

There are many lies on "respected websites about the "suffering" of Afghan women, yet there are no dates, names, places or anything other form of verification. Hamid gul says he found women almost always-outnumbered men in the streets and market places.
The Afghan women protesting in the west come from the Khalq and parcham factions of Afghan communists. They represent a tiny fraction of the population.

The Taliban were extra strict on these communist women to ensure they didn't cause friction and trouble and stir up trouble. The women only had to wear the Burqa in the streets, at home; they were free to dress as they pleased. According to a female nurse, women in hospitals rarely wore the burqa or even hijab as there were no men present.

According to a survey by the Swedish Committee for Afghanistan (SCA), 80% of girl's schools were located in rural Afghanistan and under the Taliban were operating in full swing. Ms Pia Karlsson, education advisor at the SCA, said 85% of girls were still in schools. In KunduzProvince, under the Taliban, 122 girls schools were operating, with 390 registered female teachers!

Prior to Taliban rule, there were 350 beds in Kabul for women. In august 2001, there were 950 beds for women in women only hospitals in Kabul. Some women only hospitals include RabiaBalkhiHospital, MalaliHospital, KhairKhanaHospital, IndiraGandhiHealthHospital, Atta Turk Hospital, Kuwait Red Crescent health Centre and a Contagios Disease Health Clinic! There were also 32 Mother and Child clinics.

In addition, the women received treatment at the ICRC and Sanday Gal Orthopaedic Centres. In All these hospitals and centres, only women doctors and nurses worked providing health care.
Yet the Sun, Dailey express, New York Times, and all these tabloid press agencies never reported any of this, neither did the BBC, CNN, Fox news etc. It was part of a campaign of lies and deception to turn the public against the Taliban.

You were told women couldn't work, women could not go out the house, that women could not go to school, or even go to hospitals, well the facts are proving otherwise.

Source

2) I will not bring up anymore, i would love to ask those who accuse the taliban of oppression to bring your evidence if you are clear in truth, Intellectual debates should be established on this thread.

Note: I advise you to be smart in this debate.

What about some of the videos that are circulation on the net, supposedly of Taliban beating up women?
__________________

Thank You,

First video - The woman shot in the head in the Soccer Stadium

This punishment was due to a crime in which that woman had murdered her husband and sleeping with their child. The tribe of the husband have asked the Taliban to perform a public execution of the woman or otherwise they would handle the case.

The Taliban as instructed by the Council, were ordered to execute the woman for the murder of her husband and sleeping with the child.

Second video - The woman beaten on the street in Kabul

This is the most interesting video, since the cameraman forgot to show the full film and record what was occurring.

A narrow minded Talib patrol was speaking with a woman and noticed from his point of view that she was not properly covered, in which he started whipping her with a stick. However, if you look towards the end of this video, you see another Talib member stopping the man from hitting the woman with the stick.(which should draw some conclusions)

Some Talib's were nice, while other's were very intimidating to watch. In the case of this man, he had witnessed over 10 years of war and 4 years of civil war, losing his family. Surprisingly, he is still sane and attempts to adhere to his religion as best as he can after continuous hardship.

2 suggestions in this case

1) the man who had hit the woman with the stick was very narrow-minded and did not fully understand the consequences of his actions

2) If one police officer beats a man or a woman in Los angeles, do we blame the whole United States Police Force?

The taliban were not perfect, although they're law and implementation may seem rigid, they came the closest to a true Islamic Sharia compared to other taghut regimes and non-islamic based governments.

And the man who beat that woman with the stick was relieved of his command and punished.

JazakAllah khair for the questions,
May Allah swt bless you with increase iman and send you to firdaus..


And what about Buddah Statues?
__________________

Assalam Alaikam

The Buddah Statues-

Two clarifications

1) No one cared about the children of Afghanistan after the Russian invasion or its people. Children living in huts next to the statues were starving.The world was in love with the buddahs of bamiyan. The taliban ambassador have stated that buddhas of bamiyan were blown with the help of Saudi and Pakistani engineers over their rage that UNICEF would only provide funds to protect the Statues.

When it was the British who used the statues for target practice and nearly wanted to blow the statues apart in the first Anglo war, yet no one mentions that.

2) It is an Islamic ruling to rid of all Idols whether worshiped in the past or in the present, this was the practice of Ibrahim Alayhisalam and Muhammad sws.

Scenario

If you are your children are starving at home, and i am a wealthy billionaire, i tell you that i will protect a certain aspect of your house, but i will not give you or your family any money for food or clothing.

If you had the means of getting rid of that part of your home, would you do it?

2nd Scenario

You are a mumeen who believes that all forms of Idols should be destroyed, you see a very large idol, and know through the Quran and Sunnah that Muhammad sws and Ibrahim Alayhisalam destroyed all forms of Idols.

Would you do it?

JazakAllah khair, Assalam Alaikam, And Again May Allah swt raise your iman and may you be in firdaus...



What about Hazara propaganda that Taliban *massacred* their people.
__________________

Two massacres had occurred, both in retaliation from the Taliban.

The Hazara, one of the leader's of them being Dostum, who was a savage warlord who was once backed by communism, between him and rabbani both feuding warlords who turned kabul into rubble during the civil war. In the case of hazara, certain hazara soldiers were told to rape and humiliate poshtun women and children. The reason being is that if anyone knows poshtun culture, one would realize that humiliation is worse than murder.

The hazara in Mazar who were mostly communist backed, as the Northern alliance who consisted of former communist backed warlords who also sought aid from Europe to fight the established Islamic State. The Hazara and other northern alliance commanders butchered thousands of poshtuns, in retaliation the taliban had done the same, to get equal.

One brutal talib leader who also abused the Sharia was Mullah Dadullah, who was told by the Taliban to leave for his brutality.

Mullah Dadullah however holds a strong grudge towards the hazara due to majority of his close associates and relatives were massacred and tortured at their hands.

"And if two parties from the believers fight amongst themselves, then make peace between the two. And if one of the two parties rebels against the other, then FIGHT the party that is rebellious until the order of Allah does come to pass..." [Quran 49:9]

The northern alliance rebelled against the established Islamic State, for those who overpraise Ahmed Shah Masood. Show me one documented battle in which he fought outside of pansjir valley for.

So the so-called massacre of hazara was in retaliation for the massacre of poshtuns.

Then some might bring you a statement from hazara.net stating what the mullah said "hazara are not muslim, you can kill them", which was a mistranslation in which he states if you find any hazara who denies sharia and rebells against you then you may kill him since he is not a muslim considering his statues of fighting an established Islamic State.


Now Comes the person who had asked about Taliban profiting from Opium.
Undoubtedly, you do not have to be even a mumeen to understand this.
Under the Taliban rule, Opium was eradicated from Afghanistan. However, since the Democratic rule, it has been revived. The taliban do not get their funding from opium, to state this, bring your proof.

Btw, when you ask a question, bring your evidence to support a claim.

Taliban nearly eradicate all Opium from Afghanistan

It is Hamid Karzai's brother Ahmed, who is profiting from the Opium, he is known to be one of the biggest drug dealers in Afghanistan. Opium was not started by the taliban, but condemned and nearly eradicated by them.

To say the Taliban get their funding from Opium, you simply just have to provide evidence, and if you do, i will refute your evidence.

Reply

wilberhum
07-10-2007, 11:52 PM
CNN and other propaganda machines.
With your head so deep in the sand, don't forget to come up for air. :muddlehea
Reply

Amadeus85
07-11-2007, 12:17 AM
Just for destroying ancient Buddha statues talebans should be condemned and named as barbaric. They shot at them from rpg's , using dynamite, machine guns, even muslims from other countries condemned this act.
Reply

islamirama
07-11-2007, 12:24 AM
Despite my posting being there, you still your ignorance.

Only people should be condemed are the westerners who were crying out for the statues but didn't give a dam about the people, and the ignorant "muslims" in other countries who were parroting their masters.

Originally Posted by Aaron85
Just for destroying ancient Buddha statues talebans should be condemned and named as barbaric. They shot at them from rpg's , using dynamite, machine guns, even muslims from other countries condemned this act.
READ AGAIN ...

The Buddah Statues-

Two clarifications

1) No one cared about the children of Afghanistan after the Russian invasion or its people. Children living in huts next to the statues were starving.The world was in love with the buddahs of bamiyan. The taliban ambassador have stated that buddhas of bamiyan were blown with the help of Saudi and Pakistani engineers over their rage that UNICEF would only provide funds to protect the Statues.

When it was the British who used the statues for target practice and nearly wanted to blow the statues apart in the first Anglo war, yet no one mentions that.

2) It is an Islamic ruling to rid of all Idols whether worshiped in the past or in the present, this was the practice of Ibrahim Alayhisalam and Muhammad sws.

Scenario

If you are your children are starving at home, and i am a wealthy billionaire, i tell you that i will protect a certain aspect of your house, but i will not give you or your family any money for food or clothing.

If you had the means of getting rid of that part of your home, would you do it?


Reply

Amadeus85
07-11-2007, 12:47 AM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Despite my posting being there, you still your ignorance.

Only people should be condemed are the westerners who were crying out for the statues but didn't give a dam about the people, and the ignorant "muslims" in other countries who were parroting their masters.


READ AGAIN ...

The Buddah Statues-

Two clarifications

1) No one cared about the children of Afghanistan after the Russian invasion or its people. Children living in huts next to the statues were starving.The world was in love with the buddahs of bamiyan. The taliban ambassador have stated that buddhas of bamiyan were blown with the help of Saudi and Pakistani engineers over their rage that UNICEF would only provide funds to protect the Statues.

When it was the British who used the statues for target practice and nearly wanted to blow the statues apart in the first Anglo war, yet no one mentions that.

2) It is an Islamic ruling to rid of all Idols whether worshiped in the past or in the present, this was the practice of Ibrahim Alayhisalam and Muhammad sws.

Scenario

If you are your children are starving at home, and i am a wealthy billionaire, i tell you that i will protect a certain aspect of your house, but i will not give you or your family any money for food or clothing.

If you had the means of getting rid of that part of your home, would you do it?

Ok islamirama, but just for once try to control your hatred for infidels and ask yourself- was it necessary to destroy those ancient statues? For you they were just idols, but for millions of buddhists they were something important. So really under sharia law all places of infidel cult places shall be destroyed?
Reply

snakelegs
07-11-2007, 12:52 AM
well, of course i think blowing up the statues was wrong. but islamirama has a point here:
No one cared about the children of Afghanistan after the Russian invasion or its people. Children living in huts next to the statues were starving.The world was in love with the buddahs of bamiyan. The taliban ambassador have stated that buddhas of bamiyan were blown with the help of Saudi and Pakistani engineers over their rage that UNICEF would only provide funds to protect the Statues.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-11-2007, 01:01 AM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
well, of course i think blowing up the statues was wrong. but islamirama has a point here:
Yes but it wasnt buddhists fault that afghani children suffer. I still think that that act was barbaric.
Reply

islamirama
07-11-2007, 01:03 AM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Yes but it wasnt buddhists fault that afghani children suffer. I still think that that act was barbaric.
UNICEF would only provide funds to protect the Statues not the kids, many protested to the end of the status but not the kids. Who is really barbaric here?
Reply

Sinbad
07-11-2007, 01:14 AM
The Buddah statues where a reminder of the scentific genious of the region before islam.
Reply

snakelegs
07-11-2007, 01:17 AM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Yes but it wasnt buddhists fault that afghani children suffer. I still think that that act was barbaric.
it was barbaric when the u.s. washed its hands and walked out once the evil commies had been defeated. the u.s. used the people in its proxy war and than threw them in the garbage can. the world was indeed more concerned about the statues than about the starvation of the people.
i do hope you understand that i am not condoning the idiotic destruction of one of the world's treasures - i most certainly am not.
it's a matter of perspective what you choose to see as barbaric.
Reply

Keltoi
07-11-2007, 01:33 AM
Originally Posted by snakelegs
it was barbaric when the u.s. washed its hands and walked out once the evil commies had been defeated. the u.s. used the people in its proxy war and than threw them in the garbage can. the world was indeed more concerned about the statues than about the starvation of the people.
i do hope you understand that i am not condoning the idiotic destruction of one of the world's treasures - i most certainly am not.
it's a matter of perspective what you choose to see as barbaric.
The U.S. proxy war in Afghanistan, which it was, doesn't mean the U.S. owed Afghanistan anything. That might sound barbaric, but supplying arms to aid the enemy of your enemy doesn't mean you adopt a nation. It was payback for the aid the Russians gave North Vietnam. Do you think the Afghans and the foreign fighters there were killing Russians for the sake of the U.S.?
Reply

Malaikah
07-11-2007, 01:39 AM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Just for destroying ancient Buddha statues talebans should be condemned and named as barbaric. They shot at them from rpg's , using dynamite, machine guns, even muslims from other countries condemned this act.
Wow, who cares about all the poverty and rape and murder and war! The statues mean that much to you huh?
Reply

Keltoi
07-11-2007, 01:44 AM
The destruction of the statues was almost a metaphor for the Taliban themselves. No, the destruction of the statues wasn't the worst thing going on in Afghanistan, that is certain.
Reply

snakelegs
07-11-2007, 01:57 AM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
The U.S. proxy war in Afghanistan, which it was, doesn't mean the U.S. owed Afghanistan anything. That might sound barbaric, but supplying arms to aid the enemy of your enemy doesn't mean you adopt a nation. It was payback for the aid the Russians gave North Vietnam. Do you think the Afghans and the foreign fighters there were killing Russians for the sake of the U.S.?
no i don't. but i still think it was wrong to just completely lose interest in the country and its people once it had served out needs. people were starving and the world was crying about statues. i can see why some people took offense.
(please remember i most certainly do not condone the blowing up of the statues).
Reply

Malaikah
07-11-2007, 02:00 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
Civilians among Afghan blast dead
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...CDCFE05C07.htm


[MAD]I guess the children were resisting too.[/MAD]
And the proof that this was carried out by the Taliban would be what exactly? :?
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-11-2007, 06:10 AM
The Taliban is a Islamic party so why would they let Buddhist things stay in Afghanistan.
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-11-2007, 06:16 AM
The Brittish helped helped Afghan resistence e.g the Mujahaden against the Soviets.
Reply

E'jaazi
07-11-2007, 06:44 AM
As bad and extreme as the Taliban were, it was still better than what they have there now. Now, the country is in far worse condition than when the Taliban were in charge. That is what you get when you turn to the kuffar!
Reply

north_malaysian
07-11-2007, 07:02 AM
How "Islamic" is the Taleban?


* Zarmeena Case*

Zarmeena, a mother of seven children was found guilty of beating her husband to death.

During her execution, it's been mentioned that the family of her deceased husband announced to the Taleban that they FORGAVE her several minutes before execution.... but the Taleban refused to stop the execution as "THEY HAD ALREADY ANNOUNCE IT TO THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE".

Under Qisas, when the family of the deceased agreed to forgave the murderer, she MUST BE FREED of Execution by any means...

Just to pleased thousands of people, they ignored Islamic rule....imsad

http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm
Reply

north_malaysian
07-11-2007, 07:04 AM
How "Islamic" is the Taleban?


* Zarmeena Case*

Zarmeena, a mother of seven children was found guilty of beating her husband to death.

During her execution, it's been mentioned that the family of her deceased husband announced to the Taleban that they FORGAVE her several minutes before execution.... but the Taleban refused to stop the execution as "THEY HAD ALREADY ANNOUNCE IT TO THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE".

Under Qisas, when the family of the deceased agreed to forgave the murderer, she MUST BE FREED of Execution by any means...

Just to pleased thousands of people, they ignored Islamic rule....imsad

http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm

http://www.rawa.org/zarmeena2.htm
Reply

north_malaysian
07-11-2007, 07:24 AM
* JAMILA CASE *

Jamila was given a sentence of stoning to death for adultery.

What is the "adultery" she has done?

Her husband caught her TRYING TO FLEE with another man - which is amounted to ADULTERY for the Taleban?

Adultery liable for stoning to death must be an illicit sexual relation between a married man and a married woman, or the party (either man/woman) which is married where the consummation happened and being witnessed by 4 fair males.

Edit: It seems more apropriate to explain it less graphically like this:
Full coitus needs to be performed before it can be considered as adultery

Catching your wife running with another man IS NOT under Adultery liable for stoning.

Islamic laws have procedures, need evidence, need fair witnesses...

http://www.rawa.org/stoned.htm
Reply

Malaikah
07-11-2007, 07:28 AM
:sl:

Bro RAWA are known liars, you should not take your information from them.
Reply

north_malaysian
07-11-2007, 07:33 AM
Originally Posted by Malaikah
:sl:

.... RAWA are known liars.
proof?
Reply

Malaikah
07-11-2007, 07:43 AM
:sl:

It was posted up some where in the forum... sorry I don't remember where.
Reply

north_malaysian
07-11-2007, 07:47 AM
Originally Posted by Malaikah
:sl:

It was posted up some where in the forum... sorry I don't remember where.
So, I dont know whether they're lying or not... BUT if whatever they reported are the truth......... I am so sad to see a group of people who wanted to impose their "Islamic" laws UN-ISLAMICALLY....
Reply

islamirama
07-11-2007, 01:18 PM
Originally Posted by north_malaysian
So, I dont know whether they're lying or not... BUT if whatever they reported are the truth......... I am so sad to see a group of people who wanted to impose their "Islamic" laws UN-ISLAMICALLY....
when you go to unreliable sites for your news, listen to media lies, then ofcourse you will parrot the ignornace you talk about. Why don't you go back to watching your hindu movies and particpate in topics you have some knowledge one. Don't you know gheebah of your Muslim brothers is haraam and is like eating the flesh of your brother, and you take non-muslim sources to indulge in such sins?
Reply

Keltoi
07-11-2007, 01:29 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
when you go to unreliable sites for your news, listen to media lies, then ofcourse you will parrot the ignornace you talk about. Why don't you go back to watching your hindu movies and particpate in topics you have some knowledge one. Don't you know gheebah of your Muslim brothers is haraam and is like eating the flesh of your brother, and you take non-muslim sources to indulge in such sins?
Perhaps instead of telling him to stop watching Hindu movies you could give an example of how RAWA are liars? Perhaps an article by any respected international body or journalist that shows how humanitarian and just the cuddly Taliban were?
Reply

islamirama
07-11-2007, 01:35 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Perhaps instead of telling him to stop watching Hindu movies you could give an example of how RAWA are liars? Perhaps an article by any respected international body or journalist that shows how humanitarian and just the cuddly Taliban were?
are you afghan, or paki? do you have close friends or relatives from there? what is your source of information? or his? some bunch of sites that list crap? Like said, some people here talk as if they are experts, what do they know except what little trash they pick up from online and their tv box lies at home.
Reply

Keltoi
07-11-2007, 02:00 PM
Among the accounts of mutilations, beatings and arbitrary executions there was evidence of a new abomination: the torture of children. An unknown number of infants were savagely beaten during the Islamic militia's 14-month occupation of Taloqan, the former headquarters of the Alliance, usually for the supposed crimes of their parents." (Source: The Times [U.K.], 11/13/01)

"The barbarity of the Taliban plumbed new depths when troops shot dead eight boys for daring to laugh, sickened refugees revealed yesterday. The teenage lads had been chuckling at the soldiers who suddenly raised their Kalashnikov rifles and gunned them down. It was one of a string of atrocities in the besieged Afghanistan city of Kunduz, which was last night poised to fall to the Northern Alliance. At least 300 frightened Taliban were killed by men from their own side because they wanted to surrender." (Source: The Sun [U.K.], 11/19/01

"The Taliban is jailing children as young as 10 in Kabul to root out dissent, it is claimed today. According to French journalist Michel Peyrard, who was held by the Taliban for 25 days, the biggest threat to the extremist regime is its own paranoia. He said his fellow detainees included several children. On one occasion the nephews of an escaped political prisoner - aged 10, 13 and 19 - were rounded up. The eldest was tortured and subjected to a mock execution. The Taliban also jails leaders and military commanders for being traitors on only the flimsiest evidence." (Source: The Evening Standard (London), 11/9/01) ATROCITY

"The BBC has confirmed that the central Afghan town of Bamiyan was totally destroyed by the Taleban before they fled over the weekend. Evidence has also emerged of Bosnian-style ethnic cleansing in the region involving the execution of hundreds of local ethnic Hazara men." (Source: BBC News, 11/13/01)

September 1996 -- Upon capturing Kabul the Taliban castrated President Najibullah, dragged his body behind a jeep for several rounds of the Palace and then shot him dead. His brother was similarly tortured and then throttled to death. (Source: Department of Defense)

January 1998 -- In the Western province of Faryab, the Taliban massacred approximately 600 Uzbek villagers. Western aid workers who later investigated the incident said civilians were dragged from their homes, lined up and gunned down. (Source: Department of Defense)

August 2000 -- Taliban execute POWs in the streets of Heart as a lesson to the local population. (Source: Department of Defense)

Massacre at Yakaolang -- Taliban forces committed a massacre in Yakaolang in January 2001. The victims were primarily Hazaras. The massacre began on January 8, 2001, and continued for four days. The Taliban detained about 300 civilian adult males, including staff members of local humanitarian organizations. The men were herded to assembly points, and then shot by firing squad in public view. According to Human Rights Watch, about 170 men are confirmed to have been killed. According to Amnesty International, eyewitnesses reported the deliberate killing of dozens of civilians hiding in a mosque: Taliban soldiers fired rockets into a mosque where some 73 women, children and elderly men had taken shelter. (Source: State Department)

Massacre at Robatak Pass -- The May 2000 massacre took place near the Robatak pass. 31 bodies were found one site, of these, 26 were positively identified as civilians. The victims were Hazara Shi'as. (Source: State Department)

Massacre in Bamiyan -- When the Taliban recaptured Bamiyan in 1999, there were reports that Taliban forces carried out summary executions upon entering the city. According to Amnesty International, hundreds of men, and some instances women and children, were separated from their families, taken away, and killed. Human Rights Watch reports that besides executing civilians, the Taliban burned homes and used detainees for forced labor. (Source: State Department)

Massacre in Mazar-I-Sharif -- In August 1998, the Taliban captured Mazar-I-Sharif. There were reports that between 2,000 and 5,000 men, women and children -- mostly ethnic Hazara civilians -- were massacred by the Taliban after the takeover of Mazar-I-Sharif. During the massacre, the Taliban forces carried out a systematic search for male members for the ethnic Hazara, Tajik, and Uzbek communities in the city. Human Rights Watch estimates that scores, perhaps hundreds, of Hazara men and boys were summarily executed. There were also reports that women and girls were raped and abducted during the Taliban takeover of the city. (Source: State Department)


Yeah, I know they are all lies...
Reply

ISLAMASWEENEY
07-11-2007, 03:19 PM
The Taliban ran Afghanistan successfully though.
Reply

rania2820
07-11-2007, 03:36 PM
:sl:

there is no doubt that the taliban was far from being perfect islamic government. they would use islam laws but then add their own spin on things. during the taliban regime women were banned form being educated, which is in a contradiction of how islam tells me to treat women. children's toys were banned, this is also in a contraction of islam, as it has reported in hadith that when the prophet (pbuh) wife aisha was small she use to play with dolls that had wings on it. so this is an indication that it's halah for children to have toys.
they would punish women with punishment which were not even prescribed by islam. women that were caught running an education center were put in jail. women were not allowed to work. and because many of the women's male relatives were killed off in the wars. the women and children were left to fend for themselves and give their children moldy bread. in islam it's halah for the woman to work if she has to.and those women's case they had to work
Reply

Woodrow
07-11-2007, 04:22 PM
time to cool off. time out for this thread.
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: 18
    Last Post: 10-24-2014, 05:50 PM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-09-2014, 12:38 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-19-2012, 07:42 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-10-2008, 04:46 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!