Do people blame Islam for Manchester bombing?

[Karl]

If anyone can critique secularist society honestly and holistically and sincerely based on a stable and uncontradictory method of judgement without ending up automatically vilifying it - they deserve a Nobel prize for doing the impossible and a gold medal for Olympic grade semantics.

The secularists believe they are the lords of the world and the controllers of destiny, the pious do not.

 

[Scimitar]

Evolutionist have tried to explain this by saying altruism exists in species because its gives them mutual benefit and helps people survive and thrive together. Alone they would have less chances of surviving and reproducing. Although I do not believe any scientific theory is a good explanation on morality. As a Muslim I believe it calls to a higher realm outside of science - God and religion -Islam.

Just like science doesn't give us meaning or explain our subjective conscious experience or our aesthetic perspective. It doesn't have much to do with Morality as well.

morality is closely linked with altruism. Whose to say ants don't have morals? They have fitra! So whose to say?

the issue here is that altruism is directly in conflict with the idea which evolutionists propagate - survival of the fittest.

In fact, watch this: https://youtu.be/TPFfkr_Xnjg?t=33m23s for a better understanding of what science can and cannot prove!

God bless,

Scimi

 

[Scimitar]

If anyone can critique secularist society honestly and holistically and sincerely based on a stable and uncontradictory method of judgement without ending up automatically vilifying it - they deserve a Nobel prize for doing the impossible and a gold medal for Olympic grade semantics.

Olympic grade gold medal semantics pwahahahaaa, bro, I miss you for the sake of Allah Subhaana wa ta'aala - when you coming back for a visit? It's been tooooooo long wallah!

Scimi

 

[Simple_Person]

Why do the Turks not like the Kurds even though both are sunni?

Because the Turks have taken Kurdish lands. After WW1, there would be a treaty called "Treaty of Sèvres" where a independent Kurdistan would be there, however Mustafa Kemal (ataturk), deceived the Kurds, by rejecting the plan and making a deal with the western powers to make a land called Turkey ( Treaty of Lausanne). From there on, the killing and oppressing the Kurds have been going on. They were banned for decades wearing their own Kurdish clothes, speaking the language, listening to their own music (in own language), giving their children Kurdish names, given their children Kurdish education etc. etc. Turks were trying to make Kurds forget their own identity, just like what these days mostly has happened with Berbers in Morocco for example. They do not say we are Berbers...they say we are Moroccans. However with Kurds they objected it and have been fighting against the oppressive Turkish state.

Back in the 80's, PKK finally was created to fight against Turkey. The Turks have branded them as "terrorists", while by logical view a terrorist is somebody who terrorizes you in your own lands. Which automatically would be the Turks occupying in Kurdish lands. When you ask a Turk they say those lands belong to us. If you ask them based on what? They say our forefathers have fought to regain it. However as far as you go in history it were the Kurds even fighting those wars. And even during the Ottoman empire many Kurds were fighting the Ottomans. So the Turks through out the history deception upon deception. No principles, only imperial dreams and nationalistic ideas.

To this day Erdogan says i am a Muslim, however all you see in his actions is nationalism and imperial dreams. No Islam whatsoever. He has now a lot of power one might say if so, what keeps you from implementing Shari'a in Turkey as a whole? Or even leaving NATO, which is killing Muslim? Or even uniting with the Kurds under Islam and make the west leave Middle East? Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy. In the past the world did not know about Kurds and who they were etc. However Allah has also made that clear. The hypocrisy of the Turks is also shown far and bright to people all around the world, when they support ISIS, while ISIS killing Muslims. Yet there are those foolish Arabs that choose Turkish side to fight Kurds instead of fighting oppression. They think this will not be used against them on the Day of Judgement? However i am more afraid for them that they might not even believe in Day of Judgement. As Islam even with many Arabs has become something "our forefather believed". Like for example these days with many Muslims, they fast because their parents fast, not because they say well Allah has commanded us to fast.

Indeed Rasullah(saws) has spoken the truth.

"You would tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step so much so that if they had entered into the hole of the lizard, you would follow them in this also. We said: Allah's Messenger, do you mean Jews and Christians (by your words) "those before you"? He said: Who else (than those two religious groups)?"

Source used: https://sunnah.com/muslim/47/7

As the Jews and Christians are worshiping their priests and rabbis, being a Christians because your parents were Christians and pursuing nationalism instead of what Allah has commended them to do. What is these days any different with Muslims from them? Those lines of Muslims and Christian/Jews is becoming less and less clearly visible. As another example Christians celebrating Christmas while it was a pagan holiday and even Muslims have joined them in celebrating Christmas. As if that is not shirk.

 

[fromelsewhere]

Iran had good relations with the US and Isreal before 1979 because of the shah of Iran (not a nice guy). The ayatollah had a lot of support in Iran because the shah was perceived to be corrupt, He also came into power by overthrowing a democratically elected government with the help with the US (1953 coup). All this went against him.

As corrupt as the shah may have been, the ayatollah regime has been even worst for its people. I happen to know some Iranians who witnessed first-hand women getting severely beaten in the streets in Iran by the "morality police" for not being covered enough after the ayatollah regime took control. The ayatollahs accused the shah of being corrupt, which was true and which is why countries like France initially supported the ouster of the shah, but things have gone far worst in Iran in terms of both human rights and corruption since then. Sometimes you're better off with the devil you know than the devil you don't know. To be fair, things have been gradually improving since the early years post-revolution as the ayatollah regime has decided to relax a bit and be less controlling. But matter-of-the-fact remains that Iranians still have less freedoms now than under the shah.

I do hope that Iran returns to the pre-1953 coup days where it had a true democratically-elected government. Once again, we have the UK and the US in 1953 destabilizing a country's government, and later, it comes back to haunt them.

It is still in Iran's interest to stop its systematic anti-US positions and to pursue further dialogue with the US and other Western powers because it gives the US a good excuse to sell billions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia. I can't see this US-Saudi Arabia deal leading to any good (to say the least).

I dont believe Turkey would support anyone in a war with the saudis and Iranian simply because it has too much on its own plate (syria, the kurds, internal issues). It would most likely stay out just like it did with the war with in the 80s between Iraq and Iran.

Turkey is very anti-Assad. Why is that, I wonder? Turkey has tried to help many anti-Assad rebel groups, and Russia has been very vocal at times about this issue. Maybe Turkey won't directly join in the fighting if there was to be a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but I suspect that they would work "behind the scenes" to help out Saudi Arabia. Of course, I could be wrong and you might be right. Hopefully, we will never find out who's right and who's wrong. It does depend to some extent also on who decides to attack first and for what excuse.

Ultimately what I'm saying is that your over emphasis on sectarian lines isn't a good explanation on whats actually is happening. It simply doesn't take in account of the bigger issues - Why does a Iranian religious theocracy support a secularist Baathist government in Syria but against them in The Iran and Iraq war in the 80s? Why does Saudi Arabia not like Isis even though they have some similarities? Why do the Turks not like the Kurds even though both are sunni? etc etc All those alliances and wars can easily be explained on geopolitical lines rather then religious lines.

Why Iran supports the Baathist government in Syria? That's easy. Maybe the Assad regime is relatively secular, but they are nevertheless Shiites. Why does Saudi Arabia not like ISIS? That's also easy. Saudi Arabia does not like ISIS because ISIS is an insult to Islam and gives a bad reputation in particular to Salafism and Wahabism. But you are right about the Turks not liking the Kurds... it is mainly because they don't want them to have their own country and potentially take a part of Turkey as territory for their new country.

 

[fromelsewhere]

The secularists believe they are the lords of the world and the controllers of destiny, the pious do not.

The (ultra) pious believe that everything that happens is God's/Allah's/The Great Manitou's will. This reduces us to puppets.

 

[Zafran]

It is still in Iran's interest to stop its systematic anti-US positions and to pursue further dialogue with the US and other Western powers because it gives the US a good excuse to sell billions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia. I can't see this US-Saudi Arabia deal leading to any good (to say the least).

I dont believe it does - How would the US feel if somebody was bullying it to make certain concessions and if it didn't listen slap sanctions on it. No country deserves to be treated like that - especially if its independent. Especially when the US keeps threatening Iran with war which is bad for the world.

Why Iran supports the Baathist government in Syria? That's easy. Maybe the Assad regime is relatively secular, but they are nevertheless Shiites. Why does Saudi Arabia not like ISIS? That's also easy. Saudi Arabia does not like ISIS because ISIS is an insult to Islam and gives a bad reputation in particular to Salafism and Wahabism. But you are right about the Turks not liking the Kurds... it is mainly because they don't want them to have their own country and potentially take a part of Turkey as territory for their new country.

The questions were Rhetorical But I disagree with few statements you made.

Iran supports Assad because its one of the few friends it has. Assad also is not the same type of shia that Iran consists of. Iran is twelver and Assad is alwaite.

The Saudis dont like ISIS because they are a prime threat to them - Its salafi but with no monrachy. A threat to the Saudi royal family.

 

[fromelsewhere]

I dont believe it does - How would the US feel if somebody was bullying it to make certain concessions and if it didn't listen slap sanctions on it. No country deserves to be treated like that - especially if its independent. Especially when the US keeps threatening Iran with war which is bad for the world.

Iran was threatening other countries in the Middle East. For instance, it was threatening Israel of destruction by building a nuke, and it was very hostile towards other countries such as Saudi Arabia and the US for no good reason. Many countries felt quite threatened by Iran's behavior, and not without reasons. Iran was also funding many Shiite militant groups such as the Hezbollah, which are heavily involved in terrorist activities and are currently strongly backing al-Assad. The sanctions were therefore fair game in my opinion. Iran wants to be hostile to the US and others? Fine, but the US and other countries will respond with sanctions. If you want to act like a bully towards others in the region, don't be surprised that the hostile attitude is returned in kind. Things have changed slightly under Rouhani, but he has his hands tied to make further reforms by the ayatollah regime. Too bad.

 

[Scimitar]

Iran was threatening other countries in the Middle East. [/snip]

When was the last time Iran invaded a nation?

Scimi

 

[Zafran]

Iran was threatening other countries in the Middle East. For instance, it was threatening Israel of destruction by building a nuke, and it was very hostile towards other countries such as Saudi Arabia and the US for no good reason. Many countries felt quite threatened by Iran's behavior, and not without reasons. Iran was also funding many Shiite militant groups such as the Hezbollah, which are heavily involved in terrorist activities and are currently strongly backing al-Assad. The sanctions were therefore fair game in my opinion. Iran wants to be hostile to the US and others? Fine, but the US and other countries will respond with sanctions. If you want to act like a bully towards others in the region, don't be surprised that the hostile attitude is returned in kind. Things have changed slightly under Rouhani, but he has his hands tied to make further reforms by the ayatollah regime. Too bad.

are you serious?? You do know that Israel has a nuke - has invaded countless countries and occupies one - The Saudis are right now in a war and lets not forget there funding with western nations of crazy rebel groups in Syria. Furthermore they have just received new toys from Trump.

And the US - well war is what it likes and lives for.

Hezbollah is a political party in Lebanon - If the US can fund Israel and the Saudis - then the Iranians have right to fund Hezbollah.

The last time Iran was at war was with Iraq with Saddam Hussian in the 80s - a defensive war - who was backed by the US Ironically. Iran hasn't invaded any country - unlike others.

 

[UrbanMuslimah]

In my area where i live in (south east london) people there are open minded and don't think that Muslims should get blamed but just the bomber.^o)

 

[muslim brother]

the responsibility to challenge the ideology,the justification for murder, must come from us muslims.

we know it is haram.we do condemn it.

but what do we do about it ?

ahmed patel
sick to death of saying this past few days,
unfortunately the brother in law of 7/7 london bombings ringleader 12 years ago

in 5 weeks im gonna have to deal with the "anniversary" of 7/7

more c"*p to deal with...mg:

 

[Abz2000]

Yes, we should condemn those criminals who betray Allah and His messenger, who join murderous gangs whose leaders and commanders reject the supreme authority of Allah and hate what He has revealed, who embark on unjust invasions based on falsehood and barefaced lies and who oppress and murder millions of innocent men women and children and destroy property without just cause. We should absolve ourselves of any relationship to the oppressors and we should pray to Allah that He delivers us from their harm and that He doesn't punish us with them.

We should also beware of those who claim to be Muslims whilst they are actually deceivers who think they deceive Allah and the believers whilst they only deceive themselves and the weak minded faasiqoon of like nature to theirs.

Last time it was "roasted cashew", somehow I had a strong feeling it would be steered into a way of enraging, accusing and vilifying Muslims - and some people still wondered if it was a conspiracy theory.

Muslim World Silent on Syrian Government Massacre

Muslim World Silent on Syrian Government Massacre

https://www.islamicboard.com/world-...syrian-government-massacre-3.html#post1520851

 

[Simple_Person]

[MENTION=38090]noraina[/MENTION] sister you done ONLY grieving about Manchester..and not talking about politics?..because if we keep doing that right now what just again happened in UK we still shouldn't talk politics according to your logic.

You see what I was trying to saY?

 

[fromelsewhere]

Hezbollah is a political party in Lebanon

Hezbollah is a bit more than a political party. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you fromelsewhere;

The (ultra) pious believe that everything that happens is God's/Allah's/The Great Manitou's will. This reduces us to puppets

The fear of God is the start of Wisdom. At some point we shall all have to stand before God, so it is only right that we should strive to be the best person possible. We pray to a God of justice, compassion and mercy, and during this month of Ramadan it is a worthwhile exercise to study the 99 names of Allah.

In the spirit of searching for a God of justice compassion and mercy,

Eric

 

[Zafran]

Hezbollah is a bit more than a political party. I'll leave it at that.

Its a political party - like Likud.

 

[fromelsewhere]

Its a political party - like Likud.

It's a political party that likes to travel to foreign lands and fight: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hezbollah-commander-killed-fighting-isis-iraq/

When they're not fighting in Syria, they're fighting in Iraq alongside Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-iran-idUSKBN18N0F9?il=0

 

[Abz2000]

Mullah bradleys for cnn - where news becomes stage managed:

2nd July, 2007 – Parliament Square, London

I was taking a friend around London today when we came across a protest in Parliament Square.

http://tanya-n.com/Rushdie/rushdie1.JPG

It must have been a pretty spontaneous demonstration – police had just started to arrive.

http://tanya-n.com/Rushdie/rushdie2.JPG

I crossed the road and went into the park to take a look at what was going on.

http://tanya-n.com/Rushdie/rushdie3.JPG
http://tanya-n.com/Rushdie/rushdie4.JPG


They were demonstrating against Salman Rushdie’s knighthood, which has already sparked protests in other countries such as Pakistan and Iran.


http://www.tanya-n.com/?p=80







The book was banned in the Republic of India as hate speech directed towards a specific religious group.

Humphries estimated nearly 3,000 Muslims were gathered in front of the mosque in north London June 22, after Friday prayers, to protest Queen Elizabeth’s knighting of Indian author Salman Rushdie, the target of a death-sentence fatwa for “insulting” Islam’s prophet Muhammad in his 1988 book “The Satanic Verses.”

Muslim leader’s charge, along with interviews with protesters and a “literal foaming-at-the-mouth” diatribe by another speaker, were captured on tape June 22 by nationally syndicated talk radio host Rusty Humphries.

Humphries, who was in London with WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein, recorded angry Muslim leader Abu Saif, who kept his voice at a fever pitch through declarations such as: “Brothers and sisters, make no mistake. Make no mistake. The British government, the queen, the MPs in this country, they are enemies to you, enemies to Allah and enemies to the Muslims.”


“Democracy, hypocrisy,” Choudary chanted as the crowd echoed him. “Tony Blair, terrorist! Tony Blair, murderer! Queen Elizabeth, go to hell!”

For Humphries, the response of the Muslims at Islam’s largest house of worship in the UK was telling.

“Not one said, ‘You’re not speaking for me’ or ‘Not in my name.’ They stood there and watched and applauded,” he told WND.

.

.....to defeat Muslims militarily, even though they were divided and weak, the forces of Western crusaders had long since launched a “theological war” whose ideological platform was described in the words of a U.S. official, “If you found out that Mullah Omar is on one street corner doing something, you set up Mullah Bradley on the other street corner to counter it.”

Thus, “Mullah Bradley” has become synonymous to an “Islamic clergyman” who, with a turban on the head and in the military uniform of the crusader forces, “teaches” Muslims the “true Islam.” Very often, Mullah Bradley does not wear a military uniform, but a uniform of a (grand) mufti, an Islamic teacher, or a “pious scholar.”
However, regardless of whether or not they wear turbans, military uniforms, or robes of imams, a common characteristic of all Mullah Bradleys is to teach people the “true Islam,” the commandments of which were carefully written in Washington.
The fundamental commandment of this “true Islam” is: “Love the enemy of Islam as you love your neighbor; consider the occupiers as liberators and the freedom fighters as terrorists.”

http://listofbidaas.blogspot.com/2013/04/are-you-follwoing-mullah-bradley.html?m=1[/url