Arab Governments sending weapons/equipment to Lebanon

[wilberhum]

siding with kaffir goverments/millitary like usa and israel is siding against Allah, and anyone who does so becomes an apostate under this verse:

005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

the word correctly translated should say allies/protectors, so basically muslims should not take jews and christians (usa & israel) as allies and if done so then whoever does it becomes of them, basically becomes a non muslim, and an apostate. so all these arab goverments are apostates according to this verse, well not all, syria is the only one i know off that isnt an ally to the usa, the rest are all sell out apostates.

So Muslim bank robbers are better than Kaffir governments? :skeleton:
If that is what you think then you probably don't need to worry about taking Jews or Christians as friends. Few people who like bank robbers have friends that aren’t robbers. :?

 

[Sami Zaatari]

stop repeating urself 10 times, muslims shudnt side with kaffirs PERIOD, ur like a broken record with ur bank robbery BS. get it through ur head muslims CANT make allies with kaffirs. the muslims have the right to stop robbers, in Islam we chop their hands off incase u didnt know, but fighting robbers doesnt mean we go call kaffirs for help.

and stop twisting words, no one said we choose bank robbers over kaffirs, we say no kaffir allies EVER, so stop twisting and playing games, the Quran says dont take u as allies, who said anything about taking robbers as allies over kaffirs? the point is kaffirs shudnt be ever taken as an ally, case closed.

 

[wilberhum]

stop repeating urself 10 times, muslims shudnt side with kaffirs PERIOD, ur like a broken record with ur bank robbery BS. get it through ur head muslims CANT make allies with kaffirs. the muslims have the right to stop robbers, in Islam we chop their hands off incase u didnt know, but fighting robbers doesnt mean we go call kaffirs for help.

and stop twisting words, no one said we choose bank robbers over kaffirs, we say no kaffir allies EVER, so stop twisting and playing games, the Quran says dont take u as allies, who said anything about taking robbers as allies over kaffirs? the point is kaffirs shudnt be ever taken as an ally, case closed.

Repeating myself? I keep asking different questions. And it is becoming clearer.
It is better to side with bank robbing Muslims than to side with a good non-Muslims. :skeleton: Non-Muslims have no right to defend themselves from criminals if they are Muslims. :skeleton:

 

[Sami Zaatari]

who said this had anything to do with non muslims getting hurt? what in the heck are you on about?

and no one here said anyone should side with muslim bank robbers, the lebanease goverment has the right to fight robbers, as robbery is un-islamic and punished by cutting the hands off, what we are saying is that they shouldnt get help from kaffirs, they should do the work themselves, no need to go get help from kaffirs because it is FORBIDDEN in the Quran to have kaffir allies, now do you understand? stop making things up and putting words in ppl's mouths, no one here said we should side with bank robbers.

 

[wilberhum]

who said this had anything to do with non muslims getting hurt? what in the heck are you on about?

and no one here said anyone should side with muslim bank robbers, the lebanease goverment has the right to fight robbers, as robbery is un-islamic and punished by cutting the hands off, what we are saying is that they shouldnt get help from kaffirs, they should do the work themselves, no need to go get help from kaffirs because it is FORBIDDEN in the Quran to have kaffir allies, now do you understand? stop making things up and putting words in ppl's mouths, no one here said we should side with bank robbers.

It is just logical conclusion to what you and NobleMuslimUK keep saying.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

no it isnt a logical conclusion at all, i said its forbidden to take kaffirs as allies, thats all, the goverment has the right to fight the robbers, they dont have the right to side with kaffirs, thats all, so your logical conclusion is based on paranoia, and your anti-muslim sentiment, thats all since no where did me nor noble make any such hint as to say we support these robbers, you made this up in your head because of your as i said paranoia and anti-muslim sentiment.

how does saying we shouldnt take kaffirs as allies means we support bank robbers, that really beats me.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

and lol what is so funny is you act like the american goverment themselves are not robbers! lol thats the most interesting fact of all, everyone knows the american government is one of the biggest theif on this planet, but thats another topic, but just thought id mention it since u seem to act like fatah al islam are the robbers only.

 

[don532]

no it isnt a logical conclusion at all, i said its forbidden to take kaffirs as allies, thats all, the goverment has the right to fight the robbers, they dont have the right to side with kaffirs, thats all, so your logical conclusion is based on paranoia, and your anti-muslim sentiment, thats all since no where did me nor noble make any such hint as to say we support these robbers, you made this up in your head because of your as i said paranoia and anti-muslim sentiment.

how does saying we shouldnt take kaffirs as allies means we support bank robbers, that really beats me.

There was a discussion on this issue in a comparative religion thread a while ago. I have looked, but cannot find the thread. If I remember correctly, (I think Woodrow pointed this out) this should be interpreted as Muslims should not prefer the friendship of non-muslims, or choose them over muslims. It was not to mean that a muslim should never under any circumstances have a relationship or alliance with a non muslim.

 

[wilberhum]

Sami posted an article entitled “U.S., Arabs rush military aid to Lebanon” but he titled the thread “Arab Governments sending weapons/equipment to Lebanon”. He also adds a line to the front as if it was part of the article. The Arab rulers never cease to expose their hypocrisy and kufr: Now maybe there was no intent to deceive, but I was.
He seems to be offended because the US and Arabs did not assist when Israel attacked. But as I remember that was Hezbollah vs. Israel. Or maybe that is just my perspective. Never the less, it leaves the implication that if a government does not act as Sami thinks is right, they never have any right to do what is right in the future. I guess somehow governments of the world are going to need reach perfection, at least in Sami’s eyes, or never act again.

Let’s not forget how this conflict started. Some bank robbers fled into the Nahr el-Bared camp. When the Lebanon military entered the camp, Fatah Islam, militant group, open fired on the military. So the bank robbers were part of Fatah Islam, or Fatah Islam is protecting bank robbers.

I found it most interesting some of the remarks that followed. In fact I found it so interesting that I want to quote some of they said and add comments.

Zamn said:

But now, they have suddenly found their manhood to take on Palestinian refugees.

One of the things I see quite often is changing the facts to suit your argument. The Lebanon’s military are not taking on the “Palestinian refugees” they are taking on bank robbers and there protectors. Not quite the same.

Zulkiflim said

Fight to the last breath for your own life land and love.

What? These are Palestinians in Lebanon, not their land. And Love, is that love for bank robbers? Life, there was no need for loss of live. That only occurred when Fatah Islam open fire on the Lebanon army. The only ones that should have been in danger were the bank robbers.

NobleMuslimUK

The Arab governments have chosen their masters as US and Israel

So I guess he thinks it is wrong for stronger governments to help Lebanon capture bank robbers. Of course there is Israel included. Now really, is Israel sending arms? I think not. Just another case of misstating the facts to support your stance.

May Allah guide them or destroy them so badly (like the previous oppressive nations) along with their kuffar allies

So he wants Allah to destroy the Lebanese government and those that help them capture bank robbers. I can only conclude that he thinks Allah should support bank robbers. I hardly think that is the stance of Islam.

Its not about choosing sides, its about choosing who's orders you follow... They choose to follow man's orders more than Allah, truly they are losers.

Here he seems to clarify that Allah orders people to protect bank robbers. Now that is surly not Islamic. At least proper Islamic.

In response to some of Sami statements:

these men arent al-qaeda

Yet the article that he used called them “al-Qaida-inspired Islamic militants”. Of course you would not know that unless you read the article because Sami failed to copy that part. I guess he sees a great difference between being al-Qaida and al-Qaida-inspired and having the same agenda. He goes on and on about that, but I see little difference. I think most people think of al-Qaida more as an ideology than as a group. I know I do.

Fatah al Islam's goals are to only fight israel and establish islamic law in palestinian camps

If that is the “Whole Truth”, then why are they fighting the Lebanon army to protect bank robbers? It would seem to me that Shari Law would not condone killing people to protect bank robbers.

siding with kaffir goverments/millitary like usa and israel is siding against Allah

So here he makes it quite clear, at least to me, that accepting help from non-Muslim countries is standing against Allah. So it is better to allow bank robbers to get away than let a non-Muslim country help. That sure seems to me like he thinks bank robbers are better than non-Muslims. Well I don’t know what Allah thinks, so I guess I will leave that up to people that know Allah better. But he does support his stance by quoting.

O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them.

Then he goes on to imply that all of Lebanon are apostates because they accepted the US and Israel support. But here again we know that Israel is not helping. Just another of the many cases of making false statements to gain support for your opinion.

muslims shudnt side with kaffirs PERIOD

It seems Muslims should never help or accept help from non-Muslims. So even if there is a common good, Muslims should never assist or receive assistance.
t

hey shouldnt get help from kaffirs, they should do the work themselves,

But they are not strong enough to defeat them without help. So I colluded that he thinks it would be better to be defeated by those that support bank robbing than accept help from a non-Muslim.

your anti-muslim sentiment

I guess since I don’t support bank robbing he thinks I’m anti-Muslim. The reverse of that is obvious, he the thinks Muslims support bank robbing.

It has been a really bazaar thread.

And of course he ends with the standard “Your momma is uglier than my momma” rebuttals.

ol what is so funny is you act like the american goverment themselves are not robbers!

I wonder what his attitude would be about a non-Muslim fireman saving him from a burning house. :skeleton:

 

[Philosopher]

This thread reeks of stupidity. The Muslims here need to take their share of the blame for the world's problems.

 

[Cognescenti]

I have what I think is a truly Solomonic solution.

They need only rob a Kaffir bank and all is well, right? If it is part of the Jewish banking cabal then even better.

BTW...are there really any Islamic banks? I thought there was a Koranic proscription against usury?

BTW (II)...this idea that the Lebanese government is a US puppet is laughable. What percentage of the Lebanese Parliament are Hizbollah? It is not an insubstantial number.

 

[KAding]

The Muslim world will not know development and prosperity as long as it is ravaged by these private militias. How can any Muslim country ever become stable and progress if the state doesn't even have sovereignty and control over its territory.

 

[Zman]

/Peace To All

Gen. Dayton Admits US Is Helping Fatah

By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER,
JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT, WASHINGTON
May. 27, 2007 0:55
Updated: May. 27, 2007 3:06

As violence raged this week in the Gaza Strip between Hamas and Fatah, US officials stressed the importance of American efforts to bolster forces loyal to the latter and said further help was necessary.

"This chaotic situation is why the USSC [United States security coordinator] is focused on the legal, legitimate security forces in our attempts to reestablish law and order," said Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton, the USCC working with the Palestinians, in testimony Wednesday before the House Subcommittee on the Middle East. But he added, "The legal security forces of the Palestinian president still lack what they need to achieve … law and order."

The State Department has in the past denied that America's non-lethal training of the presidential guard of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah - largely aimed at securing the Karni border crossing and protecting Abbas and other VIPs - amounted to the US taking sides in Fatah's fight with Hamas.

But at the hearing Dayton highlighted the US role in helping Fatah as it faces attacks from the Islamic radicals in Hamas.

"We are leading, through the acts of this Congress, the international effort to possibly affect this worrisome situation," he said. "The security assistance plan that you have authorized me to just begin to implement is pointing the way forward for all international and regional allies."

Congress recently allowed $59 million to be used to further Dayton's efforts at training the presidential guard of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah.

The money, however, didn't go through the normal appropriation process, as the White House took previously approved funds and simply reallocated them.

Dayton pushed the case for further US assistance to the Palestinian guard, despite months of efforts on the ground that have seemed to have little effect against the well-disciplined and well-supplied Hamas.

"We are entering a rough patch," Dayton acknowledged, "but all is not lost and our regional partners share that sentiment. However, it is critical that those who support the legitimate authority and forces represented by President Abbas receive the critical assistance they need."

Dayton is visiting the US from Israel, where he is based, and testified before the Middle East subcommittee at the behest of its chairman, Gary Ackerman (D-New York).

In response to a question about Israel's security raised by subcommittee ranking member Mike Pence (R-Indiana), Dayton assured the members, "Nothing we do to strengthen the Palestinian's security capability will be targeted against Israel … The presidential guard will not become a threat to Israel."

Source:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708687359&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

 

[Keltoi]

It's no secret that the U.S. would rather deal with Abbas and Fatah than Hamas.

 

[NobleMuslimUK]

It's no secret that the U.S. would rather deal with Abbas and Fatah than Hamas.

Its amazing how you defend the terrorist plots and activities of the Bush regime. Zionists dont care about you or America they just want to leech for their own good.

 

[wilberhum]

Its amazing how you defend the terrorist plots and activities of the Bush regime. Zionists dont care about you or America they just want to leech for their own good.

Where did he defend the "terrorist plots"? :rollseyes
And still are we talking Israel/Zionists? :?
They have nothing to do with the situation. :skeleton:
Is this just your standard, naming Israel justifies anything? :raging:

 

[snakelegs]

The Arab governments have chosen their masters as US and Israel, just like Pakistan has. What a shame. May Allah guide them or destroy them so badly (like the previous oppressive nations) along with their kuffar allies as an example and lesson for the whole of mankind. Ameen.

in all fairness, do you think pakistan really had a choice?

 

[Trumble]

BTW...are there really any Islamic banks? I thought there was a Koranic proscription against usury?

Plenty. There are more ways to make money from money than earning and charging interest on it.

For example, one way a 'mortgage' can be arranged is thus;

1. You find the house you want, and agree the price in the normal way.
   
2. The bank (not you) pays that price.
   
3. The bank then sells the house to you at a higher price.
   
4. You pay the bank an initial deposit and the balance in installments in the usual way.

Of course, the difference between what the bank pays the vendor and what you pay the bank is determined principally by the duration of the repayment term, so the more cynical may say that it amounts to 'interest' in everything but name, but it seems the difference is sufficient to fall within Islamic law.

Another alternative is renting the house from the bank, rather than buying it. You pay monthly rent, plus a contribution towards buying the house when the term of the lease expires. Again, you could argue that the 'rent' is also no more than interest under other name, but again it seems satisfactory under Islamic law.

Islamic banking is increasingly popular in the UK, and (surprisingly) not just with muslims. It seems Islamic banks offer much better customer service than regular ones, which must say something! .. and a lot of the regular banks are now offering 'Islamic' alternatives, too. I think first option in particular is a pretty smart choice, particularly when generally rising interest rates means the banks aren't too keen on long-term fixed rate deals; in this case they have no choice as there is no other way of arranging it.

 

[Cognescenti]

Plenty. There are more ways to make money from money than earning and charging interest on it.

For example, one way a 'mortgage' can be arranged is thus;

1. You find the house you want, and agree the price in the normal way.
   
2. The bank (not you) pays that price.
   
3. The bank then sells the house to you at a higher price.
   
4. You pay the bank an initial deposit and the balance in installments in the usual way.

Of course, the difference between what the bank pays the vendor and what you pay the bank is determined principally by the duration of the repayment term, so the more cynical may say that it amounts to 'interest' in everything but name, but it seems the difference is sufficient to fall within Islamic law.

Another alternative is renting the house from the bank, rather than buying it. You pay monthly rent, plus a contribution towards buying the house when the term of the lease expires. Again, you could argue that the 'rent' is also no more than interest under other name, but again it seems satisfactory under Islamic law.

Islamic banking is increasingly popular in the UK, and (surprisingly) not just with muslims. It seems Islamic banks offer much better customer service than regular ones, which must say something! .. and a lot of the regular banks are now offering 'Islamic' alternatives, too. I think first option in particular is a pretty smart choice, particularly when generally rising interest rates means the banks aren't too keen on long-term fixed rate deals; in this case they have no choice as there is no other way of arranging it.

Pretty clever...seems like a dodge, however. Isn't the "buyer" expected to make some kind of "down payment"?

 

[Zulkiflim]

This thread reeks of stupidity. The Muslims here need to take their share of the blame for the world's problems.

Salaam,

Will the west ever accept they started it?

LOL nver..