Lal Masjid Massacre

[islamirama]

Where am I going with this? It has something to do with it actually. You obviously think there is something wrong with being a gov't stooge, since you see this as a valid reason to not pray behind a khateeb. You link to IslamQA in your user title, so I assume that you take that as a reputable source? Well, according to Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid (and also the favoured opinion of shaykh 'Uthaymeen rahimahullaah), the correct opinion is that you can pray behind a sinner, and the reasons for this are:

1 – The general meaning of the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “The people should be led in prayer by the one among them who has most knowlegde of the Book of Allaah.” (Narrated by Muslim, 673).

2 – The specific meaning of the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning oppressive leaders who lead the prayer at the wrong time: “Pray the prayer on time, then if you come to them at the time when they are praying, pray with them, and it will be a naafil prayer for you.” (Narrated by Muslim, 648). And al-Bukhaari narrated: “If the imaam leads the prayer correctly, then he and you will receive the rewards, but if he makes a mistake (in the prayer) then you will receive the reward for the prayer and the sin (will be his).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 694).

3 – The Sahaabah, including Ibn ‘Umar, used to pray behind al-Hajjaaj, and Ibn ‘Umar was one of the keenest of people to follow the Sunnah and pay attention to it, and al-Hajjaaj was known to be one of the most rebellious and sinful of the slaves of Allaah.

It might also be said that everyone whose prayer is valid, it is also valid for him to lead the prayer. There is no evidence to suggest that we should differentiate between the validity of the prayer and the validity of leading the prayer, because if a person commits a sin, he does so for himself, but this is merely theoretical. See al-Sharh al-Mumti’ by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, (4/304).​

Source

And if you do not consider it to be a sin, then there is no issue here then is there? If 'Abdullah ibn'Umar radhiyAllahu 'anhu would pray behind the likes of al-Hajjaaj, the rebellious tyrant, then I do not see why there is a need to spread fitnah? Who do you consider to be more evil, al-Hajjaaj or this supposed gov't stooge? And who do you consider to have more hikmah, you or 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar?

And by the way, if you consider Musharraf to be Muslim, you should know that it is the manhaj of the people of the Sunnah to not spread the faults of the Muslim rulers, aslong as they establish the prayer. Unless you think Musharraf is a disbeliever, then that's another issue.

It's about time you let that out, i was just waiting for you to say it.

Firstly, no one is denying the amount of the knowledge this khateeb has nor is anyone calling him a sinner.

secondly, there are enough knowledgeable people there to lead the prayer. it's a madrassa (islamic school), wouldn't it make sense to think they would have alims there? Alims are more learned the many khateebs over there. When he was refused to lead the prayer, he stormed out of there without even praying jummah. So you were saying something about "knowledgeable"?

Thirdly, if the gov't murdered your father in cold blood and then send a man as a suitable spouse for your mother, would you accept him? The residents of Lal masjid lost a lot, it was a massacre if you haven't noticed. It would be very naive on your part to even think that those victims will allow a murdering dictator put a khateeb to lead them and their masjid. This is more than just khutbah, this is about being the Head of the masjid.

Fouthly, the residents have every right to choose whoever they want as their Amir and give baya to him and reject anyone who choose not to accept. Islam too allows that.

Lastly, Musharaaf doesn't establish salaah nor does he tell the people to pray. He drinks alcohol and does other unislamic stuff and protects the brotherls and indecency in the land as "freedom". He's politicians go to brotherls. So whether he is a Muslim or not, i'll leave that for another thread. I'll just remind you to go look up what islam ways about those who rule with other what shar'iah.

 

[snakelegs]

islamirama,
they were demanding to have abdul aziz, and he is in detention. in short, they were killing their fellow muslims to protest his arrest. i don't know how you find this an acceptable method of protest.

Al Muwahhidah,
thanks for your post - it answered a question i also had.

 

[islamirama]

islamirama,
they were demanding to have abdul aziz, and he is in detention. in short, they were killing their fellow muslims to protest his arrest. i don't know how you find this an acceptable method of protest.

they are demanding his release becuase he has not done anything to be charged with. You already know war crimes the dictator and his army qualifies of this massacre they just committed. Do you honestly think they are just and only holding guilty people or they won't smear their propaganda lies on these people?

As for the killing, they are not killing their fellow Muslims. They are killing the servants of the Dictator who are killing the Muslims of this masjid. The police there is different than the police here. There i can give any police officer a $100 and have you arrested and beaten till your skin peels off just for even insulting me public. No body respects the corrupt police there and justly so.

---

 

[snakelegs]

they are demanding his release becuase he has not done anything to be charged with. You already know war crimes the dictator and his army qualifies of this massacre they just committed. Do you honestly think they are just and only holding guilty people or they won't smear their propaganda lies on these people?

As for the killing, they are not killing their fellow Muslims. They are killing the servants of the Dictator who are killing the Muslims of this masjid. The police there is different than the police here. There i can give any police officer a $100 and have you arrested and beaten till your skin peels off just for even insulting me public. No body respects the corrupt police there and justly so.

actually, i think the just thing to do would've been to cut off power and water many months ago.
you have decided these people are all innocent, but i don't think the majority of people agree with your verdict on this one. the protest demonstrations right after the action were very poorly attended.
i know that a lot of the police are very corrupt and easily bought. (this is true in most poor countries, and even some not-so-poor ones). so i can see why they are not respected - but there is a big leap between not respecting someone and murdering them. (tell you the truth, i don't especially respect police here either. )
i really doubt that islam permits murder that easily.
also, just because the gov't is wrong doesn't necessarily mean the lal masjid people are right either. from what i can tell, there are many valid grievances against the gov't. but this doesn't mean that a group can decide to force shariah by kidnapping people and killing people.
and it looks like the majority of pakistanis agree, even though most do want an end to the military rule, according to everything i have read.

now this one really has me puzzled:

quote: (doorster)
"wasalaam alaikum to Muslims"

your reply to this was:

another example of this hindu culture worshiper.

:?

 

[islamirama]

actually, i think the just thing to do would've been to cut off power and water many months ago.
you have decided these people are all innocent, but i don't think the majority of people agree with your verdict on this one. the protest demonstrations right after the action were very poorly attended.
i know that a lot of the police are very corrupt and easily bought. (this is true in most poor countries, and even some not-so-poor ones). so i can see why they are not respected - but there is a big leap between not respecting someone and murdering them. (tell you the truth, i don't especially respect police here either. )
i really doubt that islam permits murder that easily.
also, just because the gov't is wrong doesn't necessarily mean the lal masjid people are right either. from what i can tell, there are many valid grievances against the gov't. but this doesn't mean that a group can decide to force shariah by kidnapping people and killing people.
and it looks like the majority of pakistanis agree, even though most do want an end to the military rule, according to everything i have read.

The whole thing was planned out by busharaf's team from months. They wanted all this to happen. Paksitan is used to be a unisome society but it has changed over time. Now we have a clear line that divides the people. We have really religious and secular extremists on both sides and there is no longer middle ground anymore. So it's easy to see now who wants what.
You say the demonstrations were poorly attended, where did you get that information. I can tell you from eyewitness and people who were they how strong the demonstrations were or how majority are against the dicatotor. There are few lunatics here who try to paint their dictator with colorful brush and call the innocents as terrorists. These are what you call secular extremists who claim to be Muslim but everything they say points to their culture and secularism.

Islam doesn't permit murder which the gov't did here. It does allow you to fight back and stand for your rights. And when you have an institution that openly massacres over a 1000 people. Then islam or not, emotions run high and retaliation is to be expected against those who did such crime. The friends, supporters and kin of the dead will not sit idly. They don't see justice being given since the unjust the big hancho himself.

As for forcing shar'iah and kidnapping people. They were not forcing shar'iah, they were calling to set up islamic based courts. As for kidnapping, they did only two. One was of the brothel owners to compel them to shut their business down. Would honestly let a brothel open up in your town? the 2nd was the police officers they kidnapped. These officers harassed the female students and took them prisoners and so the male side students took the police officers in return to exchange for the female hostages police took. Like i said, the police is very corrupt there and unless you live there you wouldn't completely understand how things get down over there. Here you go to police academy and get training in everything, including ethetics. There you can get your buddy in without any training just by word of mouth (reference) and bribes.

now this one really has me puzzled:

quote: (doorster)
"wasalaam alaikum to Muslims"

your reply to this was:

:?

as'salaamu alaikum (peace be upon you) is the Muslim greeting to each other.

wa'laikum as'salaam (and peace be upon you) is the return of that greeting.

and the doorknob implied that he was excluding me when he said "to Muslims"

 

[Mustafa Sharif]

MaShallah

That was S0000000 Nice Brother... Thanks 4 that Wonderful post

 

[snakelegs]

The whole thing was planned out by busharaf's team from months. They wanted all this to happen. Paksitan is used to be a unisome society but it has changed over time. Now we have a clear line that divides the people. We have really religious and secular extremists on both sides and there is no longer middle ground anymore. So it's easy to see now who wants what.

from everything i've been able to learn, there are a lot of people who are exteme at neither end of the relilgious - secular spectrum. and there are not only 2 perspectives.
i think a more realistic division would be between those who have education and those who do not. those who have money and those who have nothing.
and i think this is part of the appeal of the religious movements - they are performing much needed social services - filling a vacuum.

You say the demonstrations were poorly attended, where did you get that information. I can tell you from eyewitness and people who were they how strong the demonstrations were or how majority are against the dicatotor. There are few lunatics here who try to paint their dictator with colorful brush and call the innocents as terrorists. These are what you call secular extremists who claim to be Muslim but everything they say points to their culture and secularism.

my information does not come from direct sources, but from people who have family there and reading on the web. yes, most are against the dictatorship - who wouldn't be? but this does not automatically translate into support for the people of lal masjid. the opposition comes from many different kinds of perspectives. but about the demonstrations, i admit you may well know better than i do.

Islam doesn't permit murder which the gov't did here. It does allow you to fight back and stand for your rights. And when you have an institution that openly massacres over a 1000 people. Then islam or not, emotions run high and retaliation is to be expected against those who did such crime. The friends, supporters and kin of the dead will not sit idly. They don't see justice being given since the unjust the big hancho himself.

yes, murder was committed by both sides. i understand emotions run high - but it was not only policemen who were killed.
also weren't the people given plenty of chance to leave and refused because they chose to be shaheeds instead?


As for forcing shar'iah and kidnapping people. They were not forcing shar'iah, they were calling to set up islamic based courts. As for kidnapping, they did only two. One was of the brothel owners to compel them to shut their business down. Would honestly let a brothel open up in your town?
no, i would not like to see a brothel open in my town. but i would not get together with some friends and attack or kidnap the owners.
parenthetically, i actually think on this one, it was more chinese pressure tha u.s. pressure that caused the gov't to act. but who knows?

the 2nd was the police officers they kidnapped. These officers harassed the female students and took them prisoners and so the male side students took the police officers in return to exchange for the female hostages police took. Like i said, the police is very corrupt there and unless you live there you wouldn't completely understand how things get down over there. Here you go to police academy and get training in everything, including ethetics. There you can get your buddy in without any training just by word of mouth (reference) and bribes.

you are right - i don't live there so i can not know the situation. but i am not sure that even the people that live there know what is really going on behind the scenes, any more than we do here. i am aware of police corruption, tho.
but you can't really expect a government - any government - to sit back and allow people to kidnap or kill its policemen or soldiers, without taking action against them. (by the way, i do not agree with the way this whole thing was handled).

anyway, i thank you for your reply.

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

It's about time you let that out, i was just waiting for you to say it.

Glad to see that my post was so anticipated.

Firstly, no one is denying the amount of the knowledge this khateeb has nor is anyone calling him a sinner.

secondly, there are enough knowledgeable people there to lead the prayer. it's a madrassa (islamic school), wouldn't it make sense to think they would have alims there? Alims are more learned the many khateebs over there. When he was refused to lead the prayer, he stormed out of there without even praying jummah. So you were saying something about "knowledgeable"?

If he's not a sinner, then there's nothing wrong with him being the khateeb. Right? If not, provide juristic evidences. You see, Islam tells us what is right and what is wrong. Allah declares what is halal and what is haram. Not what our gut instincts tell us, or our personal opinions. Please keep that in mind.

You ignore the example of ibn 'Umar. Did he not pray behind al-Hajjaaj? Whilst he was a tyrant, who murdered great companions such as 'Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr and great tabi'een such sa'eed ibn Jubair? And did not Ahmad ibn Hanbal stop his Muslims brothers from rebelling against the leader of that time who was teaching the Muslim children that the Qur'an is created (which is kufr)? What do you think the hikmah was behind this? Do you know what Ibnul Qayyim said about rebelling against the rulers and making khurooj???

And you're guessing that there are more knowledgable people in the area. Is there proof of that?

Thirdly, if the gov't murdered your father in cold blood and then send a man as a suitable spouse for your mother, would you accept him?

How on earth is that even close in resemblance to the situation we are discussing?!

The residents of Lal masjid lost a lot, it was a massacre if you haven't noticed. It would be very naive on your part to even think that those victims will allow a murdering dictator put a khateeb to lead them and their masjid. This is more than just khutbah, this is about being the Head of the masjid.

I'm not questioning the residents of Lal masjid, just so you know. The situation there is unclear, and I do not have the knowledge to pass a fatwa on the events occurring there. What I am questioning is your logic and reasoning.

Fouthly, the residents have every right to choose whoever they want as their Amir and give baya to him and reject anyone who choose not to accept. Islam too allows that.

Bring forth the adillah. Yes we should implement Islam in our own lives, but what evidence do you have that the Muslims should forcibly create an Islamic state, especially when the results will be a blatant massacre? Islam teaches hikmah, not action without knowledge and careful thought.

Lastly, Musharaaf doesn't establish salaah nor does he tell the people to pray. He drinks alcohol and does other unislamic stuff and protects the brotherls and indecency in the land as "freedom". He's politicians go to brotherls. So whether he is a Muslim or not, i'll leave that for another thread. I'll just remind you to go look up what islam ways about those who rule with other what shar'iah.

The underlined part makes one a faasiq, not a kaafir. Only the khawaarij believe that major sins take you outside the fold of Islam. And i'm sure you do not want to be amongst the khawaarij on yawm al-Qiyaamah. As for the bold part, I do not know if that is true or not. And as for that which is italicised, the answer is very easy. However, to say that something is kufr is quite straightfoward. But to apply it to a certain situation requires so much ijtihaad. That's why even though the scholars have disagreed over whether ignorance is an excuse for major kufr and shirk, they all agree that takfeer is only to be done by the people of knowledge. So if some reputable scholars who are sound in their manhaj and 'aqeedah have made takfeer of him, then fine. That changes a lot of things. But I think you have somehow missed the point. I'm not criticising the Muslims of Lal Masjid, i'm questioning your opinions. Because you are not basing your opinions on knowledge that is baseerah (or at least you are not presenting this knowledge), but rather you are just ranting based upon your own personal feelings on the matter.

And just so you know, I am not being biased. Because I used to have the same view point as you on these kind of issues.

 

[islamirama]

If he's not a sinner, then there's nothing wrong with him being the khateeb. Right? If not, provide juristic evidences. You see, Islam tells us what is right and what is wrong. Allah declares what is halal and what is haram. Not what our gut instincts tell us, or our personal opinions. Please keep that in mind.

Islam tells us what is right and wrong, and islam also gives you the right to choice. What is wrong with him to be khateeb is that the people who wants to represent them CHOOSE not to have him represent them. They have every islamic right to choose who they want to be their khateeb.

You ignore the example of ibn 'Umar. Did he not pray behind al-Hajjaaj? Whilst he was a tyrant, who murdered great companions such as 'Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr and great tabi'een such sa'eed ibn Jubair? And did not Ahmad ibn Hanbal stop his Muslims brothers from rebelling against the leader of that time who was teaching the Muslim children that the Qur'an is created (which is kufr)? What do you think the hikmah was behind this? Do you know what Ibnul Qayyim said about rebelling against the rulers and making khurooj???

And you're guessing that there are more knowledgable people in the area. Is there proof of that?

It's a madrassa, islamic school. With over 7000 students of each gender. The khateebs, many of them also graduated from there or other similar madrassa. Common sense would tell you the ones teaching there would be alims and have sufficient knowledge to teach these students who will go on to be khateebs one day. There is no single one person that has ultimate knowledge and we should put him ONLY in power. The madrassa has well qualified people and they can choose one that share's their sentiments and can represent them properly. They have a right to that, islamically.

I'm not questioning the residents of Lal masjid, just so you know. The situation there is unclear, and I do not have the knowledge to pass a fatwa on the events occurring there. What I am questioning is your logic and reasoning.

thanks and i question your angle of coming at it, you clearly are not understanding the point of view of these people. You are trying to force a khateeb on them they just don't want, regardless of him being good or bad.

Bring forth the adillah. Yes we should implement Islam in our own lives, but what evidence do you have that the Muslims should forcibly create an Islamic state, especially when the results will be a blatant massacre? Islam teaches hikmah, not action without knowledge and careful thought.

When i said Amir, i mean for their masjid not the ummah. They have the right to choose whoever they want as an amir for their masjid and not accept anyone the gov't sends over to keep an eye on them.

The underlined part makes one a faasiq, not a kaafir. Only the khawaarij believe that major sins take you outside the fold of Islam. And i'm sure you do not want to be amongst the khawaarij on yawm al-Qiyaamah. As for the bold part, I do not know if that is true or not. And as for that which is italicised, the answer is very easy.

He can be faasiq and he can be a munaafiq as well. No one here is claiming his major sins put him out of islam. But did you also know that a man is not a believer while he is in the act of committing a sin. So if this dictator were to die while committing this atrocity, where do you think he will end up?

However, to say that something is kufr is quite straightfoward. But to apply it to a certain situation requires so much ijtihaad. That's why even though the scholars have disagreed over whether ignorance is an excuse for major kufr and shirk, they all agree that takfeer is only to be done by the people of knowledge. So if some reputable scholars who are sound in their manhaj and 'aqeedah have made takfeer of him, then fine. That changes a lot of things. But I think you have somehow missed the point. I'm not criticising the Muslims of Lal Masjid, i'm questioning your opinions. Because you are not basing your opinions on knowledge that is baseerah (or at least you are not presenting this knowledge), but rather you are just ranting based upon your own personal feelings on the matter.

I did not call him a kufar but merely stated that is best left for another thread. He can be one or he cannot be one depending his stand on beloved democracy and dictatorship and his stand on shar'iah'. Like i said, go look up in the Quran what Allahs about those ruling with other than what Allah sent (quran). You may see it just "ranting" of my "opinions" but then again you came it from the wrong angle to begin with. I suggest you go back to the drawing board before you come attack me again for my "ranting".

And just so you know, I am not being biased. Because I used to have the same view point as you on these kind of issues.

really?, you sure fooled me there...


Anyways, i will not be replying to your next msg as i'm leave this forum. I've had my share of from this place, it's mgt and it's select few who openly without any fear call other muslims kuffar (maybe you should go talk about takfeer to him).

 

[doorster]

Sister gave examples from Islaamic history and in return she is getting home made rulings!

 

[doorster]

"....we should implement Islam in our own lives (and our leaders will be born out of us), ....what evidence do you have that the Muslims should forcibly create an Islamic state, especially when the results will be a blatant massacre? Islam teaches hikmah (wisdom, strategy etc.), not action without knowledge and careful thought".

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

:salamext:

Those who rule by other than the rule of Allah are kuffaar. That's simple 'aqeedah. But the implications of this are great, and only the people of knowledge can comprehend this. Brother, it seems like you want Musharraf to be a kaafir. Where's the ikhlaas? Truly Allah spoke the truth when He said that it is the 'ullemaa who fear Allah the most! That's why you see that the 'ullemaa are so careful in performing takfeer, whilst the laypeople rush to it. It's best left for another thread? Brother, it's best left to the 'ullemaa! As for him being a munaafiq, I did not know that anyone after the Prophet salAllaahu 'alayhi wa sallam from this ummah could receive wahiy from Allah?

There is a reason that the salaf did not needlessly oppose the rulers even though they also lived under evil tyrants. Now you can see why it is so heinously incorrect when people say that the way of the salaf is safer, but the way of the khalaf is better/wiser.

It is probably bets that you don't reply to my post, as I can see you have no intention of responding to the focal points of my posts. If you can stay and benefit from this forum then that is good, but if you wish to leave then that is your choice.

:wasalamex

 

[snakelegs]

Islam tells us what is right and wrong, and islam also gives you the right to choice. What is wrong with him to be khateeb is that the people who wants to represent them CHOOSE not to have him represent them. They have every islamic right to choose who they want to be their khateeb.

It's a madrassa, islamic school. With over 7000 students of each gender. The khateebs, many of them also graduated from there or other similar madrassa. Common sense would tell you the ones teaching there would be alims and have sufficient knowledge to teach these students who will go on to be khateebs one day. There is no single one person that has ultimate knowledge and we should put him ONLY in power. The madrassa has well qualified people and they can choose one that share's their sentiments and can represent them properly. They have a right to that, islamically.

they weren't demanding to pray behind an alim from the school - they were specifically demanding a man who is under arrest to be their khateeb.
btw, i can't imagine why they reopened lal masjid anyway.

 

[nevesirth]

Evidence Of White Phosphorus In Lal Mosque Solidifies

Reported by Ahmed Jan, JUS Pakistan Correspondent in Islamabad

Editors Note: George Orwell eloquently wrote in Nineteen Eighty Four, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” These words were never truer than they are today as the use of banned weapons, secret renditions, torture and rape are standard forms of warfare hidden from public view, for at least a while, and considered “business as usual”.

The US State Department labeled JUS one of the “Trio of Disinformers” for our reports on chemical weapons use in the Fallujah Massacre. At the time, the first reports out of the battlefield incorrectly identified the substance as mustard gas due to the yellow nature of the bodies. Eventually, after many “revolutionary acts”, the truth came out and the substance was identified as white phosphorus, a banned chemical weapon.

Evidence of the use of this horrific toxic substance is now surfacing in the recent Lal Mosque Massacre and JUS will surely once again be accused of “disinformation” before the truth will eventually become wide spread. Indeed, it’s a small price to pay to expose the illegal use of this outlawed killing substance.

Islamabad: As the days pass, more evidence is surfacing over the brutal means, methods and weapons used by Pakistani munafiqeen commandoes against sisters and brothers in Lal Mosque. As reported earlier by JUS, banned white phosphorus was used by the apostate regime forces, with new evidence confirming our initial reports.

Confirmed reports from internal sources that chemical weapons including white phosphorous incendiary weapons were used by apostate Pakistani commandoes against the Islamic students, men, women and children in Lal Mosque massacre were the first reports to rise from this historic mass execution. Pakistan has now joined the rank of nations after US and Israel to use these types of banned weapons against innocent civilians that can only be described as the appalling crime against humanity. The majority of bodies recovered from the Jamia Hafsa Madressah were so severely burnt and they could not be identified. Many had no limbs intact. During the operation white smoke was also seen rising from the building. Such a slaughter of women and children would never go unpunished, Allah Willing.

On 12th July, a local television broadcasted a program in which the presenter visited Jamia Hafsa. While touring the bullet riddled compound a number of military personal hovered around, at a certain point the presenter asked an accompanying Army personal about all the evidence of smoke around the area as to why was there so much smoke. The solider mentioned "WP". On seeking explanation the solider replied "White Phosphorus" or Willy Pete as it is commonly called in military circles.

White Phosphorus is a flare or smoke- producing incendiary weapon which is also used as an offensive anti-personnel flame compound capable of causing serious burns or death. White phosphorus weapons are controversial today because of its potential use against humans, for whom one-tenth of a gram is a deadly dose. According to the Geneva Convention and later amended by the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons signed into effect in 1997, white phosphorus is expressively prohibited for use against civilians. White Phosphorus have been used in the recent past by Israel in Lebanon and US and UK in Iraq, but probably the first time ever by a an apostate army against its own people.

Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as ‘any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target’. The same protocol also prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilians or in civilian areas. However, the use against military targets outside civilian areas is not explicitly banned by any treaty. To understand the viciousness one only has to the images of burnt bodies; the sight is excruciatingly painful, when the Americans used White Phosphorous on the victims in Fallujah back in April 2004.

If you look at the image on the on the front page that appeared in a local English newspaper one can clearly see the classic signs of a high intensity flame, which reached astounding temperatures to melt flesh from bones. The public was not shown the remains of sisters and brothers martyred in cold blood by apostate forces and were quickly buried in concealed wooden coffins the next day.

The Ummah is shocked and stunned at what has just happened, it should be enough for the world to wake up and rise up to put an end to the criminal acts of the butcher Musharraf, America and Israel.(JUS)


http://www.jihadunspun.com/index-side_internal.php?article=108556&list=/index.php&

 

[doorster]

Re: Evidence Of White Phosphorus In Lal Mosque Solidifies

.......................

The US State Department labeled JUS one of the “Trio of Disinformers” for our reports on chemical weapons use in the Fallujah Massacre. At the time, the first reports out of the battlefield incorrectly identified the substance as mustard gas due to the yellow nature of the bodies. Eventually, after many “revolutionary acts”, the truth came out and the substance was identified as white phosphorus, a banned chemical weapon.

Evidence of the use of this horrific toxic substance is now surfacing in the recent Lal Mosque Massacre and JUS will surely once again be accused of “disinformation” before the truth will eventually become wide spread. Indeed, it’s a small price to pay to expose the illegal use of this outlawed killing substance.

Islamabad: As the days pass, more evidence is surfacing over the brutal means, methods and weapons used by Pakistani munafiqeen commandoes against sisters and brothers in Lal Mosque. As reported earlier by JUS, banned white phosphorus was used by the apostate regime forces, with new evidence confirming our initial reports.

Confirmed reports from internal sources that chemical weapons including white phosphorous incendiary weapons were used by apostate Pakistani commandoes against the Islamic student................

..................the first time ever by a an apostate army against its own people.

......................
..............

Days before the event, did anyone say to the motley crew of rambos "surrender or you will be killed"?

Did those inside the compound kidnap or kill any army/police personnel before or during the incident? or did they just sit there Gandhi style while we "martyred" them?

 

[nevesirth]

Re: Evidence Of White Phosphorus In Lal Mosque Solidifies

Days before the event, did anyone say to the motley crew of rambos "surrender or you will be killed"?[/COLOR]

Did those inside the compound kidnap or kill any army/police personnel before or during the incident? or did they just sit there Gandhi style while we "martyred" them?

so whats ur point?????????????

 

[doorster]

so whats ur point?????????????

If you did not get the point so far, you ain't likely to get it, no matter what I say!

Instead I'll suggest you read up on fiqh of jihad or join up al-maghrib and ask for hidayah from one of the patient brothers there about calling us monaafiqs and apostates as I tend to get rather emotional.

 

[nevesirth]

If you did not get the point so far, you ain't likely to get it, no matter what I say!

Instead I'll suggest you read up on fiqh of jihad or join up al-maghrib and ask for hidayah from one of the patient brothers there about calling us monaafiqs and apostates as I tend to get rather emotional.

how does tht justify the use of a banned chemical weapon if i may ask?

 

[nevesirth]

If you did not get the point so far, you ain't likely to get it, no matter what I say!

Instead I'll suggest you read up on fiqh of jihad or join up al-maghrib and ask for hidayah from one of the patient brothers there about calling us monaafiqs and apostates as I tend to get rather emotional.

what do u mean? are u a pakistani soldier?

 

[doorster]

what do u mean? are u a pakistani soldier?

No, I am 46 year old (past my prime).