Paris Shooting
- Thread starter Sojourn
- Start date
- Replies 242
- Views 40K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
Salaam
The hysteria is reaching fever pitch. Heres an alternative response you wont be hearing anytime soon in the mainstream media.
Dr Abdul Wahid On The Recent Events In Paris
In the aftermath of the events in Paris, with perpetrators still on the run, the West’s press and politicians have set a narrative across the world – that the journalists at Charlie Hebdo were killed as part of a war on free speech and as such they died as martyrs.
We could go around in circles with arguments and counter arguments. ‘Had there been no provocation there would have been no backlash’ versus ‘violence is never justified when insulted’.
One thing is for sure, in my view. Had any government in the Muslim world taken a robust stand on the on-going insults to the Prophet – peace be upon him – threatening diplomatic action or to cut trade relations over the insulting depictions – I do not believe individuals would feel the frustration to retaliate. This is one of the reasons why calls for the restoration of a legitimate Islamic polity in the Muslim world continue to resonate so strongly amongst Muslims globally – to return stability and independence to the region.
But those who blame Islam for these killings say that like all religions it needs critiquing.
In that case, let me offer a critique of the modern secular ‘religion’ of liberalism – but with less crudeness and fewer insults than normally accompanies many ‘critiques’ of Islam.
France’s claim that free expression is a ‘fundamental principle’ of the Republic is a myth. For in France free expression is for some but not for others. Women are fined for wearing niqab – or banned from education for wearing hijab. Even at Charlie Hebdo, upheld as a bastion of free speech, this ‘fundamental principle’ was set aside to appease domestic political sensitivities when they sacked their own cartoonist Maurice Sinet for refusing to apologise for his biting item about Nicholas Sarkozy’s son, which appeared to denigrate him for marrying Jewish heiresses for money.
Similarly, when the French Prime Minister previously stated that the cartoons published by the magazine in 2011 were “expressed within the confines of the law and under the control of the courts”, he ought to have been reminded that the French senate passed a bill earlier that year outlawing denial of any genocide recognised by French law – restricting expression under the law and through the courts for political reasons.
”Free speech” is never absolutely “free”. No society has ever said there is an absolute right to say what you want. Laws outlawing speech are all around us. The British government is in the process of introducing legislation that will criminalise everyone from toddlers to parents for saying things that aren’t “British”. It has already criminalised people for insulting British troops. Germany criminalises holocaust denial, despite it remaining legal elsewhere. There are many examples across Europe – and usually applied selectively.
Every society has restricted speech according to their belief and value system. In secular Western society religion is largely unvalued so blasphemy is permitted. Whereas in many other parts of the world, including the Islamic world, religion is a central value and so blasphemy becomes a redline issue, including insulting any of the Prophets of God, starting from the Prophet Adam, to Prophets Moses and Jesus to the Prophet Mohammad (salallahu alaihi wasallam – and Peace be on all of them).
The existence of redlines in different societies should not imply the closure of debate. Certainly not in the case of Islam, which has a centuries-old Islamic tradition to engage in debate, tolerate criticism and hear the critiques of others. But criticism and debate is different to deliberately targeting the insult to others.
The cost to societal harmony from the ‘freedom to insult’ is rarely discussed. This freedom to mock and deride, born out of Europe’s particular dilemma of Church authority, opened the door to the growing disrespect and anti-social behaviour in society – where rudeness is celebrated as a sign of assertiveness, courtesy undervalued as weakness, and all too many people do not respect each other or the law.
Where such “freedoms” were once used to account those in power and prevent the excesses of the state, they are now directed at a community that holds no such status. The freedom to insult the sacred symbols of Islam has become a tool to bully and persecute a minority community – with a rise in the far right and anti-Muslim sentiment.
In this context an ultimatum has been served to Muslims – that it is not enough to say that the capital punishment for insulting the Prophet of Islam should be done after due judicial process by an Islamic authority – and not by ‘lone rangers’. That it is not enough to say that Muslim in a non-Muslim country under a covenant should not be a vigilante, killing people in broad daylight, some of whom had nothing to do with insulting the Prophet.
Rather, what is expected of a Muslim in Europe today is that you bow down before the god of free speech until you accept that every Prophet can be insulted – and you learn to like it or laugh it off!
That is an unacceptable expectation by those who attack Islam. Muslims living in the West have only one option when faced with insults against their beloved Prophet – and that is to speak out. Those who work to remove even that option will fail. They will find we continue to speak out loudly– despite the mockery and hatred.
Those who say we must all be allowed to insult each other freely should realise the resulting society is one where people start to hate each other, even when they tolerate each other. By contrast a society that considers deliberate insult and unnecessary provocation of others something to be avoided, is one where people will live harmoniously despite their varied differences.
The current pattern of state policies, community alienation, provocation and retaliation only fuels fear, intimidation and mistrust – for Muslim and non-Muslim alike. What is needed is more mature debate and intellectual discussion rather than insults, lies and false narratives. And despite the ultimatums put to us, Muslim remain ready for this.
http://www.hizb.org.uk/current-affairs/dr-abdul-wahid-on-the-recent-events-in-paris
The hysteria is reaching fever pitch. Heres an alternative response you wont be hearing anytime soon in the mainstream media.
Dr Abdul Wahid On The Recent Events In Paris
In the aftermath of the events in Paris, with perpetrators still on the run, the West’s press and politicians have set a narrative across the world – that the journalists at Charlie Hebdo were killed as part of a war on free speech and as such they died as martyrs.
We could go around in circles with arguments and counter arguments. ‘Had there been no provocation there would have been no backlash’ versus ‘violence is never justified when insulted’.
One thing is for sure, in my view. Had any government in the Muslim world taken a robust stand on the on-going insults to the Prophet – peace be upon him – threatening diplomatic action or to cut trade relations over the insulting depictions – I do not believe individuals would feel the frustration to retaliate. This is one of the reasons why calls for the restoration of a legitimate Islamic polity in the Muslim world continue to resonate so strongly amongst Muslims globally – to return stability and independence to the region.
But those who blame Islam for these killings say that like all religions it needs critiquing.
In that case, let me offer a critique of the modern secular ‘religion’ of liberalism – but with less crudeness and fewer insults than normally accompanies many ‘critiques’ of Islam.
France’s claim that free expression is a ‘fundamental principle’ of the Republic is a myth. For in France free expression is for some but not for others. Women are fined for wearing niqab – or banned from education for wearing hijab. Even at Charlie Hebdo, upheld as a bastion of free speech, this ‘fundamental principle’ was set aside to appease domestic political sensitivities when they sacked their own cartoonist Maurice Sinet for refusing to apologise for his biting item about Nicholas Sarkozy’s son, which appeared to denigrate him for marrying Jewish heiresses for money.
Similarly, when the French Prime Minister previously stated that the cartoons published by the magazine in 2011 were “expressed within the confines of the law and under the control of the courts”, he ought to have been reminded that the French senate passed a bill earlier that year outlawing denial of any genocide recognised by French law – restricting expression under the law and through the courts for political reasons.
”Free speech” is never absolutely “free”. No society has ever said there is an absolute right to say what you want. Laws outlawing speech are all around us. The British government is in the process of introducing legislation that will criminalise everyone from toddlers to parents for saying things that aren’t “British”. It has already criminalised people for insulting British troops. Germany criminalises holocaust denial, despite it remaining legal elsewhere. There are many examples across Europe – and usually applied selectively.
Every society has restricted speech according to their belief and value system. In secular Western society religion is largely unvalued so blasphemy is permitted. Whereas in many other parts of the world, including the Islamic world, religion is a central value and so blasphemy becomes a redline issue, including insulting any of the Prophets of God, starting from the Prophet Adam, to Prophets Moses and Jesus to the Prophet Mohammad (salallahu alaihi wasallam – and Peace be on all of them).
The existence of redlines in different societies should not imply the closure of debate. Certainly not in the case of Islam, which has a centuries-old Islamic tradition to engage in debate, tolerate criticism and hear the critiques of others. But criticism and debate is different to deliberately targeting the insult to others.
The cost to societal harmony from the ‘freedom to insult’ is rarely discussed. This freedom to mock and deride, born out of Europe’s particular dilemma of Church authority, opened the door to the growing disrespect and anti-social behaviour in society – where rudeness is celebrated as a sign of assertiveness, courtesy undervalued as weakness, and all too many people do not respect each other or the law.
Where such “freedoms” were once used to account those in power and prevent the excesses of the state, they are now directed at a community that holds no such status. The freedom to insult the sacred symbols of Islam has become a tool to bully and persecute a minority community – with a rise in the far right and anti-Muslim sentiment.
In this context an ultimatum has been served to Muslims – that it is not enough to say that the capital punishment for insulting the Prophet of Islam should be done after due judicial process by an Islamic authority – and not by ‘lone rangers’. That it is not enough to say that Muslim in a non-Muslim country under a covenant should not be a vigilante, killing people in broad daylight, some of whom had nothing to do with insulting the Prophet.
Rather, what is expected of a Muslim in Europe today is that you bow down before the god of free speech until you accept that every Prophet can be insulted – and you learn to like it or laugh it off!
That is an unacceptable expectation by those who attack Islam. Muslims living in the West have only one option when faced with insults against their beloved Prophet – and that is to speak out. Those who work to remove even that option will fail. They will find we continue to speak out loudly– despite the mockery and hatred.
Those who say we must all be allowed to insult each other freely should realise the resulting society is one where people start to hate each other, even when they tolerate each other. By contrast a society that considers deliberate insult and unnecessary provocation of others something to be avoided, is one where people will live harmoniously despite their varied differences.
The current pattern of state policies, community alienation, provocation and retaliation only fuels fear, intimidation and mistrust – for Muslim and non-Muslim alike. What is needed is more mature debate and intellectual discussion rather than insults, lies and false narratives. And despite the ultimatums put to us, Muslim remain ready for this.
http://www.hizb.org.uk/current-affairs/dr-abdul-wahid-on-the-recent-events-in-paris
Peace be with you all,
I think the biggest question is whether these attackers were justified in their actions according to an Islamic point of view. I can sympathize with grievances Muslims in France have over not being able to wear the niqaab or having their Prophet insulted and depicted in ways they find inappropriate, but the question is does this justify killing? Dr Walid's article doesn't really address this, although his tone makes one think that perhaps he does find it justifiable.
With all this done, unfortunately the imagine of "Islam" will only further tarnish. Perceptions of Islam as promoting violence will only grow. The prohibitions against Muslim articles of clothing that express Islamic identity will probably only be seen as more justified now. So even if some Muslims find these attacks as justifiable, as horrible and unfortunate as that would be, in the end Islam and the global Muslims community will only suffer more.
Pax et bonum
I think the biggest question is whether these attackers were justified in their actions according to an Islamic point of view. I can sympathize with grievances Muslims in France have over not being able to wear the niqaab or having their Prophet insulted and depicted in ways they find inappropriate, but the question is does this justify killing? Dr Walid's article doesn't really address this, although his tone makes one think that perhaps he does find it justifiable.
With all this done, unfortunately the imagine of "Islam" will only further tarnish. Perceptions of Islam as promoting violence will only grow. The prohibitions against Muslim articles of clothing that express Islamic identity will probably only be seen as more justified now. So even if some Muslims find these attacks as justifiable, as horrible and unfortunate as that would be, in the end Islam and the global Muslims community will only suffer more.
Pax et bonum
LearnIslam
Well-known member
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Other
I do agree that some cartoons on Muhammed were in not so good taste. But I wonder what Islam says about making an objection.
I also want to know - if a person like Anjem Chaudhary, clearly enjoying the benefits of life in Britain and who condoned the attacks, uses his freedom of expression to suffocate people in Britain, then would a non-Muslim be wrong in expecting his freedom of expression against Muslim beliefs in a Muslim nation?
I also want to know - if a person like Anjem Chaudhary, clearly enjoying the benefits of life in Britain and who condoned the attacks, uses his freedom of expression to suffocate people in Britain, then would a non-Muslim be wrong in expecting his freedom of expression against Muslim beliefs in a Muslim nation?
Hulk
Part-time Avenger
- Messages
- 2,155
- Reaction score
- 305
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
There is nothing in Islam that condones murder, nor vigilantism.
As for your next question, it doesn't really make sense for someone to expect a muslim majority country to treat him in a certain way because of how a muslim behaves in another country. One would have to abide by the laws of the place that he is in.
h-n
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
Importance here is of people remembering God. Where he punishes people and takes them into the next world to the fires of Hell. God didn't say that we were to kill everyone who is against Islam, we only fight against those who fight against us. This is where God himself kills the unbelievers ie at the time of Prophet Lut peace be upon him.
There are important points to consider as per Islamic point of view, in regards to what is being said;-
1. There are those that are saying that the media makes fun out of other religions, but that doesn't justify making fun out of others, does that mean that if you dirty your shirt, its OK for someone else's shirt to be dirty too???
2. Of course all the Muslims find it offensive of the cartoons, and those that even depict the Prophet with the likes of dogs-may Allah turn them into dogs in the next world! -Allah himself turned the evil doers to apes. So here the importance of remembering the next world, of what the person is adding to his record and building up for himself on the Day of Judgement.
3. Anyone making fun out of God, the Prophets will be made to answer them in the next world. It is the fact that people disrespect and trivialise the sins of people. For example, anyone would find it offensive and deeply hurtful if they were to make a cartoon of the Archangel Gabriel- every single angel would be ready to strike anyone for saying anything bad, making malicious cartoons about him. It is funny that they are willing to use loyalty to suit there needs ie films, for example in the Lord of the Rings trilogy they have the elves, if anyone was to be rude to the leader, all the elves would be upset about it.
4. Are they trying to teach us not to take it as an offence??? For that will never happen. The editor who died in the fire, what was he standing up for?? That people shouldn't care about religion?? He himself was having a relationship outside of marriage-his partner has been speaking to the press. So how is that people who aren't even living respectfully claim to be in any position to attack religion?? Anyone who is supporting those that make cartoons of the Prophets, then again we remember the next world, then stand with them on the Day of Judgement. If they are so sure, then tell people that they were God fearing people and that they believe that they are going to Heaven.
5. It is as above important to remember that God has allowed people to choose, and its up to them to reject the message, if they wish to make a mockery of it-and what they use is the material that they have gained from the Muslims-if we were embarrassed about it then do they think we would have allowed anyone to view them in the first place???
6. Another thing is that newspapers etc report on things that are of interest to the people, obviously people are not interested in reading up on the life of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, so why make cartoons of him?? When Muslims are a minority?? The majority are law abiding? Here they are not interested in getting along with people. They should get to the point, again as above, are they saying that the Muslims should accept it, when God, the angels find it unacceptable??
7. Of course anyone who wishes to write against Islam etc, have been jumping on the bandwagon for financial incentives, well it serves them right and the people who support them, to waste their time and money, its like some Muslims who left Islam to move abroad-for financial reasons, whatever people are going to say, is not going to get rid of Islam.
8. For the people that are saying it would be worse for the Muslims, again we remember Allah, where its entirely up to him, how long he tests people, and the fact that they accept homosexuality etc, what makes them think its the Muslims with the problems??
9. For the people who quote what the western world has ie technology, well the people of Thamud were just as arrogant. Carving homes out of mountains. The west tells people that we should just agree with them because of what they say they offer-it is they that should respect God of the Worlds, after all the food that he has provided them with etc. They cannot guarantee that they will be here tomorrow. OF course if they read on religion, they should know people don't forsake their religion for money etc. If that was the case, then we would have listened to Satan.
10. The way that they talk is that they will be here for a very long time. If the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him was in France-it wouldn't be acceptable to tell him that you need to be secular, that we don't like your Mother wearing a headscarf. That you need to listen to our rules, instead of listening to the Lord of the Worlds. Here, they reject the laws of God, (even quoting killing-why did France join the war with the USA???), but they wish for people to "respect" them, when they are promoting lewdness.
11. They wish to claim that they are fighting for freedom-they are living the way they wish to live, how has a Muslim stopped them from doing so?? No Muslim cares if they don't accept Islam, they try and claim that we are after them, and use the stories of the past. Are not even some males looking to marry someone from abroad?? They have nothing to worry about, no Muslim would wish to get married to a tattooed, drunkard female. They claim to be siding with what is right, what is right is what is from God, with what has been given to the Prophets, ie Ibrahim and Moses peace be upon them etc.
As Muslims go, whenever they talk it is a reminder of the Day of Judgement and what they will be facing. They need to be concerned with protecting themselves from the fires of Hell, any people who claim to support people who reject religion-will be disowning them on the Day of Judgement. Anyone who is arrogant and wishing to say they are with people who go against the Prophets Moses, Ibrahim, Noah peace be upon them etc-then we as Muslims will remember and we will all view the conditions of these people on the Day of Judgement. No need for arguments etc, just wait for the Day of Judgement.
Remember Allah and the Day of Judgement.
There are important points to consider as per Islamic point of view, in regards to what is being said;-
1. There are those that are saying that the media makes fun out of other religions, but that doesn't justify making fun out of others, does that mean that if you dirty your shirt, its OK for someone else's shirt to be dirty too???
2. Of course all the Muslims find it offensive of the cartoons, and those that even depict the Prophet with the likes of dogs-may Allah turn them into dogs in the next world! -Allah himself turned the evil doers to apes. So here the importance of remembering the next world, of what the person is adding to his record and building up for himself on the Day of Judgement.
3. Anyone making fun out of God, the Prophets will be made to answer them in the next world. It is the fact that people disrespect and trivialise the sins of people. For example, anyone would find it offensive and deeply hurtful if they were to make a cartoon of the Archangel Gabriel- every single angel would be ready to strike anyone for saying anything bad, making malicious cartoons about him. It is funny that they are willing to use loyalty to suit there needs ie films, for example in the Lord of the Rings trilogy they have the elves, if anyone was to be rude to the leader, all the elves would be upset about it.
4. Are they trying to teach us not to take it as an offence??? For that will never happen. The editor who died in the fire, what was he standing up for?? That people shouldn't care about religion?? He himself was having a relationship outside of marriage-his partner has been speaking to the press. So how is that people who aren't even living respectfully claim to be in any position to attack religion?? Anyone who is supporting those that make cartoons of the Prophets, then again we remember the next world, then stand with them on the Day of Judgement. If they are so sure, then tell people that they were God fearing people and that they believe that they are going to Heaven.
5. It is as above important to remember that God has allowed people to choose, and its up to them to reject the message, if they wish to make a mockery of it-and what they use is the material that they have gained from the Muslims-if we were embarrassed about it then do they think we would have allowed anyone to view them in the first place???
6. Another thing is that newspapers etc report on things that are of interest to the people, obviously people are not interested in reading up on the life of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, so why make cartoons of him?? When Muslims are a minority?? The majority are law abiding? Here they are not interested in getting along with people. They should get to the point, again as above, are they saying that the Muslims should accept it, when God, the angels find it unacceptable??
7. Of course anyone who wishes to write against Islam etc, have been jumping on the bandwagon for financial incentives, well it serves them right and the people who support them, to waste their time and money, its like some Muslims who left Islam to move abroad-for financial reasons, whatever people are going to say, is not going to get rid of Islam.
8. For the people that are saying it would be worse for the Muslims, again we remember Allah, where its entirely up to him, how long he tests people, and the fact that they accept homosexuality etc, what makes them think its the Muslims with the problems??
9. For the people who quote what the western world has ie technology, well the people of Thamud were just as arrogant. Carving homes out of mountains. The west tells people that we should just agree with them because of what they say they offer-it is they that should respect God of the Worlds, after all the food that he has provided them with etc. They cannot guarantee that they will be here tomorrow. OF course if they read on religion, they should know people don't forsake their religion for money etc. If that was the case, then we would have listened to Satan.
10. The way that they talk is that they will be here for a very long time. If the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him was in France-it wouldn't be acceptable to tell him that you need to be secular, that we don't like your Mother wearing a headscarf. That you need to listen to our rules, instead of listening to the Lord of the Worlds. Here, they reject the laws of God, (even quoting killing-why did France join the war with the USA???), but they wish for people to "respect" them, when they are promoting lewdness.
11. They wish to claim that they are fighting for freedom-they are living the way they wish to live, how has a Muslim stopped them from doing so?? No Muslim cares if they don't accept Islam, they try and claim that we are after them, and use the stories of the past. Are not even some males looking to marry someone from abroad?? They have nothing to worry about, no Muslim would wish to get married to a tattooed, drunkard female. They claim to be siding with what is right, what is right is what is from God, with what has been given to the Prophets, ie Ibrahim and Moses peace be upon them etc.
As Muslims go, whenever they talk it is a reminder of the Day of Judgement and what they will be facing. They need to be concerned with protecting themselves from the fires of Hell, any people who claim to support people who reject religion-will be disowning them on the Day of Judgement. Anyone who is arrogant and wishing to say they are with people who go against the Prophets Moses, Ibrahim, Noah peace be upon them etc-then we as Muslims will remember and we will all view the conditions of these people on the Day of Judgement. No need for arguments etc, just wait for the Day of Judgement.
Remember Allah and the Day of Judgement.
czgibson
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 3,234
- Reaction score
- 481
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Atheism
Greetings,
The Paris shootings are another sad example of behaviour that harms non-Muslims and Muslims alike. I like to check in to this forum at times like this to see how the issue is being discussed.
As usual, there's lots of wrong-headed bleating that ignores the central issue:
Anyone who thinks that killing is preferable to satire urgently needs to reassess their moral priorities.
This writer was on the verge of getting the point:
Yes - exactly. If you can't put up with your religion being mocked, then don't live in a secular country.
I'm not saying I believe religion should always be mocked, but many people in secular countries do. They believe religion as a whole is worthy of nothing other than contempt and ridicule. That is simply a fact, and if you can't tolerate that, and perhaps even "laugh it off", then live somewhere else.
In the nearly ten years I've been a member of this forum, I've learned a lot about Islam. I've met some interesting people, and I've almost learned to see things from a Muslim point of view - certainly more than most of my friends can.
One thing that seems very clear to me is that Islam urgently needs a central living authority. Muslims call for a Caliphate, and I think they're right. Not covering the entire world - that will never happen - but substantial enough to command the respect of Muslims worldwide.
Until this living authority exists, then terrorists can carry on giving Islam a bad name by listening to the scholars who support them, and ignoring the scholars who condemn them. Islam is a religion that is in a huge mess at the moment, and the sooner it is re-organised (or even Reformed - how about that for an idea?) the better it will be for planet Earth as a whole.
Peace
The Paris shootings are another sad example of behaviour that harms non-Muslims and Muslims alike. I like to check in to this forum at times like this to see how the issue is being discussed.
As usual, there's lots of wrong-headed bleating that ignores the central issue:
Anyone who thinks that killing is preferable to satire urgently needs to reassess their moral priorities.
This writer was on the verge of getting the point:
Yes - exactly. If you can't put up with your religion being mocked, then don't live in a secular country.
I'm not saying I believe religion should always be mocked, but many people in secular countries do. They believe religion as a whole is worthy of nothing other than contempt and ridicule. That is simply a fact, and if you can't tolerate that, and perhaps even "laugh it off", then live somewhere else.
In the nearly ten years I've been a member of this forum, I've learned a lot about Islam. I've met some interesting people, and I've almost learned to see things from a Muslim point of view - certainly more than most of my friends can.
One thing that seems very clear to me is that Islam urgently needs a central living authority. Muslims call for a Caliphate, and I think they're right. Not covering the entire world - that will never happen - but substantial enough to command the respect of Muslims worldwide.
Until this living authority exists, then terrorists can carry on giving Islam a bad name by listening to the scholars who support them, and ignoring the scholars who condemn them. Islam is a religion that is in a huge mess at the moment, and the sooner it is re-organised (or even Reformed - how about that for an idea?) the better it will be for planet Earth as a whole.
Peace
h-n
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
What a lot of tripe!!!
First of all you don't listen to the God of the Worlds, so you reject that, he who owns this world and everything in it, but then you expect people to listen to people's made up whatever they want.
This world belongs to God Almighty-so we don't have an issue of where we live and comply with our religious beliefs.
So if you don't like it-your the one who should build your own world and get off this one!!!!
Also why don't you get to the point??? As none of the french people who are supporting the cartoonists have done so. Frankly they have lost the plot. When do you see the Muslims making cartoons of hindu idols etc???
Who would buy these papers? The non-Muslims, so why bother making cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him?? This is done only with the knowledge that the Muslims do not like it, which it could have been anything, if we didn't like anyone drawing a tree etc.
So what are you trying to get from the target audience of these paper buyers?? They don't like Islam, well a lot of people don't, but what kind of response do they think they should get??? They are nothing to do with fighting for what is "right", they are not oppressed, fighting persecution etc.
Just because someone is offended with something, doesn't mean that you draw it on purpose knowing full well that its offensive.
There is only one God, Allah, not a "God of free speech", and funny that you talk of secular, but then willing to use the word God. You are able to say what you want, but that doesn't mean that you can control how other people react, not all Muslims but there are some people who will act violently, if you say awful things about their Mother etc.
It is the fact that the cartoonists have done nothing for France, its not like they brought something of benefit, they haven't done something worthy of anything in this world. There are people who do write well, ie Agatha Christie etc.
These fools have purposely drawn something on purpose to offend Muslims, and even the editor asked for a bodyguard-maybe, if he wanted to do something, he shouldn't be asking others to protect him.
I as a Muslim have zero sympathy for him (not saying they should have been killed), just like a person being a criminal and dies in the process of robbing a house. We could have a field day and make plenty of cartoons of secularism, what of;- homosexuality, people not knowing who their father is etc, but we DON'T, and neither do we find it funny. So actually we have respected you more, then you have respected each other as we are not telling females to be single parents, it a hard situation to be in etc.
We follow Prophets Jesus, Ibrahim, Noah, Moses, David, Solomon, Muhammad peace be upon them etc. We certainly aren't going to change religion to make it acceptable to the sinful people-how stupid is that!! How is that any different to just doing what Satan wishes us to do???
Also its good that we don't have a central leader, as all your asking is for a leader for the Muslims to listen to, and be corrupted by the west. The leader of the Muslims will be coming during the Major signs of the Day of Judgement, and they are two, the first is the Mahdi and the second is Prophet Jesus peace be upon him-and as you can see, certainly with the latter, they aren't going to tell us to change our religion so we accept evil.
ardianto
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,551
- Reaction score
- 931
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Assalamualaikum, greeting.
Regarding to Paris Shooting case, a terrorism observer in Indonesia says it's because press in the Europe are 'too wild'. To be honest, as Indonesian, I think he's right. Press in Indonesia have journalistic ethical code that do not adheres to "free speech", but adheres to "responsible freedom". Also, press in Indonesia are not allowed to offend any ethnic, any religion, any race, any social class. How if a media offend or insult an ethnic, religion, race, social class?. People can sue this media to the court.
It sound like curb the freedom of press. But this law was made to prevent friction among people from different ethnic, religion, race and social class. Also to prevent vigilante action from people who offended by a news.
Okay, how about journalistic ethical code in France?.
Regarding to Paris Shooting case, a terrorism observer in Indonesia says it's because press in the Europe are 'too wild'. To be honest, as Indonesian, I think he's right. Press in Indonesia have journalistic ethical code that do not adheres to "free speech", but adheres to "responsible freedom". Also, press in Indonesia are not allowed to offend any ethnic, any religion, any race, any social class. How if a media offend or insult an ethnic, religion, race, social class?. People can sue this media to the court.
It sound like curb the freedom of press. But this law was made to prevent friction among people from different ethnic, religion, race and social class. Also to prevent vigilante action from people who offended by a news.
Okay, how about journalistic ethical code in France?.
ardianto
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,551
- Reaction score
- 931
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
There are few non-Muslims in Indonesia who made statements that offend Muslims. But Indonesian medias do not 'blow up' their statements. Different than what British medias do to Anjem Choudary which they treat him like a celebrity. Like in this Paris shootings case which British medias quickly run to Anjem, ask his comment, then blow it up like he represent Muslims in general.
Indeed, Anjem misuse the freedom of expression. But unfortunately British medias support it. My advice to British medias, stop asking statement from Anjem Choudary.
LearnIslam
Well-known member
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Other
Some places take statements from someone like Anjem. But others took it from Muslims who rectified the opinion. This is what I notice :
- Western countries don't value religion closely. Muslims do. And its good in my opinion to value faith.
- They use means to continuously provoke Muslims.
- The terror network connected to Muslim majority countries then shows its ugly head out.
- People like Anjem are interviewed and they approve it.
Do I make sense when I say that many of the influential Islamic leaders are intolerant of dialogue or discussion with non-Muslims? That is the reason Islam has this image in the eyes of many. I am not a Muslim, but I have Muslim friends.
And there are times I feel Muslims demand thing overriding the state/country law in non-Muslim countries, while are strict on imposing Shariah or whatever law they want in countries they form the majority. Is there an explanation for this in particular? (1)
Quran says (if I am not mistaken), "There is no compulsion in religion". What does Quran or Hadith say about the means of making an objection? (2)
czgibson
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 3,234
- Reaction score
- 481
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Atheism
Greetings,
In consequence, I won't be leaving this planet any time soon based on what are, from my point of view, your untrue beliefs.
You don't have to agree with me, and you are welcome to insult my beliefs if you want. I will not threaten you with violence in return.
I thought I made the central point of my post pretty clear. I even put it in bold. In case you missed it, here it is again:
Anyone who thinks that killing is preferable to satire urgently needs to reassess their moral priorities.
To be honest, I've never seen any offensive cartoons made by Muslims against Hindus. I've seen plenty targeted at Jews though. I don't want to provide a link here, but a simple Google Image search will show you that hundreds of them do exist.
I didn't use the word "God" once in my previous post. You must have imagined it.
They have stood up for freedom of speech in the face of repeated threats of violence from people who claim to share your religion. Other newspapers have been too afraid to do the same, because they realise (as has been demonstrated yet again) that these threats of violence are very real.
I hope every news organisation in the West simultaneously republishes the same cartoons, to show that we are united in our support for freedom of speech and to show that we are fed up with this religious bullying. Look at Facebook - thousands of individuals are doing this already.
You are clearly on the side of the killers. Your entire post is one long attempt to justify their actions. Are you even slightly ashamed?
You are welcome to develop a sense of humour any time you like.
You are perfectly welcome to your religion, and I wish you the very best of luck with it. I mean that sincerely - I genuinely hope it brings you fulfilment and happiness.
Just stop expecting the rest of us to obey its rules.
Peace
In case you hadn't noticed, I'm an atheist. I don't believe God exists. According to me, God was created by humans in order to scare people like you into behaving well and believing things that are untrue.
In consequence, I won't be leaving this planet any time soon based on what are, from my point of view, your untrue beliefs.
You don't have to agree with me, and you are welcome to insult my beliefs if you want. I will not threaten you with violence in return.
I thought I made the central point of my post pretty clear. I even put it in bold. In case you missed it, here it is again:
Anyone who thinks that killing is preferable to satire urgently needs to reassess their moral priorities.
To be honest, I've never seen any offensive cartoons made by Muslims against Hindus. I've seen plenty targeted at Jews though. I don't want to provide a link here, but a simple Google Image search will show you that hundreds of them do exist.
I didn't use the word "God" once in my previous post. You must have imagined it.
They have stood up for freedom of speech in the face of repeated threats of violence from people who claim to share your religion. Other newspapers have been too afraid to do the same, because they realise (as has been demonstrated yet again) that these threats of violence are very real.
I hope every news organisation in the West simultaneously republishes the same cartoons, to show that we are united in our support for freedom of speech and to show that we are fed up with this religious bullying. Look at Facebook - thousands of individuals are doing this already.
You are clearly on the side of the killers. Your entire post is one long attempt to justify their actions. Are you even slightly ashamed?
You are welcome to develop a sense of humour any time you like.
You are perfectly welcome to your religion, and I wish you the very best of luck with it. I mean that sincerely - I genuinely hope it brings you fulfilment and happiness.
Just stop expecting the rest of us to obey its rules.
Peace
Greetings and peace be with you czgibson;
I am a Christian, and I found those cartoons highly offensive. Clearly there are millions of Muslims who have also found those cartoons offensive, but they have not killed anyone. Do you seriously want to offend all those millions of Muslims yet again, because of what four individuals have done?
You talk about religious bullying, but if every paper published those cartoons again, this might be considered to be bullying by the secular community. Killing is wrong, but two wrongs do not make a right. As I understand, four gunmen/women have died, who else needs to be punished for their actions.
In the spirit of praying for justice for all people
Eric
I am a Christian, and I found those cartoons highly offensive. Clearly there are millions of Muslims who have also found those cartoons offensive, but they have not killed anyone. Do you seriously want to offend all those millions of Muslims yet again, because of what four individuals have done?
You talk about religious bullying, but if every paper published those cartoons again, this might be considered to be bullying by the secular community. Killing is wrong, but two wrongs do not make a right. As I understand, four gunmen/women have died, who else needs to be punished for their actions.
In the spirit of praying for justice for all people
Eric
Last edited:
h-n
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
If you don't know what you post yourself, then you should refrain from posting. You used the word God in your quote;-
Rather, what is expected of a Muslim in Europe today is that you bow down before the god of free speech until you accept that every Prophet can be insulted – and you learn to like it or laugh it off!
Also you talk as if Muslims are telling you what to accept, we are not, we accept that people don't wish to convert to Islam, which is your own problems. What people are basically trying to say is that they are like some people in the past, who fought against oppression, slavery, or bad treatment by bad bosses-but this is not the same. Publishing cartoons just to offend people is wrong. Your are not fighting for justice, you are fighting for the right to say bad things, be abusive without being attacked-where you cannot control some people's reactions. How foolish are they?? They quote the past, and treat themselves as if they are doing the same thing, ie by people who were effected by tyrants.
The people in France, have not been effected by the Muslims, in terms of we have not stopped them from having sex outside of marriage, we have not prevented them from eating pork, or drinking alcohol, they have lived the way they have wished to live-but this wasn't good enough for them, instead of accepting this tolerance from the Muslims, they want to attack the way we THINK-by saying we are not happy until you accept our cartoons. You have not got to the point, your blabbering on about free speech, when people fight for something, whatever it is, they lay out what they wish to have achieved, ie when fighting against slavery, there is not accomplishment, there is not goal here, as if you think that you are going to get the Muslims to not be offended by this is never going to happen.
You say that you wish to for all the papers to publish the cartoons-so you yourself are not getting to the point, first you say that you wish for the Muslims to take the cartoons lightly and not be offended, but the newspapers target audience is non-Muslims so how is that going to change the Muslims???
I don't know what every Muslim is doing on the planet, but I don't agree with cartoons of the Jews either, regardless of our problems, I am not going to act like those Jews who go against Muslims when they worship the one God, where we can pray at a Synagogue, and we certainly don't need unreligious people talking on behalf of Judaism. Even as a Muslim, I hear of Jews who say that they are homosexuals but also are Jewish-I don't agree that they are, as the people who have been given the Torah, you can't pick and choose out of religion. So that also shows that we aren't going to use an example of what some Jews are doing and say that they all are doing it.
I am not interested in making cartoons of non-Muslims, or anything, I am not like you, neither do I need to act as a child who thinks they are doing something funny or clever by saying something that someone doesn't like just to show opposition.
It is actually the west that effects the lives of people abroad;-
1. Taking away what was once children's playgrounds ie the beaches and turning them into tourist destinations, where people are just wearing next to nothing and laying down-so thereby changing the way things are. Even if the place is so nice and beautiful, you would still wish to bring alcohol, which is not a way of enjoying a scenery.
2. The factories abroad, which is hard on the workforce, to work long hours, and targets and targets, its not because ie the company is going to make a loss if the workers worked at a more comfortable pace it because of their greed. They wish to pay the workers little by trying to justify that its what are the average wages, but are happy to pay themselves more then the average by products ie trainers, electronic equipments. Then these business are looking to making more profit every year, if they don't surpass last year's profit they treat it as they make a loss. They wish to run people's lives by making more profit every year, so its not good enough for them to have a comfortable wage to live on, but its ok to pay very little to people who work so hard??
3. You are not fighting on the side that is right, you are only repeating what evil doers have been doing in the past. Where they threw the Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him into the fire, the believers being persecuted, not because they threatened to kill people, but because they worshipped the one God, been thrown into hot oil, places with scorpions etc.
4. The wars, why did France go into Iraq and Afghanistan??? They again have lost the plot, if you wish to say that you don't want anything to do with religion, then why attack people because the follow Islam?? They didn't have to join the war with the USA-sure they could have got along without France. Talk about as if your righteous, good people but are far from it, attacking women for wearing headscarfs etc.
As above that is a huge lie that anyone can claim that they are fighting for what is right-which is what is good, that people can recognise around the world, again if they fought against tyrants, where people wish to oppose them because of their persecution of people. You are fighting for the right to be abusive to others.-which you are able to do, but trying to control the reaction of people is something that has never happened. How can you control how people react if you wanted to make lewd, perverted cartoons of your Mother and as if she was a dog??
Of course you can publish the cartoons as many times as you like, but that will change nothing, that the Muslims are offended, and that these people are not interested in getting along with others, and tolerating people-the very thing they are accusing us of not doing, tolerating doesn't mean accepting someone's abuse and evil. So the cartoonist goals where to try to control the reaction of those people who would wish to go out an attack them, as of course the majority of the Muslims would not do. So they failed-as they got killed, nevertheless if they were not killed, they would still be facing punishments for attacking religious people as of course its a sin to attack Prophet Jesus peace be upon him.
At the same time as stating that your fighting for "freedom"-such a broad term and nonsense, you then in your previous posts state that Muslims should have a leader so we then are basically more controlled.
Instead of wasting time with cartoons etc, there is a solution, of course such foolish idiots such as yourselves don't talk much of this, but instead of being abusive to people. If you don't like the Muslims, then get your democratic government, or vote whoever will to throw the Muslims out. The Muslims are not going to just give up everything they worked for just because someone doesn't like them, no difference in having bad neighbours who make people's lives difficult. There are the Muslims who also converted to Islam, but of course the Muslims will need to work together and help each other to get places to stay as we don't own homes abroad, you can't just go to a another country and get a home. But nevertheless, issue resolved, also please refrain from bombing countries abroad, its not the Muslims fault, how can people justify bombing, Pakistan, Afghanistan Syria, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Somolia etc you claim its not you but its us that started it, when the masses in the western world don't have a clue what the governments are actually doing in these countries. So you need to make a law to threw the Muslims out, then make another to stop bombing the countries and also another to stop using other countries resources (don't try to justify ie tourism by giving people jobs, they can cope without working in tourism). That's all you need to do, instead of wasting time with cartoons.
MuslimInshallah
Moderator
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 204
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
Assalaamu alaikum,
About 17 years ago, I was travelling in France, and needed to stop overnight in a middle-sized city. It was around the beginning to middle of May. I was there with my husband and my two small children, and expecting my third.
We phoned a tourist information number and got the names of some local hotels. My husband went into the first. He was told the hotel was full. He went into another. The same story. A third hotel was very dirty and unpleasant. He was told there was room there. I took one look at the rooms, and refused. We went on to a nicer hotel. Again, there was no room.
I couldn't believe it! In May? Everything was full?! I suggested to my husband that I go to the next hotel to see about rooms, and I hauled my oversized self out of the car, and walked in. I was greeted very politely by the hotel clerk. Space? Yes, of course! Plenty of rooms. I had a look at a room. It was a nice and clean one. I said we'd take it, and I went to tell my husband and children to come in. The clerk saw my husband and looked like he'd bitten into something unpleasant. But it was too late… he'd already ok'd the room for me.
You see, my husband looked typically Middle Eastern. And I am White. And at that time, I was not wearing a headscarf.
This experience was just one of several we had in France travelling through to meet my relatives. I have also been treated to the lovely things my relatives have said about Muslims/Middle Easterners (both before they were aware of my religious inclinations, and after) and about my darker-skinned children (versus their lighter-skinned cousins).
Much has been said about the use of satire in France. But what is not being discussed is the fact that satire is supposed to be the weapon of the weak against the people and institutions of power. But Muslims in France are not in any position of power. They are routinely discriminated against, mocked and vilified. They are weak.
I am all for satire (in good taste). The weak need ways to bring the powerful to a little humility. But mockery and jeering of the powerful towards the weak is not satire. It is bullying.
I do not support extra-judicial killings (frankly, I'm not keen on capital punishment either...). I do not agree with what the murderers in France did. I also don't think that vigilante justice in the US against police officers is correct. Or that the killing of Pierre Laporte (a politician in Quebec) by the FLQ (Québec Liberation Front) was right. Or the murders in the Irish “troubles”. But we have to be honest in our understandings of these events. When groups of people are mistreated and denied justice, there will be those who will explode and use violent ways to seek redress.
If we twist reality and try to pretend that it is the weak who are powerful, and the unjust strong are upholders of liberty, equality and fraternity, we do not help our societies mature and deal effectively with issues that are tearing our social fabric.
The clamping down by the Federal Government of Canada was not what diffused the terrorist threat in Québec. Frankly, it fanned the flames. It was the accession to political power by the oppressed French-speakers in Québec, and their subsequent ability to access fair treatment, that calmed Canadian society. (smile) Yes, there are still grumblings in English-speaking Canada about Québec getting too much. Or verbal snipings about Québecers being lesser in some way or another. And we have the occasional lunatic who tries to off a politician (like the English-speaker who tried to assassinate the Premier of Québec a couple of years ago, and killed an innocent bystander). But overall, Canada is a pretty quiet place.
Why? Because we are trying to be more just to everyone. We are a very diverse bunch, a mix of every colour and ethnicity and language and culture and religion… new Canadians, Native Canadians, several-generation Canadians… whenever we have been unjust, we have seen strife. So we must struggle to be more just. Our society could not exist otherwise. We are not perfect, but I am heartened by the efforts I have seen in my lifetime. For example, 25 years ago, I would never have expected to see the level of understanding and respect towards Natives peoples in Canada rise to the levels I see today (which are completely deserved and appropriate. I hope we may see even more improvements in this direction). This is a much better way to diffuse tensions than by vilifying Native peoples because some of them took up arms (which has happened).
Do we need to protect the public against violent acts? Yes. Must we hold perpetrators accountable? Yes. Killing is not right. But we must also be honest, and work to address legitimate grievances.
Muslims and people of colour are not well-treated in France. This also is not right. And mocking and insulting the weak is not right.
May God, the One Who Knows and Understands... and Loves, have Mercy on us all.
About 17 years ago, I was travelling in France, and needed to stop overnight in a middle-sized city. It was around the beginning to middle of May. I was there with my husband and my two small children, and expecting my third.
We phoned a tourist information number and got the names of some local hotels. My husband went into the first. He was told the hotel was full. He went into another. The same story. A third hotel was very dirty and unpleasant. He was told there was room there. I took one look at the rooms, and refused. We went on to a nicer hotel. Again, there was no room.
I couldn't believe it! In May? Everything was full?! I suggested to my husband that I go to the next hotel to see about rooms, and I hauled my oversized self out of the car, and walked in. I was greeted very politely by the hotel clerk. Space? Yes, of course! Plenty of rooms. I had a look at a room. It was a nice and clean one. I said we'd take it, and I went to tell my husband and children to come in. The clerk saw my husband and looked like he'd bitten into something unpleasant. But it was too late… he'd already ok'd the room for me.
You see, my husband looked typically Middle Eastern. And I am White. And at that time, I was not wearing a headscarf.
This experience was just one of several we had in France travelling through to meet my relatives. I have also been treated to the lovely things my relatives have said about Muslims/Middle Easterners (both before they were aware of my religious inclinations, and after) and about my darker-skinned children (versus their lighter-skinned cousins).
Much has been said about the use of satire in France. But what is not being discussed is the fact that satire is supposed to be the weapon of the weak against the people and institutions of power. But Muslims in France are not in any position of power. They are routinely discriminated against, mocked and vilified. They are weak.
I am all for satire (in good taste). The weak need ways to bring the powerful to a little humility. But mockery and jeering of the powerful towards the weak is not satire. It is bullying.
I do not support extra-judicial killings (frankly, I'm not keen on capital punishment either...). I do not agree with what the murderers in France did. I also don't think that vigilante justice in the US against police officers is correct. Or that the killing of Pierre Laporte (a politician in Quebec) by the FLQ (Québec Liberation Front) was right. Or the murders in the Irish “troubles”. But we have to be honest in our understandings of these events. When groups of people are mistreated and denied justice, there will be those who will explode and use violent ways to seek redress.
If we twist reality and try to pretend that it is the weak who are powerful, and the unjust strong are upholders of liberty, equality and fraternity, we do not help our societies mature and deal effectively with issues that are tearing our social fabric.
The clamping down by the Federal Government of Canada was not what diffused the terrorist threat in Québec. Frankly, it fanned the flames. It was the accession to political power by the oppressed French-speakers in Québec, and their subsequent ability to access fair treatment, that calmed Canadian society. (smile) Yes, there are still grumblings in English-speaking Canada about Québec getting too much. Or verbal snipings about Québecers being lesser in some way or another. And we have the occasional lunatic who tries to off a politician (like the English-speaker who tried to assassinate the Premier of Québec a couple of years ago, and killed an innocent bystander). But overall, Canada is a pretty quiet place.
Why? Because we are trying to be more just to everyone. We are a very diverse bunch, a mix of every colour and ethnicity and language and culture and religion… new Canadians, Native Canadians, several-generation Canadians… whenever we have been unjust, we have seen strife. So we must struggle to be more just. Our society could not exist otherwise. We are not perfect, but I am heartened by the efforts I have seen in my lifetime. For example, 25 years ago, I would never have expected to see the level of understanding and respect towards Natives peoples in Canada rise to the levels I see today (which are completely deserved and appropriate. I hope we may see even more improvements in this direction). This is a much better way to diffuse tensions than by vilifying Native peoples because some of them took up arms (which has happened).
Do we need to protect the public against violent acts? Yes. Must we hold perpetrators accountable? Yes. Killing is not right. But we must also be honest, and work to address legitimate grievances.
Muslims and people of colour are not well-treated in France. This also is not right. And mocking and insulting the weak is not right.
May God, the One Who Knows and Understands... and Loves, have Mercy on us all.
czgibson
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 3,234
- Reaction score
- 481
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Atheism
Greetings h-n,
I'm not going to address your post in detail, as much of it is irrelevant babble that has nothing to do with the issue of the Paris shootings.
Those are not my words though, are they? That is a quote from someone else.
Are you insane? Twelve people are dead. What kind of tolerance is this?
Also, why should French non-Muslims should obey Muslim rules?
France famously did not join the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
I don't know what you think you're raving about, but you're clearly not living in the real world.
Peace
I'm not going to address your post in detail, as much of it is irrelevant babble that has nothing to do with the issue of the Paris shootings.
Those are not my words though, are they? That is a quote from someone else.
Are you insane? Twelve people are dead. What kind of tolerance is this?
Also, why should French non-Muslims should obey Muslim rules?
France famously did not join the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
I don't know what you think you're raving about, but you're clearly not living in the real world.
Peace
Last edited:
Abz2000
Abz Iz Back!!!
- Messages
- 5,358
- Reaction score
- 589
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
It were good for them if they did.
And speak for yourself, as they are researching the truth as you type.
Peace to those who follow the guidnce of the King of the Heavens and of the earth.
h-n
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
You can't reply as it is the truth, the fact that Muslims live their lives by what is taught by God, so to say it has nothing to do with the situation is foolish.
Why bother using a quote if you don't accept it yourself?? That is how stupid you are.
As per the message from God, we have to make sure that we die in a state that is successful for the hereafter, you don't know when you are going to die, and Muslims should be prepared. Those people in the past died after being persecuted, ie the magicians at Pharoah's court accepted the one God, which Pharoah chopped their hands and feet at alternative sides and died. So what your complaining about?? These people who died making their cartoons (the others who didn't still need to be prepared for the hereafter), were wishing to use other people to protect them, they should be willing to die if you believe in something so much-but of course they weren't as they weren't fighting against oppression, a tyrant, they were fighting for the right to be abusive.
So you have to make sure that you don't die whilst having butt implants,
Make sure that you don't die whilst drinking alcohol
Make sure that you don't die whilst clubbing
Make sure that you don't die whilst having illicit sexual relationships
But die in the state of worshipping the one God, remembering the Day of Judgement, Paradise and Hell.
I have already and other Muslims stated is that no, they shouldn't have been killed, but leave it for them to die. But I have zero sympathy, and I don't care that they died just as people who die whilst being abusive to others, that is their problem.
Its not about Muslim rule its about what your stating that you doing but being a hypocrite, you talk about tolerance but you don't tolerate others by being abusive to people, so we are being tolerant as we are not the ones that are making stupid cartoons. Also forbidding headscarfs etc where made after Muslims lived there, it wasn't because they were not following and being law abiding citizens, it was because they decided they didn't like it and wanted to get rid of it, so they are being intolerant, whilst at the same time as telling people to be tolerant.
What is France being bombing recently?? Iraq, What are they also doing in Niger?? Its pathetic, whilst claiming to be civilised but doing the attacking, even their past about having colonies and wishing to take over the world.
I am living in the real world, where the homosexuals at the time of Prophet Lut peace be upon him were being abusive to him for no other reason that he was telling them to stop their awful behaviour, they then stormed to his home. The people who supported the homosexuals are no difference to what people are supporting today, they attack people who are doing no other thing but worshipping God, whilst they themselves side with being who are immoral, wearing rubbish clothing etc. Its a no brainer, your on the side of evil and your attacking people who don't agree with you.
In regards to this shooting, then join the police force and catch the culprits who seek to attack you. There is no need to go on Islamic forums to tell us how to think. We follow the law of God. We certainly don't care of your opinions when you happy to use people for sex and then dump them as if they are meaningless and then say that you respect people more. Even with the dead, you say its OK for them to be homosexual, have sex outside of marriage and be treated disrespectfully, but then bleat as if you really cared about them.
You are not better then;-
Prophet Jesus peace be upon him
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him
Prophet Solomon peace be upon him
Prophet Noah peace be upon him
Prophet David peace be upon him
Prophet Jonah peace be upon him
Prophet Moses peace be upon him
Prophet Lut peace be upon him
Prophet Job peace be upon him
Prophet Salih peace be upon him etc that we are going to listen to you over them.
Everytime you speak, along with people who are critical of Islam are only showing that if you were alive at the time of Prophet Noah peace be upon him you would have been drowned in the flood. There is nothing else that comes into our minds, so sprout about your nonsense, as we will see each other on the Day of Judgement, where you have not friends, where people will disown each other, just as Christopher Hitchens who died cares not of what he said and doesn't care about the people saying he did a good job, he didn't do a good job. He would ever ask for an opportunity to come back into this world to oppose the Atheists. Everyone will be brought on the Day of Judgement, everyone will die and be faced with the justice of God Almighty.
Last edited:
hameedhamza
New member
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
you get burned, when you play with fire