|
Terrorists Attack London's Transportation System (pg. 16)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | The Sunni Council denounced the bombings as anti-Islamic and said the Koran, the Muslim holy book, forbade suicide attacks.
"Who has given anyone the right to kill others? It is a sin. Anyone who commits suicide will be sent to Hell," said Mufti Muhammad Gul Rehman Qadri, the council chairman. "What happened in London can be seen as a sacrilege. It is a sin to take your life or the life of others." |
Notice how he says the Koran forbids suicide attacks (probably because noone anticipated suicide bombs in the 7th century).
What he fails to mention is that the Koran is FULL of passages imploring Muslims to kill "unbelievers," Christians, Jews, idolaters, etc.
sample:
So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (009.005)
Just go here and use the search terms "slay," "kill," etc.
The other thing is, Muslim groups condemed the 9/11 attacks, and yet Muslims continue to commit terrorism. The time for words is over... the time for action is now.
| quote: | The council said Muslims should not use "atrocities being committed in Palestine and Iraq" to justify attacks such as those in London that killed 55 when suicide bombers struck in three Underground trains and a double-decker bus, the fatwa declared.
"We equally condemn those who may have been behind the masterminding of these acts, those who incited these youths in order to further their own perverted ideology," Mr. Qadri said. |
And there's the problem. Muslims not taking responsibility for their actions, blaming the Zionist/American conspiracy, etc.
There is NO equivalency between the terrorists and any Western country's foreign policy.
| quote: | | The bombings have prompted the government to propose new legislation outlawing "indirect incitement" of terrorism — including public praise for those who carry out attacks. |
That new legislation scares the hell out of me. You could be arrested just for visiting certain websites. :nervous:
| quote: | | Pakistani intelligence agents have questioned students, teachers and administrators at the school in central Lahore, and at least two other al-Qaeda-linked radical Islamic centres, showing pictures and a dossier on Mr. Tanweer. |
Notice that they became terrorists after attending religious Islamic schools.
| quote: | The fourth suspect, Jamaican-born Germaine Lindsay, 19, who came to Britain as an infant, lived in Luton, a city north of London.
|
Jamicans never commit terrorist acts... except the ones that convert to Islam. First there was Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," now this guy Lindsay.
Clearly, there's a problem within Islam. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
Despite your opinions regarding Islam, ShadoWolf, the point is, there are Islamics out there (a lot in fact) that don't agree with extremists.
It would be akin to me not liking all Catholics because of a few bad priests who molested young boys.
Or not liking the whole Trance gendre because of 103.5 Eurotrash...
Painting the whole religion as controversial because of extremism?
You might as well be looking down the wrong end of a telescope because that's about as much perspective and insight as I can see of it...
Kutos to those Islamics that are actually standing up and renouncing terrorism!  |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
What makes Islam bad is that in Koran it clearly says that if a Muslim kills an enemy, then he will be rewarded in afterlife. That whole concept has been twisted around and taken advantage by extremists and deep religious followers. Islam is not such a bad religion, though it does have some provisions that have really hurt it as a society that could have brought greater contributions to the world. An example of one of these problems is the gender equality issue in Muslim society.
If Islam can reform or allow a greater level of freedom and equality in its society, its future will be much brighter. Thats one of the better ways they can beat the Americans, because politically the world's only remaining superpower is a big bully, and having a lot of power has allowed them to initiate wars that would have been unthinkable if they were started by a different nation.
EDIT: Oh yes, how could I forget the most important factor, besides gender equality - EDUCATION. However, it has to be fair and truthful like the western world's educational system, taught to both sexes equally, to see the world in a better picture. Better educated people will be smart enough to know right or wrong. Extremists are taught very well in religion, so well that they will not believe anything else. Religion must be taught after education. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
Here's an EXCELLENT article that sums up my views nicely:
http://www.canada.com/national/nati...8a-c11ba77aef77
What we should expect from Muslims
David Frum
National Post
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Western Muslims feel badly misunderstood. The vast majority of them utterly abhor terrorism against the countries in which they live. And yet they sense suspicion from their fellow citizens.
Meanwhile, those fellow citizens are feeling increasing frustration with their Muslim neighbours. Since 9/11, security forces have foiled some 40 major plots against Western nations. Many if not most of those plots have been the work of local Muslims. Hundreds of European Muslims have journeyed to join the insurgents in Iraq. Extremist preachers exploit the freedom of Western societies to incite terrorism against them.
Moderate Western Muslims -- and careful politicians -- prefer not to acknowledge this reality. But euphemism is breeding resentment on all sides. We'd all benefit from speaking clearly. Let us be explicit about what we expect from Muslim communities:
- Acknowledge Reality; accept Responsibility. Obviously it would be unjust to blame the religion of Islam for terrorism. But equally obviously, terrorism is a problem within Islam, and Islamic communities bear a special obligation to uproot it.
Yet how many times have you heard an Islamic leader in a Western country urge Muslims to take action against the extremists in their midst? Or unequivocally repudiate violent jihad? Or condemn by name those who lead young Western Muslims astray?
- Isolate and Exclude Extremists. Too often, even the most moderate Western imams excuse and condone extremism.
Charles Moore of London's Daily Telegraph cited a very disturbing example of this tendency: The day after Thursday's attacks, the imam of the East London mosque, Mohammed Abdul Bari, stood beside the Anglican bishop of Stepney to condemn the London bombings. "But if you look up Mohammed Abdul Bari, you find that he welcomed to the opening of the London Muslim Centre Sheikh Abdul Rahman al Sudais, the Saudi-government-appointed imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca," Moore notes. "In Mecca two years ago, al Sudais described Jews as 'scum of the earth,' 'rats of the world' and 'monkeys and pigs who should be annihilated.' Yet, criticize al Sudais, and Mohammed Abdul Bari leaps furiously to his defence."
- Co-operate actively with police and security services. After the 9/11 attacks, one U.S. Islamic organization distributed a pamphlet called Know Your Rights, explaining to American Muslims that they had no obligation to answer questions from the police. From a legal point of view, that is of course correct. But one would have imagined that patriotic Muslims would want to tell the police anything that might help protect the country against future attack and bring the guilty to justice.
Many imams have in fact been cooperating with the police in the United States and the United Kingdom. But they often do so shame-facedly, grudgingly, incompletely, and only under pressure. And they are even more reluctant to urge their congregants to do the same. That must change. The pamphlets on "knowing your rights" should be matched by sermons on "knowing your responsibilities."
- Stop carving out special exemptions. One important reason that Western Muslims find it so difficult to speak forthrightly against Islamic terrorism is that too many of them want to preserve exceptions in favour of certain forms of terrorism: against India, against democratic Iraq, and above all against Israel.
Israel is a special challenge to Muslim communities in the West. It's hard to take a principled stand against al-Qaeda if you privately support Hamas and Hezbollah. It's almost impossible to hold the line against religious extremism if you yourself are steeped in anti-Semitism.
The Arab-Israel dispute is often cited as a fundamental cause of terrorism. But if this is true, it is true in this way: So long as Muslim communities refuse to accept the legitimacy of Israel, they will be crippled in their attempts to deny the legitimacy of terrorism.
- Accept Islam's status as one religion among equals. Western societies grant equal rights to all religions. Middle Eastern societies enforce the primacy of Islam: That's why there are mosques in Rome and churches in Jerusalem, but Jews and Christians are forbidden to set foot in Mecca. Do Western Muslims accept the Western way of doing things -- or do they yearn for a Middle Eastern future? The answer is far from clear. As one prominent North American Muslim said in a lecture in California in 1998: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
Prominent British Muslims have called for the replacement of parliamentary democracy with a "new civilization based on the worship of Allah," in which the Queen herself would pay the extra tax imposed on non-Muslims. And the former president of the Canadian Society of Muslims has argued that Canadian law should permit Muslim communities to punish Canadian Muslims who choose to change their religion.
Islam will have made itself at home in the West when Western Muslims can express dislike for The Satanic Verses while defending Salman Rushdie's right to publish it; when they accept the right of Muslims to leave Islam as cordially as they encourage non-Muslims to embrace it; and when they welcome Christian and Jewish worship in Saudi Arabia in the same free and tolerant spirit that Islam has been welcomed in the West.
These changes should not be expected overnight. But they should be expected -- demanded -- all the same.
© National Post 2005 |
|
|
| Rhue |
Shadow WOlf... what you don't state under your quoted verses is the context or the situation with these verses or Surah as they are called in the Quran are revealed. I find it highly amusing that people can jump to conclusions without having full authority on the subject.
This verse is in regards to the fact that after the Prophet had been persecuted and sent into exile in another city(Medina), the Quraish tribe (those who exiled him) started looting the properties of muslims back in Mecca and destroying their livelyhood and families left behind. Several Muslims in Medina were outaged and demanded a retaliation or some action for this unjustice, but were told by the Prophet to be non-violent and be patient. It was only after the Quraish tribe sent a full scale military force with 100 cavalry units to attack muslims with a few horses and a few hundred men did this revelation come into being. This was clearly a defensive posture or Pre-emptive, very similar to what Israel's stated policy is (which i believe makes a lot of sense) and USA attack on afghanistan following 9/11.
" then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."
Notice how clear instructions are given that if the enemy surrenders or repents, he should be set free to go home. If he becomes a believer all the better for him. Now tell me something, If the Muslims stuck in Guantanemo Bay ask for forgiveness, will they be sent home by the US. I highly doubt it. Also when you study history or quote it you have to look into the context and epoch it is being stated in. THis verse is more than 1400 years old and if you were to open your history books and see how the western powers (france, Britain,Holy roman Empire) treated their enemies, you would realize that Islam's treatment were highly respectful and merciful. The same period where Islam was declaring that prisoners be fed with the same food that soldiers eat and treated with the highest of respect, the French were killing their captives for little excuses like retreiving their gold teeth. While in Islam it was madatory (yes madatory) for women and Men to recieve full education, The women in the west were treated as mere commodities.
Honestly as someone who reads history it is a shame that a bunch of idiots have hijacked a civilization that helped take the west out of the dark ages and kept the light of knowledge alive. The real cause as always is politics and not religion itself, wether we discuss the Fanatic Jacobins in the french revolution, the Fundamentalist Crusaders or todays Extremist Islamic Terrorists. Islam forbids killing human life and it is stated than killing one innocent man is equal to killing the whole human race and these terrorists are a product of Power and not Religion.:rolleyes:
P.S As far as my insight into such matters is concerned, i have been an Associate member of the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs (affiliated with the Royal Institute of Intl Affairs UK) for several years before i moved to Canada. My current majors are Economics and Intl Relations at UofT. History/military history, politics, strategic studies and intelliegence gathering is what i have been studying or reading since i was in grade 7. :)
If you have any further questions/arguments etc, don't hesitate to ask.;) |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rhue
Islam forbids killing human life and it is stated than killing one innocent man is equal to killing the whole human race... |
Interesting...I've never heard that arguement before.
This is exactly what we need to hear from those on the Islamic side... |
|
|
| jon jon |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Here's an EXCELLENT article that sums up my views nicely:
David Frum
National Post
|
I prefer your posts when sourcing. Thanks, and I did think it was a good read. |
|
|
| Rhue |
| quote: | Originally posted by jon jon
I prefer your posts when sourcing. Thanks, and I did think it was a good read. |
aren't you supposed to change your nick or something.... Don't tell me we had a 5 page thread running for nothing!:D :p |
|
|
| starsearcher |
I am so absent from this discussion... :p
Although I see the death toll has risen lately and it's very sad :( It upsets me tremendously and the cities that I love so much are being attacked by idiots and there's not much I can do about it right now. |
|
|
| jon jon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rhue
aren't you supposed to change your nick or something.... Don't tell me we had a 5 page thread running for nothing!:D :p |
? I have no idea what you're talking about. |
|
|
| zoogla |
Very nice explanation, Rhue...thanks for referring to the hadith and tafseer to explain that verse. :) Even I didn't know that!
The only thing I disagree with in this article:
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Islam will have made itself at home in the West when ... they welcome Christian and Jewish worship in Saudi Arabia in the same free and tolerant spirit that Islam has been welcomed in the West. |
Muslims all over the globe don't control Saudi Arabia's monarchy that fabricated these rules. I don't know if this has to do with security or what but it is certainly not keeping in the principle that ALL HUMANS (okay maybe not animals--sorry animal rights activists; although animals are supposed to be treated with utmost respect as creations of God ;)) are welcome inside mosques and attend services. EVERYONE. Not just the paying congregation, and not just Muslims. EVERYONE. I have always disagreed with Saudi Arabia's policy of exclusivity of those mosques from non-Muslims because that is not consistent with the principles of generosity and tolerance in Islam. I always wished I could share the magnificence and awe of the 2 holy mosques in Makkah and Medinah with my non-Muslim friends (when I lived in Saudi Arabia) and especially my fiancee.
Anyway, another interesting article today about the shift in focus to Pakistan; Rhue I would be VERY interested to hear your insight about it:
(also Shadow, there is reference to the madrassas that you mentioned in response to my first article; these "Islamic schools" teach a specific EXTREMIST and POLITICAL version of Islam, not the general, tolerant version that majority of Muslims in the world believe in...so stop blaming the religion in GENERAL for the love of trancEaddict! :p)
Also, Shadow, how come all your sources are individual people's OPINIONS while mine are Associated Press reports that are far more objective? I found that kind of interesting...
OOPS!!! I posted the wrong article...THIS is the right one (the original is still below):
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...BLAST19/TPStory
London bombing probe shifts focus to Pakistan
By DOUG SAUNDERS (LOL oops this is not from AP; nevermind! I find it a lot more objective, still, then the editorials that Shadow quotes; not front-page news like what this is)
Tuesday, July 19, 2005 Page A1
LONDON -- The focus of attention in the aftermath of the London bombings shifted yesterday from Leeds to Pakistan, where President Pervez Musharraf acknowledged that his country's radical Islamic cells and schools played a major role.
British investigators have flocked to Pakistan after it became apparent that at least three of the four young men responsible for the July 7 blasts, which killed at least 56 people, had spent some time last year attending a madrassa, or Islamic school, that is considered an indoctrination centre for Islamist extremism.
Security officials yesterday released surveillance photos showing ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan, 30, and fellow bombers Shahzad Tanweer, 22, and Hasib Hussain, 18, entering Karachi last year. All of them are British citizens of Pakistani ancestry.
Mr. Khan and Mr. Tanweer arrived together in November, 2004, and left together on Feb. 8 on a flight bound for London. Mr. Hussain arrived from Saudi Arabia in July, 2004, but officials were not sure when he left.
Some reports yesterday suggested that they did not actually spend much time attending the madrassa, but instead used their stay to meet with al-Qaeda operatives and possibly to attend terrorism training sessions.
Diplomatic and political relations between Britain and Pakistan were tense, as British officials noted that there has been a steady stream of terrorists and their supporters between the countries, including such figures as "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, while some Pakistani officials suggested that Britain has problems controlling its own population of Muslim radicals.
Mr. Musharraf tried to ease these tensions by acknowledging that his country's Islamist underground may have contributed to the attacks, and describing their actions as "un-Islamic."
"Yes, today, some madrassas are involved in extremism and terrorism. . . . Launching bomb attacks in London in the name of Islam is not Islamic."
Over the weekend, Pakistani police detained five militants with the organizations Jaish-e-Mohammad (Army of Mohammad) and Sipah-e-Sahaba (Soldiers of Mohammad's Companions), both from the city of Faisalabad, which is the native home of much of Britain's Pakistani population. The detainees were accused of forcing their ideology on others.
Mr. Musharraf and his deputies, however, did not say that the detainees had anything to do with the London bombings. And some skeptical British security officials suggested yesterday that their arrests may have had more to do with Mr. Musharraf's own motives, since at least one of the men is linked to the al-Qaeda cell responsible for the attempt on the President's life in 2003.
Reports yesterday also suggested a direct involvement in the attacks by Osama Nazir, a Pakistani al-Qaeda leader and expert bomb-maker now in prison for terrorist attacks in Pakistan, who is said to have admitted from jail that he had met Mr. Tanweer.
While most of Pakistan's thousands of madrassas are simple religious schools, there are a number of Saudi Arabian-funded schools that teach a particularly violent and radical form of political Islam, and have been accused by both Western and Pakistani authorities of being recruitment and indoctrination centres for al-Qaeda.
Despite Mr. Musharraf's efforts, relations with Britain were strained after Pakistan's United Nations ambassador Munir Akram pinned the blame on Britain's foreign policy and denied his country's responsibility.
"It is important not to pin blame on somebody else when the problem lies internally," he said in a surprisingly undiplomatic interview on BBC Radio. "Your policies in the Middle East, your policies in the Islamic world, that is the problem with your society and that is where the problem lies as far as this incident is concerned. It would be a grave mistake to point fingers at Pakistan or anybody outside your country."
He added: "You have to look at what you are doing to the Muslim community and why the Muslim community is not integrating in British society."
Hilary Benn, Britain's International Development Secretary, responded by pointing out that the bombers, especially Mr. Khan, who was a highly regarded primary-school teacher, had in fact been highly integrated into the society.
-------------------------
ORIGINAL ARTICLE I POSTED:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv.../International/
Pakistan arrests seven with possible links to London
Tuesday, July 19, 2005 Updated at 12:33 PM EDT
Associated Press
London — Police rounded up seven Islamic militants in Pakistan on Tuesday to determine whether the London bombing plot stretched to South Asia and Prime Minister Tony Blair asked British Muslim leaders to weed out extremists blamed for radicalizing their young followers.
Investigators are trying to find out whether any militant group or individual provided three of the four London suicide bombers who visited Pakistan last year with training or other assistance in the July 7 bombings aboard three subways and a bus that killed at least 56 people and injured 700.
“We are holding a few militants who are suspected of having links to the London suicide bombers,” said Tariq Saleem, police chief in the town of Lahore. Officials want to determine whether the “London bombings have any tentacles in Pakistan, especially in Lahore,” he said.
Mr. Saleem did not name the suspects or say how many were detained.
Other police officials, insisting on anonymity, said that the seven detained men were from two outlawed militant groups, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jaish-e-Mohammed. Both are al-Qaeda-linked, and some of their supporters have been arrested for trying to assassinate the President, General Pervez Musharraf.
Five of the detained men were picked up in eastern Punjab province in recent days, and two were caught overnight in southern Sindh province, the officials said.
On Monday, Shahid Hayyat, deputy director at Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency, told Associated Press that three of the London suspects travelled to the southern port of Karachi last year – Hasib Hussain, 18, in July, 2004, and Mohammed Sidique Khan, 30, and Shahzad Tanweer, 22, in November. All three were Britons of Pakistani origin. Mr. Hayyat said the purpose of their trip was still unclear but authorities were investigating it.
Pakistani intelligence officials have said Mr. Tanweer, born in Britain to Pakistani parents, stayed briefly at a religious school in Lahore. They said he met Osama Nazir, a Pakistani arrested in November, 2004, for helping plan a 2002 grenade attack on an Islamabad church that killed five people, including two Americans. Mr. Nazir, a member of the outlawed Jaish-e-Mohammed, told officials that he met Mr. Tanweer last year in Faisalabad, southwest of Lahore.
Many militant groups maintain clandestine offices in Lahore, near the border with India in eastern Punjab province, and some al-Qaeda operatives have been arrested there.
In Britain, The Times reported that Pakistani authorities know the identity of a British-born man who London investigators believe may have masterminded the bomb plot.
Al-Qaeda organizers in Europe may also have provided organizational help.
Security forces in London remained vigilant on Tuesday. British Transport Police dispatched dogs to search for explosives on the Underground. Dogs have been used before on the train that connects Heathrow airport to the capital, but police said this was the first time they were being deployed on the subway.
Meanwhile, Mr. Blair met two dozen representatives of the Muslim community to discuss anti-terrorism legislation his government plans to introduce this year. The leaders fear the laws target their community.
Opposition Conservative Party Leader Michael Howard, who attended the meeting, said the strongest message was “the responsibility of the Muslim community for reaching out to those who have been the targets of the merchants of evil and hatred.”
The attacks have also raised troubling questions over possible British intelligence failures.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that a panel of British intelligence and law-enforcement officials had played down the possibility of an attack less than a month before it occurred.
The newspaper said it had obtained a confidential threat report by the Joint Terrorist Analysis Centre that prompted the government to lower its assessment of the likelihood of an attack one level, from “severe defined” to “substantial.”
The report suggested that Iraq was acting as a “motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist related activity.”
Mr. Blair's government has sharply disputed the contention that Britain's alliance with the United States in the Iraq war may have motivated the bombers.
At least one person in Britain has been arrested in connection with the bombings. The man, whose name has not been released, was detained last week in a series of raids on homes in West Yorkshire, where three of the suspected bombers lived.
News reports have said a Briton of Pakistani origin suspected of links to al-Qaeda and involvement in the bombings had entered Britain two to three weeks before the attacks and flown out the day before.
“This would indeed be evidence of an enormous failure” of intelligence, if true, said Charles Shoebridge, a security analyst and former counterterrorism intelligence officer.
The Home Office, which speaks for the domestic intelligence service MI5, would not comment on the suggestion that agents had missed the suspect, whose identity is not known, or on reports that at least one of the suspected suicide bombers was investigated last year by MI5.
Questions are intensifying over the revelation that MI5 agents reportedly determined that Mr. Khan was not a threat to national security and decided against putting him under surveillance after checking him out in connection with an alleged plot to blow up a truck bomb in London.
British intelligence reportedly found that Mr. Khan, 30, a teaching assistant at a northeastern England primary school, had visited the home of a man linked to an alleged plot to blow up a London target, possibly a Soho nightclub, with a fertilizer bomb. |
|
|
| amb_ |
| According to CP24, three more stations in London have been evacuated. |
|
|
|
|
