The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Heads in the sand on terror > Comments

Heads in the sand on terror : Comments

By Waleed Aly, published 14/7/2005

Waleed Aly argues some Muslim clerics may be delusional but it doesn't mean they support the actions of terrorists.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. All
"However the conflict between Muslims and Christians as to who has the best prophet, can readily escalate into who has the best bomb, and more lives will be needlessly and tragically lost."

Finally Timkins has actually made a very good point (not a feminist in sight);-)

Praise be to BD for proving the truth in Timkins' post.
Posted by Xena, Friday, 15 July 2005 8:27:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert, the editors of the site are reading, but don't see any need to delete Destructor's comments for a number of reasons. Fundamentally the site is about free speech and engagement. You can't engage with someone's wrong views unless you allow them to express them. And you probably don't properly understand what you believe yourself unless you are forced from time to time to explain them. How can you do that if wrong views are suppressed. All of which assumes that Destructor's views are wrong, which I think they are.

But then, if I went around deleting wrong views I'd set myself all sorts of problems. Where would I draw the line. Destructor's not the only one who has said something wrong or nonsensical on this thread!

Apart from the practicalities, in principal Destructor has a right to views and to be able to express them as long as he is not violating the law.
Posted by GrahamY, Friday, 15 July 2005 10:28:08 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Destructors views may not be incorrect, as there are very many anomalies with the official line regards the 9/11 attacks.

However Sheik Mohammed Omran may not be totally incorrect also in saying that Osama Bin Laden was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Or at least, Osama bin Laden may not have been "directly" responsible.

It has to be remembered that Al Qaeda was initially a product of the Russian – Afghan war (EG Al-Qaeda (Arabic: "the foundation" or "the base") is the name given to a worldwide network and alliance of militant Islamist organizations. Originally funded ($3 billion) by the USA. Built on the mujahideen resistance movement against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, it seeks to defend, via military and terrorist tactics, other Islamic communities that it considers to be under siege, including those in Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine. http://www.answers.com/topic/al-qaeda)

After the withdrawal of the Russian troops from Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden and his network of arms, money and fighters had no enemy anymore, and they began to turn their attention towards countries such as US, (which ironically had previously supported them in their fight against the Russian forces).

However Al Qaeda does not appear to be a hierarchal type structure, and some believe it no longer exists at all, because so many of the people who were within Al Qaeda initially have been killed or jailed. So if a terrorist attack does occur somewhere, it is not necessarily organised by Osama bin Laden, or even by Al Qaeda.

There is a danger now for Muslims, in that they can be used as a scapegoat for any type of terrorist activity taking place somewhere in the world.
Posted by Timkins, Friday, 15 July 2005 11:15:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A leading Muslim cleric states that he doesn't think Muslims are capable of terrorist acts: sounds sinister and dangerous to me!
Posted by bozzie, Friday, 15 July 2005 1:29:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bit laughable Xena’s sloppy argument quoting Old Testament texts at that great Christian defender Boaz David, given that the texts were specific to the Israelites about 3,500 years go. How about some New Testament texts Xena, like something from the lips if Jesus?

Also not sure where Xena got to with her proof from the Qur’an but to help her out here are several (sura and verse numbers given):

• “As for those who are slain in the cause of God, He will not allow their works to perish. ... He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them.” (47:4-6)

• “Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter, fight for the cause of God; whether he dies or triumphs, We shall richly reward him. ... The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan ...“(4: 74,76)

• “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. ... lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way ...“(9:5)

• “Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme” (8:39)

• “Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given (meaning Christians and Jews) ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.” (9:29)

And there are plenty more texts from where these came.

The point at issue is that neither Xena nor anyone else can demonstrate any examples of present day Christians (or for that matter Christian in the past) using the texts she quotes to kill Muslims whereas there are at least some Muslims in disturbing numbers who use the quoted texts from the Qur’an as justification to bomb the London transport system and much more besides.
Posted by David Palmer, Friday, 15 July 2005 3:18:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David:

I think you missed Xena's point that is: you can dig up any dirt from any religious text - especially if you want to incite hatred which you, BD et al are doing.

Top Ten Signs that You're a Christian

10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of your god.

9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from lesser life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.

8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Trinity god.

7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" -- including women, children, and trees!

6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.

5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loop-holes in the scientifically established age of the Earth (4.55 billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by pre-historic tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that the Earth is a couple of generations old.

Contd
Posted by Ambo, Friday, 15 July 2005 4:06:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy