No offence to the religious, but i don't think any religious figure is likely to be a prophet. I respect your opinion on islam but i just think its a little unfair on the muslims who actually have the right idea. In fact, I'd probably hang out with a muslim before a born again radical in 5 seconds, oh wait, there's my sister, uuuurgh! P.S. How's the John Safran going?
john safrans doing mighty fine have also adviseda few other people to see it too this you may find interesting http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/009791.php#more we have also been having a discussion on what is a moderate muslim on faithfreedom.org , its a bit of a tricky question and goes wider than immediate support for terrorism . but I think thats getting a bit of topic back to terrorism people need to follow things like hamzas trial some of the things he comes out with seem wacky but the problem is he does have precedence in islamic history . http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/12/nhamz12.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/01/12/ixportaltop.html I noticed the bit where he said He said: "Killing the kafir for any reason is OK, killing the kafir for no reason is OK," and he specifically singled out those that granted licences for "wine shops". Hamza added: "We like blood and are addicted to it. When they say they love Allah they must ask themselves how much fafir blood they have spilt for Allah." Describing non-believers as "germs and viruses" in another tape he added: "There is no drop of liquid loved by Allah more than blood of Serbs, Jews or any other enemy of Allah." well this reminded me of what khalid bin walid said when fighting the romans,he said You are mistaken about the reason why we are here. We are people who drink the blood of our opponents. We have heard that Roman blood is very delicious, and we have come here to enjoy it” khalid bin walid was called the sword of allah he was a close companion of mohammed and is one of the top islamic heros of all time . he once took three days beheading people near a river in iran to turn the river red , I can quite see how young people brought up on storys of people like him might like what hamsa is saying . hamsa is in jail but there are thousands of people in the uk who support him and others like him ,so I think we are going to see more attacks
abu hamza is using the defence that all he said was taken directly from the koran 2:216 says: "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." or 9:111 : "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain..." that about martyres getting gardens in paradise all this is very interesting because people have been jailed for saying that the koran preaches hatred and war towards non muslims . in some cases they havent been able to even have the jury look at the koran to see if thats the case because of course islam is a religion of peace . and now you have someone who the government say has been preaching murder and terrorism and his defence is all I was saying was the koran , it says to fight non muslims even if you dont personally want to and the command is open ended , to fight and enslave them . when they say he preached hatred of jews his defence is that it says in the koran that a a jew will hide behind a tree and the tree will say “there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him”. from my point of view this is a very honest defence , and very interesting I wonder how long he will be allowed to continue this as a defence , as even if you are following a religious book that says kill people I dont think that would be a valid defence in english law . but great case http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/009856.php#comments
I think the war on terrorism is the right thing. The only thing America and its allies did wrong was to wait so long until they declared a war on terrorism. They should have acted to wipe out international terrorism decades earlier when it first appeared.
yes thats totally right, we are 100% good and pure, whilst the rest are 100% evil and unpure "lets kill a disobediant mischievous child because the chances are they may turn into the type we do not want in our society"
# i was referring to previous post which claimed we should of wiped out terrorism before it got big because we knew it wuld start in the middle east area. i compared wiping out all islamists to wiping out all 'naughty' children, as a prediction of how thing would turn out. the majority of 'naughty' children will not be a major threat to our society and the majority of islamists will not either. actually we have only had one real large attack from islamists on our soil
before the little suicide bombing attacks I was told we would never have a attack and that the threat of terrorism in the uk was just made up by the govement . when I posted links to al-queda websites a year or two before sept 11 which by the way used to host their sites in the uk I was told they were no real threat and the bnp were the real danger . Is the only threat terrorism no thats the minor threat, the aim of the majority muslims is to turn this country in to a islamic state they differ on the timing and methods but thats the general aim . now at the moment that seems a crazy idea, although muslims have tried invading europe and lots of other parts of the world with the express aim of taking them over for allah over the last 1400 years . but lets imagine that was the game plan how would you go about it . Im not going to go through all the stages to creating a islamic state out of a country of kafirs , I know them because Ive been reading european islamic discussions on this subject for years , but how would you do it . and how could terrorism be used to help this islamic state come about how do you use fear . I will ask you a question is it dangerous to mock islam in the uk , is it dangerous to be a muslim and leave the religion and say openly that you think its crap and mohammed was a liar . if you dont know the answer it is dangerous, how can the ability to create fear in your critics be helpful in taking over a country. how are things like the rushdie affair or the killing of theo van gogh and the running into hiding of ayaan hirsi ali over making a film about the abuse of women linked to terrorism . which was more important the killing of some critics of islam and the effect that as on free speech, or the bombings, more people were killed in the bombings but war isnt about just numbers of dead its about political and social effect violence and fear causes. also what are the advantages of having terrorist attacks happening and then saying you condemn them or they have nothing to do with you . hitler did it all the time is it possible that people who are not white christians can tell lies to or be imperialists . now if that is the situation is there a peaceful way of dealing with it that will work
