ISIS 'betraying' Muslims, Calgary imam says before hunger strike

a reply to: baburak

Quite right sir, that would be every muslim because their kind is threatened by isis, except sunni muslims of course, they support isis, some even travel to Syria to join.

a reply to: earthling42

Oh so you have polled every Sunni as to their views on ISIS and can thusly speak with authority?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

There might be moderate sunni muslims, i don't doubt that, but there is also more than enough support which won't be coming from shiite muslims or yazidi, and so on.

a reply to: earthling42

So, you didn't so you can't.
Ok.
Gotcha.

Good day sir.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

i think you have a problem with reading
Good day to you too sir

I say good on the Inman for making a symbolic gesture of opposition to Islamic State. There was another famous bloke in India who also went on hunger strike and very effectively too. His name was Ghandi. So it can work. As to Islamic State itself they don't represent ANY religion save perhaps the worship of death and destruction. I cannot find anywhere in the Koran which states Infidels must be buried alive, beheaded or indeed crucified. Islamic State are just a bunch of moronic and evil thugs who need to be exterminated from the face of the planet. A lot of the wars of the last decade have been morally questionable, however I would support sending in the army and military and take these thugs out and then withdraw peacefully and let Iraq get on with reconstruction. This war would be morally justifiable. Right now the campaign against them is being done with one hand tied behind the military's back. If Islamic State thinks a couple of sorties is a war then they are very deluded indeed. That is just lobbing a few warning shots across the bow.

Don't get me wrong. I am not a war mongerer. But there are times in history when one has to fight. Like the world did in 1939 when it stood up to Hitler. Now is such a time. We need to stand up and fight Islamic State. Otherwise they will eventually overrun the Middle East. Unchecked I can see them take over Jordan, Turkey, attempt to infiltrate Israel and even as far as Saudi Arabia. After all Mecca would be the greatest "prize" of all. It is the Holy Epicentre for the Islamic faith (for true Muslims at least). Oh and Iran. Although I think Iran will fight them into the ground. They are not one for being messed about with.

So I think unfortunately the only solution to all of this is to go in with boots on the ground and engage in face to face combat. We should do things the proper way though. Get the consent of the Arab League first (which has been so quiet of late, interestingly) and also get a green light at the UN as well. I don't think Russia would object because if you look at the map of the Middle East you can see that this is a problem that could well affect them too.

Anyway that's my thoughts on the matter. Lets hope we have the political leadership that has been so sadly lacking. Cameron with his fifteen holidays in the last year (He is swanning around surfing in Cornwall at the moment) and Obama thinking he is playing at The Open for the Claret Jug does not inspire confidence!

a reply to: earthling42

You said Sunnis support them.
Thus my question.
Which you did not answer.

originally posted by: Wirral Bagpuss
I say good on the Inman for making a symbolic gesture of opposition to Islamic State. There was another famous bloke in India who also went on hunger strike and very effectively too. His name was Ghandi. So it can work. As to Islamic State itself they don't represent ANY religion save perhaps the worship of death and destruction. I cannot find anywhere in the Koran which states Infidels must be buried alive, beheaded or indeed crucified. Islamic State are just a bunch of moronic and evil thugs who need to be exterminated from the face of the planet. A lot of the wars of the last decade have been morally questionable, however I would support sending in the army and military and take these thugs out and then withdraw peacefully and let Iraq get on with reconstruction. This war would be morally justifiable. Right now the campaign against them is being done with one hand tied behind the military's back. If Islamic State thinks a couple of sorties is a war then they are very deluded indeed. That is just lobbing a few warning shots across the bow.

Don't get me wrong. I am not a war mongerer. But there are times in history when one has to fight. Like the world did in 1939 when it stood up to Hitler. Now is such a time. We need to stand up and fight Islamic State. Otherwise they will eventually overrun the Middle East. Unchecked I can see them take over Jordan, Turkey, attempt to infiltrate Israel and even as far as Saudi Arabia. After all Mecca would be the greatest "prize" of all. It is the Holy Epicentre for the Islamic faith (for true Muslims at least). Oh and Iran. Although I think Iran will fight them into the ground. They are not one for being messed about with.

So I think unfortunately the only solution to all of this is to go in with boots on the ground and engage in face to face combat. We should do things the proper way though. Get the consent of the Arab League first (which has been so quiet of late, interestingly) and also get a green light at the UN as well. I don't think Russia would object because if you look at the map of the Middle East you can see that this is a problem that could well affect them too.

Anyway that's my thoughts on the matter. Lets hope we have the political leadership that has been so sadly lacking. Cameron with his fifteen holidays in the last year (He is swanning around surfing in Cornwall at the moment) and Obama thinking he is playing at The Open for the Claret Jug does not inspire confidence!

Well you haven't looked hard enough. Here are some juicy verses for you

Sahih International 5:33

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.
Sahih 8:33
[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.

Yusuf Ali 47:4
Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

So is that enough verses for you to prove that beheading, crucifixion and outright murder is all ordained in the Koran for the true Muslim ?.

originally posted by: fishwhisperer

originally posted by: Wirral Bagpuss
I say good on the Inman for making a symbolic gesture of opposition to Islamic State. There was another famous bloke in India who also went on hunger strike and very effectively too. His name was Ghandi. So it can work. As to Islamic State itself they don't represent ANY religion save perhaps the worship of death and destruction. I cannot find anywhere in the Koran which states Infidels must be buried alive, beheaded or indeed crucified. Islamic State are just a bunch of moronic and evil thugs who need to be exterminated from the face of the planet. A lot of the wars of the last decade have been morally questionable, however I would support sending in the army and military and take these thugs out and then withdraw peacefully and let Iraq get on with reconstruction. This war would be morally justifiable. Right now the campaign against them is being done with one hand tied behind the military's back. If Islamic State thinks a couple of sorties is a war then they are very deluded indeed. That is just lobbing a few warning shots across the bow.

Don't get me wrong. I am not a war mongerer. But there are times in history when one has to fight. Like the world did in 1939 when it stood up to Hitler. Now is such a time. We need to stand up and fight Islamic State. Otherwise they will eventually overrun the Middle East. Unchecked I can see them take over Jordan, Turkey, attempt to infiltrate Israel and even as far as Saudi Arabia. After all Mecca would be the greatest "prize" of all. It is the Holy Epicentre for the Islamic faith (for true Muslims at least). Oh and Iran. Although I think Iran will fight them into the ground. They are not one for being messed about with.

So I think unfortunately the only solution to all of this is to go in with boots on the ground and engage in face to face combat. We should do things the proper way though. Get the consent of the Arab League first (which has been so quiet of late, interestingly) and also get a green light at the UN as well. I don't think Russia would object because if you look at the map of the Middle East you can see that this is a problem that could well affect them too.

Anyway that's my thoughts on the matter. Lets hope we have the political leadership that has been so sadly lacking. Cameron with his fifteen holidays in the last year (He is swanning around surfing in Cornwall at the moment) and Obama thinking he is playing at The Open for the Claret Jug does not inspire confidence!

Well you haven't looked hard enough. Here are some juicy verses for you

Sahih International 5:33

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.
Sahih 8:33
[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.

Yusuf Ali 47:4
Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

So is that enough verses for you to prove that beheading, crucifixion and outright murder is all ordained in the Koran for the true Muslim ?.

5.32 5.33 then read 5.34 should give you a full insight.

Tafsir al-Jalalayn:

The following was revealed when the ‘Arniyyūn came to Medina suffering from some illness, and the Prophet (s) gave them permission to go and drink from the camels’ urine and milk. Once they felt well they slew the Prophet’s shepherd and stole the herd of camels: Truly the only requital of those who fight against God and His Messenger, by fighting against Muslims, and hasten about the earth to do corruption there, by waylaying, is that they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, that is, their right hands and left feet, or be banished from the land (the aw, ‘or’, is [used] to indicate the [separate] application of [each of] the cases
[listed]; thus, death is for those that have only killed; crucifixion is for those that have killed and stolen property; the cutting off [of limbs on opposite sides] is for those that have stolen property but have not killed; while banishment is for those that pose a threat — this was stated by Ibn ‘Abbās and is the opinion of al-Shāfi‘ī; the more sound of his [al-Shāfi‘ī’s] two opinions is that crucifixion should be for three days after [the] death [of the killer], or, it is also said, shortly before [he is killed]; with banishment are included similar punishments, such as imprisonment and the like). That, mentioned requital, is a degradation, a humiliation, for them in this world; and in the Hereafter theirs will be a great chastisement, namely, the chastisement of the Fire.

a reply to: TKDRL


Explain how so titch.

If my comment regarding it will do nothing is "dumb" then I assume you think ISIS will be defeated by hunger strikes or think anyone will take real notice. Again I live 2 hours from there and it isn't even on local news.

If my comment regarding ISIS may retaliate against such hunger strike with killings due to being offended is "dumb" then you obviously know nothing about ISIS and their viciousness.


So the most ignorant comment I have read today goes to you sir. Now hurry back to your closet.

a reply to: samsamm9

I admire this Imam and others like him that do promote peace between religions and denounce acts of extremists.

If only there were more like him and the Kurds, who have given their very lives to rescue, relocate and protect thousands of non-muslims (something you don't often see in the middle east or any other Islamic region).

While I generally dislike all religions and faiths, I have to give credit to humanity and charity where it is due...

Understand WE DON'T want to harm anyone but THIS is unacceptable and results MUST be achieved. How great if Turkey ,Syria and Saudi Arabia were to put this dowN?
The US is under siege right now by a Prog assault to alter the culture. We don't HAVE trust any more JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD.We don't WANT a civil war here either.

If the M.E. can fix this I would be beyond surprised because right NOW it looks like ONLY the US can do it and we are messed up right now.

a reply to: resistanceisfutile
Again, it's stupid. Not only are you pissing on the dude's public display of condemnation of evil, and promotion of peace; you are insinuating his doing so is going to be to blame for more evil. And people wonder why they don't see more of it, because idiotic responses like yours.

When they say nothing all you hear is "Hey, where are all the moderate people? Why don't they condemn this?"

When they do say something you belittle it, or worse say that any evil response to his display would be on him.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I wouldn't bother either.

Then YOU and yours GO stop them ALL from militant EXPANSIONISM of your faith or more WILL DIE because WE cannot tell you apart.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

O.o ........................
How, exactly, do you propose they do that?
It's all well and good to expect others to do something.
But if you cannot realistically figure out how you could do it if you were in their shoes.
Then you have no place passing judgment like you are.

Let us see you solve the problem of Christians acting decidely unchristlike.

Imho, we should just do airlifts and fly the christians and shiites to other countries and forget the rest, let the countries over there sort it out.

STM

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

WE don't let SKIN HEAD CHRISTIANS and KKK run loose, WE don't have to FIX a thing.
Don't hook up the Oliigarch with the people.