₦airaland Forum

BetaThings: Please don't bother. Every Muslim believes in Shariah - the laws of Allah. It is fundamental to Islamic belief

what did i say, did you read my post at all? You 've already jumped in defence, no one attacked sharia yet. Sanusi said he suffered prosecution from Sheikh Jaafar due to his position on Sharia and i opined that individual differences in application of sharia complicates its implementation. In our times, these differences aren't resolved. Scholars do not all agree on the statutes. Anyone calling for sharia at this point is like an individual calling for a soccer match where players and officials have varying position on it rules!

AlBaqir: A book under certain conditions and motives cannot judge the
understanding and foundation of the kind of Islamic system of
government ISIS embark on.

Am reminding posters that there are scholars that recognise ISIS ideology as Islamic. I didn't mean Milestone is a credible Islamic source.

Sayyid Qutb wrote many other books but politics swept them under the carpet.

But milestone was his final work. There, he ditched his more tolerant views for extreme, militant ones. That 's why he supported the coup to violently oust prowestern Egyptian government towards the end of his days.

Mind you, even as pure as the holy Qur'an, takfir use many verses in it to justify their many abominable acts.

seconded.

vedaxcool: the op clearly explains the un-Islamic nature of what isis have done! Normally people like u rely on simplistic views to explain issues that have a lot of intricacies

He only posted the views of those scholars. I wanted to imply that his scholar may not be another man 's scholar. How is that so simplistic? He didn't invoke any scriptural verse, go read the the works of most of these militants. They are filled with references from hadith, Ijma and Quran on occasions. The war on terrorism is a war of ideas. You can't win by just yelling; "killing the innocent is un islamic, a caliph cannot be installed without general consultation, bla bla, bla".

Isis didn't just read sayyid qubt book and said let's go set up a caliphate, that 's how simplistic your view on this sound!

Have you read the book or not? Top Islamist militants like Bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri have cited this book as a source of inspiration and yet you tell me that i hold a simplistic view? Am yet to find any book authored by one of your sages that soundly refute this book just as they debunk democracy or gender equality.

Aligning yourself with scholars is an easy fallback. It keeps you from ever considering the possiblity of being wrong. The militants have their own scholars too and i believe this ISIS affairs cannot be explained away by the OP 's scholars as "misguided Islamist movement, lacking any scholastic approval".

In the 60s, Milestones, an Islamic work was published. It layed down plans for recreating an Islamic state or caliphate, declaring the current muslim world has fallen for corrupt western influences and this must be fixed by starting a vanguard, preaching and forcibly establishing a sharia governed Islamic caliphate which must be continously explanded by conquest of other territories. I see a compliance of this by ISIS, building a clerical side for preaching her own version of Islam, radicalising muslims and building a Jihadist side that is ever ready to slaughter any person, community or government that is unwilling to establish the sharia.
Milestones was authored by Sayyid Qutb, an Islamic writer and thinker highly influencial in the 20th century muslim era. If you want to tap into the inner psyche of Islamist terrors in your street or militants in your country, i recommend this it.

I think excessive dating has plays a role. When you date a partner so much that you two cannot be differentiated from a couple, then tieing the nut only feel like a party. At this point, you have done everything with your partner, you have learnt everything about your partner, you 've had all the fun that should have been reserved for post matrimony. So everything feels old and repeated.

Buffy V Faith(Buffy: The vampire slayer)
After watching several episodes of this show, i was moved by this rivalry. I find myself rooting for Faith. Buffy V Faith fight are usually brutal and reckless, far ore than any other fight in the show.

Undertaker V Kane(WWE)
Darkness meet Fire. Two brothers borne out of tragic past, squared against each other by Paul The Bearer

Clark V Lex (Smallville)
Watch smallville and witness how lies, greed, betrayal and self-righteousness transformed best of friends into the coldest foes. This is what i love most about smallville.
Tom V Jerry.
Poor Tom
Let 's have yours.

SUPERMAN V DARKSEID(DCAU)

Brutal, destructive and endless is this rivalry. Superman and Darkseid are parallels. Superman is hope and light, Darkseid is doom and darkness. Superman can see hope of redemption even in Lex luthor, for Darkseid, everything is dark and this sums up why once, Superman was even willing to let Brainiac annihiate apokolips if it mean bidding farewell to Darkseid. Darkseid is total evil, devoid of any good.
Darkseid, a tyrant cannot stand the hero in Superman. To him, Superman is no where his equal but either his pawn or knight. To prove this Darkseid has once gone overboard, brainwashing Superman into destroying nearly the whole metropolis, damaging his reputation and the faith people have in the man of steel. Their battles are usually lengthy, back and forth, even sided and epic. As a result they mutually respect each other.

SUB-ZERO V SCORPION(MK SERIES)
Unfortunately, it is under appreciated by audience.
Subzero/Scorpion isn't about hero vs villain. In this rivalry, both rivals are neutrally aligned and only driven by personal vendatta.
Way before the first game, Quan Chi, an evil sorcerer sent Sub zero to retrieve map of element. Subzero was a cold assasain, member of the Lin kuei clan that hold enemity with Shirai Ryu; a neighbour clan. In return, Quan chi promised the Lin kuei of exterminating Shirai ryu if Subzero succeed. As plan B, Quan chi, secretly hired Scorpion from the Shira ryu clan.

The two combatants fought their way to the location of the map and a brutal fight to determine who take the map ensued. Subzero won, coldly murdering Scorpion whose soul was transported to the netherealm to meet retribution. Quan chi kept his promise to the Lin Kuei but informed Scorpion that Subzero was responsible. This pushed scorpion over the edge, vowing to stop at nothing, to kill Subzero even though he was already dead. This marked the bloody beggining of the rivalry.
Scorpion would eventually get his ressurection and fulfil his vow after a couple of brutal bouts, killing Subzero at the end of the first Mortal kombat tournament.

Again and again, tv, be it in form of tv series, film series or video game series have treated us to some of the most bitter character rivalries one can imagine.
What 's your pick, friend?
I mean, which two or more character rivalry do you find as the most bitter and unforgettable?
What makes the rivalry so bitter that you think it will go down in history as one of the fiercest?
Let 's have your pick(s) in a short note. You don't need an epistle but a post of one or two lines, though acceptable isn't beffiting to the topic. This should be a discussion thread.
You 're welcome.

Empiree: U see usermane, ur problem is your creed is weak.

I wouldn't go there if i were you considering that your creed has been dissected and debunked here over and over by the shiites, and even the atheists know that.

At some point u may be right and i personally share some of ur thought but consistently shift all blames on Muslims makes u unpopular.

Pay attention to pronouns and adjectives whenever you read. I seldom generalise. The only thing is you "muslims" have a hard time in eating the crow.

I remember telling u that most misconceptions about Islam today from non-Muslims are media's fault. You consistently blame Muslims again and again.

I remember telling you that no doubting Thomas, fall prey to media propagandas and you can't continue to play off inadequacies like religious intolerance or killing of apostates in your ummah by bemoaning the media.

Another example is ur latest topic talking about bemoaning stuff. I chose to ignore commenting on it.

Because i went as far as exposing the baselessness in bemoaning the media for paying less coverage to the murder of a muslim convert than the judicial execution of a muslim apostate, the former driven by human grief and emotion and the latter sanctioned by the "divine laws of a religion"

Now back to topic, there is nothing like killing apostate for changing religion. It doesn't matter how highly a Sheik supports such. Bottom line is killing apostate is not in Qur'an.

@underlined, what about this hadith?

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists)
were brought to 'Ali and
he burnt them. The news
of this event, reached Ibn
'Abbas who said, "If I had
been in his place, I would
not have burnt them, as
Allah's Apostle forbade it,
saying, 'Do not punish
anybody with Allah's
punishment (fire). ' I
would have killed them
according to the statement of Allah's
Apostle, ''Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Your claims are at odds with your creed, all sunni schools of thought recognise death as penalty for apostacy. Of course the penalty isn't in the Qur'an but according your creed, its presence in hadith books confirms it. Did you forget that Eid-el Fitr isn't in the Qur'an, why do you mark it yearly?

As for cutting hand stuff, going by the way you talk (ur creed) that Qur'an is enough to judge, now Qur'an says to "cut off"( or something close to that) thieves hands(5:38). So why don't you agree with that since you claim only Qur'an is enough? Answer that pls.

Study chapter 12 v 31 & 50. The arabic word you translated as cut off in 5:38 is the same word used in 12:50, i don't think the Quran mean that the women amputated their hands, does it?
"Cutting hands" here can either be taken figuratively or literally as making a cut but not amputation.

As for u (usermane) they will keep ignoring you cus you sound ignorant even you make good point sometimes that i can agree with. You off the hook in most cases

Nope, lets just say they get too bitter after reading my proof backed criticisms or polemics of their "infallible" doctrines to respond, that is if at all they can man up enough to read through my complete writting and verify the proofs. You all know i don't fall for straw man or window dressers, i go for rational analysis, theisis and investigation and i deal with issues you are too afraid to consider. So usermane topics are no go areas for many of you. And thanks to the moderator, my topics always end in the recycle bin.

Over the last few years,
Ja’far has on various occasions made me the personal subject of his Friday sermons and radio
preaching sessions in a
desperate attempt to
incite the population of
Kano against me, labeling
me a hypocrite, lover of
Christians and enemy of
Shari’ah. My first crime
was to let Muslims know
that the conviction of
Safiya Hussaini and her
sentencing to death by
stoning was not Islamic-
nor even Maliki Law-but a
complete travesty thereof.
Scholars like Ja’far who
kept defending the
judgment as consistent
with the Law were not
happy that I published
references from
authoritative sources

Sharia activists can't see this. They 'll be too busy glorifying and campaigning for Sharia to even sit and define the laws and applications. So many are uneducated about this sharia, they don't all agree on its applications, limits or flexibility yet they believe it is this perfect and divine constitution, the cure to all humanity 's problems. That is why Sanusi and Ja'afar cannot agree here.

I do not accept what
is happening in some
northern states today,
where poor thieves are
amputated and poor
women are harassed for
adultery by incompetent
and thieving politicians to
be Shari’ah, I will never
defend it, and I will not
stop criticizing it until the
governors change

I try to do somewhat the same here, but the moderator can't even stand me. No one ever bothers. No one likes to talk issues that doesn't directly affect him, especially when it involves criticism, debunking or falsifying of his philosophies. That is why you see, people boycott this kind of thread.

What are you talking about? Yes but this is nothing. True love transcend beyond petty things like this.

Yobo 's case is one that he 'll always remember. He was the one demanding for appearance fee at the beggining of the tournament but at the end he rounded up with an own goal.

This section rarely make front page and the first time in a long period that it does, the moderators have no better pick than this topic?

No, can't. My student would be like a younger or baby sister to me. And besides, i cant date someone much younger than i am

I think i respect Bukhari and would pick him over GEJ anyday. However, two things failed Bukhari;
1. His lack of proffesionalism, evident in his speeches which sometimes generate religious or political sentiments.
2. Fanatic PDP supporters who choose party over candidate

Otherwise i think he 's a good person, too good to become the theocrat that the OP wants. A democrat considers everyone, a theocrat considers only himself. As filthy as the OP thinks democracy is, it best theocracy anyday. You don't need an explanation, just pick out one theocratic nation and one democratic nation and compare. Particularly, dig into how equal people of different religious groups are treated.

At this point, it is antiquated of orthodox muslims to keep bemoaning the media of favouritism. Rather, the orthodox muslim should bemoan his community like in the middle east, for letting honor killings, misorgyny, tyranny, oligarchy, killing of apostates, ultra conservatism, biase treatment of non-muslims and other media attractive vices flourish to garner media coverage and potraying Muslims or Islam in a darker tone.

PEACE

He was interviewed shortly after and even after 20 years in prison, he expressed not an atom of regret for his action or apology to Faraq Foda 's family.

www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/3926.htm

In the West, a murderer is a murderer regardless of his motives, cursed and stoned while walked into courtroom by the police. In the middle east, one can sometimes find a cold blooded murderer like Abu Al-'Ela Abd Rabbo showered with heroic praises and blessings by fanatic muslim crowds who protests for his release off police arrest while cursing and swearing at the murdered whose corpse already rot in the morgue!

Lets head down a memory lane.
In 1992, Faraq Foda(Egyptian), a muslim secularist writer was assasinated by the Muslim Brotherhood after the clerics declared him an apostate. Thanks to Hosni Mubarak led secular Egypt regime, Faraq 's murderer; Abu Al-'Ela Abd Rabbo was sentenced to life in prison. Although in vain, the clerics and their fanatic muslim followers at that time protested, defended Abu Al-'Ela Abd Rabbo, praised him and demanded his unconditional release.

Upon the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood 's candidate to the presidentiat seat post 2012 democratic elections, Abu Al-'Ela Abd Rabbo was granted instant bail.

http://m.gulfnews.com/news/region/egypt/slain-egyptian-anti-islamist-writer-faraj-fouda-remembered-1.1196122

Here is what am talking about:

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists)
were brought to 'Ali and
he burnt them. The news
of this event, reached Ibn
'Abbas who said, "If I had
been in his place, I would
not have burnt them, as
Allah's Apostle forbade it,
saying, 'Do not punish
anybody with Allah's
punishment (fire). ' I
would have killed them
according to the statement of Allah's
Apostle, ''Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

The former case isn't that simple. If the accused woman of apostacy is eventually executed following the sharia court 's ruling, the Sharia police, Sharia council, Sharia executioners and even their muslim supporters will never feel an atom of remorse for their acts which according to them is nothing personal but a compliance with their religious duties. You will still find some orthodox muslims justifying this unholy, vile execution with lines from their religious texts! What could be worse than murder other than justifying the murder in itself?

Cutting the crap, with the mainstream media outlets paying more airtime to the sharia court 's death sentence than the murder of a muslim convert by her father(a pastor), this same bemoaning can be heard. See, for a critical observer, it wouldn't make any difference if the media shed more light on the latter case than the former. For the latter, the entire Christian world admit the pastor 's action as wrong and the pastor 's act was born out of personal grieviance rather than compliance with religious laws. Eventually, this pastor will see the errors in his way, regretful and never justify it with any line from his holy book.

On the flipside, a non Muslim in Saudi Arabia cannot even distribute his religion pamphlet outside his temple, to invite others to his faith. Most of these matter not to the media outlets yet when the Uyghur muslims faced religious restrictions from the Chinese authorities, like the Christians once did in China, orthodox muslims cried foul and reacted loud enough to garner media attention. Fine, how just can a major media outlet operated by middle eastern orthodox muslims maintain justice relative to the Western ones when their Sharia government go length to block and even hack into websites, forums, blogs etc which indulge in polemic criticism of their Islamic beliefs and central government?

The mainstream media outlets can't take most of the blame. If it weren't for their maintainance of political correctness and liberal policies, even more reports on violence, corruption, discrimination or intolerance among the middle eastern muslims will make more headlines. Islamist militants in Syria persecute non muslims, copts in Egypt are treated as second class citizens thanks to "Quran & Sunnah" driven Muslim Brotherhood. All because they refuse to leave their beliefs for "Islam".

Personally, i wrote this article because amidst the bemoaning, some orthodox muslims in this forum have attacked my character, accusing me of buying into anti Islamic propagandas, biasely reading muslims, sowing discord among them and parting them from "Islam". Mind you, this is despite the fact that am not a Christian; i have always stood in defense of Islam both from the fanatic non-muslims bent on demonising Islam and the fanatic orthodox muslims bent on distorting and perverting the pure Islamic message and ideals with human extra-scriptural teachings.

Bemoaning the media houses for injustice by orthodox muslims intensified after a Sudan Sharia court 's sentence of a woman for apostacy recieved robust media attention whereas the media outlets didn't direct as much coverage for a later murder of a teenager by her father(a pastor) for embracing Islam. Orthodox muslims have questioned the credibility of mainstream media outlets, accusing them of conspiring against Islam in alliance with non-muslims.

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27424064

http://m.jordantimes.com/article/father-admits-to-killing-daughter-for-converting-to-islam

That was only in the good old days when the mainstream media outlets were heavily relied upon for sincere reports on crucial matters. Today, with internets, and unofficial media outlets, bemoaning rarely draws sympathy as before. People take the products of the media houses as simply a means to an end because most of the mainstream media outlet are government sold out. Therefore, what ever CNN, BBC, NTA conceals, is somewhere abundant on internet be it websites, chatrooms, forums, blogs etc, so forget these media outlets. Today, bemoaning the media wount fetch you sympathy or cover your inadequacies, it is antiquated.

The responsibility of disseminating news from a neutral ground on trends and events to the masses require honesty. Bemoaning of the media is not uncommon as media houses tend to lend their contents to sentiments and government censorship. For instance, where there is a controversy between two parties, at times the media houses tend to favour one party over the other, either due to sentiments or compulsion by higher authorities. The return is bemoaning of the media of biase by the victimised party thereby drawing sympathy from the masses who tag the media acts as breach of trust, invariably concluding the victimized party is the right horse in the whole controversy.

Posted this in Islamic section, the mods deleted it without stating any reason.
I mailed the mods 12 hours ago to clarify the issue but they haven't responded.
So instead of wasting my time, here is the topic. After reading it, you can tell if i violated any forum rule or not.

What is all these nonsense? am so disappointed with you all on this thread.
The hypocrisy of the Muslims is exposed, you complain about this and you don't even let people leave your religion?
And we have Christians spewing thrash and supporting Chinese authorities.