Is Muslim violence a proof against Islam?

This is a comment to an article about the role of Zionism in the Norway massacre.

 

Name any nation that is not at war…  you can’t.  Nearly every country in this world is in some sort of conflict.  No matter what religion the majority of their citizens claim.  Read the news:  Buddhist Thailand vs. Buddhist Cambodia, over a temple.  Civil wars and rebels all over the Christian nations of Africa.  The secular and Christian nations of the West occupying, attacking or aiding conflict all over the world.  Zionist Jews in Palestine.  Hindus committing atrocities in Kashmir and against Muslims and Christians in India.  It’s everywhere.  EVERY religion has members that are fighting, that kill innocent people, that commit murder and rape, that embezzle, scandal, scam, scheme and plot, rob, plunder and steal, commit adultery, abandon children, can’t read or write, molest children, bribe their way out of justice, etc., etc., etc….  And secularists, atheists, agnostics, and humanists get in on it too, so don’t blame religion

 

As you can see, a religion’s texts are a proof for or against its members.  They are not a proof for or against it.  You measure a religion by its book, and you measure its members by its book, too.  They either live up to it or fall short of it.

 

Let us look at an example.  It is true that many Christians were at the forefront of abolishing slavery worldwide (many were also the leaders of enslavement).  Should we judge Christianity by that?  According to some places in the Old Testament and Romans 13.1, opposing the laws that allowed slavery were AGAINST what they consider to be the word of God.  In other words, they had to step OUTSIDE Christianity to free slaves.

 

Islam’s Qur-an and Hadeeth (Prophetic narration) literature support abolition and forbid enslavement outside of the context of war-captives when there is no exchange for prisoners.  So while many Muslims were involved in the slave trade, they were stepping OUTSIDE of Islam to keep slaves.

 

Judge them by the book.

 

The United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence, celebrated symbols of freedom, enslave Africans, dispossess Native Americans, deny the rights of non-landowning white males, and deny the rights of all women.  So freedom, justice and equality can only be achieved by stepping OUTSIDE of America’s founding principles.

 

This is why we Muslims argue from our book.  That, not the action of the next Muslim you walk past, is Islam for us.  We only know the Qur-an as Islam.  We don’t know what every Muslim in the world is doing and why, but we will argue as strongly against a (seemingly) good deed as we will against a bad one if it is inconsistent with our law and doctrine.

Oh my God!! They're eating ice cream...

The truth is that Muslims also do a lot of good things, for the sake of Allah, in the name of Islam, to get a reward in heaven, etc.  Find them and what they do.  See, do they outnumber the wrongdoers?  I leave that as an open question to any sincere seeker of accurate information, I won’t answer it for you.

 

Personally- and this is admittedly subjective- I’ve been around the world and read and heard viewpoints from many walks of life.  I was in NYC on 11 September 2001 and accepted Islam there 3 years later.  Islam is my free choice because after research and experimentation, I found it to be the best and most complete way of life.  I won’t lecture you that I’m right, but I assure you that I’m aware and sincere.  See for yourself:  https://qahiri.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/11/

 

So please, do justice to yourself and stop ignoring all the wrongdoing and conflicts involving non-Muslims, and all the good done by Muslims, to prop up an argument that is an offense to intelligence, reason, history and logic.   Islam is singular in its establishment of justice and right.  Why do some Muslims act to the contrary?

 

Ask them.

 

For more on the accusations of rape, sexism/masochism and slavery in Islam:  https://qahiri.wordpress.com/category/stockholm-syndrome/

To see the deceptive and erroneous nature of Islamophobia and WikiIslam exposed:  https://qahiri.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/dealing-with-doubt/

To see whether Islam is incompatible with democracy:  https://qahiri.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/is-democracy-islamist/

To see if there is any difference between Arab culture and Islam:   https://qahiri.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/is-islam-arabian-part-i/

To read what Islam actually is:   https://qahiri.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/what-islam-is/

 

An Open Letter to David Cameron

Open Letter to Mr. Cameron

To The Rt. Hon. David Cameron

Prime Minister 10 Downing Street

 

Dear Mr. Cameron

 

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

 

“For me, I have set my face, firmly and truly, towards Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to Allah.” ( The saying of Abraham, Quran 6:79)

We are deeply dismayed by your statements made in the Munich Security Conference on the 5th February 2011. Your speech was misleading, ill-timed, counter-productive. You have insulted the Muslims you are meant to serve and have demonstrated a failure to understand the Muslims and their faith.

 

A Muslim, literally, means one who has submitted his will to God. We bow our head in prayer to Allah, five times a day, in submission to Him and Him alone. We only have one Master, and we are Muslims first. Our beliefs in our values, and in what we hold to be right and wrong is dictated not from an elected parliament, but from Allah (God) as revealed in the Quran and the teaching of last Messenger, Muhammed (Peace be upon him) and consensus of the Muslims. Furthermore, we believe that this life is a test, that after our death we are accountable before Allah on a Day of Judgement, and we will all be given recompense according to our deeds. This, above all, is what motivates us:

Every human being is bound to taste death: but only on the Day of Resurrection will you be requited in full [for whatever you have done] – whereupon he that shall be drawn away from the fire and brought into paradise will indeed have gained a triumph: for the life of this world is nothing but an enjoyment of self-delusion. 3:185

 

We readily accept and work to strengthen the meritorious institutions of British society, especially those that exist because of the common origin of the Muslim and Judaeo-Christian tradition that British values were derived from: of honesty and moral integrity; of altruism and neighbourliness; of social, political, and economic justice. We encourage Muslims to do whatever they can, even while being a minority, to assist in increasing the general good and minimising harm in society, even if it be by an act as small as removing something harmful from a walker’s path. We seek to work towards a peaceful society in Britain.

 

We encourage Muslims to work for the benefit of the people of Britain, for no one’s sake but Allah’s. We will go further to say that we endeavour to work with greater sincerity for the betterment of Britain and its people than any Prime Minister or an elected parliament does, for we seek no worldly gain. We would be insincere citizens if we failed to share with Britons what we believe will bring them peace and tranquility in this life and in the hereafter. Our role models are the Prophets of God, among them Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammed (peace be upon them all). As one Prophet said:

“I wish not, in opposition to you, to do that which I forbid you to do. I only desire your betterment to the best of my power; and my success can only come from Allah. In Him I trust, and unto Him I look.”

 

But Muslims will not be bullied by ‘muscular liberalism’ into compromising on their teachings and the principles of their faith as Christiandom and others may have done, nor will we be forced to embrace values that oppose the faith of millions of Muslims in Britain, Europe and the world over. Interpretations of British values change as governments do, and what may be in keeping with liberal values may be completely unacceptable to our belief, whether it be mocking God and His Prophets, the alcohol culture with all its ills, and any cohabiting out of wedlock between man and woman, this being the only relationship Islam recognises. Are we still to be forced to embrace such liberal values and promote them? What values allow the fighting of illegal wars that kills thousands to spread democracy by the gun or of staunchly supporting nations that deprive a people of a land their rights and oppresses them? Are these British values?

 

What we believe to be wrong and unjust, we will exercise our right to speak out against. You cannot speak of a belief in the freedom of speech and religion while in the same breath denying the Muslims the right to proclaim and preach their belief. You thus make ‘freedom of speech’ an empty slogan. You either accept that people – British Muslims included – have a right to believe in the values that their religion teaches, or that the state regulates our beliefs and our values as in a ‘thought police’ that incriminates and sanctions citizens for what they may believe even if they break no law. This, in essence, is what you propose. If so, then how different is that from communist dictatorships that repress those voices that oppose the state’s ‘values’? You are travelling down a road that will end with sanctions being placed on Muslims for simply believing in Islam and the Quran.

 

The Islamic faith does not teach extremism. But the Prime Minister, MPs and non-representative think-tanks with their own prejudices will not dictate to Muslims what constitutes a correct Islamic understanding and what does not. You would be ill-advised to be directed by any biased coterie of individuals with neo-conservative leanings or those who seek to undermine Muslims to forward the cause of other interest groups. The government has already, on the basis of such misinformation, branded mainstream Muslim individuals, events and organisations as extremist, reinforcing the perception that your government is unable to make an impartial judgement about its Muslim citizens. This reality makes your speech a cause for even greater concern among British Muslims.

 

In your speech you stated regarding terrorism that the “threat comes in Europe overwhelmingly from young men who follow a completely perverse, warped interpretation of Islam”. This is not true. The 2008 TE-SAT report of European terrorism confirmed that in 2007, only 4 out of 583 (0.007%) attacks were ‘Islamist’ in nature. In 2006 it was 1 in 498. The main threat comes from separatists and left-wing groups. Why do you seek to exaggerate the threat from Islamists when the facts state otherwise? It is irresponsible for you to further sour the relationship between a minority and the community at large, where there is already evidence of much anti-Muslim feeling. Statistics demonstrate that by sheer numbers alone there are more non-Muslims who feel hostility to Muslims (more than 20% in UK) or than vice versa. While singling out Muslims in the attack on multiculturalism, you made no mention of some Christians, Jews, Hindus and Sikhs who have been united for a common cause of hatred against Muslims in various guises under the banner of the EDL who were marching on the same day that you spoke. Rather than countering this unhealthy Islamophobia that is sweeping across Europe, you contributed to it. That you were on German soil should have reminded you of the consequences of contributing to hatred against minorities.

 

The most insulting and disdainful of your remarks directed to the Muslims was the threats of withholding funding from whom you think are extreme. Do you think that the strength of our conviction in our values is measured against paltry handouts or opportunities for photoshoots with MPs? Muslims do not need such money nor do they have any need to share platform with such ministers, and certainly not if these are meant to bribe them away from their principles. Reliance and trust upon Allah are the bedrock of our faith. What is the entitlement of any citizen – regardless of religion –should be granted to them. If the government decides to wrongfully withhold this from a Muslim individual or group because of ill-informed reservations about their beliefs, then it is the government that should be held accountable. It is time Britain comes to terms with the reality of Muslims as part of Britain with the differences that we have between us. If this is what you want to confront, and this is how you want to browbeat Muslims with ‘muscular liberalism’ then do, for we will, with God’s help, will be even harder-nosed in standing up for our faith, for we are responsible for this before God. We will always turn to Him and His guidance and we will, Insha’Allah (God willing) have the mettle to remain patiently steadfast on our faith and speak what we believe to be right:

Say: “O my people! Do whatever ye can: I will do (my part): soon will ye know who it is whose end will be (best) in the Hereafter: certain it is that the oppressors will not prosper.” 6:135

 

Your speech has led to much upset in the Muslim community. While you may win over many right-wing and possibly racist voters, you will lose Muslim voters who will not forget your remarks in four years’ time. But it is not votes, but a sense of justice and perspective that should guide you. We hope you reconsider your statements and reassess the direction this government is taking with regards to the rights of Muslim citizens of Britain, and not join Europe’s growing far-right.

– from Shaykh Haytham al-Haddad

The Osama Dialogues: Part 3

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Obama: “Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, in fact, he slaughtered many Muslims.

…so have you, Barack Hussein…

Now that he’s dead, can we start looking for the REAL 9-11 culprits? Or do we already know who they are?

6 people like this.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver I was in NYC on 9-11, & all I can say is: never forget…

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=loose+change+final+cut&aq=1

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2296490368603788739#

… and you just don’t get it

you keep it copacetic

and you learn to accept it

and oh, you’re so pathetic

Colleague Z Are you saying it wasn’t Al Qaeda? That’s news to me.

 

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver check out the videos, and there’s also a group called “architects and engineers for 9/11 truth”. that’s a start, not the finish, but there’s more than evidence out there to question the official story. there are two kinds of americans in my view: those who believe the george-washington-and-the-cherry-tree story and those who know he was the richest man inamerica when he became president, and forced soldiers to

fight at the threat of death. red pill, blue pill…

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver here’s some further reading:

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/07/201071994556568918.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/08/201081811555316381.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2010/09/201094155358615769.html

these illustrate how and why the war on terror is forged and waged, in addition to what’s in the aforementioned video links…

Former Colleague/Coffee Mate You are a knucklehead! Osama himself claimed responsibility many times. Why not listen to him? Daniel, I know you are bright, but to think that Bin Ladin did not do these things is to wander far off into conspiracyland my friend.

Former Schoolmate ‎”It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.” -Samuel Adams

Austin Muslim Former Colleague/Coffee Mate, who told us that Osama himself claimed responsibility many time? If you are going to base your facts on doctored videos of him speaking in arabic then your argument doesn’t stand. To this day, we have yet to know who was behind the attacks. If you think for a second that our govt. would never lie to us (wmds inIraq), then honestly nothing can change your mind.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver I think it’s more important to evaluate evidence and analyze arguments, than to just pick a side. We all have certain inclinations, so only by thinking can we overcome our inclination to be inclined. I don’t care as much about someone agreeing with me as I do about that said someone constantly reading, thinking and self-evaluating.

The Osama Dialogues: Part 2

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver I’m sure of one thing: had “they” captured Osama bin Laden instead of killing him, and put him on trial for 9/11, they would NEVER have been able to convict him.

(Maybe that’s WHY they killed him, if it is indeed true that they have…)

1 person likes this.

Colleague X I only believe it because some Al Qaeda leadership is confirming it. I doubted it before though . Have you seen that hilariously badly done photoshop picture of him ‘dead’?

High School Colleague He was never charged with anything in connection to 9-11. There is absolutely zero evidence directly connecting him to the crime. They had to kill him, like you said. Thing is he’s been dead for a decade and now young Americans fill the streets and unite in their new found love of empirecial war.

Newscaster Well stated High School Colleague!

Australia Acquaintance That could be right..no words from dead men

Thailand Acquaintance maybe they killed him because he declared war on the U.S. and all its citizens (the fatwa in 1998), or maybe because he claimed responsibility for killing 18 US service members in Mogadishu in 1993…regardless he had plenty of offenses that cause people to get killed.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver well, Thailand Acquaintance, I won’t argue with you about someone neither of us has met. But I’ll put forward a fact and a theory: Fact: Neither of us can sensibly claim to know the truth about Osama bin Laden. Theory: It doesn’t matter anyway because the real issue isn’t terror, or religion, or even a conspiracy. It’s dreams. You see, bro, they’re all being unevenly distributed, but the truth is that there is more than enough food to go around, more than enough oil, and more than enough of every other resource. That’s not why people are fighting, or ever have fought. The only thing there’s not enough of in this world is room for everyone’s dreams to come true. Every man faces a choice in his life: realize his dream or accommodate others’.

Former Colleague KSA Ah but you forgot the old US doctrine – “this world aint big enough for the both of us pardner”….Bin Laden never had anything to do wit 9 / 11 Al Qaeda is not an organization but a loose affiliation of groups joined by a common idea – and of course you can’t kill an idea – the only thong which will change this undercurrent of Islamic facism is the sweepin popular revolutions in the Middle East now a genuine Intifada against the old rulers that America has propped up for so long..

Former Colleague KSA The fact or myth that Bin Laden is dead has no impact on the status quo the guy retired from playing an active role in anything years ago…

Former Colleague KSA wow what an amazing typo – I can’t believe I wrote thong instead of thing!

SSS Alum if Osama bin laden never even existed how can he be killed? but more importantly if he never existed he isnt dead. If he didnt live and he didnt die why do we know his name? If he didnt live to speak the words we heard why were we listening? Let’s get back to what’s important: royal weddings. Peace.

 

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Former Colleague KSA: freudian slip?

The Osama Dialogues: Intro. + Part 1

The Osama Dialogues are a cut-and-paste of Facebook discussions surrounding posts I published about Osama bin Laden.  From Obama to Osama to Wills & Kate, no stone has been left unturned.  You’ll laugh, you’ll get pissed, you’ll agree…

…but you won’t regret reading them…
 Feel free to leave a comment and/or add me as a friend on Facebook!


*****

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver: A civilian’s a civilian, and Bush/Obama have admittedly directed the killing of many, many more of them than Osama bin Laden is even accused of. Is anyone out there ready to admit, though, that ‘democracy’ and “American” (military/industrial) ‘interests’ (hegemony), rather than Islam-“ism”/extremism/fundamentalism that is the true threat?

Like ·  1 person

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Would people be more justified if they danced at the news of their deaths?

Like ·  1 person

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Do they not see how their own logic is a proof againt them?

Like ·  1 person

Former Colleague/Coffemate Daniel, Justice is the thing Americans are celebrating

Colleague Z’s Husband They have NEVER sanctioned the killing of civilians!

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Former Colleage/Coffeemate: i agree. i’m only pointing out that if this is justice, similar retaliation against american leaders could also be considered justice, for they are guilty of some of the same crimes, in particular overseeing the killing of civilians. i don’t think though, that many people on either side are intellectually or morally mature enough to see things from the other side…

Former Colleague KSA Until proven guilty Osama was definitely a ‘civilian’ – the very method of his death (shooting an unarmed man in the head) shows how low we have sunk – I don’t hear any reports that he was able to defend himself or was armed. All I here wa…s a women tried to shield him (even if you consider him evil he was basically an old defenseless man confronted by a well armed group of determined well trained soldiers). It is amazing that a woman faced down several soldiers….she should be commended for her bravery. Sometimes you have to respect the bravery of your enemy. This kind of mutual respect was very clear throughout WWI and WWII – we have lost that altogether. What was the point of shooting Osama? By doing this we just lost the best source of information we could ever dream of – unless of course he was spirited away to some foreign prison (Gitmo) to be tortured year after year (more likely). At least question him put him on trial and let him prove his guilt or innocence to prove that we still have some shreds of humanity and are better than those who unleash terror in the world (GWB, Hitler, Saddam, Mubarak et al). Until we understand are enemy and respect that he too has a voice people will only resort to horrific acts of violence in a vain attempt to be heard. Dialogue not war is the only lasting answer – to kill a human soul (even a blackened soul) and then profit from T-Shirt sales and the media frenzy shows we have no more human dignity. It is a dark day for the West and can only

1 person likes this.

Former Colleague KSA Only good I see coming from this is that once and for allPakistan has to admit they tolerate if not openly sponsor terrorism. The other good news (especially good if you’re an Indian) is thatPakistan’s air defense is non existent….

Colleague Z So are we, in fact, saying that the 9/11 victims do not get to be considered innocent civilians? Are we saying that the attack was okay becauseAmerica has killed civilians in the past? If so, and 9/11 was an act of war, then Osama does not get to hide behind the word ‘civilian’ either.

Colleague Z’s Husband I can not argue with pure fiction. If you choose to go down the road of complete uneducated conspiracy theories then that leaves facts by the way side and thus truth can not be found in your minds because the moment your presented with something you just don’t like you simply change the facts to soot your fantasies. So intelligent conversation and discussion are no longer yours to have.

Colleague Z’s Husband ‎”…to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear”

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Colleague Z’s Husband: i think what you are saying is absolutely true, for every perspective or side of an argument or debate. the truth is, speaking for my self, i am not knowledgeable about OBL or 9/11. i simply have not put in the time to investigate beyond a few videos, articles or conversations. and i am not well-studied enough in the sciences involved to draw a conclusion that i could reasonably expect others to accept.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver there is a science of knowing. either you are knowledgeable about a thing from having studied or rare cases of people with verifiable intuition (e.g. einstein). if you do not fit either case on a given subject, you can still gain knowledg…e/certainty from someone who is knowledgeable/intuitive AND trustworthy. what other way is there to know something? you either study or are intuitive, or you pay attention to someone you know and trust who has studied or is intuitive. this i consider direct knowledge.

Colleague Z People who hate Bush try to find ways to blame Bush for 9/11. People who hateAmerica try to find a way to blameAmerica for it. People who watched the news after 9/11 heard Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden claim responsibility for it and watched Palestinians dance in the streets to celebrate it. What are we, as Americans, supposed to think?

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver going back to ObL/9-11, very few people have direct access to the facts with the knowledge to understand them. very few people know and trust someone with such access and understanding. (books of course, preclude having to actually talk t…o somebody, but the author’s credentials should be verified.) as such, no matter what people think about ObL/9-11, they should be most sure of the fact that thinking is all they do about it. you don’t know. and if you unjustifiably claim to know what you only think, you are feeding the “conspiracy theories” of the other side. “most people think they know, but i know that most people only think.” i for one am unconvinced by any explanation that has been offered of ObL/9-11 simply because i have not had the chance to meet my own standards of verifiability, and no one i’ve met has either. i think it is dishonest for most of us to feel otherwise…See More

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Colleague Z: the 9/11 civilians were innocent civilians, but who killed them? who killed them? we’ve all heard a lot, but what can anyone be sure of unless they review the evidence themselves, or if the accused are put on trial if they can be? without that everything else is speculative/incidental. without producing the methodology, evidence and results of thorough studies, or a conviction in a convincingly-fair trial, each person is just forcing everyone else to doubt his/her claim and therefore convincing them, by default of their own. it’s vicious cycle of baseless bravado and doubt fed by all sides.

Colleague Z Well, I thought someone claiming responsibility answered that question..

 

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver the last thing i’ll add now is: (1) i don’t hate bush. i disagree with him but i respect him as a fellow human, husband and father (i’ve even met his daughters at a high school party). i disagree with people disrespecting him or talking about him in ways which they would not like with themselves. (2) my doubts about ObL/9-11 are not based on my being a Muslim. they started when i was in NYC on 9-11, and, generally, before that. i simply have never let anyone make up my mind for me, and until now, i’ve not been presented with anything fully convincing, from EITHER side…

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver @ becky: are you in the office? we coulda done this over coffee… anyway, you’re right, and this is why i am of the opinion that he should have been put on a trial in which this statement of his, after being verified, would have led to an easy conviction. would that not have put all rational doubts to rest, and saved the masses from the temptation of irrational far-flung theories?

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Colleague’s Husband: the drone strikes in pakistan andafghanistan alone refute what you are saying

Colleague Z’s Husband We do not in any way target civilians on purpose the only civilians are accidental causalities of war. By implying that we do target civilians you are either ignorant of the facts or your trying to istugate the uneducated masses to belive the lies.

Colleague Q There are people who consider the Iraqi and Afghani people killed by US forces as collateral damage… There are people who consider the ones killed on 9/11 as collateral damage too.

 

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Colleague Q: (as salamu alaykum) this is part of my point. and i’m sure neither you nor i fit into either of these groups, btw.

@ Colleague Z’s Husband: let’s assume for the sake of (not having an) argument that

you are correct. even so, the taking of a life, even if

unintentional, still incurs a penalty. if a man oversaw or a group committed voluntary manslaughter against hundreds of people, what

would you say the penalty should be? would they not be told to stop? (i’m anticipating the excuse that it is to stop terror, but is it not then terror and indiscriminate killing itself?) we’re moving towards something like the film “minority report” where people are punished

for crimes we anticipate them committing. either way, i’m not taking sides, for the Qur-an says to seek justice even against yourselves.

i’m only calling for all criminals to be punished, and all murderers

to be executed, after convicted in a fair trial, unless their victims’ families accept a ransom from them and choose to forgive. would you call that fair?

Colleague Z’s Husband Ah but you see the huge difference is that those radical Islamist who killed innocents in 9/11 did it on purpose. the causilties of war done by our troops are regretted by even the most battle hardened soldiers. The brainwashed morons who killed innocents in 9/11 and those morons who support it, kill innocents and think its ok matter of fact they celebrate it. that is called evil. So please don’t even compare those who accidently kill the innocent and regret what has happened to those who take pride in shedding innocent blood.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver ‎@ Colleague Z’s Husband (and this point is also pertains to Former Colleague/Coffeemate’s last comment on this post): this is one issue on which we are unlikely to agree.

Allah says in the Qur-an that mankind is the most argumentative thing, which is a criticism, not a compliment. Prophet Muhammad is quoted as saying “do not argue, even when you’re right”. i find that as an injunction never to argue, for when does one argue, except when they feel they are right? so i’ll leave you with a question whose answer i also seek: have you or any trustworthy, knowledgeable person you know well observed evidence, from a thorough investigation, about the 9/11 culprits? if the answer is yes, please pass that to me. if it is no, then how can you or anyone in a like position insist that it was Islam-“ists” and, further, that it was ONLY Islam-“ists”?

Moving from that point, both accidental and intentional killing, in every legal system that i know-U.S., Judeo-Christian, Islamic, etc.- incur a penalty. i only insist that such penalties be incurred by all. doing so would prevent the accident. (perhaps visualizing another perspective would be useful: what if hindus were accidentally killing christians in the your country while trying to target criminals? how acceptable would you find it?)