beloved Imam explains Islam

[carolineislands]

This Imam is one of the most respected Imams and lecturers in all of Islam. Zakir Naik. In this video he asserts that anyone who is terrorizing America, whom he refers to as "the biggest terrorist" is "following Islam" and he is with them. Then he says if Osama Bin Laden is terroizing the USA then he is following Islam and that every Muslim SHOULD BE A TERRORIST.

Watch and give your opinion.

1. The Quran orders Muslims to terrorize the enemies of Islam.
2. Then all Muslims are commanded by the Quran to be terrorists, as Zakir Naik states.

The question is this -- Is Zakir Naik WRONG? If so, give proof that he is wrong. If he is right, then Islam is a terrorist religion.

Here's the vid:

[carolineislands]

CarolineIslands: you are out of line. I know i'm not a moderator, but that last quote was ridiculous.

You are attacking umair personally as well as the religion of Islam.
If you read umair's full BOLDED quotation, you would see that he suggested humanity unites together to fight terrorism.

don't be petty, you are bringing down the quality of the forum

Oh really? The quotes I'm making are straight from the lecture by Zakir Naik. My question was whether or not the Muslims here agreed with Zakir Naik. My question was not about the difference between war and terrorism. What umair did was avoid the question by trying to divert the focus on a totally different situation and group. And what he did was cloak his statement that he agreed with Zakir Naik by sandwiching it between all the red herrings. The purpose of that was to get a reaction just like yours -- you completely missed the fact that leaders of Islam are calling for all Muslims to support terrorists and that umair agrees with them. Instead, you focused on the diversions provided just for that reason.

What I did was sort out the answer to the question, strip away all the red herrings and answer that point only. If umair didn't want to answer the question that was posed he could have easily refrained from replying. I am not forcing anyone to reply to my questions. By the same token, I have the right to not acknowledge irrelevant points that do not pertain to the question at hand and are only included for the purpose of diverting attention from the real issue.


I'm sorry this topic has offended your sensibilities, and I can understand how it would, as a matter of fact, I think you should be offended -- but not by ME. You should be offended by the fact that this highly respected Imam has made a very bold and public statement that he supports the actions of Osama Bin Ladin and that every other Muslims should. Not only that, that every Muslim "should be a terrorist." By only reading the diversions and getting angry at me for stripping them aside and going to root of the discussion you are only shooting the messenger.

The fact remains that some of the most respected Imams and teachers in Islam are openly calling for 100% Muslim support of terrorism and the people who carry it out (specifically Osama Bin Ladin and all the atrocities that he has orchestrated), and even "moderate" Muslims will not take a stand against that philosophy. That is a profoundly important and dangerous message and THAT is what this discussion is about. Now, you may think that it is about taking sides and being petty, but I dont, and somehow I doubt that the families of the victims of Bin Ladin would either.

[zepper899]

I did not comment on the post or the quality of Islam.
I simply tried to prevent you embarrassing yourself.
The added tirade was unnecessary.

[carolineislands]

I did not comment on the post or the quality of Islam.
I simply tried to prevent you embarrassing yourself.

I see. Did you read the original post and watch the video? If not, that would probably give you an idea of how important this topic is, and what the discussion is really about. Then we should probably try to stick to the topic.

The added tirade was unnecessary.

In two very short posts you've said that I am "ridiculous" "petty" "out of line" "bringing down the quality of the forum", "embarassing," now that my last post is a "tirade" and "unnecessary." And yet you're whole point was

You are attacking umair personally...

My whole point is outlined in the original post. I will look forward to discussions on the topic

[umair]

now here is the end of the story.

here is what he says in the video.
"there are more of the muslims saying whether osama bin laden
is right or wrong.

bombing in nigeria,america osama bin laden is the headline,did or not
you don't know!

but if you ask my view,if he is on the truth ,if he is fighting the
enemies of islam,i am with him.

i don,t know what he is doing, iam not in touch with him , i just read
it in a newspaper.

if he is terrorising the terrorist , if he is terrorising america the
biggest terrorist i am with him.(and such) every muslim should be a
terrorist.the thing is that if he is terrorising a terrorist he is following islam,

whether he is (one) or not i don't know.

so you as a muslim without checking up laying allegation is also wrong.
so i am with those people who are following the quran, even
if the whole world is against them i am with them."

[carolineislands]

Exactly. Every Muslim should be a terrorist. And he is with Bin Ladin. He knows what Bin Ladin does and so does everyone else. And he supports that and says every other Muslim should too. And that is following the Quran.

He's right. Terrorizing people and nations that Muslims perceive as their "enemy" IS following the Quran. It's following the example of Muhammad. So is avoiding responsibility for their own actions by invariably pointing the finger at some other person or nation to place the blame on.

As to whether or not America is the biggest terrorist of all, that is just a disclaimer he throws in there to keep from being nailed down on the truth of what he says, which is that he supports Bin Ladin and so should every other Muslim. You know what he meant. I know what he meant. And so does everybody else that watches that video. He knows full well what kind of crimes Bin Ladin has done. I bet he wouldn't be so hesitant to stand up against the Danish cartoonists, even though he never spent any time with them, nor did he actually see them draw the cartoons. Yeah, their signature was all over the work. So was Bin Ladin's. What a cop out.

It's erroneous to say America is a "terrorist." First of all America is several nations. The United States is a nation with people of every race, ethnic group, every religion, every type of political affiliation and every sort of philosophy you can imagine. And the voices of the people of the United States do not necessarily influence the behavior and decisions of the government.

If you really think it's good for terrorists to terrorize "America" then you'll be sure and support them when they fly an airplane into an "American" mosque where "American" Muslims are praying -- right?

[umair]

yes i totally abide by dr.zakir naik

and the quran does ask us to fight against terrorism

but the way you percieve the word terrorism is far away from the realms of reality.

and yes remember what you call as terrorism exists because you want it to exist.
you enter nations destroy them ,kill millions,slaughter millions,just for political gains, EVERY NATION HAS IT'S MOUTH SHUT IN FRONT OF AMERICA.

but then ,when a person like osama shows the courage to challenge your intellegence, you become outrageous, you again enter nations ,destroy them, kill millions.

and hence the show goes on.

remember the day you stop irrelevent killings, there will be no need left for the people like osama to rise against you.


and yes stop considering that a plane might bomb a mosque in america, because thousands of bombs have been already dropped on namazis during prayers,in various mosques of iraq and afghanistan.

a muslim is a muslim , and a human being is a human being,irrespective of his nation or colour.

and i always pray that none should die ,niether in america nor elsewhere. i know that you cannot expect such a prayer from a muslim, because you have read possibly a lot of negative material regarding islam in the past few years,which can easily be concluded on how you took the excerpts from the speech of dr zakir naik
which was rather in a negative sense than humanitarian.

plz stop hating other religions and let the peace prevail.

[Fallibleone]

Of course to the best of my knowledge I've never met carolineislands - we live on different continents. However, I believe the chances are slim that she personally has committed any 'irrelevant killings', entered any nations and destroyed them or killed millions for political gain. If she has never done any of these things, why should she be considered a legitimate targert?

I suspect you might argue something along the lines of 'she supports the government whch sent troops to kill the innocent'. I suppose I would go on to ask you how you know who she supports.

Speaking from my own perspective, I am a British citizen (actually I have dual nationality between Britain and Canada). I voted Tony Blair into No. 10. I regret it now. If I'd known he'd follow Bush so blindly after 9/11 I would rather have stayed at home on polling day. So even though I voted this man in, I most certainly did not vote for him to send troops to Iraq or Afghanistan. Every time I hear that someone has died over there I throw my hands up in despair. The US's and UK's conduct infuriates me. If the decision to send troops to these places had been put to a public vote, and the citizens had voted 'yes', then there would be a reason to accuse us and target us. We didn't get a say.

Once a government is in place the general population does not have much say in what they do. Sure, a government can be unpopular. Every few years we have a chance to vote them out. Unfortunately, many people choose to stay at home instead. And if only 61% of people eligible to vote bother to vote (as they did at the last election), millions of people have no say or have passed up their chance to have a say in who is elected. Add to that the fact that Tony Blair was elected Prime Minister on having gained the vote of only 35%, or just over a third, of that 61% who bothered to turn out, and you can see how the majority of the UK population did not in fact vote for him, or his policies. Right now, we have a Prime Minister that NONE of us voted for!

Basically, carolineislands has killed no one. She might have voted for Bush, she might not. Either way, she is not responsible for the actions of her government and nor am I. And yet we are both seen as legitimate targets - people who have done no harm to anyone and in my case, I can't speak for carolineislands, someone who wants it all to end NOW, wants the troops out NOW, never wanted them to go there to begin with.

[carolineislands]

That's just the thing. We are legitimate targets in Muslim thinking for one simple reason -- we are not Muslim. Killing innocents only refers to Muslims because only Muslims are considered innocent.

Correct me if I'm wrong, umair. But aren't non-Muslims considered infidels and therefore don't fall under the catagory of "innocents?" That's what your Imams say.

Vote for Bush?! Bite your tongue! I can't hardly even fly anywhere any more because of my very vocal opposition of the current regime. Matter of fact, I don't support tyranny of any flavor -- capitalistic or Islamic. Neither justifies the other.

Unfortunately, Islam is a religion that very strongly teaches an eye for an eye and worse. Muhammad himself had a few people killed for talking about him. And that's the great Muslim example.

As for killing people. Well, I have never killed anyone, but I could if I had to. If someone were trying to kill my children or my husband and the ONLY WAY I could prevent that was to kill that person, I would slit his throat without blinking an eye. But I wouldn't kill them for calling me names, or not agreeing with me, or deciding not to believe me any more, or criticizing my religion. I wouldn't kill someone even if they painted pictures of Jesus and Mary doing the nasty on every wall in the city -- heck, I'd probably laugh and the only reason they might end up spending time in jail in my country would be for damaging property. We have statues of jesus floating in urine in art museums! Some people whine about it but they don't impale anyone to the sidewalk! They just complain and then go home.

As for your last post Umair, the things you said about Naik spoke volumes, so I don't feel a need to reply at all. You painted a very clear picture all by yourself.

[carolineislands]

Just a little aside. Did you ever wonder how long it took that guy to save up all that pee? He must have been pretty bitter towards religion, aye?

[umair]

although i am really delighed by your thought's , but why dont you think the other way round

Of course to the best of my knowledge I've never met carolineislands - we live on different continents. However, I believe the chances are slim that she personally has committed any 'irrelevant killings', entered any nations and destroyed them or killed millions for political gain. If she has never done any of these things, why should she be considered a legitimate targert?

plz go and find the answer for this from the millions of dead iraqis

I suspect you might argue something along the lines of 'she supports the government whch sent troops to kill the innocent'. I suppose I would go on to ask you how you know who she supports.

one is the type of support which you give at the time of elections , well if it goes wrong,no problem.
but the problem lies in the support which you give by not standing up against or protesting against or speaking against the govt. when it takes a wrong decision.

Speaking from my own perspective, I am a British citizen (actually I have dual nationality between Britain and Canada). I voted Tony Blair into No. 10. I regret it now. If I'd known he'd follow Bush so blindly after 9/11 I would rather have stayed at home on polling day. So even though I voted this man in, I most certainly did not vote for him to send troops to Iraq or Afghanistan. Every time I hear that someone has died over there I throw my hands up in despair. The US's and UK's conduct infuriates me. If the decision to send troops to these places had been put to a public vote, and the citizens had voted 'yes', then there would be a reason to accuse us and target us. We didn't get a say.

Once a government is in place the general population does not have much say in what they do. Sure, a government can be unpopular. Every few years we have a chance to vote them out. Unfortunately, many people choose to stay at home instead. And if only 61% of people eligible to vote bother to vote (as they did at the last election), millions of people have no say or have passed up their chance to have a say in who is elected. Add to that the fact that Tony Blair was elected Prime Minister on having gained the vote of only 35%, or just over a third, of that 61% who bothered to turn out, and you can see how the majority of the UK population did not in fact vote for him, or his policies. Right now, we have a Prime Minister that NONE of us voted for!

Basically, carolineislands has killed no one. She might have voted for Bush, she might not. Either way, she is not responsible for the actions of her government and nor am I. And yet we are both seen as legitimate targets - people who have done no harm to anyone and in my case, I can't speak for carolineislands, someone who wants it all to end NOW, wants the troops out NOW, never wanted them to go there to begin with.

see i totaly abide by you, that much is not in the hands of the public once the govt. is in power.

but what was the sin of those who have lost their parents,children,families, just because you leisurely went out and voted for someone.
just for once keep yourself in the place of a person who has seen his family deing in front of him, and then you will feel the responsibility of being the national of a powerful nation.