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]

As usual, not a peep from the "moderate" Muslims. Perhaps that's because they are only "moderate" in name only?

Why is it when someone draws a cartoon the entire world's Muslim community takes to the streets in hoards and yet, when unspeakable atrocities are committed in the name of Islam only a handful of Muslims even speak a word about it?

Actions speak louder than words, i.e. the people calling themselves "moderate" Muslims are NOT or they would take a stand against radical Islam. Their silence is proof that they condone the actions and ideology of "radical" Islam.

[carolineislands]

As usual, not a peep from the "moderate" Muslims. Perhaps that's because they are only "moderate" in name only?

Why is it when someone draws a cartoon the entire world's Muslim community takes to the streets in hoards and yet, when unspeakable atrocities are committed in the name of Islam only a handful of Muslims even speak a word about it?

Actions speak louder than words, i.e. the people calling themselves "moderate" Muslims are NOT or they would take a stand against radical Islam. Their silence is proof that they condone the actions and ideology of "radical" Islam.

People, we had better start waking up and looking at the situation realistically. If there were moderate Muslims, don't you think they'd be making themselves seen and heard in opposition to terrorism and "radical" Islam? Think about it. When someone "insults" Muhammad, there are global riots and protests and articles and uprisings everywhere. But when millions of little girls are being taken by adult men in marriage at the age of 9, nobody says a word. When terrorist acts are committed -- silence. When people are buried up to their wastes and stoned to death -- maybe a couple of newspaper articles by NON Muslims. When gays are executed by hanging -- a couple of articles again.

When are we going to get this people? If what we call "radical" Islam is really the minority then WHERE IS THE MAJORITY? People like to talk about moderate Muslims but are they really "moderate" when atrocities are committed over and over and over again in the name of their religion and they just sit around like this:

We need to wake up and close our borders or we're going to end up just like Lebanon.

[zepper899]

We need to wake up and close our borders or we're going to end up just like Lebanon.

Relax there ma'am.
I don't think you're asking the right questions. You are asking moderate muslims to say that the scripture is inerrant.
You say: Since the scripture calls for violence, give proof that the scripture is non violent.
A moderate muslim, just like a moderate christian, may believe that the scripture errs in some quotations, therefore they may ignore something counter to their moral beliefs.

I question you: how do you reconcile your beliefs with a god that can't even defeat a couple of iron chariots? by picking and choosing parts of scripture. such as the non-violent parts

[umair]

well , who is a terrorist?

according to the oxford dictionary (a terrorist is a person who uses terror in pursuit of political gains)

well you have to decide between GEORGE BUSH (who has devastated two developing countries and killed more than THREE MILLION people in just a matter of half a decade)

for the sake of oil (which is just a political gain).


or is it OSAMA BIN LADEN ,who left the royal palaces of saudi arab and chose to live in the mountains of afghanistan, just for the sake of fighting against the oppression of america

answer some brief questions:

1)who has been opressing the powerless for political gains?

2)who has killed the majority of people? and the most important who(christians or muslims ) have lost their lives either in the name of terrorism or war?

3)and who has been interfering in the matter of other nations, just to show its power?



4)and the most important question is that , is osama really alive and powerful enough to shake the worlds most powerful nation, or is it again a political game led by the nation itself?


please wisely answer the above questions.


and yes as far as dr zakir naik is concerned, i totaly abide by him as
fighting against terrorism is the duty of not only every muslim , but every human being

and in the present scenario , there is not a bigger terrorist than america.

[Wyvern]

well , who is a terrorist?

according to the oxford dictionary (a terrorist is a person who uses terror in pursuit of political gains)

well you have to decide between GEORGE BUSH (who has devastated two developing countries and killed more than THREE MILLION people in just a matter of half a decade)

for the sake of oil (which is just a political gain).


or is it OSAMA BIN LADEN ,who left the royal palaces of saudi arab and chose to live in the mountains of afghanistan, just for the sake of fighting against the oppression of america

This is a false dichotomy, you assume that only one can be considered a terrorist. Also get your information correct, Bin Laden is the son of a wealthy building contractor not a royal and he went to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Strangely enough it was america that funded and supplied him in those days.

1)who has been opressing the powerless for political gains?

both

2)who has killed the majority of people? and the most important who(christians or muslims ) have lost their lives either in the name of terrorism or war?

The first question is debatable since the terrorists often hide their bodies. For the second the answer is both.

3)and who has been interfering in the matter of other nations, just to show its power?

Except for 9/11 neither

4)and the most important question is that , is osama really alive and powerful enough to shake the worlds most powerful nation, or is it again a political game led by the nation itself?

9/11 required a response, you may not like the response heck Bin Laden might not like the response however he had to know there would be a directed response against him and his organization.

[carolineislands]

and yes as far as dr zakir naik is concerned, i totaly abide by him

Okay then. You do believe that "every Muslims SHOULD be a terrorist!"

And you also are with Bin Laden and support him as Naik said. He said that as long as Bin Laden is terrorizing America then he is with him. And that every Muslim should be a terrorist. If they are terrorizing American then they are "following the Quran."

Glad to hear that you agree with that. It's probably the first honest word you've said since you came slithering in here trying convince people that Islam is the religion of peace.

[umair]

and yes as far as dr zakir naik is concerned, i totaly abide by him

Okay then. You do believe that "every Muslims SHOULD be a terrorist!"

And you also are with Bin Laden and support him as Naik said. He said that as long as Bin Laden is terrorizing America then he is with him. And that every Muslim should be a terrorist. If they are terrorizing American then they are "following the Quran."

Glad to hear that you agree with that. It's probably the first honest word you've said since you came slithering in here trying convince people that Islam is the religion of peace.

do you know that it is in the same fashion, that people quote out of context verses of the quran to degrade islam, as you have quoted my statement from my last quote.

[carolineislands]

Zakir Naik said "Every Muslims should be a terrorist" and "if Bin Laden is terrorizing America, i.e. 9/11, then he is practicing Islam."

You read the text, watched the video and replied that, as for Zakir Naik, "I totally abide by him." DIRECT QUOTE.

End of story.

Unless of course, you want to retract your statement. If you believe that Bin Laden is wrong and that his actions are totally contradictory to Islam, meaning Zakir Naik was wrong to support him and shouldn't have said what he did... In other words, if you want to speak out against Islamic terrorist acts, then feel free to do so.

But I believe you've already told the truth, albeit inadvertently (which is typically the case).

[zepper899]

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