Does Britain have a jihadi problem?

[arjunadawn]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

I wonder whether the more than 1400 children raped by Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham would agree?

This is the rub, isn't it? It is an utterly baseless notion that what we see taking place in nearly every country on earth that has a muslim population reflects a minority. There is absolutely nothing to support that. The absurd logic presuming that because you are in "contact" with an enemy scouting party only you have measured the true breadth of the army arrayed before you is shockingly deceitful.

There is nothing- I repeat- nothing in islamic jurisprudence and authority that suggests "rendering unto Caesar" what is his and onto god...

[JockPieandBeans]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

[chiang mai]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

[JockPieandBeans]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

I do not actually know who the outfit are.

If you take the time to read it, you can draw your own conclusions. As someone who attended the carnage, I believe it is a fairly accurate report.

[Seastallion]

The problem with silent Muslims is the world is watching. With every act of violence left unanswered, western weakness grows. With every citation of ahadith and sura that is unanswered, jihadi strength grows.....

Except, as has been repeatedly shown, Muslims are not silent. Many, ordinary people in the street, their Imams and representatives and leaders, have spoken and condemned the jihadists.

But some dismiss such condemnation as lies as it interferes with their prejudice!

I hope you are not such.

Sorry! 7x7, this has not been the case in Rotherham, with the exception of a few, the Muslim community have been very quite. Maybe you can explain why.

I will say it over and over until people really begin to watch and see for themselves: Muslims speak in two worlds, one for non-muslims and a voice to muslims. Let me give an example which perhaps supports 7x7:

Recently, leading British muslims have issued a fatwa condemning those who serve ISIS. Wow! This is really a positive development, isn't it?

http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/in-the-media/the-sunday-times-front-page-coverage-of-anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-dr-usama-hasan/

Fatwas religiously prohibit; they do not morally suggest, condone, or condemn. Fatwas are usually supported with reference to the religious prohibition. This fatwa seemingly says everything that people like me wish to see more of. I remain hopeful but dubious for a very good reason. A fatwa that has no religious citation is not worth the paper it is written on. Few muslims will adhere to a fatwa where an opposing fatwa cites authority. This fatwa only asserts the western moral outrage for what ISIS is doing. There is little in this fatwa to be binding.

Again, it is common parlance to say something to one audience and another to your own. Regrettably, ISIS cites authority for nearly all they do, and it is shockingly valid. This fatwa is one more that enters the fray in the "fatwa wars" and this one has little religious standing, per se.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/fatwa/

I don't see any example of Muslims speaking in two worlds.

However, the fatwa issued against joining IS is plainly religiously backed despite your claim that it is not.

Firstly, it's endorsed by a mufti.

Secondly, it is endorsed by a clutch of eminent Imams.

Thirdly, it cites " British and other EU citizens are bound by their duties to their home countries according to Islamic theology and jurisprudence: "

Fourthly, according to Wiki, the Mufti and the Imams make it law.... " A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law.^[1] The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, aMufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". " ,

I'm not sure about your assertions on what a fatwa is and isn't: I think I'll take Wiki's information with a lot more confidence of it being correct.

That being so, I take it that this fatwa will be taken very seriously by British Muslims.

[JockPieandBeans]

Recently, leading British muslims have issued a fatwa condemning those who serve ISIS. Wow! This is really a positive development, isn't it?

http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/in-the-media/the-sunday-times-front-page-coverage-of-anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-dr-usama-hasan/

Fatwas religiously prohibit; they do not morally suggest, condone, or condemn. Fatwas are usually supported with reference to the religious prohibition. This fatwa seemingly says everything that people like me wish to see more of. I remain hopeful but dubious for a very good reason. A fatwa that has no religious citation is not worth the paper it is written on. Few muslims will adhere to a fatwa where an opposing fatwa cites authority. This fatwa only asserts the western moral outrage for what ISIS is doing. There is little in this fatwa to be binding.

Again, it is common parlance to say something to one audience and another to your own. Regrettably, ISIS cites authority for nearly all they do, and it is shockingly valid. This fatwa is one more that enters the fray in the "fatwa wars" and this one has little religious standing, per se.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/fatwa/

However, the fatwa issued against joining IS is plainly religiously backed despite your claim that it is not.

Firstly, it's endorsed by a mufti.

Secondly, it is endorsed by a clutch of eminent Imams.

Thirdly, it cites " British and other EU citizens are bound by their duties to their home countries according to Islamic theology and jurisprudence: "

Fourthly, according to Wiki, the Mufti and the Imams make it law.... " A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law.^[1] The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, aMufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". " ,

I'm not sure about your assertions on what a fatwa is and isn't: I think I'll take Wiki's information with a lot more confidence of it being correct.

That being so, I take it that this fatwa will be taken very seriously by British Muslims.

Seastallion

The Fatwa that you refer to, also states that " All muslims " have signed up to the Geneva Convention.

What a crock.

Muslims cannot sign up to the Geneva Convention.

In my opinion, this Fatwa is nothing more than act of appeasement.

Edited September 7, 2014 by JockPieandBeans

[chiang mai]

The Geneva Convention in 2014.

[Seastallion]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

I wonder whether the more than 1400 children raped by Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham would agree?

Right here is an example of the rabid anti-Muslim brigade altering facts and making out that their exageration is fact.

1. Less than 1400 is the reported truth, not "more than"

2. Some of the (less than) 1400 were raped, the rest were abused in some way, but not raped.

The way the post became popular with "likes" shows how one lie is taken as a cheerleading point and the next thing we know in the malicious chinese whisper game is that 1500 eleven year olds were raped and beheaded over a 3 month period.

[arjunadawn]

I will say it over and over until people really begin to watch and see for themselves: Muslims speak in two worlds, one for non-muslims and a voice to muslims. Let me give an example which perhaps supports 7x7:

Recently, leading British muslims have issued a fatwa condemning those who serve ISIS. Wow! This is really a positive development, isn't it?

http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/in-the-media/the-sunday-times-front-page-coverage-of-anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-dr-usama-hasan/

Fatwas religiously prohibit; they do not morally suggest, condone, or condemn. Fatwas are usually supported with reference to the religious prohibition. This fatwa seemingly says everything that people like me wish to see more of. I remain hopeful but dubious for a very good reason. A fatwa that has no religious citation is not worth the paper it is written on. Few muslims will adhere to a fatwa where an opposing fatwa cites authority. This fatwa only asserts the western moral outrage for what ISIS is doing. There is little in this fatwa to be binding.

Again, it is common parlance to say something to one audience and another to your own. Regrettably, ISIS cites authority for nearly all they do, and it is shockingly valid. This fatwa is one more that enters the fray in the "fatwa wars" and this one has little religious standing, per se.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/fatwa/

I don't see any example of Muslims speaking in two worlds.

However, the fatwa issued against joining IS is plainly religiously backed despite your claim that it is not.

Firstly, it's endorsed by a mufti.

Secondly, it is endorsed by a clutch of eminent Imams.

Thirdly, it cites " British and other EU citizens are bound by their duties to their home countries according to Islamic theology and jurisprudence: "

Fourthly, according to Wiki, the Mufti and the Imams make it law.... " A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law.^[1] The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, aMufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". " ,

I'm not sure about your assertions on what a fatwa is and isn't: I think I'll take Wiki's information with a lot more confidence of it being correct.

That being so, I take it that this fatwa will be taken very seriously by British Muslims.

You do that. If I had a doubt about something someone said on a forum I would also go with some published info, regardless of who posted it/ But the excerpt is not wrong; nor am I. Being as you cannot see the example of muslims speaking in two worlds you would not fully grasp this. This is not a lack of anything on your part. It is just unless someone really sees or elects to investigate what I refer to, they would not get it. Fine. So let me reiterate.

Jihadists, as well as Hamas, et al., will frequently say things that are designed for western consumption. Over the years of being an underdog they have, IMO, come to a near mastery of media warfare (from a purely objective point of view, this is quite an achievement since they battle such an overwhelmingly large entity). Other muslims are well aware of the success of various Palestinian groups in harnessing western perspective and whether mimicking or natural evolution of their struggle, they too come to manipulate western media. IMO, this is evidenced by screening the many translated MidEast forum and related sites, Palestinian Media Watch, etc., and one is shocked by the duplicity of what is said. In most cases muslims in jihad and related struggles actually appeal to other muslims with authority of context regarding their actions. Therefore, I could hardly be alone in realizing that the "moderate" muslims many speak of rarely cite scriptural authority. In this case, it is a fatwa who's weight is carried simply by virtue of the position of the signers.

This fatwa be useful. It may be enough to deter some; maybe many. I am uncertain but hopeful. I was the one who posted this piece and this link. I have no investment in being right. I need to be wrong. But I just don't feel this fatwa will carry greater weight than the call to jihad fatwas and such. You feel this fatwa will be taken very seriously. It is the case that the results of our opinions will be measured in the very near future.

[nontabury]

The problem with silent Muslims is the world is watching. With every act of violence left unanswered, western weakness grows. With every citation of ahadith and sura that is unanswered, jihadi strength grows.....

Except, as has been repeatedly shown, Muslims are not silent. Many, ordinary people in the street, their Imams and representatives and leaders, have spoken and condemned the jihadists.

But some dismiss such condemnation as lies as it interferes with their prejudice!

I hope you are not such.

Sorry! 7x7, this has not been the case in Rotherham, with the exception of a few, the Muslim community have been very quite. Maybe you can explain why.

Relevant trivia, maybe:

In Rotherham there are 4 churches and 8 mosques

In Barnsley, there are 8 churches and 11 mosques,

if Yahoo is to be believed.

Trivia it is, better to have mentioned the No of working men's clubs in Barnsley.

Hopefully 7x7 will be able to provide an answer to my original question.

[JockPieandBeans]

The Geneva Convention in 2014.

Yes, the Geneva Convention still exists today.

It does not apply to muslims as they cannot sign up to it.

So where does that leave the Fatwa ?

[chuckd]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

I do not actually know who the outfit are.

If you take the time to read it, you can draw your own conclusions. As someone who attended the carnage, I believe it is a fairly accurate report.

Permit me to assist with your queries.

1. The Long War Journal is a project of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/about.php

2. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a nonprofit group founded in the US. Their mission statement is provided here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd

3. Their executive team is shown here, with the notable presence of James Woolsey, former DCIA.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/executive-team

4. Their contributing Fellows can be found here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/fellows

I have run across them before and they seem to be highly regarded by the Pentagon and have provided some contract work for the federal government.

It took me a lot less time to find out about them than it did to prepare this post.

Cheers.

[H1w4yR1da]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com

An interesting read and kind of puts things in perspective. Almost 24,000 deadly terror attacks SINCE 9/11!!

Still, I am sure they will find a way to deflect and justify this!

That looks like an authoritative and globally recognized media source, what was its name again!

You see this is the major problem wit the internet today, people learn how to surf and comment, long before they learn how to read and comprehend what they find.

Right right! The old 'attack the messenger' ploy. Used to absolutely no effect by the 3 'axis of evil' apologist posters.

[chiang mai]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

I do not actually know who the outfit are.

If you take the time to read it, you can draw your own conclusions. As someone who attended the carnage, I believe it is a fairly accurate report.

Permit me to assist with your queries.

1. The Long War Journal is a project of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/about.php

2. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a nonprofit group founded in the US. Their mission statement is provided here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd

3. Their executive team is shown here, with the notable presence of James Woolsey, former DCIA.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/executive-team

4. Their contributing Fellows can be found here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/fellows

I have run across them before and they seem to be highly regarded by the Pentagon and have provided some contract work for the federal government.

It took me a lot less time to find out about them than it did to prepare this post.

Cheers.

Woof!

[arjunadawn]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

I wonder whether the more than 1400 children raped by Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham would agree?

Right here is an example of the rabid anti-Muslim brigade altering facts and making out that their exageration is fact.

1. Less than 1400 is the reported truth, not "more than"

2. Some of the (less than) 1400 were raped, the rest were abused in some way, but not raped.

The way the post became popular with "likes" shows how one lie is taken as a cheerleading point and the next thing we know in the malicious chinese whisper game is that 1500 eleven year olds were raped and beheaded over a 3 month period.

Why on earth would anyone step in to stipulate points of detail that do not substantially change the nature of something so horrible as this crime, and the local dhimmitude? 1400? 1350? "1500" children? Rape? Abuse? -the distinction matters to the poor child but as a society both are the same nature of evil- barbaric. How could a man rationalize degrees of evil with regard to something so repugnant to every sensibility?

As a society, I think its fair to say, we individually consider any abuse of children equal to rape irrespective of sick details.

Child abuse is heinous- IN THE WESTERN MORAL FABRIC.

And NO! the reason the post became "liked" is because of the same reason there are over 10,000 views on this thread- people are sick and tired of surrendering their cultural values and landmarks to an inferior, barbaric culture in their own backyard. People are sick and tired of allowing the incremental march of jihad across UK. That is why threads are viewed and posts are liked, not because of some perceived act of gamesmanship.

[chiang mai]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com

An interesting read and kind of puts things in perspective. Almost 24,000 deadly terror attacks SINCE 9/11!!

Still, I am sure they will find a way to deflect and justify this!

That looks like an authoritative and globally recognized media source, what was its name again!

You see this is the major problem wit the internet today, people learn how to surf and comment, long before they learn how to read and comprehend what they find.

Right right! The old 'attack the messenger' ploy. Used to absolutely no effect by the 3 'axis of evil' apologist posters.

Question: is there a word that describes a half of a woof, woofette perhaps?

[chiang mai]

Why on earth would anyone step in to stipulate points of detail that do not substantially change the nature of something so horrible as this crime, and the local dhimmitude? 1400? 1350? "1500" children? Rape? Abuse? -the distinction matters to the poor child but as a society both are the same nature of evil- barbaric. How could a man rationalize degrees of evil with regard to something so repugnant to every sensibility?

As a society, I think its fair to say, we individually consider any abuse of children equal to rape irrespective of sick details.

Child abuse is heinous- IN THE WESTERN MORAL FABRIC.

And NO! the reason the post became "liked" is because of the same reason there are over 10,000 views on this thread- people are sick and tired of surrendering their cultural values and landmarks to an inferior, barbaric culture in their own backyard. People are sick and tired of allowing the incremental march of jihad across UK. That is why threads are viewed and posts are liked, not because of some perceived act of gamesmanship.

You and Albert need to get together, you could be best friends, I'm certain.

[Seastallion]

Recently, leading British muslims have issued a fatwa condemning those who serve ISIS. Wow! This is really a positive development, isn't it?

http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/in-the-media/the-sunday-times-front-page-coverage-of-anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-dr-usama-hasan/

Fatwas religiously prohibit; they do not morally suggest, condone, or condemn. Fatwas are usually supported with reference to the religious prohibition. This fatwa seemingly says everything that people like me wish to see more of. I remain hopeful but dubious for a very good reason. A fatwa that has no religious citation is not worth the paper it is written on. Few muslims will adhere to a fatwa where an opposing fatwa cites authority. This fatwa only asserts the western moral outrage for what ISIS is doing. There is little in this fatwa to be binding.

Again, it is common parlance to say something to one audience and another to your own. Regrettably, ISIS cites authority for nearly all they do, and it is shockingly valid. This fatwa is one more that enters the fray in the "fatwa wars" and this one has little religious standing, per se.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/fatwa/

However, the fatwa issued against joining IS is plainly religiously backed despite your claim that it is not.

Firstly, it's endorsed by a mufti.

Secondly, it is endorsed by a clutch of eminent Imams.

Thirdly, it cites " British and other EU citizens are bound by their duties to their home countries according to Islamic theology and jurisprudence: "

Fourthly, according to Wiki, the Mufti and the Imams make it law.... " A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law.^[1] The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, aMufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". " ,

I'm not sure about your assertions on what a fatwa is and isn't: I think I'll take Wiki's information with a lot more confidence of it being correct.

That being so, I take it that this fatwa will be taken very seriously by British Muslims.

Seastallion

The Fatwa that you refer to, also states that " All muslims " have signed up to the Geneva Convention.

What a crock.

Muslims cannot sign up to the Geneva Convention.

In my opinion, this Fatwa is nothing more than act of appeasement.

I didn't see the Geneva convention mentioned. I only read the link provided. Would you link us to the entire document which states that, please?

I suspect that it may be a translation issue; "signed up to" = "agree with" or "endorse", however lets read it and see.

[JockPieandBeans]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

I do not actually know who the outfit are.

If you take the time to read it, you can draw your own conclusions. As someone who attended the carnage, I believe it is a fairly accurate report.

Permit me to assist with your queries.

1. The Long War Journal is a project of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/about.php

2. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a nonprofit group founded in the US. Their mission statement is provided here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd

3. Their executive team is shown here, with the notable presence of James Woolsey, former DCIA.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/executive-team

4. Their contributing Fellows can be found here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/fellows

I have run across them before and they seem to be highly regarded by the Pentagon and have provided some contract work for the federal government.

It took me a lot less time to find out about them than it did to prepare this post.

Cheers.

chuckd

Thank you for taking the time to point that out to me.

I could have posted multiple links to that atrocity.

I found this one to be the most accurate.

[JockPieandBeans]

Recently, leading British muslims have issued a fatwa condemning those who serve ISIS. Wow! This is really a positive development, isn't it?

http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/in-the-media/the-sunday-times-front-page-coverage-of-anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-dr-usama-hasan/

Fatwas religiously prohibit; they do not morally suggest, condone, or condemn. Fatwas are usually supported with reference to the religious prohibition. This fatwa seemingly says everything that people like me wish to see more of. I remain hopeful but dubious for a very good reason. A fatwa that has no religious citation is not worth the paper it is written on. Few muslims will adhere to a fatwa where an opposing fatwa cites authority. This fatwa only asserts the western moral outrage for what ISIS is doing. There is little in this fatwa to be binding.

Again, it is common parlance to say something to one audience and another to your own. Regrettably, ISIS cites authority for nearly all they do, and it is shockingly valid. This fatwa is one more that enters the fray in the "fatwa wars" and this one has little religious standing, per se.

http://counterjihadreport.com/tag/fatwa/

However, the fatwa issued against joining IS is plainly religiously backed despite your claim that it is not.

Firstly, it's endorsed by a mufti.

Secondly, it is endorsed by a clutch of eminent Imams.

Thirdly, it cites " British and other EU citizens are bound by their duties to their home countries according to Islamic theology and jurisprudence: "

Fourthly, according to Wiki, the Mufti and the Imams make it law.... " A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law.^[1] The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, aMufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". " ,

I'm not sure about your assertions on what a fatwa is and isn't: I think I'll take Wiki's information with a lot more confidence of it being correct.

That being so, I take it that this fatwa will be taken very seriously by British Muslims.

Seastallion

The Fatwa that you refer to, also states that " All muslims " have signed up to the Geneva Convention.

What a crock.

Muslims cannot sign up to the Geneva Convention.

In my opinion, this Fatwa is nothing more than act of appeasement.

I didn't see the Geneva convention mentioned. I only read the link provided. Would you link us to the entire document which states that, please?

I suspect that it may be a translation issue; "signed up to" = "agree with" or "endorse", however lets read it and see.

seastallion

I already ragged the Fatwa earlier in this thread.

The entire document was provided, at least a link to it. I did cut and paste relevent sections.

I have no desire to search through it again.

[Seastallion]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

I wonder whether the more than 1400 children raped by Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham would agree?

Right here is an example of the rabid anti-Muslim brigade altering facts and making out that their exageration is fact.

1. Less than 1400 is the reported truth, not "more than"

2. Some of the (less than) 1400 were raped, the rest were abused in some way, but not raped.

The way the post became popular with "likes" shows how one lie is taken as a cheerleading point and the next thing we know in the malicious chinese whisper game is that 1500 eleven year olds were raped and beheaded over a 3 month period.

Why on earth would anyone step in to stipulate points of detail that do not substantially change the nature of something so horrible as this crime, and the local dhimmitude? 1400? 1350? "1500" children? Rape? Abuse? -the distinction matters to the poor child but as a society both are the same nature of evil- barbaric. How could a man rationalize degrees of evil with regard to something so repugnant to every sensibility?

As a society, I think its fair to say, we individually consider any abuse of children equal to rape irrespective of sick details.

Child abuse is heinous- IN THE WESTERN MORAL FABRIC.

And NO! the reason the post became "liked" is because of the same reason there are over 10,000 views on this thread- people are sick and tired of surrendering their cultural values and landmarks to an inferior, barbaric culture in their own backyard. People are sick and tired of allowing the incremental march of jihad across UK. That is why threads are viewed and posts are liked, not because of some perceived act of gamesmanship.

Nobody is trying to "substantially change the nature of something so horrible". But you do a verbal sleight of hand, again.

My post was about your team of Islamaphobes wont to exaggerate the evil acts of Islam and Muslims to try to bolster the hatred. And the example stands.

I do take big issue with your trying to say that rape is no worse than other types of abuse, especially when some of the abuses reported were "being threatened". It makes a difference to the child, the perpetrator, and to society if a child was "threatened" rather than raped.

And 10 raped children is indeed a lot less horrific than "more than 14 000".

Another verbal sleight of hand; 10,000 views you ascribe to "people are sick and tired of surrendering their cultural values and landmarks to an inferior, barbaric culture ".. No. Many of those 10 000 views were made by people disgusted by the bigotry of people like you. "Bigotry" you exclaim, outraged? Yes...just look at your sentence about the 10 000 views; "an inferior, barbaric culture".

[JockPieandBeans]

Does the moderation community not believe this thread is now exhausted of sensible thought?

Why would that be CM.

I have contributed very little. I could go on for months. I wont

Did you read the report I posted ? What are your thoughts on that ?

[arjunadawn]

I have read this fatwa again and it will ultimately be useless. I suspect within the next week you will see increasingly more critique of this fatwa by jihadi watch groups. A lot of observers (IMO) will reject this fatwa. This fatwa contained two religious citations, both of which are equvicol.

In the first citation an early verse in the koran is cited: 5:1, and the second fairly close in Islamic history- 8:72. The koran is based on "abrogation." This means that for every part of the koran any later part that addresses even remotely the same issue supersedes the former. There are 114 suras in the koran- a lot of wiggle room here and the jihadis will see this immediately.

Also, it contains a flagrant lie, one which reveals who the intended audience really is. "Muslims" have no capacity to be signatories to the Geneva Convention, etc. This fatwa cannot withstand the scrutiny of even cursory review.

https://makkah.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/fatwa-against-isis.jpg

http://www.islam-watch.org/authors/165-jon-mc/1564-uk-imams-fatwa-against-british-muslims-joining-the-islamic-state.html

Edited September 7, 2014 by arjunadawn

[boomerangutang]

Because of repeated mentions of 'fatwa' on this side, I looked it up on a Muslim-friendly site ( http://www.questionsaboutislam.com/shariah-islamic-law/what-is-a-fatwa.php ) and in a nutshell here's what was written:

It's an Arabic word that literally means, 'opinion'. When used in a religious context it has a stronger meaning. Any senior Muslim man can issue a fatwa. So, it's essentially an opinion issued by a senior male member of the Islamist community. Perhaps sometimes it emits from a consensus of old men in a committee-like scenario. Iran's Koimeini used to issue fatawa (the plural) as often as Thaksin issues defamation suits.

Boomerangutang's spin: If we hear of a 'fatwa' being declared by a British-based Muslim man, it can be interpreted as either: One man's (or committee's) opinion on declaring something, or it could be to appease British authorities and lull them (authorities and general public) in to thinking that 'moderates' are doing the right thing.

In the real world, the effect (of declaring a fatwa) is nothing more than a panacea, at best. It's words. Words aren't going to have any affect on keeping a group of extremists from doing anything they're bent on doing. However, such slick words may have the desired affect of lulling politicians and some of the general public in to thinking the Muslim community is serious about rooting out and destroying extremists. It's not.

[chiang mai]

Does the moderation community not believe this thread is now exhausted of sensible thought?

Not until your post!

Ha! A new ploy. Can't win an argument so want to resort to getting the thread shut down.

Hey, maybe you and your 2 mates can get together and burn some books you don't like.

Don't disturb, I'm busy watching AcaDaca, far more relevant and interesting.

[Seastallion]

CM

Have a read.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/11/al_qaeda_in_iraq_cla.php

I had the misfortune of having to attend the aftermath of this event.

I truly hope that you never have to witness such an event.

I know from what you have written in the past Jock that you intend well so please don't be offended when I ask, who is this outfit that you've posted in the link? Are they a well respected or even well known body or is it just somebody with a grudge that's set up a web link and produced a document that looks convincing and furthermore, what are they trying to achieve?

I do not actually know who the outfit are.

If you take the time to read it, you can draw your own conclusions. As someone who attended the carnage, I believe it is a fairly accurate report.

Permit me to assist with your queries.

1. The Long War Journal is a project of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/about.php

2. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a nonprofit group founded in the US. Their mission statement is provided here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd

3. Their executive team is shown here, with the notable presence of James Woolsey, former DCIA.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/executive-team

4. Their contributing Fellows can be found here:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about-fdd/team-overview/category/fellows

I have run across them before and they seem to be highly regarded by the Pentagon and have provided some contract work for the federal government.

It took me a lot less time to find out about them than it did to prepare this post.

Cheers.

Thanks for those links chuck.

One has only to see one of their "projects" to see that their agenda is not quite as unbiased as their mission statement claims;

"FDD's National Security Trip to Israel is a seven day trip for D.C.-area young professionals pursuing careers in national security. The twenty selected participants will enjoy conversations and high-level meetings with senior government officials and experts on a host of security issues. Topics may include: the strategic implications of a nuclear-armed Iran, Palestinian Islamist movements, cyber warfare and lawfare, and Israel's other manifold regional security concerns. These intimate conversations will be supplemented with hands-on activities with Israel's top national security practitioners.

Previous National Security Trips to Israel included private meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Ron Dermer (current Israeli Ambassador to the U.S.), Meir Dagan (former Director of the Mossad), Shaul Mofaz (former Minister of Defense), Mark Regev (international spokesman for the Prime Minister of Israel) and other senior Israeli government officials as well as Palestinian officials including then-Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Meetings also include conversations with former reporters and other policy influencers, such as Ehud Ya’ari (Channel 2 reporter),Avi Issacharoff, and renowned historian Bernard Lewis. Experiential trips have included a visit to Microsoft, the Iron Dome, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, the Security Barrier, Ramallah and Rawabi and tactical training at elite army installations....."

[arjunadawn]

Does UK have a jihad problem? Yes. Regarding the fatwa, my initial first impressions are correct, this fatwa is nonsense. The author of this fatwa has a manipulative, multi organizational structure in place that is basically furthering islam under the premise of moderation- by playing both sides of "the" argument. Usama Hassan's newspaper fatwa is self serving. http://www.5pillarz.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/hasan.jpg

This man has less association with a mosque or clerical position than he does advocacy and politics. A former radical he markets himself now as a moderate trying to steer muslims away from extremism. However, when you look closely at his associations and their collective acts you begin to paint a picture; for example: “gender segregation on university campuses... [the] manufactured controversy targeting Muslims in the UK" (cui bono). http://www.loonwatch.com/2013/12/exposed-quilliam-leadership-directly-involved-with-neocon-douglas-murrays-henry-jackson-society/

This man will not be respected by the UK muslims rather it is more likely he will be seen as an opportunist. He is a perfect example of what I refer to as the lawfare jihad.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2013/12/exposed-quilliam-leadership-directly-involved-with-neocon-douglas-murrays-henry-jackson-society/

http://www.5pillarz.com/2014/09/06/usama-hasans-fatwa-on-isis-can-be-applied-to-quilliam-foundation/

Hassan has ties with the Quilliam Foundation in the UK, which by looking at some unsavory links you may or may not approve of their aims. I do not because it is couched in deceit. http://spencerwatch.com/tag/quilliam-foundation/ Its reported that the Qulliam Foundation promotes Hassan in producing this utterly pointless fatwa.

I had thought it would be a matter of some more days before others with more in depth knowledge than me would be critiquing this intuitively vacant fatwa but I was mistaken; they are already doing it. http://mushypeas.org/fatwa-usama-hasan-quilliam-foundation/

Hassan is an activist (not a cleric) who's bread and butter is predicated upon the for-sale notion that he can sell moderation. He and his cohort of course had not been successful in soliciting moderation and that is why UK muslims are going to Syria.

http://sturdysarissa.com/2014/09/05/anti-is-fatwa-authored-by-usama-hasan/

The following excerpts are taken from a secret Muslim Brotherhood document entered into evidence in the USA regarding the Holy Land Foundation trial. While this document pertains to America the goal is global.

"In order for Islam and its Movement to become “a part of the homeland” in which it lives, “stable” in its land, “rooted” in the spirits and minds of its people, “enabled” in the live of its society and has firmly-established “organizations” on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain “the keys” and the tools of this process in carry out this grand mission as a “Civilization Jihadist” responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and - on top of them - the Muslim Brotherhood in this country." pg7/279

"The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying 282
the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal." pg 10/281-282 Sharia- The Threat to America- Team B Report

[H1w4yR1da]

Don't disturb, I'm busy watching AcaDaca, far more relevant and interesting.

I'll let you have this one.

I first saw AC/DC at the Victoria Apollo (I think) in 1977. Couldn't hear the teachers at school over the next week.

Shame someone with such excellent taste in music should be such a wet liberal. Carry on!

[Seastallion]

I have read this fatwa again and it will ultimately be useless. I suspect within the next week you will see increasingly more critique of this fatwa by jihadi watch groups. A lot of observers (IMO) will reject this fatwa. This fatwa contained two religious citations, both of which are equvicol.

In the first citation an early verse in the koran is cited: 5:1, and the second fairly close in Islamic history- 8:72. The koran is based on "abrogation." This means that for every part of the koran any later part that addresses even remotely the same issue supersedes the former. There are 114 suras in the koran- a lot of wiggle room here and the jihadis will see this immediately.

Also, it contains a flagrant lie, one which reveals who the intended audience really is. "Muslims" have no capacity to be signatories to the Geneva Convention, etc. This fatwa cannot withstand the scrutiny of even cursory review.

https://makkah.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/fatwa-against-isis.jpg

http://www.islam-watch.org/authors/165-jon-mc/1564-uk-imams-fatwa-against-british-muslims-joining-the-islamic-state.html

I think your interpretation of the Geneva Convention part of the fatwa is quite wrong and portrays the fatwa incorrectly.

It speaks in the context of international agreements that everyone has signed up to, including Muslims. I would be quite correct to say that Christians have signed the Convention too. Look at the 196 signatory countries. There are many Muslim countries on that list.

This is quite clear to all but those that prefer the fatwa to not be an example of how there is NOT a deafening silence that condones IS. There is no flagrant lie unless the lie is when an Islamaphobe deliberately tries to misinterpret the fatwa.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Seastallion

[JockPieandBeans]

Does the moderation community not believe this thread is now exhausted of sensible thought?

Not until your post!

Ha! A new ploy. Can't win an argument so want to resort to getting the thread shut down.

Hey, maybe you and your 2 mates can get together and burn some books you don't like.

Don't disturb, I'm busy watching AcaDaca, far more relevant and interesting.

CM

I think this is rather telling.

10 minutes ago I asked you to comment on a link I provided for you. That link was about the massacre of Coptic Christians in Baghdad.

Your silence says everything. Whatever respect you might have had, like Elvis, has left the building.

You like this CM ?

One day I really hope I have the pleasure of seeing you in an orange boiler suit.