Comments: Some Thoughts on the London Attacks [Archive]

View Full Version : Comments: Some Thoughts on the London Attacks

Anonymous

9th July 2005, 11:14 PM

Assalam alaikum,

This response does not neccessarily mean that I support what recently occured in London, but I wanted to make a number of points. 

Many British people did protest and demonstrate at what has occured in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere, this is very commendable. We should respect good characteristics where ever we find them, but realistically what percentage of the population demonstrated and what percentage is actually really against the current goings on. ? 15% 20% a little more perhaps.? The recent elections in the Uk was an opportunity for******* them to dispel the tyrant and his government had they done so it would have shown the world that the British people are against the murder rape and oppression of muslims. The fact that Blair is back in power shows that although they may have cared they didnt care enough, or that the murder of muslims was just one issue that was considered along with health care immigration education etc, so by itself wasnt enough for them to vote against him. This is a democratic country so the responsibility is shared by the population. I too believe that the passport or visa is a contract that protects our wealth and honour as well as theirs, and unless these brothers(if they were brothers)*******swam the channel or hang glided in they did have some form of passport or visa to enter. So may be a contravention of contract.. So was 9/11 also a contravention of contract. ? Can I refer you to Shiekh Uqlas(ra) clarification of what occured in America. Did he miss this issue, forget something. I had the impression that 9/11 was halaal. Surely Surely the people and government knew that if they attack people elsewhere then they will be attacked, it perhaps would be bad to let them live in security whilst the muslim world is suffering. Their security cannot be guaranteed until they vacate muslim land, surely thats only natural and fair. I will not condemn these brothers (if it was in fact muslims). I think people should stop falling over themselves to condemn this attack, it is a very small and irrelevant occurance in comparison to what muslims have suffered. 

I am not a shiekh, and realise that I have alot to learn, I have simply given you my opinion. If there is any response you can provide me with to increase my understanding then please do

http://www.islamicawakening.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=1236

Anonymous

10th July 2005, 01:12 AM

Asalam alekun !

This article is thought provoking but the timing to me it is very wrong.Comparing Britain******* to country like Egypt or France we would realise that a lot things like allowing muslim woman to wear hijab in schools or by policeman are not allowed by these countries.

I believe a period of mourning should be observed.

If at all a&n article like this will be published on the net.

Ma salam.

Abdulwaheed Badmus.

Anonymous

10th July 2005, 06:26 AM

Alhamdulillaah!

a very well thought-out and written artcle...may this serve in your mizaan

of hasanaat...

Anonymous

10th July 2005, 08:40 AM

The article contains more paragraphs condemning Blair, et. al., than the Jihadist bombers. Why is that so typical?

Anonymous

10th July 2005, 12:16 PM

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

Dear Sir,

Your article "Some Thoughts on the London Attacks" was really beneficient for every muslim to be read and maintained carefully in ligh of ilm.

May Allah(swt) make your pen the strongest.

Best Regards.

gag order

11th July 2005, 03:25 AM

ruffling the feathers of the*******muslim community in the UK will not reveal the terrorists. to find them one has to look*******in the place where they were first created,

in iraq, in afghanistan

so in a nutshell*******the war from over there has now come over here making london look just a teeny little bit like a*******bombed out district*******in fallujah. 

blair is playing a dangerous game of cat and mouse with the terrorists*******it seems to me he intended to show off at G8 summit by announcing that the security services had foiled an attack, foil? more like fail to stop one!

what about the*******safety of the*******public he obviously doesnt care if he did he wouldnt be playing these wargames on the streets of london.

Anonymous

11th July 2005, 03:16 PM

Blair should take this time to reflect, and aim to move forwards, not backwards.******* Of course, him being what*******he is, it wont happen.******* 

Watch out the world, here he comes with his pal Bush.******* May Allaah preserve us all.

Anonymous

11th July 2005, 07:43 PM

The Muslims who enter into this country through the legal process of UK, do so as individuals.******* The religion is out of the official UK contract of security. This contract is same across the board.



A Muslim from Pakistan enters into this country not as a Muslim but an individual citizen of Pakistan. Same applies to a non-Muslim from Russia for example.******* So, can anyone provide some proof as to why in the case of a Muslim - the contract should be treated differently, i.e. his religion (Islam) becomes a factor of the contract as far as the UK is concerned?

slaveofLord_22

12th July 2005, 09:09 PM

Assalamu alaikum .....

Ya Abaa Zubair....its easy posting articles....but why is that u have all abandoned the crux of the matter and held onto the external matters.....

Reality is far from whats beind done by muslims.....until u leave those lands .....ur words have not the worth of an ant's eye.....

Anonymous

13th July 2005, 01:15 AM

all i can say is that*******people are always going to respond negativily when cluster bombs and depleted uraniam are what they dealing with. More relatiation and revenge is not going to do anything. All criminal should be brought to justice including those who kill systamaticly this would include the Lair and*******Bush who are responsible for the death of thousands of civilians in Iraq for that charge they are wanted. More free transperent government in the Arab world would also go a long way in solving many problems in that part of the world.

abuzakarya

13th July 2005, 06:16 PM

As-salamu alaykum. Jazakallah khayr, brother Abuz Zubair for that thought provoking article. You are a rare commodity amongst the English-speaking Muslims - a person who combines the qualities of knowledge, intelligence and awareness of current affairs. When the bombings happened, I immediately wondered: what are Abuz Zubair's thoughts on this matter? I agree with some of what has been said but there are some matters which I think need further thought.



I think we should be careful not be carried away with the media hype about the "Blitz spirit" and so on and end up exaggerating our praise for the Londoners caught up in this incident - I didn't see any smiling faces - what the cameras show is pandemonium, terror and London grinding to a halt within hours. With respect to the efforts in eradicating poverty, these are limited to*******a handful of people and the proof is that despite the utter failure of the G8 to address this matter, noone cares anymore.



The "Romans" may well resist the oppression of kings upon themselves but apparently have no qualms about imposing it upon others! What we Muslims in Britain need to wake up to is that there is no massive public support for reforming the anti-terror laws and Babar's case is supported by only a handful of kuffar - by and large, there will be no tears shed if he is sent to America. Our cooperation wih British libertarians has blinded us to the difficult-to-swallow truth. Like it or not the newspapers don't just mould public opinion - they reflect it too. We also need to face facts about the anti-war marches - a significant and vocal minority opposed the war but it is undeniable that the British army has full support for its evil actions in Afghanistan and Iraq among the British public. As a previous commentator has said, they didn't care enough to vote Blair out, did they? When they voted him in, it was explicit that he would continue the war even though the voter who voted for him may have been uncomfortable with this fact.



The issue is not whether the British deserved what happened. Noone would wish something like this upon any human, Muslim or kafir. The point is that this was inevitable - bin Ladin's words must echo in the ears of the Western leaders: "If you bomb our cities, we will bomb yours." We all know Islam prohibits attacks upon non-combatants but you know very well that, despite the dissenting opinions you quoted, "collateral damage" is permitted in Islamic warfare...why do we want to the Islamic fighters to fight with one hand tied behind their backs? Is anyone aware of any technology which selectively targets only fighters******* or enemy infrastructure sparing all civilians selectively? We may as well hand over the keys to all the Muslim lands to the Americans if we adhere to this. It is also well-known that the laws of Qisas permit equal and exact retaliation in warfare even if that means enacting what is usually impermissible. 



These attacks could equally be interpreted as attacks on the infrastructure of London, not civilians (especially since the death toll*******was relatively light)*******and their likely effect is a weakening of the resolve of the British people to continue the ruthless slaughter in Iraq eventually; this is what happened in Spain and we are seeing this in America as more and more Americans die in Iraq. Already, people are questioning Britain's involvement in America's Crusade against Iraq.*******Let us remember this is a war: "War on Terror", "War on Iraq"; there are two sides. Why do the British imagine their opponents won't fight back?



Regarding the "pact of security", this has always puzzled me. Where is this pact? What is its text? Who are its signatories? What are its terms? I was born in the UK - I don't remember making any pact with anyone; moreover, isn't a pact a mutual contract? I don't see how something imposed on us by accident of birth has much validity especially when the terms are so one-sided. I can see how an asylum seeker or immigrant may have an implicit understanding of security with the host country. However, has Britain kept its side of this "pact"? Are the Muslims free and secure? Ask Babar Ahmad; ask Abu Qataadah? Is a pact where one side repeatedly breaks the terms a valid one?



Finally I want to comment on "what we (Muslims) have been building for decades". What have we been building in the lands of the kuffar and, more to the point, why? Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wa sallam said, "I disavow myself of any Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen.”*******(sahih, Abu Dawood). Our presence here has caused so many of the Ummah to go astray and there is love in our hearts for them*******because we dwell amongst those who practise shirk and, yet, have the upper hand over us. We are hated by them; they attack us daily, spit and swear at us in the streets and we are busy making comfortable lives for ourselves here.



This is just some food for thought. It doesn't mean I condone the bombings but I want to just express some opinions which are widely known but rarely spoken. I don't claim that I am right - I may be mistaken in much of the above. Brother Abu Zubair can undoubtedly correct my errors. I would be interesting to hear the rebuttal of some of these views from an Islamic perspective.

Anonymous

14th July 2005, 07:19 PM

As-Salaam Aleikum,

There are a lot of issues that were left out in Abu Zubair article. We should look at the*******matter *******in a balanced postion. We should not jump into conclusion regarding the developments in London.

I don`t find any reason why we should give credits to these people who do not understand what sincerity means. These people i.e britons suffer from acute hypocricy and any thing they say or show should be thrown into the dust bin.

*******

I believe that the muslims in the west have adopted the saying "when you are Rome, do what the romans do". We go into the extend of praising these mujrimoon just to show solidarity at this time. Muslim*******in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Palestinia are being butchered daily yet we sit and write articles on London attacks with ease.

*******

The government of uk stands firm due to the weight given to them by their citizens. These people gave*******Blair the mandate to execute *******all sort of actions and they are greatly pleased by what Blair does. Brother Abu Zubair should not separate between the government and the people who chose them so as *******to run their affairs. We should not be apologetic when things change. 

We should put our efforts*******in helping muslims who suffer at the hands of the kaafirs than engaging ourselves in issues that would not bring fruits.

*******As regards to the attacks, i don`t know what to say.

Allaah know best .

Anonymous

14th July 2005, 11:07 PM

salaamoe 3aleikoem,

I agree with the first posted opinion. The people of Britain had the chance at time of elections to choose another leader if they find Blair a liar, a hypocrite etc etc. But they stood behind him as one man (democracy !!!!) showing that they support him and that the demonstrations against war in Afghan and Iraq was .....what? hypocrisy?

There are so many tears of innocent women, children, old men in Iraq, Afgahn, and, and (you name it) because of leadership that promotes injustice, theft, war and endless suffering. It can not be that it goes on and on and on and people do nothing, just sit around and hope that one day Allah swt*******will make things better. This is impossible.

The hadiths you mentioned*******, I find, are a little out of context. But I am no scholar, so maybe I am wrong.

Anonymous

17th July 2005, 09:34 AM

Salaam Alaikum,

Shaykh Ibn Al-'Uthaymeen rahimahullaah said it is permissible to kill the women and children of the kuffaar in retaliation, Uqubah bil-Mithl.

Anonymous

17th July 2005, 05:29 PM

FAO Abu Omar As-Sayf

Please provide a reference (tape or book in Arabic*******) for what you say regarding Shaikh ibnul Utahimeen's position.

Anonymous

17th July 2005, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Anonymous

FAO Abu Omar As-Sayf

Please provide a reference (tape or book in Arabic*******) for what you say regarding Shaikh ibnul Utahimeen's position. 



Refer to the side "B" from the third cassette of Kitāb al-Jihād from Sharh Bulūgh al-Marām. Or download it from the Shaykh’s own website: http://www.binothaimeen.com/sound/snd/a0020/A0020-3B.rm. Brothers and sisters are requested to download this before it is taken down by the Enemies of Allāh. Starting at time frame 29:09.Taken from Tibyan Publications book: "The Clarification Regarding Intentionally Targetting Women and Children."

Anonymous

18th July 2005, 06:48 PM

abuzakarya wrote:





-"Our cooperation wih British libertarians has blinded us to the difficult-to-swallow truth. Like it or not the newspapers don't just mould public opinion - they reflect it too. We also need to face facts about the anti-war marches - a significant and vocal minority opposed the war but it is undeniable that the British army has full support for its evil actions in Afghanistan and Iraq among the British public."-





How many Iraqi non-combattants*******have been killed by the British the past two years and how many by Al-Zarqawi and his followers or Al Sadr and his'? The attack on Iraq was wrong, about*******50% of *******the Brits were against it. So about 50% of the dead and wounded in London were against the attack on Iraq. Some of the dead and wounded actually were mulsims. If the attackers would have targeted militairy or governmental buildings and accidently killed civilians*******it would have been a different matter. Logic*******isn't one of your stronger points.





-"The point is that this was inevitable - bin Ladin's words must echo in the ears of the Western leaders: "If you bomb our cities, we will bomb yours." We all know Islam prohibits attacks upon non-combatants but you know very well that, despite the dissenting opinions you quoted, "collateral damage" is permitted in Islamic warfare...why do we want to the Islamic fighters to fight with one hand tied behind their backs? "-





The difference is that civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan occured through faulty*******and sometimes careless targetting while Bin Laden deliberately targets civilians and doesn't care that muslims are the victims as well. 'Smart weapons' were partially designed to limit 'collateral damage'.





-"Is anyone aware of any technology which selectively targets only fighters******* or enemy infrastructure sparing all civilians selectively"-



JDAM, AGM65 Maverick, Hellfire, TOW, the various IR-Laser targetting pods, to name but a few of these developments. They are intended to hit only what you aim for and they work a lot better than the old fashioned area destruction tactics. They are not infallible, things do go wrong and if you aim for the*******wrong target it will destroy that too. Therefore, in a way they remain rather dumb weapons.





-"These attacks could equally be interpreted as attacks on the infrastructure of London, not civilians (especially since the death toll was relatively light) and their likely effect is a weakening of the resolve of the British people to continue the ruthless slaughter in Iraq eventually; this is what happened in Spain and we are seeing this in America as more and more Americans die in Iraq. Already, people are questioning Britain's involvement in America's Crusade against Iraq."-





So they*******just wanted to blow up a bus or train, destroy infrastructure. It was*******an unfortunate accident, tough luck that they were full of passengers? What a load of utter rubbish. Who are you trying to fool? You also distourt the truth abouts Spain's withdrawal. The socalist party had promised to withdraw the troops long before Madrid, if they were elected.*******The Spanish were angry too by the lying of the government*******blaming*******ETA initially for the bombs. So Zapatera, the socialist, became premier and cept his promise.





-"Why do the British imagine their opponents won't fight back?"-





You call blowing up civilians (as also happens daily in Iraq) fighting? They blow themselves up for which you need courage, yet they hardly*******fight*******the soldiers which is cowardly





-"Muslim in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Palestinia are being butchered daily yet we sit and write articles on London attacks with ease."-





Yes, as often as not they are actually butchered by their own 'brothers'. Who needs enemies with 'family' like that? You also try to give the impression as if it is all a plot to harm*******muslims, destroy islam. It is utterly rediculous. As if Russians, Indians, Americans,*******Europeans and Israel are all in agreement and devilishly work together to erradicate Islam from the planet. 





I almost wish it was true considering the lunacy I*******read here, the bombings and slaughter in the name of Allah or the Suni -Shi'ite or other interpretation of Allah's word. You really haven't learned anything from the stupid and bloody past, ours or yours.





Elsewhere Salahudin wrote,



-"The aim of this struggle is to remove the obstacles that prevent Islam from reaching the nations and the peoples. These obstacles are reflected in the regimes, the states and their material faculties, that stand as a formidable obstacle in the face of Islam’s endeavour to reach people"-





Perhaps we already have an idea what it means and we don't want to be reached. I read the Quraan and it's awful and boringly repititious, I don't want it.





-"Initiating the Kuffar with the material struggle is not an optional matter and it must not be open to pliancy if the Kuffar were to remain as such and if they were to reject the Da'awah, or if Islam were prevented from being conveyed to people so that they could choose whether to embrace it or maintain their religion and submit to its authority, for there is no compulsion in religion."-





Fine, no compulsion. Thank you, I remain an atheist and you do what you want, bye.





A bit further,



-"However, it must be made clear that fighting neither takes place before conveying the Da’awah to Islam to the Kuffar, nor before ordering them to embrace Islam. If they refuse, they should be ordered to submit to the Islamic State and to pay the Jizyah to the State. If they refuse to embrace Islam and refuse to pay the Jizyah and to submit to the Islamic State, then they must be fought."-





Ehh...what happened to the 'no compulsion' bit? Ordering them to embrace islam? You are not even trying to be subtile.





-"The Kafir West realised in the early days the intellectual faculty of Islam and its effectiveness in the hearts of those who embrace it, as well as its ability to shape their personalities and smelt them into its crucible."-





Yes, in the past you had great men, thinkers like Ali Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd and many others. But that was a long time ago and little of their intellectuality can be found among people like you who are devoid of logic and knowledge of history. People who are still sulking about the crusades, our 'dumb' and bloody (idiot) period. 





-"In the middle of last August, a report was issued in the United States, known as The Stratfor Report, in which it was mentioned that the American persistence to strike Iraq despite the objection of most of the world’s states was aimed to destabilise the Islamic psyche and inflict it with depression and despair, giving it a deep sense of incapacity to threaten the American interests in the region, be it in the immediate future or in the long term, or to oppose the political, economic or cultural Americanisation projects. Less than a week ago, the former director of the CIA James Woolsey said during a debate organised by the Students’ Union at Oxford University under the theme of “War On Terrorism” that the United States would work towards changing the ruling systems in all the Arab states, starting with Saudi Arabia and Egypt, once Iraq has been dealt with. He added: “The war that the United States intends to launch against Iraq is not necessarily linked to the weapons of mass destruction issue, it is rather a springboard for the spread of Democracy in the Arab and Islamic worlds.” The meaning is clear from choosing Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, despite the fact that they are the most loyal of the Arab regimes protecting and executing American policy in the region."-





Interesting, can you substantiate*******these accusations and statements?*******Otherwise it remains unconvincing propaganda.

Anonymous

19th July 2005, 05:02 PM

You claim that Islam is just and peaceful, but look what has been done in the name of Mohammed.******* You ought to spend less time "preaching to the choir" and condemn the the low-life scum that kill inncocents as if their actions were righteous.******* Why have Islamic leaders not issued fatwehs against such warmongers as Osama bin Ladin?******* You claim that Islam is commited to fairness and Justice, then tell me why every government that is headed by Islamic leaders*******are despotic,*******theocratic, dictatorships?******* If******* Islam is so wonderful why not give it a chance under deomcracy, where people could chose to worship, or not,*******itstead of being forced to follow Islamic law.******* Surely, you are not afriad that people might not want to follow Islam?**************True freedom came to our world not thru religous dogma, but thru atheistic secularism.**************You have completely distorted the facts when it come to Blair and Bush, out of how many millions of Muslims have been*******imprisoned because of suspicion? About 100*******in 1,000,000.******* Your statements are reactionary.******* If you think Islam is*******so grand than why do you chose to live in Britian than one of your great Islamic theocracies?******* By the way,*******I thought I should let you know that this web-site is seen as a cover for Islamic terrorist propaganda.

Paul Willis.**************

Anonymous

19th July 2005, 07:06 PM

You claim that Islam is just and peaceful, but look what has been done in the name of Mohammed

Very much the way you claim that Western values root from justice, peace and respect for all, yet look what's been done in the name of Democracy in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

You ought to spend less time "preaching to the choir" and condemn the the low-life scum that kill inncocents as if their actions were righteous

Indeed! Just as you too, ought to spend less time preaching us your ‘Democracy’ and ‘way of life’, and condemn the massacre of thousands of Iraqi children long before 9/11, which Albright had the nerve to call ‘a price worth it’! It’s time that you root out the scums you have placed in your parliaments who have been unleashing wars on us for decades.

Why have Islamic leaders not issued fatwehs against such warmongers as Osama bin Ladin?

And why haven’t the Americans booted Bush out of the White House, or Blair out of the parliament?

You claim that Islam is commited to fairness and Justice, then tell me why every government that is headed by Islamic leaders are despotic, theocratic, dictatorships?

Indeed! Ask the leaders of your own supreme Western civilisation, why do they place these despotic rulers in place. Saddam was a CIA agent remember? And if you were to reform Egypt and other middle-eastern countries, you wouldn’t have any place to render your ‘unlawful combatants’ for torture then, would you?

If Islam is so wonderful why not give it a chance under deomcracy, where people could chose to worship, or not, itstead of being forced to follow Islamic law

If Western Civilisation is so wonderful, why not give it a chance under Islam, where people could chose to worship, or not, instead of being forced to follow Western Laws?

Surely, you are not afriad that people might not want to follow Islam?

So why then you should be afraid that the people in the middle east do not want to follow your way of life?

True freedom came to our world not thru religous dogma, but thru atheistic secularism

True freedom came to our world 1400 years ago when you and your ancestors were still living in the Dark Ages. Atheistic secularism which you promote, and as we have witnessed, has waged war on civil liberties in countries such a France where a Muslim woman must choose between a headscarf and her education. Welcome to Medieval Secular Atheist France!

You have completely distorted the facts when it come to Blair and Bush, out of how many millions of Muslims have been imprisoned because of suspicion? About 100 in 1,000,000

1 unjust detention is 1,000,000 unjust detentions. Injustice anywhere, is injustice everywhere. We as Muslims will not rest until every single person is freed from unjust detention.

If you think Islam is so grand than why do you chose to live in Britian than one of your great Islamic theocracies

Because there is no where else for us to live. Our countries our controlled by Western puppets who serve Britain’s interests before ours. You want them there. You cannot honestly believe that Bush wants democracy in Saudi Arabia at the expense of the ruling Saud family?

By the way, I thought I should let you know that this web-site is seen as a cover for Islamic terrorist propaganda

Hell with you, and hell with what you think! We will not be pressurised by your threats. We have a 1400 long history of civil rights struggles, before you even knew what ‘rights’ were. We will fight for our rights in this country by taking all the legitimate routes available until bigots like you are defeated.

Anonymous

21st July 2005, 09:34 PM

The people of Madrid didn't get a chance to vote, so if people of the UK desired it for not voting Blair out why did the people of Madrid not get their chance to vote out their goverment (which they were going to do anyway).

I am confused as to why hatred only seems to be directed towards blair and bush for the invasion of Iraq, but no for any of the suicide bombers that are purposely blowing up the innocent civilans and the people THEY voted for.

Please can you explain this and my knowledge is not very good.

Anonymous

21st July 2005, 09:51 PM

"If Western Civilisation is so wonderful, why not give it a chance under Islam, where people could chose to worship, or not, instead of being forced to follow Western Laws?"

Surely people in the UK are given more freedom to practise their religion than non-muslims living in Islamic states.

"Because there is no where else for us to live. Our countries our controlled by Western puppets who serve Britain’s interests before ours"

This seems to be the easy way out for wanting a better standard of living. There is nothing wrong in admitting that you have more freedom and money in west then you would in pakistan for example. I know many pakistani's who always complaining about the West but then are 1000's tried to get into the country pretending to be Afgans asylum seekers. Then try to get their whole family and relatives in. 

This doesn't bother me but you shouldn't be so one sided. People won't think your selling out because you prefer life in the UK.

Anonymous

23rd July 2005, 01:03 AM

The British people are not, as stated in the replies here, uncaring about what is happening in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan etc... it is that the majority of people here are not aware of what is happening - through no fault of their own! If they were aware, they would help as seen with the Tsunami

Why punish people for ignorance? Why not educate them through peaceful means rather than bomb them? Tell them what is happening around the world.

Anonymous

26th July 2005, 02:18 PM

This is an interesting board and much more mature in tone******* of conversation and knowledgable in matters of Islam and politics alike than most.

About the British election: remember that the alternative Conservative or Liberal governements we could have elected would both also have supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Blair is not a tyrant. We have had tyrannical government in Britain before, indeed until 1688 we did, and religious persecution of, for example, Catholics in England during this time involved tens of thousands of innocents horribly tortured, burned and hanged in public places for their religious beliefs. This is tyranny. ID cards and 14 day detention for investigation before arrest is not on the same scale.

We could all use some perspective here. It is also worth remembering that for Britain, perhaps unlike the Bush government in this regard, does not care what the religion of its opponents in politics or war may be.******* It is not a Christian but a secular country in which freedom of religion has been enshrined in law and supported socially (unlike in the US, though freedom of religion is a constitutional right) for a century.

Historically this comes from the movement called the Englightenment, from which it is argued that it is possible to be morally good without personal profession of religion and belief in God.

Secondly that knowledge of religion is not a good substitute for a knowledge of other things: such as statecraft, warmaking, science or philosophy. Religion knows best matters of religion: matters of religion are not the same as all matters of knowledge or action in human society. Religion cannot teach us what best to wear, nor how to build a good house, nor how to gather a good harvest.

Much blame for the current conflict should be attached to the leaders of religiously muslim countries for their pandering to the greed, for political power and economic wealth, of western states.******* Not only the one who bribes but the one who allows himself to be bribed is culpable for corruption.

Yes, in equal measure blame must attach itself to the greedy themselves. The only wise path to proceed is not to think on things that are hidden from us, or out of our own personal control but to deal with the things we can ourselves deal with: to our own conduct in the world as good men according to our conscience, or to a good understanding of what is required of us by God for ourselves, and not for what we can force others to believe or do.

Anonymous

26th July 2005, 03:45 PM

Salaam Alaikum
The first article that started this off was an analysis driven by it's author's clear goodness. The peaceful direction it took, the compassion it showed, give us an insight into an approach to today's problems that is sadly missing amongst the unthinking in our midst.
For those who seek to excuse the murder of innocents in London, I ask them to examine their consciences and dig deep into their hearts to explian why an innocent death in London is a good thing, while an innocent death in Iraq, Chechnya, Palestine etc etc etc are not. We all, as human beings, faithful or kaafir, know that a murdered child is an abomination at any time of crisis in the history and future of our world.
I live in London. OK, for those of you who want to murder me, maybe there is a tenuous justification: I am a man, I live here and hold, among others, a UK passsport, and so therefore, I am responsible for supporting Blair. The fact that I am extremely anti-Blair, that I did not vote in disgust at the appaling state of the system here (tell, me, if they had voted for anyone other than Blair in this system, who would have got in? Howard, more callous and warmongering than TB). But if my small, 1 year-old child should die in a Jihadi bomb on a train or bus, why is that good for the world? Why is it better than a small child killed by the evil bombs of Bush and Blair in Fallujah or Bagdhad?
Like the author of the first article, you and I know it is not good, in either place or at any time. Wise, loving believers will follow the path of peace among all peoples of the world, because they know deep in their confused hearts that this is the way Allah (peace be upon him) wants his children to live.
Harness your angers, you fiery youth, harness the blessing of your brain, a powerful gift, to work towards peaceful solutions to death and destruction, not towards bringing more death and destruction. Otherwise you are no different than those American right wing bombers (Oklahoma), or the Nazi gas chamber perpertrators, or any other of the evil faces of the good man that Allah (peace be upon him) made you when you, too were an innocent child.
That child remains in you as you grow older, in the form of a good heart. Harness goodness, do not spread wickedness and weak understanding. It is easier to jump to indignation than to strive hard towards understanding and constructive change. Take the hard route and be rewarded a thousand times over in the future.
Peace among all the peoples of the world.

Anonymous

26th July 2005, 06:43 PM

Would*******a British Muslim*******be so concerned (dont know if that is the right term) about these incidents if we were living abroad, i.e. in a Muslim country? 

Or does living in this country among the kuffaar make us more*******aware of these things, and more conscious about whether it is 'right' or not?

This incident is a very small one to say the least.******* Its big for British Muslims, as we will face the results from the people.******* Its big, because it will now affect us.

Look at the big picture, the global picture.******* Things are far far worse in other places, indeed, are common occurences.******* Yet, these things arent publicised or talked about as much as small incidents in the west are.

Has Muslim blood become cheap in our own eyes too?

*******

gag order

27th July 2005, 12:49 AM

i think its a big deal only becos of the media, that time honoured institution that tells us what to think, who to hate for instance and who to love. they pass off their opinions as "facts" and call it "news"

for instance more people were killed in the bombing in egypt recently, but*******lack of relentless media coverage of that means that nobody really gives a damn*******- therefore no outrage felt. 

likewise

the genocide in fallujah, becos there is no coverage of it means that 50+ people dying in london is more important than the thousands that have been killed in fallujah

if 7/7 had been reported only for 5mins there would be no outrage*******or "backlash" the only outrage and "backlash" ive felt is from the media and the government.*******

what we have to remember is to be OBJECTIVE that in a war - the "war on terror" both sides will try to inflict damage on each other. 

the west uses iraqis to*******kill other iraqis similarly alqaida uses british citizens to*******kill other british citizens - tables have turned!

its a simple case of "retaliation in the like manner" when the west does it on purpose its called "collateral damage" when the east does it on purpose its called terrorism either way the resultant effect is the same, people who are not participants in*******the war are killed on both sides.**************

and what of the muslims? anyone of us could become victims, not only are there terrorist bombs to contend with but also the "backlash", and the new "judge dredd" style police who can shoot you dead on the slightest pretext as we have seen already!

**************

*******