Politics & Stuff

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

• Never said it was. You must have misunderstood me. It's in both Sahih Hadith though and it's 100% percent authentic in all schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. You just choose to ignore it, but your views will be considered heretical.
• I actually agree with you. It hasn't existed since the fall of the Ottomman empire in the early 1900's. What is practiced in Saudi Arabia is only a partial version of Sharia.

Exactly, simply because both are just political acts . Dude, Muslims have the Quran. The "laws" are in the Quran not in a hadith. All Muslim Scholars know that by the way.

[Stingray 9,441]

I don't know how admins and mods see it, but as I see it, discussing the Qur'an is somewhat related to the conflict, even if it falls more into religious discussion than political one. I haven't had much contact with dogmas from Islamism so I find it really fascinating. I would like to keep reading the things you guys bring up if you don't mind. Even if there would be the need for continuing in another proper thread.

As long as it's done in a well-mannered and peaceful fashion I don't see why it should be a problem.

The problem is that if people take scriptures literally, you get into a moral slipperry slope - some philosophers make the statement that all three monotheïstische religiositeit bear the seed of genocide if it is used as a literally guideance for contemporary actions

For example in the Old Testament:

"Deuteronomium 20:17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded. " This concerns the Israeli/Palestinian region for example.

"Numeri 2-3 And Israel vowed a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will indeed give this people into my hand, then I will devote their cities to destruction.” 3 And the Lord heeded the voice of Israel and gave over the Canaanites, and they devoted them and their cities to destruction."

A lot of Israeli scholars also think there is evidence of succesfull cohabitation in the region of the present jews and arabs before the incoming Zionist ideas . It gives reason to believe the conflict is much more political than religious. It seems to have crystalised into a religious debate by the upcoming of Hamas as counterforce for the much more secular PLO. Some claim the origin of this lies in the early support of the brotherhood of Islam by the US and UK as a counterstrategy for communism.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_Game

This strategy to counter nationalistic organisations by supporting a religious countermovement is described by Robert Dreyfuss as playing 'The Devils Game' ( the Devil's Game is really a thought provoking gook by an acclaimed research journalist). Ironically, Just as has happened with for example Osama Bin Laden - it is a tactic prone to bite you in the butt after a while.

Just to paste out of the wiki ( im too lazy to go into the book and type it over):

'The author also discusses how the Israeli government supported the growth of Hamas as a tool to fight the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The PLO was always viewed as the major threat to Israel, because they were the more educated and secular Palestinians. They had fought a very effective campaign against Israel, whereas Hamas has had very limited success. The book predicts the current Palestinian crisis where (PLO) Fatah and Hamas militias battled each other in the streets of Gaza and in other parts of Palestine for dominance over the Palestinian people. Dreyfuss claims that the political and economic isolation of Hamas is currently suffocating the new government. Gaza is running out of gas and public workers have not been paid for many months. This has been a strategic victory for Israel in a classic example of divide and conquer.'

The release out of jail of one of the head figures - sjeik Ahmad Yassin, who was sententies for life (why was he suddenly released by Netanyahu? It begs the question really seeing the context of the peace process then. Why would you inserties a radical back into that environment), in 1997 really polarised the situation further. Remember, also on Israeli Side there was the Rabin killing in 1995. So the problem really roots much deeper than just religious Hamas extremists shooting rockets. This situation needs much more context than this.

It may or may not be true, but the head guys of Shin Bet (security service) sure make a gripping testimonial in the award winning documentary 'The Gatekeepers' implicitly acknowledging this strategy of dividend and conquer. If anything this documentary is also quite something to watch ....

http://putlocker.is/watch-the-gatekeepers-online-free-putlocker.html

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Exactly, simply because both are just political acts . Dude, Muslims have the Quran. The "laws" are in the Quran not in a hadith. All Muslim Scholars know that by the way.

The laws are in both the Qur'an and Hadith. For example, how do Muslims know to pray 5 times a day? This is one of the most important tenants. This is gotten from the Hadiths and not the Qur'an. It's impossible to (1) Understand Islam (2) Understand some parts of the Qur'an without the Hadith.

Are you a Qur'an only Muslim? I know some Muslims who are but if you reject some Hadith, then you also have to reject the Hadith that speaks about praying 5 times a day, or how much to pay for Zakat and so on. It is considered heretical by any reputable scholar worth his salt.

I completely agree with you about some Imam's, the Saudi's and Islamic scholars using Islam for their benefit but the reality is Islam has always been a highly politicized religion.

For instance in the Qur'an, you will never see a verse like "give unto Caeser what is Caeser's and give unto God what is God's" . In Islam, the concept of separation of Church and state simply doesn't exist and this a huge problem in the ME.

[Dion 2,476]

The problem is that if people take scriptures literally, you get into a moral slipperry slope - some philosophers make the statement that all three monotheïstische religiositeit bear the seed of genocide if it is used as a literally guideance for contemporary actions

For example in the Old Testament:

"Deuteronomium 20:17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded. " This concerns the Israeli/Palestinian region for example.

"Numeri 2-3 And Israel vowed a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will indeed give this people into my hand, then I will devote their cities to destruction.” 3 And the Lord heeded the voice of Israel and gave over the Canaanites, and they devoted them and their cities to destruction."

A lot of Israeli scholars also think there is evidence of succesfull cohabitation in the region of the present jews and arabs before the incoming Zionist ideas . It gives reason to believe the conflict is much more political than religious. It seems to have crystalised into a religious debate by the upcoming of Hamas as counterforce for the much more secular PLO. Some claim the origin of this lies in the early support of the brotherhood of Islam by the US and UK as a counterstrategy for communism.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_Game

This strategy to counter nationalistic organisations by supporting a religious countermovement is described by Robert Dreyfuss as playing 'The Devils Game' ( the Devil's Game is really a thought provoking gook by an acclaimed research journalist). Ironically, Just as has happened with for example Osama Bin Laden - it is a tactic prone to bite you in the butt after a while.

Just to paste out of the wiki ( im too lazy to go into the book and type it over):

'The author also discusses how the Israeli government supported the growth of Hamas as a tool to fight the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The PLO was always viewed as the major threat to Israel, because they were the more educated and secular Palestinians. They had fought a very effective campaign against Israel, whereas Hamas has had very limited success. The book predicts the current Palestinian crisis where (PLO) Fatah and Hamas militias battled each other in the streets of Gaza and in other parts of Palestine for dominance over the Palestinian people. Dreyfuss claims that the political and economic isolation of Hamas is currently suffocating the new government. Gaza is running out of gas and public workers have not been paid for many months. This has been a strategic victory for Israel in a classic example of divide and conquer.'

The release out of jail of one of the head figures - sjeik Ahmad Yassin, who was sententies for life (why was he suddenly released by Netanyahu? It begs the question really seeing the context of the peace process then. Why would you inserties a radical back into that environment), in 1997 really polarised the situation further. Remember, also on Israeli Side there was the Rabin killing in 1995. So the problem really roots much deeper than just religious Hamas extremists shooting rockets. This situation needs much more context than this.

It may or may not be true, but the head guys of Shin Bet (security service) sure make a gripping testimonial in the award winning documentary 'The Gatekeepers' implicitly acknowledging this strategy of dividend and conquer. If anything this documentary is also quite something to watch ....

http://putlocker.is/watch-the-gatekeepers-online-free-putlocker.html

The link for "The Gatekeepers" doesn't work for me. The video won't load up. But I'm gonna try to find it elsewhere and watch it when I wake up, I'm going to bed.

edit: one of the versions available below worked, yay.

[Stingray 9,441]

The link for "The Gatekeepers" doesn't work for me. The video won't load up. But I'm gonna try to find it elsewhere and watch it when I wake up, I'm going to bed.

edit: one of the versions available below worked, yay.

Have fun, its quite something that documentary ....

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

The laws are in both the Qur'an and Hadith. For example, how do Muslims know to pray 5 times a day? This is one of the most important tenants. This is gotten from the Hadiths and not the Qur'an. It's impossible to (1) Understand Islam (2) Understand some parts of the Qur'an without the Hadith.

Are you a Qur'an only Muslim? I know some Muslims who are but if you reject some Hadith, then you also have to reject the Hadith that speaks about praying 5 times a day, or how much to pay for Zakat and so on.

I completely agree with you about some Imam's, the Saudi's and Islamic scholars using Islam for their benefit but the reality is Islam has always been a highly politicized religion.

For instance in the Qur'an, you will never see a verse like "give unto Caeser what is Caeser's and give unto God what is God's" . In Islam, the concept of separation of Church and state simply doesn't exist and this a huge problem in the ME.

A couple of points. The demand for us to pray was not from the profit. It was in the Quran. As I told you in PM to answer your question, Mohammed is a messenger. His message was the Quran. He had to teach us. So God asked us to pray in the Quran, Mohammed taught us how. As I told you the commands come from the Quran and the teachings through Mohammed. So that answers your question.

No I am not a Quran only Muslim. I read hadiths too. But humand are unique. We have minds that calculate interpret and seeks reason. Now, if I see a Hadith, that doesn't make sense or adds a law I ask myself simple questions? Was God too lazy to say them? Does God have a limited Brain like us ( his creation) that can forget? The answers to me are no. So after putting the hadith to the test I decide to either accept it or reject it as the Quran also requires me to do so. You must have noticed a lot of verses in the Quran where God asks, "Don't you understand?, Can't you think? Can't you observe?" and other questions that basically ask us to use our brain.

Now Islam being used politically. Currently yes, but that is not because there is no distinction between Islam and Politics. If you want to look at Islam in it is simplest form, it is divided into two main aspects. The first has to do with way you believe in God, the tenants....etc. It is stated in the Quran that this is between oneself and his creator. The second aspect is the social aspect. Basically it is how to treat people based on certain moral concepts. Now people using religion in politics is not a new thing. It has been used before in Christianity in the past. Remember the crusaders. As a half British, Remember why Henry the 8th made himself head of the Church. Certain phases that nations go through form an environment that allows such mixture to grow and exercised.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

A couple of points. The demand for us to pray was not from the profit. It was in the Quran. As I told you in PM to answer your question, Mohammed is a messenger. His message was the Quran. He had to teach us. So God asked us to pray in the Quran, Mohammed taught us how. As I told you the commands come from the Quran and the teachings through Mohammed. So that answers your question.

Pray 5 (five) times a day is not in the Qur'an. There is no specific amount mentioned in the Qur'an and you even said it yourself, Muhammad teaches Muslims how to pray in the HADITH. So on what basis do you reject the Hadith for death for Apostates? It doesn't contradict the Qur'an. Many Muslim countries threaten it but few practice it. The same way many Muslim countries threaten stoning, amputation and things like that (from the Qur'an, no less. Allah's word. By your logic, all Muslim countries should be doing that since it's not the command of Muhammad who was just a messanger) but few practice it like the Saudi's or Sudanese do.

So it seems both the Qur'an and Hadith are open to interpretation on punishments even though one is command and the other is teaching.

A question. Under full Sharia Law, will amputation and stoning be practiced as punishments to thieves and adulterers respectively? These are from the Qur'an NOT the Hadith afterall.

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

Pray 5 (five) times a day is not in the Qur'an. There is no specific amount mentioned in the Qur'an and you even said it yourself, Muhammad teaches Muslims how to pray in the HADITH. So on what basis do you reject the Hadith for death for Apostates? It doesn't contradict the Qur'an. Many Muslim countries threaten it but few practice it. The same way many Muslim countries threaten stoning, amputation and things like that (from the Qur'an, no less. Allah's word. By your logic, all Muslim countries should be doing that since it's not the command of Muhammad who was just a messanger) but few practice it like the Saudi's or Sudanese do.

So it seems both the Qur'an and Hadith are open to interpretation on punishments even though one is command and the other is teaching.

A question. Under full Sharia Law, will amputation and stoning be practiced as punishments to thieves and adulterers respectively? These are from the Qur'an NOT the Hadith afterall.

Dude you seriously need to stop fishing. It is demanded that we pray. Mohammed teaches us to how to pray and the number of prayers. It is demanded that we clean up before praying. Mohammed teaches us the way it is done. We have to give money to the poor. Mohammed teaches us the manner we do it in. We have to go to pilgrimage to Mecca. Mohammed teaches us what to do when we go there.

Let me simplify because you seem to be so over excited in your fishing attempts. There is a job title and a job description. e.g Marketing manager. So basically you know your job function has something to do with Marketing. job description is the required task you need to perform for that title.

So God tells us to pray, Mohammed teaches us how to pray and how many times. Easy enough now?

Again on what basis do you say the apostates killing is in the Quran. So I do not need to prove it is false. People who believe it is true have to show evidence. Such strong law verily would be mentioned by God.

About the amputation, stoning, etc. Now In one of my posts I gave an example of the punishment of killing. I made it clear FROM THE QURAN that the two extreme things you can do to a killer is 1) kill him, 2)forgive him. Now that is a broad spectrum. Societies choose what to do. Don't you believe in democracy? Let nations choose their laws. So in between forgiveness, and killing, there is prison, there is payment, there is social work, and there are combos. Same applies to adultery (stoning) and theft( amputation). You have the two extreme limits. Punishment and Forgiveness. In between you have a broad spectrum of thing depending on what society wants. Can you have a law in your country if the majority of the population oppose it? NOPE. Same as in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other Arab countries with Muslim majority. Again the punishment and forgiveness is mentioned in the Quran. And they serve as guidelines to the boundaries of punishment. People have to determine for themselves.

That is simply why Sharia law does not exist. Because the punishment is so flexible but with known limits.

Clear?

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Clear?

I'll leave you alone for now bro . Discussing various religions is a hobby of mine so don't be offended.

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

I'll leave you alone for now bro . Discussing various religions is a hobby of mine so don't be offended.

Not offended bro Cheers

[EBH 283]

Dude you seriously need to stop fishing....

Well said. I didn't know that much about Islam

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

Well said. I didn't know that much about Islam

Thank you it was a pleasure

[EBH 283]

On the topic of the Israeli-Palestine conflict, the most obvious thing to do is to get rid of both Israel and Palestine and create a new country there which has absolutely no religious affiliation and is initially populated based on ethnicity rather than religion - only ethnic Middle Easterners, Muslim or Jew, should be allowed to settle in the country once it's formed (obviously everyone else can apply for entry visas and later citizenship if they want, I'm not suggesting a finite barrier between that part of the Middle East and the rest of the world). All the European Jews who flooded in after the end of the Second World War should be deported back to Germany/wherever. It isn't fair on the indigenous Muslims or the indigenous Jews of Israel that their lands were completely overwhelmed by blond haired, blue eyed Europeans who suffered genocide at the hands of a German government. If there is sufficient justification for a Jewish state, then it should by rights be somewhere in Europe, which is where the Holocaust was perpetuated. Why Israel? Because it was 'originally' a Jewish country well over two millenia ago? Right. By that sort of reasoning, we might as well pack up and leave North and South America, Africa and Australia because all of it is CAPTURED LAND that originally belonged to whoever it was that lived there first.

Shit happens. Judea was finished 2000 years ago. It will never return. In those 2000 years plenty of other people have made Israel their home. Why should they be marginalized and thrown out on account of the actions of a few thousand Germans? How is it fair to punish them for something they never did while those that did do it are currently dominating the Eurozone?

Jews are not a race. This man is Jewish. Is Israel his ancestral land? Is it fuck. And yet he is permitted to live in Israel and presumably enjoys greater opportunity and less oppression from the government than a Muslim who can genuinely call Israel his ancestral homeland.

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

On the topic of the Israeli-Palestine conflict, the most obvious thing to do is to get rid of both Israel and Palestine and create a new country there which has absolutely no religious affiliation and is initially populated based on ethnicity rather than religion - only ethnic Middle Easterners, Muslim or Jew, should be allowed to settle in the country once it's formed (obviously everyone else can apply for entry visas and later citizenship if they want, I'm not suggesting a finite barrier between that part of the Middle East and the rest of the world). All the European Jews who flooded in after the end of the Second World War should be deported back to Germany/wherever. It isn't fair on the indigenous Muslims or the indigenous Jews of Israel that their lands were completely overwhelmed by blond haired, blue eyed Europeans who suffered genocide at the hands of a German government. If there is sufficient justification for a Jewish state, then it should by rights be somewhere in Europe, which is where the Holocaust was perpetuated. Why Israel? Because it was 'originally' a Jewish country well over two millenia ago? Right. By that sort of reasoning, we might as well pack up and leave North and South America, Africa and Australia because all of it is CAPTURED LAND that originally belonged to whoever it was that lived there first.

Shit happens. Judea was finished 2000 years ago. It will never return. In those 2000 years plenty of other people have made Israel their home. Why should they be marginalized and thrown out on account of the actions of a few thousand Germans? How is it fair to punish them for something they never did while those that did do it are currently dominating the Eurozone?

Jews are not a race. This man is Jewish. Is Israel his ancestral land? Is it fuck. And yet he is permitted to live in Israel and presumably enjoys greater opportunity and less oppression from the government than a Muslim who can genuinely call Israel his ancestral homeland.

Funny you say that. Check this out

[Stingray 9,441]

Very interesting... it's Hebrew in the start but mostly english watch it...

I am sorry, but that is completely the reverse. Check the US and UK mainstream - press and opinions - they have similar opinions than her. She, however, is indeed 'scorned' by academia, but that is because she talks bollocks. Academia works on different grounds - work with facts.

Eg: http://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/may/13/stephen-hawking-boycott-israel-science

The facts are there - check the death tolls ,Check what the ex heads of Shin Bet say themselves, check what everyone NOT in the right wing camp is saying. Check the UN, Check human rights watchers, ....... Btw, she only mentions one-liners, not a SINGLE fact. Also, I couldn't care less about the 'deep historical unique claim' she ascribes to the Jewish people.Anyway, I understand you cannot be objective on a moving train. Im sure this is all propaganda to you instead of facts:

Warning ! Disturbing images:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/126226385@N06/with/14665838693/

I just have ONE question for you, just ONE. Do you think, honestly think, that Palestinians are equal to Israeli's? I dare you to speak your heart.