Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Tariqa

Are The Afghani Taliban Really Not So Extreme As They Say

Recommended Posts

It MUST have been - humanitarian agencies don't go around repairing statues.

 

Well, we cannot speculate unless we know for sure, I only know what he said in that video.

 

Annnnnnyways, do you have a copy of the records?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Be patient. The Red Cross site is huge.

 

Meanwhile, this is from Wiki:

 

On 6 March 2001 The Times quoted Mullah Mohammed Omar as stating, "Muslims should be proud of smashing idols. It has given praise to God that we have destroyed them." During a 13 March interview for Japan's Mainichi Shimbun, Afghan Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Mutawakel stated that the destruction was anything but a retaliation against the international community for economic sanctions: "We are destroying the Buddha statues in accordance with Islamic law and it is purely a religious issue".

 

On 18 March, The New York Times reported that a Taliban envoy said the Islamic government made its decision in a rage after a foreign delegation offered money to preserve the ancient works. The report also added, however, that other reports "have said the religious leaders were debating the move for months, and ultimately decided that the statues were idolatrous and should be obliterated."[15]

 

Then Taliban ambassador-at-large, Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, said that the destruction of the statues was carried out by the Head Council of Scholars after a single Swedish monuments expert proposed to restore the statues' heads. Hashimi is reported as saying: "When the Afghani head council asked them to provide the money to feed the children instead of fixing the statues, they refused and said, 'No, the money is just for the statues, not for the children'. Herein, they made the decision to destroy the statues". However, he did not comment on the fact that a foreign museum offered to "buy the Buddhist statues, the money from which could have been used to feed children."[16]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See what I mean? Those links must be invisible, but thanks for your excerpt. Yeah, it may be easy to make things up nowadays, I already Knew that, but you're passing off my evidence as simply fabricated while yours is legit. Admit it, you're doing it. My posts were from trusted sources as well, so don't try to pull that on me just so you can win an argument. Thanks :sl:

 

Thank you for agreeing that things can be made up nowadays, with some knowledge of software. That being a fact, how can I trust a video done by a western source. Few months back, there was a video of 'supposedly Taleban whipping a girl for adultery'. That video was shown on all channels around the world on the same day, and was couple of months old. Later the whole incident turned out to be a fabrication, and no such incident took place in the area. The girl names, and her famiy denied the whole thing as absurd.

 

My quoted sources are western. They would be more inclined to err in favour of western propaganda than against it. That is why I am 110% confident that they are not fabricated towards my opinion. Admit it, you have not even bothered to see them and are just arguing for the sake of it and know that it si you who is cornered, not I.

 

And you're not gullible. You're picking and choosing! Ignoring the factual evidence I provided while saying yours are valid. Things don't work like that.

 

Dealt with above.

 

No, they're not. I see no links from before.

 

Have your computer of eyes tested. The links are there.

 

Lol, like you know me. I hate CNN and fox news.

 

That is news. CNN and Fox are the favorites to which every American is glued, if not to the local channel

 

I think you realize that I've cornered you, which like I said for the 4th or 5th time now, is the reason why you say my sources are all fabricated and mostly like made up while your sources are all right and true.

 

A grave misconception, but a good try.

 

You're just trying to win an argument from selective pick and choose articles, while simply passing off the other guys sources as illegitimate. I've seen that before, too bad it makes the other person look more dumbfounded than before.

 

Already dealt earlier.

 

Nobody is going to sue me for anything. I have freedom of speech rights here in Canada, and I'm not hurting anybody.

 

When you call a newspaper like NY Times and Spiegel what you have, you can be in deep trouble as that is defamation. But probably you would not know as you keep repeating that you can't see the links even though they are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your profile says you are Muslim, yet you did not understand the question I asked regarding Abraham (on him be peace).

 

Ship Wreck

 

I see that you have either not seen this post or preferred to selectively ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While interesting links, that website is clearly anti-American. Are there any actual reputable news websites that back up the claims that the Taliban are not behind the attacks in Pakistan - the murder of innocent people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ship Wreck

 

I see that you have either not seen this post or preferred to selectively ignore it.

 

I'm not going to bother with you.

 

You ignore my sources, and then post yours that are selective and anti-american.

 

Until you can actually refute me and prove me wrong correctly, I will not address you.

 

Take that bias out of your head and actually play on a level playing field.Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you know what Abraham did to the statues? Do you know that there is only one sin God will NEVER forgive on His own?

 

Ignorance cannot save you.

 

If you mean that the Abraham destroyed statues under orders from a god (he is claimed by 3 different religion, each with their own god), and if you mean that that makes it OK to destroy statues today on the basis that your god's rules don't change, you have put your finger on one of the reasons why religious fundamentalism is dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sallam (peace). We also consider your secular godlessness, destruction of the environment, exploitation of the poor, dangerous. What statues we destroy in our countries is our business. What you do in your country is yours. Don't come to harm us in our homes for what we do there. Respect as to be reciprocated if it is to be received.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What statues we destroy in our countries is our business.

 

Well, no. At the very least, a government that destroys ancient artworks is not going to be well liked by the rest of the world (not merely "the west", whatever that means), which will result in poor outcomes on such things as trade negotiations. Ancient artworks belong to humanity, not any particular bunch of thugs in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While interesting links, that website is clearly anti-American. Are there any actual reputable news websites that back up the claims that the Taliban are not behind the attacks in Pakistan - the murder of innocent people?

 

It is very easy to try and brush off things as anti-American, but the facts on the ground prove the facts. I will give you other sources too, which may seem to you as anti-American, but give bare facts.

 

Yes, there are newspaper reports of incidents where Americans have been directly og indirectly been involved.

 

In the report on (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthenews(contact admin if its a beneficial link).pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=25079"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthenews(contact admin if its a beneficial link).pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=25079[/url] the paper is not saying it openly, but there is some ulterior motive more than the Afghan Taleban as Indians have been caught or killed in the areas where fighting is going on. The only way Indians could have come is through Afghanistan.

 

In the report on (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdaily.pk/%E2%80%9Cforce-fungibility%E2%80%9D-indian-troops-in-afghanistan-13478/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdaily.pk/%E2%80%9Cforce-fungibi...hanistan-13478/[/url] the intentions of India, and uits Hindu rulers is given, which is being supported indirectly by the US and NATO, when they allow the Indian Consulates and troops in India, and the excursions into Pakistan, disguised as Taleban.

 

The article on (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsa(contact admin if its a beneficial link).au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1542&Itemid=1"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsa(contact admin if its a beneficial link).au/index.php?option=com_...42&Itemid=1[/url] gives some understanding of what America has done for "democracy". The husband of the former leader is well known the world over for what he is, but he is supported by the US due to his being ever-willing to do what they want done.

 

Blackwater's presence and their agenda is disclosed in (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdemocracynow(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2009/11/24/blackwaters_secret_war_in_pakistan_jeremy"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdemocracynow(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2009/11/24/bla...pakistan_jeremy[/url].

 

Blackwater's role is not fully described in the article at (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetguardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/11/blackwater-in-cia-pakistan-base"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetguardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/1...a-pakistan-base[/url]. But the very fact that they are there is amply proved.

 

ANother article in (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthenews(contact admin if its a beneficial link).pk/editorial_detail.asp?id=175283"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthenews(contact admin if its a beneficial link).pk/editorial_detail.asp?id=175283[/url] is thought provoking and gives valuable information.

 

I could go on, if you wish, but will it make any sense? We have become so addicted to and brain-washed by the media, that we refuse to see the other side of the coin.

 

 

 

the caught red-handed in areas of security, have refused to identify themselves, and have refused to be searched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you mean that the Abraham destroyed statues under orders from a god (he is claimed by 3 different religion, each with their own god), and if you mean that that makes it OK to destroy statues today on the basis that your god's rules don't change, you have put your finger on one of the reasons why religious fundamentalism is dangerous.

 

First of all let me correct a grave misconception. The God of all three religions is the same. He is the Creator of this Universe and everything in it.

 

Yes, Abraham broke all the idols to prove that all idols are but useless. How can something created by man be idolized and expected to do anything that the real God can do.

 

Then you speak of fundamentalism, which is a very naive perception. To do anything in this world, be it, mathematics, any science, politics, economics, etc., you have to stick to fundamentals. Any person who does not is bound to fail. Same applies to religion. Hence, anybody who does not apply to the fundamentals is bound to go astray, without any exception. He is the one who is dangerous as he has denied the fundamentals of the most important thing in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not going to bother with you.

 

You ignore my sources, and then post yours that are selective and anti-american.

 

Until you can actually refute me and prove me wrong correctly, I will not address you.

 

Take that bias out of your head and actually play on a level playing field.Thanks

 

You are the one denying facts, and insisting that I see your links and accept them. I have asked you a question about Abraham (alaihe salam). That is a not based on a worldly matter that can have a difference of opinion, but you fail to address even that.

 

Let me clear one erroneous statement you have made. I am not anti-American, I am anti-American policies where they have two-faced discriminatory approach to countries and people. israel is a glaring example. We see a lot of support for them against what Hitler did, but, we see that there is a closed-eye to what they do to the Palestinians, and that is worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all let me correct a grave misconception. The God of all three religions is the same. He is the Creator of this Universe and everything in it.

 

Muslims consider the god of all three religions to be the same, but Christians and Jews do not.

 

He is the one who is dangerous as he has denied the fundamentals of the most important thing in life.

 

Actually, history does not bear you out on this. By far the greatest crimes committed in the name of religion are committed by those who have the strongest belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Muslims consider the god of all three religions to be the same, but Christians and Jews do not.

 

I bewlieve you missed the key word "misconception".

 

Actually, history does not bear you out on this. By far the greatest crimes committed in the name of religion are committed by those who have the strongest belief.

 

The greatest crimes have been committed by people for greed, and all organised religions are against greed. Please give one major example of a crime committed in the name of religion, and I will show you where you are wrong, as no crimes have been committed in the name of religion. It is only a matter of perception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many, many crimes are committed in the name of religions. The underlying motive may be greed, fear, whatever, but you cannot deny that it is not at all unusual for people to claim (and believe) that their crimes are ordered by their religion.

 

You might think it's a "misconception" that the Muslim god is not the same as the Jewish and Christian gods, but Jews and Christians do not - they think it's Muslims who have the misconception. It isn't possible to prove either way, so it's simpler to just assume that people know what their own beliefs are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
are they?

 

I don't know, never met them. It does depend on which Taliban your referring to since there are several groups of fighters, commencing action against the US military, the USA administration labeled all of them as Taliban which is silly because all these groups have different motives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are the one denying facts, and insisting that I see your links and accept them. I have asked you a question about Abraham (alaihe salam). That is a not based on a worldly matter that can have a difference of opinion, but you fail to address even that.

 

Let me clear one erroneous statement you have made. I am not anti-American, I am anti-American policies where they have two-faced discriminatory approach to countries and people. israel is a glaring example. We see a lot of support for them against what Hitler did, but, we see that there is a closed-eye to what they do to the Palestinians, and that is worse.

 

No, I'm sorry but throughout this whole thread, you were the one who tried to dictate the facts and reality of the matter.

 

I chose not to address what you said, because you did not address what I was saying. Simple.

 

What I find erroneous is that throughout this whole thread you have rejected every piece of evidence I have given you - while you have attempted to force your views upon me without valid evidence of your own, and you did not succeed in your attempt to dodge the facts.

 

Yes, what Hitler did to the Jews is bad. What israel does to the Palestinians is bad, too. Is it worse? No. 6 million Jews died, and some were burned alive in massive ovens. They are both equal atrocities in their sufferings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know, never met them. It does depend on which Taliban your referring to since there are several groups of fighters, commencing action against the US military, the USA administration labeled all of them as Taliban which is silly because all these groups have different motives.

 

I tried to explain to Aburafay that there are many Taliban factions, mostly consisting of tribal Pashtuns, but he failed to address or even counter that point.

 

You are right, all these groups have different political motives for different political gains. Failing to recognize that, like he also did, is failure to recognize the entire situation of Afghanistan and if you cannot understand that then you are pleading ignorance on the entire situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We see a lot of support for them against what Hitler did, but, we see that there is a closed-eye to what they do to the Palestinians, and that is worse.

 

Are you saying that what israel has done to Palestinians is worse than what Hitler did to Jews and other peoples in Europe? I hope not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

British Journalist Yvonne Ridley was kidnapped by Afghan Talibans while she was in Afghanistan. After here release she EMBRACED Islam with her own free will???

 

NOW she must have seen something good as who else would do that???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Islamic extremism is a contradiction. Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. Claiming that Islam teaches violence is against its principle beliefs. Any individual or group who use violence in the name of Islam are not true Muslims.

 

A real Muslim is a genuine well-wisher to humanity. There are no ifs, ands or buts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Islam allowed for military conquest as well. What about the expansion of Islam during Mohammad and the Caliphates time when it spread from Spain to India?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought Islam allowed for military conquest as well. What about the expansion of Islam during Mohammad and the Caliphates time when it spread from Spain to India?

 

the sad clown,

 

At that time, Islam spread through the work of Dawah, not the sword. The prophet advised his companions to distribute outside Arabia to communicate the word of God using non-violence and eloquent speech. What you see nowadays in the name of Islam is not representative of our religion. One must distinguish between the actions of Muslims and the religion of Islam.

 

Islam is an eternal religion. It could not stand the test of time if it were based on violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Byzantine–Arab Wars were a series of wars between the Arab Caliphates and the East Roman or Byzantine Empire between the 7th and 12th centuries AD. These started during the initial Muslim conquests under the Rashidun and Umayyad caliphs and continued in the form of an enduring border tussle until the beginning of the Crusades. As a result, the Byzantines (the Romans or "Rûm" in Muslim historical chronicles), saw an extensive loss of territory.

 

The initial conflict lasted from 634 to 718, ending with the Second Arab Siege of Constantinople that halted the rapid expansion of the Arab Empire into Anatolia. Conflicts however continued between the 800s and 1169. The occupation of southern Italian territories by the Abbassid forces in the 9th and 10th centuries were not as successful as in Sicily. However, under the Macedonian dynasty, the Byzantines recaptured territory in the Levant with the Byzantines armies' advance even threatening Jerusalem to the south. The Emirate of Aleppo and its neighbours became vassals of the Byzantines in the east, where the greatest threat was the Egyptian Fatimid kingdom, until the rise of the Seljuk dynasty reversed all gains and pushed Abbassid territorial gains deep into Anatolia. This resulted in the Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus' request for military aid from Pope Urban II at the Council of Piacenza; one of the events often attributed as precursors to the First Crusade.

Are you saying that the above was the work of peace loving itinerant preachers? (quote from Wikipedia)

Edited by the sad clown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×