14yr old girl reported as injured by the Taliban.

[maxmaximus]

So a believer does not just consist of 'Muslims', the idea of 'terrorists' (those who kill indiscriminately) being believers can also be addressed;

 

One could argue that none of the above say anything about believers 'dying in the line of fire', an argument often used by terrorists that those Mulims killed in terrorist attacks are somehow 'matyrs', but the following verse does address this;

 

The idea that groups like the taliban are acting in accordance with the Quran is addressed in the following verse;

 

and starting hostilities is also frowned upon, the believer should act strictly in self defence

 

 

The Muslim shouldn't begin fighting, because they should not take pleasure in warfare, in fact the character of the 'Muslim' is to be against fighting;

 

Fighting should be undertaken when the innocent are in harms way, and not to do so is frowned upon by allah, but the context is always strictly when either your life or the life of an innocent is in danger;

 

No one is pretending that war is not prescribed in Islam, only that it is strictly in the context of self defence, as the following verses say, if you are attacked, defend yourself, if they offer peace, accept it, but if they are using that peace as a 'ruse', you are permitted to fight again;

 

 

Even in these cases it is better to try to avoid fighting, in the following verses believers are told to prepare a 'show' of force to try to 'scare' the enemy into submission before the fighting actually starts.

 

Even taking all that into account the Muslim is not told they 'have' to fight, if it is possible to avoid doing so the believer is permitted to escape if it is possible;

 

 

I think you have proved my point, Muslims should fight when innocent are in harm’s way, they can fight when they are persecuted; they should not start hostilities but can continue hostilities until the persecution is ended. I believe they are also allowed to deceive their enemy.

 

Many Muslims perceive Israel as an occupation of their homeland and believe their brother Muslims are being persecuted, they believe the West supports this occupation and persecution of the Palestinians, and this gives them justification for all the actions that the Quran allows. In fact, in your words, inaction would be frowned upon by Allah.

 

So it appears to be down to the opinions of Muslims as to what constitutes Hostilities, Persecution and occupation of their home lands. My understanding is that many British Muslims believe the Palestinians are being persecuted and their land occupied, so should in fact be taking up arms against the persecutors and occupiers.

 

The west as also waged several wars against Muslim countries which can also be seen as a justification for hostilities against the West. What we see has a Muslim terrorist are Muslims following the Quran and defending their land from what they perceive to be the persecution of their fellow Muslims.

[SevenRivers]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2012/10/201210127446942327.html

 

would'nt it be something if this took off like the arab spring:thumbsup:

 

Strange that Muslims need religious leaders to tell them whether it is un-Islamic or not, obviously if it requires clarification from clerics, it must be assumed there must be some ambiguity as to whether it was un-Islamic or not.

 

For example, Muslims would not need clarification from a cleric by issue of a fatwa that eating a bacon sarnie in the middle of Ramadan fast would indeed be un-Islamic. It doesn't demand a fatwa because it is so obvious.

 

So why is it not so obvious that trying to kill a girl is un-Islamic, that it does indeed need a fatwa to deem it un-Islamic?

 

What a peculiar religion this islam is.

[PaliRichard]

I think you have proved my point, Muslims should fight when innocent are in harm’s way, they can fight when they are persecuted; they should not start hostilities but can continue hostilities until the persecution is ended. I believe they are also allowed to deceive their enemy.

 

Many Muslims perceive Israel as an occupation of their homeland and believe their brother Muslims are being persecuted, they believe the West supports this occupation and persecution of the Palestinians, and this gives them justification for all the actions that the Quran allows. In fact, in your words, inaction would be frowned upon by Allah.

 

So it appears to be down to the opinions of Muslims as to what constitutes Hostilities, Persecution and occupation of their home lands. My understanding is that many British Muslims believe the Palestinians are being persecuted and their land occupied, so should in fact be taking up arms against the persecutors and occupiers.

 

The west as also waged several wars against Muslim countries which can also be seen as a justification for hostilities against the West. What we see has a Muslim terrorist are Muslims following the Quran and defending their land from what they perceive to be the persecution of their fellow Muslims.

 

How you get that from the quotes I gave is beyond me - especially

What we see has a Muslim terrorist are Muslims following the Quran[/Quote] I clearly demonstrated not to be the case.

 

So either you are in desperate need of a new pair of reading glasses or even had the Quran stated in black and white ''Islamic' terrorists are not Muslim' you would have not accepted it.

 

I used the Quran to demonstrate my points, please feel free to use it to show where the kind of acts carried out by terrorists are justified.

[altus]

Strange that Muslims need religious leaders to tell them whether it is un-Islamic or not, obviously if it requires clarification from clerics, it must be assumed there must be some ambiguity as to whether it was un-Islamic or not.

The Taliban claim they attacked this girl because what she had done is un-Islamic. The religious leaders are refuting that claim and saying the Taliban's actions are un-Islamic.

 

If they had said nothing you would no doubt be claiming that demonstrated they agreed with the Taliban's claims.

 

@johncocker:

 

I doubt it will end up with Pakistan having a secular government but if it causes even more people to turn against the Taliban and leads to an improvement in the education opportunities for girls that will be for the good.

[MrSmith]

Pakistani police make arrests in Taliban shooting of 14-year-old education activist

 

Pakistani police have arrested a number of suspects in the case of a 14-year-old girl shot and wounded by the Taliban for promoting education for girls and criticizing the fundamentalist Islamic movement, officials said Friday.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Pakistani+police+make+arrests+Taliban+shooting+year+education+activist/7381464/story.html#ixzz296t9JQgc

Edited October 12, 2012 by MrSmith

[rosemary19]

I've noticed Muslims don't seem to have a single spiritual leader to guide them,do British Muslims have one elected cleric to speak for them?

[skinz]

I've noticed Muslims don't seem to have a single spiritual leader to guide them,do British Muslims have one elected cleric to speak for them?

 

You mean the Islamic equivalent of the pope?

[rosemary19]

You mean the Islamic equivalent of the pope?

 

I was asking a question not giving an answer.

[andygardener]

I've noticed Muslims don't seem to have a single spiritual leader to guide them,do British Muslims have one elected cleric to speak for them?

 

No, they don't.

[LeMaquis]

You mean the Islamic equivalent of the pope?

 

I don't think the Pope is the single spiritual leader of British Christians. A lot of people in the Ibrox area of Glasgow may take exception to that.