"irfghan" wrote:

"God wills it"

LOL There's a scene in Kingdom Heaven which made me lol.

The gung-ho Christian leaders pressure 'The Lepper' to go to war and everyone starts shouting 'God wills it'.

As if those bloodthirsty bruts knew what God willed.

That might actually be historic.

Historically it comes from from the James epistle chapter 4 verses 13 - 17

[i] Come now, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we shall go into such and such a town, spend a year there doing business, and make a profit"-- you have no idea what your life will be like tomorrow. You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears. Instead you should say, "If the Lord wills it, we shall live to do this or that." But now you are boasting in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. So for one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, it is a sin.[/i]

It's importance in the crusades comes from Pope Urban II's brilliant speech at Clermont to which the people responded "God wills it!"

I suppose it's possible the moviemakers were making a reference to that event - either that or it was some sort of rallying cry for the Crusaders.

Anyway, you can see how those words could spur something like the Crusades - basically the Pope was telling them what they needed to do, if they didn't do it clearly from the words of James they would be sinning (mortally).

"Constantine" wrote:

Anyway, you can see how those words could spur something like the Crusades - basically the Pope was telling them what they needed to do, if they didn't do it clearly from the words of James they would be sinning (mortally).

Prob more to do with the movie makers.

There was a clear attempt to distinguish between the 'doves' and 'hawks' on both sides.

The hawks were made to look bad and hypocritical.

"irfghan" wrote:

"Constantine" wrote:

Anyway, you can see how those words could spur something like the Crusades - basically the Pope was telling them what they needed to do, if they didn't do it clearly from the words of James they would be sinning (mortally).

Prob more to do with the movie makers.

There was a clear attempt to distinguish between the 'doves' and 'hawks' on both sides.

The hawks were made to look bad and hypocritical.

Yea... the movie seemed to be somewhat antireligion.

It was the non fanatical secularly minded westerners v. the fanatics + a nicer Saladin so muslim audiences will buy tickets.

I suppose it's impossible to give an account that pleases everybody though.

Saladin initially requested an astronomically high ransom and almost enslaved everyone in the city - Ibelin was really the one responsible for convincing him that was a wrong course of action.

I'm glad the movie gave him some attention since he's usually a footnote.

And that whole thing at the end about what the muslims did with the city was garbage, the "true cross" was dragged through the streets and spat on - and later ransomed.

I really wished they would have explained the execution of Raynard a little better - it just made Saladin look capricious.

"Admin" wrote:

Not deleted. Just she used the term 'inshallah', which 100 took as she thinks they are great.

She has refused to give her position.

No, she also wrote 'bless' after mentioning al Qaeda, in a couple of posts. It didn't seem like a matter of interpretation, but she has since suggested that Hayder and I did not understand, and that she doesn't want to be understood.

Admin, when I said you were open on the matter, I meant that you were not stating a firm opinion one way or the other, it wasn't a testament to your honesty or a criticism. Apologies for the misunderstanding. Since then you have made more detailed statements but I don't mean to continue with a running commentary.

"Admin" wrote:

I did not take it as a criticism.

RE naj, it would be easier if she did clarify her position, but at the same time... its her choice... Then again if she did, we may not agree with her... leading to another argument etc...

Shouldn't push the girl.

I'm no idiot - there are lots of muslims that like bin Laden or romanticize what he did - they aren't particularly bad people.. just angry or frustrated; i'm fully confident that if most of them were on the ground and really saw what 911 was on the ground level compassion would win the day.

Discipline over rage.

If she really does like Al Qaeda then that's her opinion, if she doesn't all the better - but we shouldn't speculate, and she obviously doesn't want to say anything so leave it at that.

I don't think support for Al Qaeda necessarily boils down to a face-off between rage and compassion. For some people authority and dogma rule the day.

I was talking about myself.

:?:

Sounds highly optimistic.

lol no no no

I mean I know a lot of muslims are angry at US policies, and I think that is the reason that some muslims say they like bin Laden or what he does - and that it should be taken with a grain of salt, because i'm sure most of them if they really saw bin Ladens actions on the ground level couldn't possibly condone what he does.

So... it's better to remember Machiavellis statement "discipline over rage" rather than just reacting to these alqaeda supportive statements when I know full well I am not talking to anyone remotely connected to terrorism.

Like exHT - or Susan.

As compared to say... Al Zarqawi. - who I would probably christen my sidearm with.

You only do more damage by getting angry at angry people who are really on the periphery of the mission.

"Admin" wrote:

oh.

I do not think many people have the ability to hurt others.

when angry they believe they can. But that is just delusion.

On the other side, they will see a person. Someone much like themselves.

Exactly - that's the whole point of basic for soldiers and brainwashing for terrorists, to break that.

If you don't go through actual training to break it, you are probably not a danger.

Especially girls - not a sexist comment but they are naturally caretakers. A person like Suzan might be able to talk the talk but when push comes to shove its always people like her that are the first to jump in and rescue a scared child or somebody asking for help.

Your humanity is hard to break

"Constantine" wrote:

lol no no no

I mean I know a lot of muslims are angry at US policies, and I think that is the reason that some muslims say they like bin Laden or what he does - and that it should be taken with a grain of salt, because i'm sure most of them if they really saw bin Ladens actions on the ground level couldn't possibly condone what he does.

So... it's better to remember Machiavellis statement "discipline over rage" rather than just reacting to these alqaeda supportive statements when I know full well I am not talking to anyone remotely connected to terrorism.

yeah muslims are angry

but they're not looking at both sides

bin laden has caused worse problems for us then america ever did

atleast we could walk down the street without getting abuse about who we are, before bin laden did his 'great act' for the muslims

i think people have blown one act of a very stupid man out of proportion

has no one heard of 'martin luther king'

what happened to getting the message across without violence

OK, two excellent points.

haha Martin Luther King.

Everything an American, a Christian, and a Southerner should be.

A while back Khan posted an interview with him and a South Carolina circuit court judge - really kinda reminds you that not only was he a compassionate person but a really sharp one.

Ironic that in their attempts to destroy him - the racists ultimately made him immortal

I dont see how one muslim can be blamed for another muslim being abused in Britain. If I blamed another muslim fro me being sworn at or abused I personally would be very worried abt my imaan.

Is my imaan so weak that when I get some two four words from som1 I look to blame an innocent muslim?

By this logic, what would people say as to who was to blame for the abuse the Sahabah Karaam suffered? Naudhubillah, would any1 say it is Holy Prophet salallahu alayhi wa sallams fault?

Ma'aadhALLAH!

Similarly if a group of muslims behave on islaam, and we are abused by kuffar for their actions then the evil lies solely and purely on the kuffar not on the muslims. NB I am not saying this is specific to any1. I am saying generally.

Eg A group of muslims establish a state and chop off the hand of the conviceted thief. Their action is correct. Tomorrow in Britain a nonmuslims swears at a lady and calls her a handchopper. This is not correct. How can we blame a muslims for the abuse that we suffer from a non-muslim?

I cannot understand this.

"Med" wrote:

I dont see how one muslim can be blamed for another muslim being abused in Britain. If I blamed another muslim fro me being sworn at or abused I personally would be very worried abt my imaan.

Is my imaan so weak that when I get some two four words from som1 I look to blame an innocent muslim?

By this logic, what would people say as to who was to blame for the abuse the Sahabah Karaam suffered? Naudhubillah, would any1 say it is Holy Prophet salallahu alayhi wa sallams fault?

Ma'aadhALLAH!

Similarly if a group of muslims behave on islaam, and we are abused by kuffar for their actions then the evil lies solely and purely on the kuffar not on the muslims. NB I am not saying this is specific to any1. I am saying generally.

Eg A group of muslims establish a state and chop off the hand of the conviceted thief. Their action is correct. Tomorrow in Britain a nonmuslims swears at a lady and calls her a handchopper. This is not correct. How can we blame a muslims for the abuse that we suffer from a non-muslim?

I cannot understand this.

bin laden is muslim?

he did his act for the greater good?

or am i just interpreting your post wrong?

"Salma" wrote:

bin laden is muslim?

he did his act for the greater good?

or am i just interpreting your post wrong?

I think u r interpreting it in a way it wasnt intended. My point is basically if non-muslims abuse muslims, it cant be blamed on the muslims that oh u did such and such so they abuse us.

I dont see how a muslim can be responsible for the non-muslims abuse.

"Admin" wrote:

Or is it?

An islamic state is not defined by chopping off hands. There is due process. such laws are not automatically started immediately. Look at how long the Prophet preached, and how laws were implemented piecemeal. One bit at a time.

Yes, admin brother. I agree that an islamic state is NOT defined by chopping off hands. I was using that as an example, the point being that if an islamic state was established and certain rules that are integral part of shariah are implemented then people would use those aspects as a means to abuse muslims living in the a hostile/alien environment.

I disagree on the second point about how long before laws are to be implemented. By us, the shariah had come complete. Once the muslims have governance over a land, as soon as possible, they should bring in the shariah, in my view.

The view you state is understood, but I disagree.

"Med" wrote:

"Salma" wrote:

bin laden is muslim?

he did his act for the greater good?

or am i just interpreting your post wrong?

I think u r interpreting it in a way it wasnt intended. My point is basically if non-muslims abuse muslims, it cant be blamed on the muslims that oh u did such and such so they abuse us.

I dont see how a muslim can be responsible for the non-muslims abuse.

ur basically saying we cant blame bin laden for the abuse we now get off non-muslims?

yes

"Med" wrote:

yes

so ur saying, without bin laden and his 'great act' for the muslims, we would still be gettin abuse

if he's not to blame for islam being slaughtered at every oppurtunity then who is?

im not denying that racism has always existed, but didn't u feel it getting worse after sept 11th, july 7th?

sum1 is obviously living in a different world to the rest of us :roll:

"Salma" wrote:

"Med" wrote:

yes

so ur saying, without bin laden and his 'great act' for the muslims, we would still be gettin abuse

if he's not to blame for islam being slaughtered at every oppurtunity then who is?

im not denying that racism has always existed, but didn't u feel it getting worse after sept 11th, july 7th?

sum1 is obviously living in a different world to the rest of us :roll:

my answer ''yes'' was specifically to ur one question. My post was a general comment, that I dont see how we can blame muslims for abuse that non-muslims heap on us.

who is?
The people who actually are attacking islam are responsible. It's like saying dont speak against injustice because then the oppressor is gonna oppress even more. Its the oppressor who is guilty of oppression, and if you think that if it wasnt for Bin Ladin, or for Taliban, or for Zarqawi then the ''west'' and the ''islamic'' world would be muddling along fine then Im sorry I personally cannot accept such a thing.

The powers of evil were amassing for a long while to launch attack on Islam, and the True Prophecies of Nabi Muhammad salallahu alayhi wa sallam must surely come to pass.

Yeh, racism and stuff has gone up. But I dont see it as that big a deal. Sahabah Karaam suffered so much for Islam, the Believers who came BEFORE Sahabah Karaam suffered EVEN MORE than Sahabah Karaam yet they didnt complain of it but remained steadfast.

What we are going through is absolutely nothing, and I wont let it effect me or get me dejected. SubhanALLAH! So many great people suffered for Islam, what we go through is really minimal, I think it would be due to weakness of my imaan if I complained abt the situation because it was due to the Sahabah Karaam's strength of Imaan that they remained steadfast and patient on haqq.

BTW im not sure I mentioned anything abt a great act? Can you point out to me please if I have, cos I cant see it.

"Admin" wrote:

Med is saying (I think):

That you cannot blame a person for getting abused if that person has nthiong to do with the subject of the abuse.

So if OBL does something, other muslims are not to blame.

Yes other muslims are not involved in that act.

But first part, I am saying that a muslim does something which kuffar detest, then in kuffar use that muslims act as a tool by which to abuse muslims, i say that muslim cannot be held responsible for a non-muslim abusing other muslims. The two in my view are unrelated.

"Admin" wrote:

Med is saying (I think):

That you cannot blame a person for getting abused if that person has nthiong to do with the subject of the abuse.

So if OBL does something, other muslims are not to blame.

ok im gettin confused now

we're going around in circles now

im not blaming muslims for abuse, i was just SUGGESTING that perhaps muslims are being treated worse since sept 11, july 7th etc etc