A few interesting links on the Berg Beheading.
A kuro5shin.org article
angryfinger
buzzflash
Marc Perkel
The Guardian
Since I'm not investigative journalist (I'll leave that to others), I merely got the following links from the kuro5shin.org article.
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
More Just Us
As if you thought it was over. Nope folks, there's more. A video has been showing where an American is beheaded with a knife. The video was titled, "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shown slaughtering an American."
According to the BBC (linked above), one of the masked men said, "How can a free Muslim sleep well as he sees Islam slaughtered and its dignity bleeding, and the pictures of shame and the news of the devilish scorn of the people of Islam - men and women - in the prison of Abu Ghraib?"
OK, first off, nobody is slaughtering Islam. You cannot slaughter Islam, it's a religion, a deen, not a person or a goat. Just as what sick people do in the name of Islam (see above link) does not, in reality, denigrate Islam, torturing Muslims (which I obviously don't agree with) doesn't "slaughter" Islam. Each of these actions only shows the depravity of the people involved. As a Muslim, I put the onus on the Muslims. To quote Shaykh Hamza Yusuf from his article, "Religion, Violence, and the Modern World," he says, "Religious people who set aside every true and universal religious principle in the name of religion are worse than any secular beast doing the same in the name of 'might makes right.' The reason is obvious: one acts in the name of religion and causes others to hate religion; the other acts in the name of power and causes others to rightly hate the worst qualities of man."
I mean, cutting a man's head off with a knife? That's a terrible death. In Islam, prisoners of war (that is if these masked men consider themselves mujahideen and not merely brigands) cannot be treated as lifeless nothings. There are rules concerning the treatment of prisoners. Consider a quote from Islam-qa (I don't actively support many of the politics/views of this site, but this bit is informative): "If the Muslims capture them and take them to a place that has been prepared for them, they should not harm them or torture them with beatings, depriving them of food and water, leaving them out in the sun or the cold, burning them with fire, or putting covers over their mouths, ears and eyes and putting them in cages like animals. Rather they should treat them with kindness and mercy, feed them well and encourage them to enter Islam."
Consider the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) referring to the prisoners taken from Badr, "Take heed of the recommendations to treat the prisoners fairly." Now mind you, these prisoners spoken of were men who fought against Muslims, killing them, and fought against the Prophet himself, and would have killed him had they the chance. The man in Iraq was a civilian! An Islamic state is even expected to free a prisoner with its own funds if he is unable to pay for his freedom. Consider this article on the treatment of prisoners. Also consider the fatwa found at IslamOnline.
Sick minds begat sick actions. I think lack of education (of Islam) is a major factor in such atrocities. And I don't accept the argument of, "Well, the US/Israel/Soviet Union/Martians do terrible things too, what about them?" The evil deeds of another does not give you a line of credit to commit evil deeds of your own. If fighting the just fight means you have to fight with one hand behind your back, and perhaps die in the process, Allahu akbar, I cannot think of a greater example of being a martyr.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to counter a wrong action with a right, and you thereby remove the power of the wrong. The cycle of violence is ended. When non-Muslims see Muslims beheading some man and shouting, "God is greatest," how many of them will accept Islam after that?
How many enemies can you make in a day?
According to the BBC (linked above), one of the masked men said, "How can a free Muslim sleep well as he sees Islam slaughtered and its dignity bleeding, and the pictures of shame and the news of the devilish scorn of the people of Islam - men and women - in the prison of Abu Ghraib?"
OK, first off, nobody is slaughtering Islam. You cannot slaughter Islam, it's a religion, a deen, not a person or a goat. Just as what sick people do in the name of Islam (see above link) does not, in reality, denigrate Islam, torturing Muslims (which I obviously don't agree with) doesn't "slaughter" Islam. Each of these actions only shows the depravity of the people involved. As a Muslim, I put the onus on the Muslims. To quote Shaykh Hamza Yusuf from his article, "Religion, Violence, and the Modern World," he says, "Religious people who set aside every true and universal religious principle in the name of religion are worse than any secular beast doing the same in the name of 'might makes right.' The reason is obvious: one acts in the name of religion and causes others to hate religion; the other acts in the name of power and causes others to rightly hate the worst qualities of man."
I mean, cutting a man's head off with a knife? That's a terrible death. In Islam, prisoners of war (that is if these masked men consider themselves mujahideen and not merely brigands) cannot be treated as lifeless nothings. There are rules concerning the treatment of prisoners. Consider a quote from Islam-qa (I don't actively support many of the politics/views of this site, but this bit is informative): "If the Muslims capture them and take them to a place that has been prepared for them, they should not harm them or torture them with beatings, depriving them of food and water, leaving them out in the sun or the cold, burning them with fire, or putting covers over their mouths, ears and eyes and putting them in cages like animals. Rather they should treat them with kindness and mercy, feed them well and encourage them to enter Islam."
Consider the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) referring to the prisoners taken from Badr, "Take heed of the recommendations to treat the prisoners fairly." Now mind you, these prisoners spoken of were men who fought against Muslims, killing them, and fought against the Prophet himself, and would have killed him had they the chance. The man in Iraq was a civilian! An Islamic state is even expected to free a prisoner with its own funds if he is unable to pay for his freedom. Consider this article on the treatment of prisoners. Also consider the fatwa found at IslamOnline.
Sick minds begat sick actions. I think lack of education (of Islam) is a major factor in such atrocities. And I don't accept the argument of, "Well, the US/Israel/Soviet Union/Martians do terrible things too, what about them?" The evil deeds of another does not give you a line of credit to commit evil deeds of your own. If fighting the just fight means you have to fight with one hand behind your back, and perhaps die in the process, Allahu akbar, I cannot think of a greater example of being a martyr.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to counter a wrong action with a right, and you thereby remove the power of the wrong. The cycle of violence is ended. When non-Muslims see Muslims beheading some man and shouting, "God is greatest," how many of them will accept Islam after that?
How many enemies can you make in a day?
How's This For Justice?
According to Xinhuanet.com (and several other sources), Palestinian Militants blew up an Israeli armored personnel carrier, killing 6 Israeli soldiers. Notice that? 6 soldiers. Saraya Al Quds, the armed wing of the Islamic Jihad movement claimed responsibility.
In response, according to eyewitnesses, an Israeli Apache helicopter (wonder where they got that from?) fired a rocket at a crowd of local residents (other sources say it was at a car). Israeli soldiers then arrested 5 residents on the spot in order to use them as human shields while they cleared away their 6 dead.
Body count?
6 Israeli soldiers dead
4 Palestinians killed, including a 10 year old boy
90 Palestinians wounded (according to the NYT), 5 of whom are in critical condition
Glad to know Israel, the only sovereign State in the fray, is fighting the good fight, and not steeping to State Terrorism
[Edit] Note, just heard on the radio that Palestinians has paraded some of the body parts through the streets, and Egypt is trying to pressure them to turn them over to Israel.
See, I just love this stuff. Let's reply to this action with some sick disgusting act. Yeah, that'll show them.
In response, according to eyewitnesses, an Israeli Apache helicopter (wonder where they got that from?) fired a rocket at a crowd of local residents (other sources say it was at a car). Israeli soldiers then arrested 5 residents on the spot in order to use them as human shields while they cleared away their 6 dead.
Body count?
6 Israeli soldiers dead
4 Palestinians killed, including a 10 year old boy
90 Palestinians wounded (according to the NYT), 5 of whom are in critical condition
Glad to know Israel, the only sovereign State in the fray, is fighting the good fight, and not steeping to State Terrorism
[Edit] Note, just heard on the radio that Palestinians has paraded some of the body parts through the streets, and Egypt is trying to pressure them to turn them over to Israel.
See, I just love this stuff. Let's reply to this action with some sick disgusting act. Yeah, that'll show them.
Monday, May 10, 2004
Observational Da'wah
Concerning Da'wah: My Philosophy, Observations
(In language a non-Muslim can understand)
Da'wah is what is known in Islam as "The Call." It's spreading the message of Islam. Da'wah is the word in Arabic transliterated, so there are numerous types of spellings. I'll stick with Da'wah.
There can be many approaches to Da'wah. Usually, when educating about Islam, people take the more formal route of listing the five pillars and six articles of faith. My approach is to head straight into Islamic beliefs: theology, perspectives and creed (aqeedah), rather than the more formal pillars approach.
I like to give the Islamic perspective on many of those certain issues a westerner might have interest in, and if their current or previous religion was Christianity, make comparisons (without any intent to demean or give off an air of superiority). I like to cite examples and sayings of earlier, more pious Muslims, that a person might see how the idealistic Islam can and has been realized, rather than how it is currently being corrupted.
I try to deliver the message in as objective terms as possible, allowing the receiver to make up their own mind and reflect in their own time, without having to filter through one-sided propaganda from me. I consider lies and sophistries, when used to achieve a certain result, a form of oppression. Should someone accept Islam on account of my words, I would want them to do so with a clear, sober and objective mind. If people are to accept Islam, they must do so in their right minds, and not through compulsion, under duress, or by trickery.
While it could be argued that, "The end justifies the means," this was and is a sick sort of rationalization. Doing any of the three underhanded methods mentioned above only shames Islam. We the Muslims, if we want to be true Believers, must be on our guard against denigrating the faith.
The job of a Muslim partaking in Da'wah is to deliver the message. I do that in the most objective, balanced way I can out of respect for the receiver, myself and Islam. I do not merely say, "Well, we believe this and this, and then that and that," and have it over with. I, and anyone in that position, should feel free to clear up any misconceptions and confusions the one receiving might have. Be interactive. Keep it interesting.
This is why I prefer the "Islamic perspective" approach, as explained above. With this style, the receiver is able to see how the belief system (deen) is manifested in real life, rather than simply reading a neutered list of beliefs and obligations.
And I personally prefer adding the comparative religion approach (only in the case of where the receiver was or is a Christian, or knows about Christianity, as I do). This way, the receiver may see what's related and what is different, and the two faiths can act as a foil to each other. It is also, interestingly enough, a very effective way to illustrate the subtle beauties and manifest mercies of Islam.
Another reason I take this approach (and what a strong attraction Islam had for me) is how I see Da'wah as "passive evangelism." In Christianity, evangelists take on "aggressive evangelism" following the command, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation," as found in Mark 16:15--part of a series of verses expunged from most modern bibles as they are not found in the most ancient texts, and are considered insertions.
With this aggressive evangelism approach, Christians see it as their duty to disseminate the "Good News" to any and all, often regardless of the receiver's interest or willingness to listen. Historically, this approach went further into compulsion, as in the case of the native "savages" of any land the Christians colonized. Their rationalization, even for the most gruesome of conversion methods, being, "It's for their own good." Saving souls, as you know, is a tough business.
For a person with a progressive frame of mind (or an ounce of respect for humanity), this approach leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Enter Islam's Da'wah, what I christen passive evangelism. In this system, the propagator is expected to deliver the message--in the best way possible (read: informative, even)--and leave the rest to God. If the receiver accepts Islam, great! If not, that is their choice. At the very least, maybe their minds will at least be cleared up of any misconceptions. And perhaps, with their new knowledge, maybe they will say something that will cause someone else to embrace Islam, or may themselves do so at a later date. It is in the hands of God, and for Him to decide. As for the one telling: come what may. What good is having faith if you don't use it?
(In language a non-Muslim can understand)
Da'wah is what is known in Islam as "The Call." It's spreading the message of Islam. Da'wah is the word in Arabic transliterated, so there are numerous types of spellings. I'll stick with Da'wah.
There can be many approaches to Da'wah. Usually, when educating about Islam, people take the more formal route of listing the five pillars and six articles of faith. My approach is to head straight into Islamic beliefs: theology, perspectives and creed (aqeedah), rather than the more formal pillars approach.
I like to give the Islamic perspective on many of those certain issues a westerner might have interest in, and if their current or previous religion was Christianity, make comparisons (without any intent to demean or give off an air of superiority). I like to cite examples and sayings of earlier, more pious Muslims, that a person might see how the idealistic Islam can and has been realized, rather than how it is currently being corrupted.
I try to deliver the message in as objective terms as possible, allowing the receiver to make up their own mind and reflect in their own time, without having to filter through one-sided propaganda from me. I consider lies and sophistries, when used to achieve a certain result, a form of oppression. Should someone accept Islam on account of my words, I would want them to do so with a clear, sober and objective mind. If people are to accept Islam, they must do so in their right minds, and not through compulsion, under duress, or by trickery.
While it could be argued that, "The end justifies the means," this was and is a sick sort of rationalization. Doing any of the three underhanded methods mentioned above only shames Islam. We the Muslims, if we want to be true Believers, must be on our guard against denigrating the faith.
The job of a Muslim partaking in Da'wah is to deliver the message. I do that in the most objective, balanced way I can out of respect for the receiver, myself and Islam. I do not merely say, "Well, we believe this and this, and then that and that," and have it over with. I, and anyone in that position, should feel free to clear up any misconceptions and confusions the one receiving might have. Be interactive. Keep it interesting.
This is why I prefer the "Islamic perspective" approach, as explained above. With this style, the receiver is able to see how the belief system (deen) is manifested in real life, rather than simply reading a neutered list of beliefs and obligations.
And I personally prefer adding the comparative religion approach (only in the case of where the receiver was or is a Christian, or knows about Christianity, as I do). This way, the receiver may see what's related and what is different, and the two faiths can act as a foil to each other. It is also, interestingly enough, a very effective way to illustrate the subtle beauties and manifest mercies of Islam.
Another reason I take this approach (and what a strong attraction Islam had for me) is how I see Da'wah as "passive evangelism." In Christianity, evangelists take on "aggressive evangelism" following the command, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation," as found in Mark 16:15--part of a series of verses expunged from most modern bibles as they are not found in the most ancient texts, and are considered insertions.
With this aggressive evangelism approach, Christians see it as their duty to disseminate the "Good News" to any and all, often regardless of the receiver's interest or willingness to listen. Historically, this approach went further into compulsion, as in the case of the native "savages" of any land the Christians colonized. Their rationalization, even for the most gruesome of conversion methods, being, "It's for their own good." Saving souls, as you know, is a tough business.
For a person with a progressive frame of mind (or an ounce of respect for humanity), this approach leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Enter Islam's Da'wah, what I christen passive evangelism. In this system, the propagator is expected to deliver the message--in the best way possible (read: informative, even)--and leave the rest to God. If the receiver accepts Islam, great! If not, that is their choice. At the very least, maybe their minds will at least be cleared up of any misconceptions. And perhaps, with their new knowledge, maybe they will say something that will cause someone else to embrace Islam, or may themselves do so at a later date. It is in the hands of God, and for Him to decide. As for the one telling: come what may. What good is having faith if you don't use it?
I'm giving it a whirl
Well I've been using livejournal but shoot, I like this design a lot. And having a blog is much spiffier than having an online journal. A journal is, "Let me share my stupid feelings and thoughts." A blog is, "Did you hear about this? It's fucking terrible! We need to do something!" Well, that's how I see it.
I don't think I'm going to leave livejournal though. I like my design there too. I think perhaps I'll keep both. I'll use livejournal for its thing, and use this for its thing, whatever that thing will be. This will be more article-ish posts. I think I'll copy one of my LiveJournal posts to it.
I don't think I'm going to leave livejournal though. I like my design there too. I think perhaps I'll keep both. I'll use livejournal for its thing, and use this for its thing, whatever that thing will be. This will be more article-ish posts. I think I'll copy one of my LiveJournal posts to it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)