Explaining it to an American Friend

Ref scout #: 5

[gowardhan/harimau,

could you leave one Chowk board without your hateful excrements?]

Harteful? To whom? To those who have a sense of logic.

Tell me, sweetheart, when was the first time elections were held in Northern Territories. In case you forget Pakistan`s geography, this is the area not included in ``Azad`` Kashmir but was originally part of the Kingdom of Kashmir.

The residents of that area went to the Pakistan Supreme Court and demanded the right to elect their own leaders, if you remember correctly. And, you want self-determination for ``Indian Occupied`` Kashmir!

Tell me, Ardeshir Cowasjee has NOT pointed out that Shia professionals are being singled out for killings in Pakistan.

The more you interact here, the more you are becoming like YLH.

Are you dating him, by any chance?

An expanation of the verse with some comments of my own.

Allah the Almighty says:

``Do not kill the person God has forbidden to kill, except with

justification. Whoever is killed unjustly, We have appointed to his

next-of-kin authority (for revenge) but let him not be extravagent in

killing: for surely he is helped by the law``

[Surah al Israa (17): 33]

Baidawi, the Quranic exegesist writes:

Regarding ``Do not kill the person God has forbidden to kill, except with

justification``; the exception is with regards to one of three cases:

unbelief after previous belief, adultery after having led a virtous life and

the intentional homicide of a believer.

Regarding ``Whoever is killed unjustly``; means without the death being

deserved according to the law

Regarding ``We have appointed to his next of kin``; refers to the one who

administers their affairs after death, that is, the heir.

Regarding ``authority (for revenge)``; refers to authority to carry out the

punishment prescribed for homicide on him who is to be punished, or to

undertake retaliation (qisas) upon the one who committed homicide. Since

Allah says in the verse `whoever is killed unjustly`, this shows that the

killing must be an intentionally hostile act, since mere error is not

characterised as unjust.

Regarding ``but let them not be extravagent``; the one who kills in one of the

three cases above is justified

Regarding ``in killing``; in that he may perhaps kill someone whom it is not

justified to kill. The prudent person thus will do nothing that brings

destruction to him. Or, the `heir` who is not to be extravagent (in

exercising his option for revenge_ ismeant, when he inflicts mutilation

whilekilling, or when he kills anotherthan the one who committed the

homicide.

Regarding ``for surely he is helped by the law``; here the motive for the

prohibition of extravagence is stated in a new sentance. The pronoun `he`

refers either to the one who is killed (unjustly), since he is helped in

this world through retaliation for the death which is established by God for

the sake ofjustice, and he will be helped in the hereafter though the reward

of paradise. Or the pronoun refers to his (wali/heir) since God has helped

the latter in that He granted him the retaliation and commanded others to

assist him. Or the pronoun refers to those whom the wali (heir) kills in

extravagence, because they are helped in thatretaliation in extravagence or

punishment and responsibility for the extravagence are accepted.

No one doubts the atrocious nature of the attack in NY & DC. The

perpretrators, whoever they may be must be caught, and punished. However as

Prophet Muhammad said:

``The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by his strength, but the

strong is the one who controls himself while in anger.``

[Bukhari 8.135]

Prudence needs to be considered in order to ensure that no more `innocent

lives` are taken.

At the same time, it has to be realised that US foreign policy does itself

result in many innocent peoples lives being taken away as collatarel damage

e.g in Iraq where hundreds of thousands of children have died as a result of

US sanctions; or in Palestine; or in ...

What ought to be sought is justice, not a pre-Islamic form of tribal

revenge; that is, your son killed my son, so not only will I kill your son,

but your whole tribe even if you and the rest of the peolpe in your tribe

had nothing to do with it. This was a very common occurance in the pre

Islamic days amongst the Arab tribes.

Allah the Almighty says:

``In the long run evil in the extreme will be the End of those who do

evil...``

[Surah ar Rum (30): 10]

``You will all return to Me and I will tell you the truth of all that you

did``

[Surah al Ankabut (29):

Israeli Zionist teams are training Indian forces in Indian occupied Kashmir: Jane`s

Updated on 2001-08-17 13:45:26





WASHINGTON, August 17 (PNS): Israeli intelligence agencies have ``several teams`` now in Kashmir training Indian occupation forces to fight Kashmiri Mujahideen groups operating there.

``Israel is understood to be ``heavily involved`` in helping New Delhi combat Mujahideen and this is part of the intensifying of relations between the security apparatus of the two countries, said a report on Jane`s Terrorism and Security Monitor.

It gave no specific details of the cooperation or deployment, but said the moves ``fits into Israel`s increasing focus on events in Central Asia, and as far as Indonesia``.

Recent reports in the Israeli media also speak of increased exchanges between New Delhi and Tel Aviv, including one account of a phone conversation between India`s foreign minister Jaswant Singh and Israel`s Shimon Peres in which they discussed the security issues facing their countries.

Although Singh did not express or mentioned anything on Israel`s brutal action against Palestinian Mujahideen and, on the contrary, had plenty of questions, Peres is said to have explained the rationale of the Israeli counterattacks.

``I am suggesting that it is about time that America/Americans started at least asking themselves whether they had any part to play in creating the psyches that lead to these terrible events``

Hey dude, this is just great. How about we kill five million of their people and let them introspect on what part they had to play in creating the psyhces that lead to it. Oh yeah, not that I condone the death of five million innocent people at all...Dude, I think that`s just terrible it happened..

PM:

I think the following article from Dawn proposes a better outlook:

/ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */

From evil can come good

By Humayun Khan

Osama Bin Laden, ironically a child of the CIA, has been the cynosure of all eyes, particularly American eyes, for more than three years now. Today, he is the prime suspect in the outrage committed in America last Tuesday. By association, those in any sort of contact with him, be they individuals, organizations or governments, are also the subject of close attention.

First among these, of course, is the Taliban government of Afghanistan which is his host. Despite its claims that bin Laden`s activities have been effectively curbed for many months, the Taliban have failed to convince the world. Compounding their poor image on this count, they have, by other actions, incurred the further odium of the international community. So, rightly or wrongly, it is unlikely that their protestations of innocence following the horrendous events of September 11 will fall on sympathetic ears.

One step removed from the Taliban, in this context, is Pakistan. It is one of three countries that recognize their regime but it is the only one that maintains normal relations with them. Indeed, the impression worldwide remains that they were initially a creation of Pakistan and their survival has, to a large extent, been underwritten by us.

So it was only to be expected that Pakistan would be at the centre of the storm generated by the barbaric atrocities in New York and Washington. In a sense, therefore, our chickens have suddenly started coming home to roost. Half-hearted attempts by us in the past to prove that, in fact, we strongly disagreed with many of the Taliban`s policies and futile claims that we were a restraining force on them are, today, of little avail.

For many months now, saner voices within Pakistan itself have been calling for a more decisive and courageous disassociation with all kinds of extremist elements, be they governments or so-called religious organizations. Unfortunately, however, a certain ambivalence on the part of our policy-makers has been evident. Much lip-service has been paid to moderation but every attempt to curb extremism has been abandoned soon after it had started.

Now it seems that a decision is to be forced upon us. Initial indications are that we will take the right decision and this is to be welcomed. But it is not going to be easy and its domestic repercussions will be severe. Our real test will lie in our resolve.

Despite the dangers, there is no doubt that we cannot avoid firm and courageous decisions, not just in the context of the specific reaction to the acts of terror on September 11, but also in the more relevant context of Pakistan`s own future. We have to decide whether we are to remain silent hostages to the forces of extremism and terror and continue to bear the consequences of their misdeeds, or we are to join the mainstream of the battle against them.

All people with any sense of compassion and decency sympathize with the victims of murder in New York and Washington and with the United States as a country. The people of Pakistan are no exception. These acts have to be seen not just as crimes against America or against the western world or against NATO. Seen in their proper perspective, they are crimes against humanity. There were Pakistanis among those killed in the World Trade Centre. What is more, within our country, innocent citizens are regular victims of the evil forces of extremism. Surely the time has come to put an end to their barbarity.

Pakistan`s response has to be measured not just against the yardstick of support to the United States, but against the yardstick of its own national interest. This interest demands that the forces of extremism be permanently stamped out. There could be no better opportunity than now. Any wavering at this juncture will have incalculable consequences for our future.

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, the greatest blunder would be to punish the Afghan people for the misdeeds of their rulers. Any military action which results in the killing of innocent Afghans must be avoided. They have already had more than their fair share of suffering, inflicted on them by outsiders and insiders alike. With technological sophistication of such a high degree now available, it should not be impossible to selectively target those who may be the culprits and those who support them. Pakistan should not shy away from being part of a drive against such elements. Indeed, Pakistan should be prepared to be in the forefront against such of them whose operations and influence extend to our own country.

The task is obviously complex because of the interface between its international and domestic aspects. On the international front, this is a unique opportunity for Pakistan to rejoin the mainstream of universal attitudes and aspirations. Domestically, this is a challenge which calls for a clear sense of the country`s future direction and the courage to move in that direction.

It is clear that the immediate objective of the world community is to bring to book the perpetrators of the atrocities of September 11 and their supporters. But there is also a longer term objective which is to wage a continuing war against terrorism as a phenomenon. On the latter count, Pakistan till now has been more often bracketed with a handful of countries where terrorism has thrived rather than the majority where it has found no tolerance.

This is an image we now have to erase. If, in the process, elements within our society, misleadingly proclaiming that the cause of Islam will suffer, choose to oppose these efforts, then we must be prepared to face them. There is a large, silent majority in Pakistan which is moderate in its outlook and which wants to live a life free of coercion and threat. This majority does not agree that the brand of Islam propagated by extremist organizations is the true Islam. Their voices, so long muted by fear of the militants, must now come to the fore. We can no longer allow men of violence to dictate to us how we should lead our lives.

In the true spirit of Islam, the first efforts must be through conciliation and dialogue. But the militants must be left with no illusions. They must not be allowed to believe that dialogue is being sought because they are strong and in a position to hold the country hostage. It should be made clear that if they do not put an end to their violence, their threats of violence, and their advocacy of violence, the full might of the state, backed by the vast majority of peace-loving citizens will be brought to bear upon them.

If, unfortunately, such an eventuality does arise, we must not flinch. We must take heart from the fact that we will have the full support of the international community and, in the process, perhaps we might be able to dispel many of the prejudices and animosities to which we are now subject because, by our actions, we would be proving that good can come out of evil.

/ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */

Thrasher Rules

Semper Fi

About Poll

How should the United States handle the September 11 attacks?

Diplomatic pressure and a public trial (19)

51%



Military retaliation (18)

48%



Total Votes: 37

``Is Science without Religion a Desirable Entity?``

Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal - Director, Center for Islam and Science

The tragic events of September 11 have been universally condemned. These events have, once again, shown that science and its sister, technology, has really transformed the way our lives our shaped. From the crime itself to its reporting and from the reactions it produced to the extent of global reach of these reactions, everything would have been unimaginable fifty years ago. The technological advances, based on new discoveries in various branches of science, have made it possible for us humans to suffer tragedies as they happen.

This transforming power of science has also produced the illusion that science is really all that we humans need to live. After all, no other

entity has such a global reach. No other entity can produce instant global reactions to a human situation. Religions do not come into our sitting rooms with the same force, they do not evoke a universal response and they are but an individual affair. Rather, more than this. The tragedy has profaned at least one religion and it has made a case against all religions as being suspect; they motivate violence.

In the midst of the tragedy, the reappearance of Richard Dawkins` 1996 article on Metanexus with its provocative illusion to ``one of the stories

told to the young Muslim suicide bombers`` further enhanced the impression that the tragedy was somehow the result of teachings of a religion. In this case Islam. We all know Dawkin`s position on science and religion discourse. His publicly stated position is that science and religion belong to two non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA).

But this false and dangerous notion, that science and religion have nothing in common, is taken to its logical conclusion in Dawkin`s full article where he unabashedly proposes complete elimination of religion, through his ``new

education`` aimed at removing all absolutes. But what is more painful at this time of grief is the perpetuation of mis-information and false charges

against Islam in the quoted text reproduced in Metanexus regarding the Islamic teachings. Dawkin sites no source for his information; he gives no

reference. Instead, in a highly unscientific and scandalous way, he merely perpetuates false notions by saying that the ``suicide bombers [are taught that this] martyrdom is the quickest way to heaven -- and not just heaven but a special part of heaven where they will receive their special reward of 72 virgin brides. It occurs to me that our best hope may be to provide a kind of `spiritual arms control`: send in specially trained theologians to deescalate the going rate in virgins.``

This patently false notion, further vulgarized by a scientist who believes in total separation of science and religion, forces us to pause and to

reflect on the question: What kind of education has produced a mind which can churn out such false notions? A scientific education for sure but one without values. A person who can rely on such unscientific ways to argue his point must have some other foundation for his assertions. What might be that foundation other than prejudice and ignorance?

But there is no time to waste on such falsehood. I believe the task for us is to find ways to engage members of our respective faith communities to establish bridges and regain a sense of proportion, direction and purpose in

fighting the menace that terrorizes us all. What is needed is not the kind of rhetoric that would create an unbridgeable chasm between different faith communities but a sober understanding of our common future on this planet--a future that has been decidedly and irreversibly shaped by science but which cannot be worth living if science is not guided by a higher system of

values, ultimate ends and goals. These values cannot come from science itself. They have to be culled from the common heritage of human race, from the wisdom and teachings of religions, none of which advocates terrorism.

T

here is no religion which preaches violence that consumes lives of thousands of innocent people; it is people like Dawkins who propagate such

false notions about religions; their motivation is merely to discredit religions.

In times of crisis like this, one cannot help but rely on the absolutes. As humans, the only way open to us is to search for truth and use all our

inherent abilities to respect other people`s truths. This requires humility.

This requires compassion and love. Humility, compassion and love which science alone cannot provide. The sooner we understand this, better it is, for nothing less than our survival is at stake.``

I am touched once again by your patriotism... Thankyou for working to save Pakistan`s image.

Gowardhan

Enlighten us, is Patrick Masih an Islamic fundamentalist too?

-YLH

i love you

Pat,

The responsibility is not only on fanatics who claim they are muslims, but also on people (muslim, christian, atheist, whatever) of those countries in whose country these cowards have set up cells. It is time to stand up for humanity`s sake and oppose these fanatics, rather than justify historically why these bafoons act like this.

Fanatics are in every religion, but only Islam has trouble controlling their bafoons. KKK in USA can not get enough support from public like islamic fanatics are getting. You see, finally it boils down to majority of people who can shape up a society or culture. Be brave and help the humanity. Americans still can not understand why civilians of these contries can not rise to the challenge. Americans understands why these fanatics are behaving badly, but sorry, there is no justification to their rationale.

It has been estimated that 4,000 jews work/worked in the WTC...almost none of the jews showed up for work on black tuesday...what a coincidence(?)!

``The `Journalists` first question was: `if you recapture all of Afghanistan, what will be your attitude to Osama Bin Laden?` They didn`t wait for an answer. One of the two french-speaking North African men detonated a powerful bomb, killing himself instantly and fatally wounding the man they had journeyed across the globe to meet: Ahmed Shah Massoud, leader of the ragtag Northern Alliance that is fighting a civil war against the ruling Taliban militia...Many analysts suspect the attack on Massoud was a preemptive strike by Bin Laden: anticipating retaliation against Afghanistan in the wake of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, he had sought to deprive the US of a powerful prospective ally.``

SOURCE: Anthony Davis, ``One Less Weapon Against Bin Laden.`` The Time Magazine, September 24 2001

RE: Fatimah

``Israeli Zionist teams are training Indian forces in Indian occupied Kashmir: Jane`s``

This is great news! It`s about time Indian forces stamped out these Muajhideen Pakistani terrorists! Now if only Mossad could teach RAW a few things.

Here`s to Indo-Israeli friendship!

ylh

[Is PM an Islamic fundamentalist?]

Not only Islamic fundamentalists are fools. Remember you are one also.