• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

At least 82 killed as gunmen rampage in India city

While I would agree that it is difficult to label them because of their unethical tactics,

It's not difficult, it's not a "label," and it has nothing to do with whether the tactics are "ethical."

The Third Geneva Convention is very clear what "combatants" are eligible for POW status. jin1776 was explicitly referring to the standards Geneva requires for combatants to be entitled to such status when he referred to uniforms, carrying arms openly, etc. (these also include being attached to a regular military force or a militia formally attached to a regular military force). Combatanats that satisfy the POW standards are considered lawful combatants and are eligible to enjoy the privileges and protections provided by Geneva.

Now, in 1977 there was an international movement to bring terrorists into the Geneva fold. That was called Protocol 1 and the United States refused to sign it. As well, there is an opt-in provision for states and sub-national groups who are not formal signers of Geneva. However, to opt-in they must adhere to the Conventions prescriptions for waging war.

This is not difficult stuff and it has nothing to do with judging the behavior of some as ethical or otherwise.

They take issue with one thing, the presence of the occupying coalition force. Not just US troops, but those from other countries as well as over 100,000 private contractors who, do not fall under military or Iraqi jurisdiction. As long as the occupying forces play a large role in security they will see the Iraqi democracy as nothing more than a pro-US puppet.

Who cares? These insurgents are not only fighting US and coalition forces and contractors attached to the US military, but Iraqi civilians. Whether bombing polce/security service employment lines, beheading Iraqi civilians that assist US troops, murder Iraqi contractors assisting coalition public works projects, they are killing civilians. They are terrorists even if their goal is an insurgency designed to undermine the legitimacy of the national government.
 
Dirka dirka, mohammad, jihad... yeah I get it..


Dispute these facts.

FrontPage Magazine

Wake up Reverend, they were not convicted for violence charges or paying for bombs. They were charged for selling products from their computer company. The "terrorist money" in half those organizations went to pay for schools and the needy. Categorizing any money that goes to Syria or Libya as "terrorist funds" may work for you, but I'd prefer to distinguish between terrorists and charity cases.
 
Wake up Reverend, they were not convicted for violence charges or paying for bombs. They were charged for selling products from their computer company. The "terrorist money" in half those organizations went to pay for schools and the needy. Categorizing any money that goes to Syria or Libya as "terrorist funds" may work for you, but I'd prefer to distinguish between terrorists and charity cases.




Then actually distinguish, don't just claim it.
 
Thanks. This paper ran the story describing them as a "continuing insult" and a "racist bomb". on 10/17/2005 17 days after they were published in the Danish paper not 3 months before. It showed 4 of the 13.

You know, you're absolutely right. I'M SORRY, EVERYONE! Really, I read that all wrong....

Little stir was caused when an Egyptian newspaper printed the Mohammed drawings last October during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan


A popular newspaper in Cairo printed the much-contested Mohammed drawings last October during the Muslims' holy month of Ramadan, reported an Egypt-based blog-writer.

The widely read independent opposition newspaper Al-Fagr printed the caricatures just a few weeks after they originally appeared in Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten, but no protests were reported, noted the blog-writer, an Egyptian investment banker who goes under the name 'Sandmonkey'.

Although Muslim protestors have attacked Danish embassies in a number of countries to protest the publication of the caricatures in Jyllands-Posten, there was no reaction from the Egyptian newspaper’s Muslim readers indicating that they found the drawings insulting, Sandmonkey told The Copenhagen Post.

'This whole business has been driving me crazy for the past two weeks,' he said. 'Of all the countries to protest against - why Denmark? You guys have been a friend of the Arabs for years.'

The blog-writer said that he believed authorities in Egypt and other Muslim countries were using the case for political reasons.

'The drawings create a common enemy to distract people from political reforms. It's useful to have something outside the country to focus your anger on,' he said.
The Copenhagen Post
 
Sheep Of Fools

"Sheep Of Fools"
The point that I always make around this issue...and any issue similar is this. Islam did not cause these actions to occur. It is the people, their interpretation of Islam and their own mindset that caused these things to occur. Without Islam, they would have used something else to justify their actions. We see this all throughout history with, pretty much, every religion, ideology, nationality, etc... It's people's perceptions and interpretations that are the problem, not the conceptual belief system. Those that blame Islam are about as bad as those who pervert Islam.
There are reasons to agree and disagree with your assertion.

Consider that the qurayn is first an uncompromising manifesto.

The initial decree is for creation of the establishment; it is a mandate of fierce determination for the acquisition of the city state of hejaz and for the resolute protectionism of its traditions and laws, as a matter of survival for the quraysh peoples, as the perpetuation of the patriarchal lineage of ishmael.

Ishmaelism is to remain highly vigilant.

Any subsequent decree or acclaim as a religion of peace is intrapersonal to the domain of the city state, and interpersonal with outsiders as long as the establishment of the city state is not threatened.

Now, the problem exists that non-quraysh peoples have misappropriated the religion, by presuming its universality and overgeneralizing its jurisdiction and discertionary boundaries.

Thus, the first decree of establishment is clearly consistent with the responsibilities ordered by the religion itself, eventhough, it is not the intent of the religion to establish its laws beyond the city state of hejaz.

Similar rules of conduct exist in the torah for the israeli peoples however pundist of israelism do not claim that their traditions and laws are universal and applicable beyond the city state of israel.

Now "christians" say they see fit to exclude certain tenets of the torah, though it seldom seems to relate a reason.

That is, non-israelis according to the torah should aspire to the seven laws of noah, which have been referenced as a basis for secular law.

That is a distinct departure from the city state laws of either ishmaelism or isrealism which cannot be excised, per se, from the orthodoxy of the religions.

Thus, non-ishmaelis must be rebuked for any adherence to the establishment decree of ishmaelism outside of hejaz.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sheep Of Fools

"Sheep Of Fools"
There are reasons to agree and disagree with your assertion.

Consider that the qurayn is first an uncompromising manifesto.

The initial decree is for creation of the establishment; it is a mandate of fierce determination for the acquisition of the city state of hejaz and for the resolute protectionism of its traditions and laws, as a matter of survival for the quraysh peoples, as the perpetuation of the patriarchal lineage of ishmael.

Ishmaelism is to remain highly vigilant.

Any subsequent decree or acclaim as a religion of peace is intrapersonal to the domain of the city state, and interpersonal with outsiders as long as the establishment of the city state is not threatened.

Now, the problem exists that non-quraysh peoples have misappropriated the religion, by presuming its universality and overgeneralizing its jurisdiction and discertionary boundaries.

Thus, the first decree of establishment is clearly consistent with the responsibilities ordered by the religion itself, eventhough, it is not the intent of the religion to establish its laws beyond the city state of hejaz.

Similar rules of conduct exist in the torah for the israeli peoples however pundist of israelism do not claim that their traditions and laws are universal and applicable beyond the city state of israel.

Now "christians" say they see fit to exclude certain tenets of the torah, though it seldom seems to relate a reason.

That is, non-israelis according to the torah should aspire to the seven laws of noah, which have been referenced as a basis for secular law.

That is a distinct departure from the city state laws of either ishmaelism or isrealism which cannot be excised, per se, from the orthodoxy of the religions.

Thus, non-ishmaelis must be rebuked for any adherence to the establishment decree of ishmaelism outside of hejaz.

What verses make you so confident that the religious laws are confined to specific geographic regions and/or people and were concrete references rather than subjective ones.
 
Standing

"Standing"
What verses make you so confident that the religious laws are confined to specific geographic regions and/or people and were concrete references rather than subjective ones.
Which confirmations do you seek, those for ishmaelism, or those for isrealism?
Qurayn -

Sura 5: The Table
"(48) And to you We have revealed the Book containing the truth, confirming the earlier revelations, and preserving them (from change and corruption). So judge between them by what has been revealed by God, and do not follow their whims, side-stepping the truth that has reached you. To each of you We have given a law and a way and a pattern of life. If God had pleased He could surely have made you one people (professing one faith). But He wished to try and test you by that which He gave you. So try to excel in good deeds. To Him will you all return in the end, when He will tell you of what you were at variance.

Surah 29: The Spider

(27) And We gave him Isaac and Jacob, and We appointed the Prophecy and the Book to be among his seed; We gave him his wage in this world, and in the world to come he shall be among the righteous.

Surah 106: The Quraysh
(1) For the composing of Koraish,
(2) their composing for the winter and summer caravan!
(3) So let them serve the Lord of this House
(4) who has fed them against hunger and secured them from fear.

Surah 109: The Disbelievers

(1) Say: 'O unbelievers,
(2) I serve not what you serve
(3) and you are not serving what I serve,
(4) nor am I serving what you have served,
(5) neither are you serving what I serve
(6) To you your religion, and to me my religion!'

Sura 46: The Dunes

"(35) .....This is the message to be conveyed: Shall any perish but the ungodly?"

al-Hejaz (also Hijaz, Hedjaz; Arabic: الحجاز‎ al-Ḥiǧāz,) (ln) literally "the barrier"
Its main city is Jeddah, but it is probably better-known for the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

Quraysh (ln)
(3) al-Arab-al-Mustariba meaning ‘the mixed Arabs’: this line of Arabs traced their line to Ishmael, the son of the prophet Abraham, who migrated and married to the Arab-ul-Ariba of Mecca. Muhammad’s line is traced to Kedar, one of the sons of Ishmael.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I don't see why they should have to. The differences between the extremists and the peaceful Muslims should be glaringly obvious. The problem is that people don't want to do the research to find out for themselves. For instance, I'm a fairly anti-Christian person. However, I'm able to see the clear differences between extremist idiots like the Westboro Baptist lunatics and an average Christian. The differences are blatant and obvious, just as the differences are for extremist Muslims and peaceful Muslims.

Besides, peaceful Muslims have stood against the extremists and expressed their disgust. Unfortunately, a majority of people turn a deaf ear to this, not to mention our own media. Obviously their standing against the extremists isn't doing enough to get the message out. So what else are they supposed to do?

Bull****, Thats just another cowards excuse.

I know of a group of Muslims who ARE NOT afraid. Maybe you and lala could learn something from them.

Muslims Against Sharia
 
Re: 40 Held Hostage in Mumbai Terror Attack

Today, Reuters reported:

Pakistani investigators have unearthed substantive links between the gunmen who attacked Mumbai in November and a banned Pakistani Islamist militant group, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Ten gunmen killed 179 people in the attack on India's financial hub that India has blamed on the Pakistan-based Islamist group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) group.

Pakistani investigators find Mumbai link: report | U.S. | Reuters
 
Back
Top Bottom