Paris Attack

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by TruthWinner, Dec 17, 2023.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    That's a problem of different dimension.

    Trying times indeed with sunnis being buffetted by non-believing swines on one side, charlatan sufi wolves (in sheepskins) on other and salafi dogs on another. As aH said, let swines devour dogs; but who will devour the wolves? the dogs, may be?
    Noori likes this.
  2. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    I concede that sidi abu Hasan's standpoint on vigilantism is correct. I'm merely making a nafsanic vengeful argument. There's nothing more to my points than seeking gratification in seeing a blasphemer meet his just end in this very world. Who knows in what trying conditions I will be in the hereafter when these blasphemers will be getting roasting.
  3. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    On few occasions, I have heard ulemas (such as Allama Qamaruzzaman Azmi) citing the inflammatory attacks on the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by Christians under Muslim Spain. At first, these Cordovan Christian martyrs (who would stand in street corners and conduct their filthy rants) were promptly executed. This soon became such a commonplace that Muslims started ignoring these attacks and it was only a matter of time that Muslim reign in Spain came to an unceremonious end.

    For a long time I thought that these stories about blaspheming cordovans were probably apocryphal, until I read Quinn's "The Sum of All Heresies - The Image of Islam in Western Thought" which confirmed that these events were indeed true. I still doubt if there was any direct causal link between the demise of Muslim rule and tolerant/blaise attitude shown by Muslims to blasphemy against the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi wasallam).

    What we see now is probably a case of history repeating itself in some form.
  4. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    sherkhan, i comprehend what you're saying about abu hasan's 2 points.

    what about my point that i added to his 2 points - namely the fact that we are hounded by rotten munaafiqeen and scholars for dollars and they have many many mureeds whom they can easily mislead and misguide.

    i made that point precisely BECAUSE we live in this dystopian world!

    we can watch and understand our damned enemies very well, regardless of our ability to deter them or not.

    the problem comes when we have to watch our "friends" and "shuyukh" and "leaders"

    it's not about an acid attack on a mosque or two in europe, or chinese maoists breaking the bones of uighur dissidents

    it is about shayateen like padri and keller and hanson and yaqoubi and jifry and adnan trying to make blasphemers out of ordinary Muslims!
  5. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    But these kafirs have been spewing filth with impunity since time immemorial. Whether or not CH was attacked, such scurrilous publications will never end, since they enjoy the immunity from their govts and double-standard laws.

    Charlie Hebdo published cartoons on its own accord without any trigger or provocation. First CH published cartoons in 2006 (and reprinted the Danish cartoons), then they took it a step forward in 2011 and finally emboldened by support from Sarkozy, Hollande et al breached all boundaries in 2012.

    Tell me why CH did it. What provoked pastor Terry Jones to burn the holy Qur'an? These pigs are not reacting to events but merely acting in pattern. Filthy minds will spew filth, provocation or no provocation. They did not stop then; they will probably not stop now.

    I repeat myself for the 3rd time on this thread, at least the latest attack will act as deterrent and instill fear in minds of institutional press. Fringe lunatics will still spew filth, but any company employing few heads will now be scared to do so. Mere virtual threat from North Korea was enough to send Sony cowering; real threat to life (on those who have only one life to live for) will deter them. Real threat worked with fatwa on Rushdie; it will work now.

    In a Utopian world, I and you would raise hands in du'a, curse the blasphemers and lo & behold they would drop dead. But alas this is a dystopian world; so someone needs to pick up arms and "express themselves freely" with it (oh yes, why should west only limit freedom of expression to tongue and pen, why not extend that to guns?), so that others sit up and notice.

    Muslim lives are in ever increasing danger. This attack will not alleviate, nor aggravate it. Attack or no attack, their faith will continue to be crushed (ask the uighurs in Xinjiang), they will be vilified by media, hounded by the authorities and denied basic rights.


    I don't disagree with your concern on vigilantism. You consider it evil, I consider it "necessary evil" (in some cases, such as this).
    Noori likes this.
  6. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    the west MUST endorse the view that the freedom of speech / expression DOES NOT mean "freedom to insult".

    do not the western nations have scores of laws and millions of lawyers, who jump at the smallest excuse to file a case of libel / slander / defamation? does not abusing the "sacred constitutions" of such countries carry penalties equal to that of sedition / treason? our Islamic law, the real sacred law, stipulates the same penalty. it is universal, not confined by borders. and everyone must respect it.

    we, as Muslims, never abuse nor ever will abuse the true Prophets - in fact we are even forbidden to abuse the false deities, lest someone reacts by abusing the Supreme Lord, Allah.

    وَلَا تَسُبُّوا الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ فَيَسُبُّوا اللَّهَ عَدْوًا بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ ۗ كَذَٰلِكَ زَيَّنَّا لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ عَمَلَهُمْ ثُمَّ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِم مَّرْجِعُهُمْ فَيُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ

    Do not abuse those whom they worship besides Allah lest they become disrespectful towards Allah’s Majesty, through injustice and ignorance; likewise, in the eyes of every nation, We have made their deeds appear good – then towards their Lord they have to return and He will inform them of what they used to do.
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    to yaqubi (or whoever is tweeting in his name):

    yes. but what about ka'ab ibn ashraf (whose fort is the national heritage of saudis) and the SaHabiy Muhammad ibn Maslamah?
    is that hadith forged too?
  8. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran

    553536536793595905 is not a valid tweet id
  9. Wadood

    Wadood Veteran

    ma sha Allah, ma sha Allah, brother AbdalQadir, my du'a is to Allah that there be more sincere people like you among Muslims in the west, who speak the truth, who do not budge upholding the truth!

    may Allah blacken the faces of neutrals, they are accomplice to this crime against Muslims living in the West, and now in the East too
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    @AQ: brother, it is possible that yaqubi sahib is trying to do damage control and intends innocents (assuming the policeman) etc. you don't have definitive proof that he deems blasphemers as innocent. try to have some husn-zann brother. i am sure these people secretly say the same thing we do, but they are doing this for public consumption and to avoid a backlash.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    this is both a straw-man and a false-generalisation. we do not mind freedom of ideas, good and bad. but that doesn't mean freedom to insult. because following the prophet is based on loving him [i.e., if you love him, you will follow him] and love means that you cherish everything that is related to him. SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. muslims love their prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and will be enraged when an uncouth scoundrel disrespects him.

    let us suppose a couple who love each other deeply; and if a tramp, low-life vermin spits on your beloved, it is natural to get angry. and people will 'understand' that your violent reaction was because of love.

    the love of a muslim for his/her Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is far greater, ethereal and nobler than any mundane love. loving him SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is true faith itself.

    conversely, if the Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is not admired, and given due respect, love will diminish and consequently nothing remains of faith or religion. just like what happened to the west - they became godless eventually.

    the Lord Almighty commands us to respect him and revere him:


    one of the reasons we say that wahabis are far from faith, is because their putrid madh'hab deems it polytheism!

    shirk Tahrey jis meiN ta'zeem e Rasul
    us burey maz'hab pey la'anat kijiye

    look, the wahabis were the foremost to issue condolences for the human filth.

    so the straw-man argument is: that muslims abhor a 'culture of freedom of ideas, good or bad'. if that were the case, you would not find extreme heresies recorded by the most pious men of their time, and then patiently refuting why they are wrong. but there is no point in insulting things deemed sacred in faith.

    the generalisation is that we are intolerant for EVERY criticism.

    what progress is gained by insulting or disrespecting religious figures? are your minds so narrow, that outside of insulting religious figures, you cannot see any progress? i challenge you to show me five points of progress that you crave for your civilisation that can be gained by insulting prophets.

    yes. the qur'an taught us before you preach it to us.






    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Noori and Ghulam Ali like this.
  12. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    la3natullahi 3alaih for saying and teaching that those who insult the Prophet are "innocent". la3natullahi 3alaih.

    disclaimer: my comment is aimed at ANYONE who calls those who insult the Prophet sal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam as "innocent". i stand by my words very proudly. if yaqoubi's account was hacked or someone said that on his behalf while unauthorized by yaqoubi, my comments are aimed at the utterer of that blasphemy. if yaqoubi did indeed say those words, then i very proudly say that my words apply to him.

    i don't believe any scoundrel who calls those who insult the Prophet as "innocent" to be a Sayyid.


    is this the same "person" who spoke against hassoun's blasphemy????
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2015
  13. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran

    Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi‏@Shaykhabulhuda
    No insult to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is worse than killing innocent people by his Name. He said, human life is more precious than the Ka'ba

    553522854369955841 is not a valid tweet id
  14. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    this is probably posted by a kafir, but this same line of thinking is being promoted by "shuyukh" like keller and other butlers

    it's a very strong psychological trap used by dajjals to dupe Muslims. it starts of on strategic issues like "let them bark and shut up so that they do not do it any more" but eventually the dajjals stretch it further to say Muslims should be "tolerant" of such filth.
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    yes. a rather candid admission by hamza.

  16. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    @sherkhan: i do not shed crocodile tears on the death of the accursed blasphemers at charlie-hebdo; my point is, that it is not in wider interests of muslims to violate local-laws.

    that article you posted "i am not charlie" should be sent to muslim 'leaders' who are mourning the death of scoundrels at charlie-hebdo. may they burn in hell and be damned forever.

    PS: AQ summed it well too. this encourages them to spew more filth, and as ulama have advised, it is like an itch. the more you scratch, the more it increases, until you get bloody. we should ignore it - NOT because we are passive, but with the strategic goal of stopping it.

    may Allah ta'ala forgive us, and give us courage to stand for the honour of the Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  17. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    sherkhan dear, the key points of abu Hasan's post are

    in these times when "Muslim" rulers have become bought and paid for agents and speak the language of the enemy (not just linguistically) and are such vermin that their comfortable velvet beds can't be compromised in the name of Islam & Muslims, let alone the honor of the Prophet sal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam, then such blaspheming zaneem's become all the more courageous and defiant. one danish paper may have been deterred because it is an organized venture. but it doesn't mean every God-damned zaneem of the west will be deterred on online media, offices, streets, etc. etc. etc.

    notwithstanding their hate speech and attacks at the Muslims living in those countries and violence against mosques (which incidentally, is not counted as "terrorism" by the same zunamaa). sure, it is the truth that the lives and properties of all the Muslims on the planet are not more valuable than the honor of a toe nail of the Prophet sal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam, but in such cases of vigilante attacks, both these outcomes come together hand in hand.

    i would say that a related third and even more serious drawback is this:

    the butlers of such zunamaa who sit on pulpits and have access to a microphone, will mislead Muslims in droves. already some french "imams" are asking Muslims to mourn along with the nation and express solidarity with them in this "trying time" for the french nation. people like hanson will craft fantastical theories on how he is one of "us" as well as one of "the cartoonists at charlie hebdo"*. keller will probably move a step ahead and bring forward examples of how the Prophet 3alaihis salam overlooked all the "shortcomings" of ibn ubay and still offered to pray his janaza, and so on and so forth.

    the only thing more evil than such zunamaa spewing filth against the Prophet 3alaihis salam, is the multiplication of such zunamaa. whats sadder is that these zunamaa belonging to Muslim crowds will be even more sinister and sneaky than the first group of zunamaa who openly hurl nonsense against the Prophet 3alaihis salam. this latter group of zunamaa will not directly disparage the Prophet 3alaihis salam, but rather bring in all sorts of sophisticated rhetorical and psychological tools to promote such evil - both among the zunamaa of the west, as well as the zunamaa born in Muslim lands/families - 'the Prophet forgave those who threw trash in his path', 'he 3alaihis salam prayed ibn ubay's janaza', 'he forgave the bedouin urinating in the mosque', 'we will defend the Prophet's honor by showing our acquiescing draped as Prophetic Sunnah, adab and akhlaq', 'we will show them just how "strong" we are by painting murals of 'democracy', 'free speech', and 'freedom of choice' on our mosque walls and ceilings' (remember "laa ikraaha fid deen" and "fa man shaa'a fal yu'min wa man shaa'a fal yakfur")... the list goes on and i'm afraid the people falling for such dajjals is only growing in number.


    we seek Allah's refuge from all that earns His or His Beloved's (3alaihis salam) wrath.
  18. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    I don't disagree with your "idealised" view.

    But which state/authority could have carried action against Charlie Hebdo? You make a hypothetical case for how KSA etc. could have demanded hand over, but that's not practical. At least in case of Salman Taseer, the state of Pakistan was within powers to act against him, still Mumtaz Qadri took the cudgel. Charlie Hebdo cartoon was an institutionalised attempt (aided & abetted by "enemy" state) to blaspheme; not just individuals apostasing here and there. I would argue that there was no other option other than non-state actor to carry out this act. As I pointed out, already Danish paper is deterred. Even in Islamic history, false prophets, apostates etc. have been assassinated by individuals (without an Islamic state directly carrying it out); so this was no different.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2015
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i wrote this two days ago, but i didn't post it immediately.

    there are a number of issues here. firstly, i have no regret that scoundrels were killed - neither will i give condolence to those blasphemers nor will i show 'outrage'. let them burn in hell, which they shall undoubtedly.

    but at the same time, we do not encourage or condone muslims to take up arms and act against local laws. this is a matter of policy - because muslims live in millions around the world and these acts hurt us collectively. punishing blasphemers should be done by muslim rulers, who have the authority and force to carry out such punishments. vigilante attacks are not right and should be unequivocally discouraged and condemned. this is not in sympathy to scoundrels, but rather to safeguard our own rights and the muslim communities at large.

    for example, we believe that apostates should be executed. many people with muslim names (or descending from muslim families) in the west have become apostates - al-iyadhubillah. while we believe that their punishment is execution, we cannot carry it out ourselves. this is the job of people vested with the authority and have the power to administer such punishments. moreover in hanafi fiqh, there is a clause that when one or two people become apostates, they are executed - and when a community becomes apostate, they are boycotted.

    similarly adultery is rampant in the west - and individuals cannot administer hudud. it is said in islamic eschatology, that towards the end of time, hudud/punishments will be abandoned. this is a reality today - but notice that the hadith did not ask you to administer those punishments on an individual basis.

    if saudi arabia or egypt were true muslim countries run by true and upright muslims, they should have demanded these now-killed blasphemers at charlie hebdo to be handed over, like america demands those it considers as having violated american law (and a threat to their values); and then tried in islamic courts and punished according to islamic laws.

    secondly, this encourages scoundrels to spew more filth - and it is easy to circulate such things in our time. it is like the bullies on the playground, if you try to hit-back, they will do more and more; the west is mostly atheist and the only god they worship is their own desire and what is right according to their culture and values. so they won't have any inhibitions and will do worse and worser - more to hurt you.

    just as charlie hebdo wanted to be irreverent and deemed it their right to insult anything and everything; we too are irreverent towards western values and whatever they deem sacred. to hell with their values and may the blasphemers at hebdo burn in hell.

    nobody should give condolence to the killed criminals of charlie hebdo. yes, terrorism (modern definition) and vigilante attacks should be discouraged - deplored even (with the view that they threaten muslim interests) but no condolence to the destined-to-hell blasphemers at charlie hebdo.

    we ask the western press: why is it that irreverence is reserved only for others? can any of them have the courage to be irreverent towards and lampoon the slain charlie-hebdo cartoonists? i don't think they will do so (perhaps one or two may, just to make a point) - because suddenly "sensitivities" will become prominent; and across the board there people will talk of 'civility' 'courtesy' etc.

    why should respect be accorded ONLY for memory of western contemporary figures?

    this is a cultural divide. we look at these blaspheming-cartoonists as evil and filthy criminals; just as the west looks at bin laden and co.

    [note, that i am not a bin-laden or qaeda sympathiser, and i am just giving the other perspective.]
    when US invaded a sovereign country (which is apparently an ally - pakistan), illegally landed and carried out an operation to kill bin-laden, the western world cheered those snipers. movies are being made and those killers are being celebrated as heroes. this is only because, in western eyes, bin-laden is an enemy, a criminal and against their 'values'. so they can go to any extent to safeguard their values.

    similarly, according to our values, blasphemers are evil and filthy criminals who should be executed and authorities should execute such scoundrels. except that we (ordinary muslims) also say that this should be done by authorities, and after a trial, and judgement.

    imagine if america were a muslim country: they would send navy seals, who would violate airspace of france, land a few commandos who would execute blasphemers at charlie hebdo and pick their bodies and dump them at sea? [notice that if US were an islamic country, it would be defending islamic values and therefore punish those who threaten those values].

    by those standards, the terrorists who attacked charlie-hebdo are much more civil (or lack capability) by not picking up the slain blasphemers and dumping them in the channel.

    reiterated note: we do not condone vigilante attacks and muslims living in the west should respect the law of the land, wherever they live; muslims should not resort to taking law in their own hands thereby endangering themselves and other muslims.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Ghulam Ali and Harris786 like this.
  20. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    A few weeks back France and Ireland supported the Palestinian demand for recognizing statehood. Israel didn't like it.US and Australia went against this Palestinian demand in the UN.

    Conspiracy theories

    1)Major Russian TV network says US intelligence carried out the Charlie Hebdo attack

    Watch this!




    Third, the neatly parked ‘abandoned’ car conveniently had the ID of one of the ‘terrorists.’

    SURELY, THIS IS classic Mossad of pulling an ID of a formerly charged ‘criminal’ already in the intelligence system readily available to be set up as a patsy.

    Seriously, who takes their ID on a commando-style ‘terror attack?’


    Last edited: Jan 10, 2015
    Abu Aaminah and Ghulam Ali like this.

Share This Page