Islam condemns suicide, we hear endlessly from American Islamic apologists. In reality the situation is a bit more complicated. From MEMRI, with thanks to Sr. Soph:
The following are excerpts from a panel discussion at the counter-terrorism conference of religious scholars at Sharm Al-Sheikh, Egypt. The discussion aired on Iqra TV on August 22, 2005. (To view this clip, visit: http://memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=822.)Dr. Muhammad Rafat 'Othman, Egyptian professor of Islamic law: "According to another opinion, a person who blows himself up is committing suicide. This opinion is based on sources that categorically forbid self-killing. The Koran says: 'Do not kill yourself, surely Allah is ever merciful to you.' There are also such sources in the Sunna and in the general consensus of scholars. No text in Islamic religious law permits a person to kill himself. Even in the case of Jihad, which is the pinnacle of religious duties, Islam does not permit a person to kill himself.
"What Islamic religious law does permit is for a person to wage Jihad, facing one of two options – victory or martyrdom. He may risk being killed by someone else, but may not kill himself."
[...]
Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi: "Dr. Said Ramadhan [Al-Bouti] stressed the legitimacy of defense, saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq. I think that saying it is a legitimate right is not enough, because a right is something that can be relinquished. It is a duty. All scholars say that defending an occupied homeland is an individual duty applying to every Muslim. Reducing this duty to a 'right,' which can be relinquished, is a kind of depreciation.
"We must stress this point, and emphasize that it is the rights of those defending their homeland. It is not only a right, but also their duty. I am amazed by what Dr. Muhammad Rafat 'Othman said.
"This has nothing to do with suicide. This man does not want to commit suicide, but rather to cause great damage to the enemy, and this is the only method he can use to cause such damage. Since this method did not exist in the past, we cannot find rulings about it in the ancient jurisprudence. We may find rulings about plunging into the [ranks of the] enemy and risking one's life, even in cases of certain death – so be it. The truth is that we should refrain from raising this issue, because doubting it is like joining the Zionists and Americans in condemning our brothers in Hamas, the Jihad, the Islamic factions, and the resistance factions in Iraq. It is as if we are joining them.
"We all condemn violence or terrorism, although, to tell the truth, I personally don't like the word 'terrorism.' I always say 'violence.' I have written a book called Islam and Violence. But since this word is so widespread, I use it. We all condemn the [terrorist] operations. We condemned them before we came to this conference. We condemned the bombings in London, Madrid, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Egypt. We condemned them as individuals and as institutions. This is something everyone agrees on. We cannot say we pat these misguided boys on the back, but we do want to listen to them. They have gone astray, so we want to treat them in a way that will set them straight, and bring them closer to us. We don't want to be like prosecutors, demanding their execution. We want to treat them the way clerics treat their students, the way fathers treat their sons."...
Al-Bashir: "We have agreed that resisting the occupier is a sacred right and an obligatory duty, approved by Islamic religious law and by [international] conventions. It has nothing to do with forbidden terrorism. Moreover, it is legitimate. As proposed by Sheikh Al-Bouti, we emphasize this point in this concluding statement."
Participant: "And one cannot call their deaths suicide."
Al-Bashir: "Yes."
Participant: "It is an obligatory duty."
Al-Bashir: "Yes. I've already said that. It is an obligatory duty and a legitimate right. Someone who carries out this duty cannot be said to have committed suicide."
Read it all.
Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi:
Surely this isn't the same well rounded human being that the lovely cuddly Mayor of London has invited to Londonistan at the taxpayers expense?
Q: When is a right not a right?
A: When it is a good Muslims duty.
I will dig out one of several letters I have written to the Clown Prince Charles Clarke demanding that he ....yadda, yadda, small hope....etc,etc
Just some harmless chuckleheads who "have gone astray..."
Put'em in a headlock, give'm a knuckle-rub to the tops of their pointy little heads and tell'em not to do it again. They're really good boys, just misguided, don'cha know.
Good is bad, bad is good, suicide isn't suicide, lies are truth, truth is lies.
We condemn terror, but fighting infidels isn't terror, you see.
Um,....huh?
Where's Prophet Geoff(bbuh) when you need an opinion? I think we could all use a fatwa about now to clear this up for us.
"This has nothing to do with suicide. This man does not want to commit suicide, but rather to cause great damage to the enemy, and this is the only method he can use to cause such damage..
This nothing more than Orwellian Doublespeak! I don't see how any rational person could hear that statement and not think that.
How often have we heard "and this is the only method" they have? This is utter nonesense as demonstrated by the number of RPGs and roadside bombs they use in addition to their "human bombs."
These men live in an alternate reality than the one I live in, constructed and maintained by the primative ideology of Islam.
Resist occupation? There are any number of ways that can be done short of killing oneself. Only a complete idiot would choose a method of combat that insures your own distruction.
Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi and the other Islamic "Scholars" mentioned are insane idiots, not scholars or "thinkers" but Islamic robots.
When will the Islamic world wake up and start throwing these guys out of the mosque doors and into the dirt outside where they belong?
f.g.
My post from yesterday may be more appropriate here.
Martyrdom is art
If you have any doubts about islam's intention to rule the whole earth, listen to Iran's "president".
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=782
...Art on the offensive exalts and defends the noble principles, and attacks principles that are corrupt, vulgar, ungodly, and inhuman. ... Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? The words of Iranian President-Elect Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad.
It is difficult to believe that a thinking, feeling, human being could say such a thing and actually mean it.
Islamic martyrdom, a.k.a. suicide bombing, is of course entirely corrupt, vulgar, ungodly, and inhuman.
Those are the words of an authoritarian despot who would never dream of making such "divine art" himself. But rather, he seeks to manipulate others into killing themselves to further his goals and the goals of the Islamic state.
I think Orwell's 1984 pretty much sums up what living in an Islamic state is like and what we can expect from the likes of Mahmound Ahmadi-Nejad.
f.g.
Al-Qardawi says: "Since this method [jihadist martyrdom] did not exist in the past, we cannot find rulings about it in the ancient jurisprudence. We may find rulings about plunging into the [ranks of the] enemy and risking one's life, even in cases of certain death – so be it."
Previously, al-Qardawi has been quoted as linking the 7/7 suicide bombing in London to what he called "inghimass" (to throw oneself against the enemy). "According to him, this has been permitted by religious teaching since the early days of Islam."
I did a Google search for "inghimass": I found only 4 entries for it -- and all 4 entries were to the same comment by al-Qardawi!
I suspect that "inghimass" (suicidally plunging into the ranks of the enemy who is defending itself against Muslim attack) has been a major tactic of Islamic armies since the 8th century. Why is there only one entry (4 referring to the same link) on Google for it (while there are 984,000 results from a Google search for "kamikaze")? I think this has to do not with the fact that inghimass is insignificant in Islamic history, but rather with the general Western ignorance for the history of Islam, the same ignorance that widely refers, for example, to the spread of Islam in SE Asia and the Pacific as a kind of natural movement like tidal currents or glacial change, rather than what it in fact was: a ruthless and singularly savage military conquest and colonialism.
If "inghimass" were to be more rigorously researched by scholars, it might point to a pathology in Islam itself, a fanatical zeal to spread Islam to the point of suicidally hacking away with one's sword at the "enemy" (who is only defending himself against the Islamic offensive) -- lately availing itself of new technology, such as airplanes and bombs.
FFI is back on line
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
So...if Muslim leaders say they want to rule the world should we believe them? If they say they want to restore the Caliphate should we believe that? No, we should believe the Brooklynn Bridge salemanship of "religion of PEACE"
kevin
"Dr. Said Ramadhan [Al-Bouti] stressed the legitimacy of defense, saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq. I think that saying it is a legitimate right is not enough, because a right is something that can be relinquished. It is a duty.
LET ME GET THIS STRIEGHT
He is saying it is okay to kill the Iraqi people??
If this is the case why are the Iraqis so pissed at the islamic terrorist killing their people??
It is always funny to me those who think they are so much better than others and while they sit in freedom are willing to take it from others??
wonder what they would say if someone comes to kill their familys??
wonder if they will be all for all this killing??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
The discussion presented above is a perfect and most vivid display of how the moderates are losing a theological battle with the radicals. Just note how the opponents of the suicide bombings initially eqaute them with a suicide, but by the end of the program, the clerics seem to agree unanimously on their legitimacy.
This is arguably the best representation of what's happening today at thousands of Mosques all over the World. The radicals are easily taking over, for the Qur'an and the Sunnah are all at their side.
-----------------------------
dolphin, CAGE co-founder.
http://www.acage.org
Catherine:
You have it half right.
Al-Qaradhawi is saying that it's OK to kill both Iraqis and Israelis, confirming what we have been told time and time again by Spencer, Hugh and others -- that to the Sunnis of Saudi Arabia, the Shias of Iraq are just as much infidel enemies as Israeli Jews, if not Jews anywhere in the world. And I'm sure he has his mirror image in the new boss in Iran.
Nonetheless, despite the enormous enmity between the Iranian Shias and Sunnis from just about anywhere, when it comes to killing the liberation forces, they will cooperate with each other, even if it means some of their own will be massacred (witness the massive roadside bombs being employed in Iraq which were produced in Iran, and,for all we know, with explosives that Saddam might have stashed there before the invasion).
Yet another musim doctor...at least we know what this doctor has his doctorate in...Islamic Law.
As such he should have reminded the others that the martyr duty and obligation, belongs not to just a few mental midgets, but to them as well. He should have insisted that they form their own martyr brigade right there and then. They should have selected a volunteer to carry out their first operation.
If Al-Bashir had any guhanchoes he would be the first to 'volunteer'.
Never see that do you...the volunteers are never clerics or muslim 'Doctors'. They are always pumped up, young mental infants, who are not only easily swayed, but they are expendable as well...Not remarkable really...Mohammad did the same thing...sent men into battle to get something for himself. At least Mo went into a few battles himself, he sustained minor injuries, re-thought it, and decided to stay home in the future, and protect the slave girls. It was hard, disgusting and dangerous work, but someone had to do it.
These guys (collectively) got to be the most twisted and demented bunch of BS'rs Allah can produce. What is even more sinister is that there are lots of them. Allahs faucet of streaming, Islamic, liquid propaganda BS'ers, is stuck open...we need a plumber...anybody got a wrench?
Posted by: waterdragon52 at August 26, 2005 03:24 PM
Well that is good then we are allowed to protect ourselfs and kill the enemy!!!
MORE than 50 islamic terrorist dead today thanks to the Red White and Blue ;-)!!!!
Got them having a meeting and the Iraqis don't like having their children killed by these monsters??
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY [FREEDOM] TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
Shouldn't the conference-goers who approve of suicide bombings be targeted and destroyed, according their own logic, by the non-Islamic world?
The only thing preventing it- a WMD attack in the West to clear away the fence-sitting pussyfooters.
Then:
GPS coordinates, a handful of cruise missiles, and GO!
Islamic logic is very simple.
1)You can change the meaning of an act by citing the intention.
2)The basic context is domination, control, and conquering.
Therefore, suicide is not suicide if the intention is defence. Everything is defence because the context is making the world Islamic. You have eliminated the problem (of suicide) and you can do anything you want.
Islamic Arabs (and some of their non-Arab co-religionists) recognize no social boundaries. The reason they even give lip-service to Western social boundaries is that they have to in order to get along before whatever big strike comes next.
Unless there are some really big changes, the only way they will be put in their place is through military might.
Yes, Catherine. The Iraqi people may be divided over who should dominate the government and the extent to which they should be governed in accordance with Sha'ria, but few of them really want to see their children slaughered by any of the psychopaths -- Baathist, Sunni or Shia. Al-Jazeera and other media outlets make sure we see and hear plenty about the parents who are proud to have their children become martyrs, but I have also read a few accounts of parents who were shattered by the loss. The initial account I heard about the first female Palestinian suicide bomber was that her father had been deemed a collaborator because he did business with the Israelis and she may have been recruited as a very insidious way of getting back at him. Then, of course, the usual media spin set in and this aspect of the story was quickly buried.
It's going to be a long, hellish war, but what choice have we? Can anyone who has read what the new leader of Iran (still can't spell his name off the top of my head) had to say about world dominance? We haven't seen or heard the like of this since Hitler. They aren't just talking about ridding the Middle East of infidels; they do want to run the world in accordance with the most totalitarian and repressive "ideals" imaginable.
Can see only a few remedies to force the despicable imams to silence (STFU):
First, fear of reprisal. Whether it be deportation or being written up in English in an organ of information accessable to Western eyes, or targeted killings.Though one might enjoy personal satisfaction with the latter, the former is preferable.
Second, fear of condemnation. If Islam can be shifted through self criticism. Impossible ? A Reformation ? Unlikely. But then even the BBC has started to turn (lol).
Need to find duh_swami's wrench to turn off the spigot of this open sewer of Islam