American Muslim scholars condemn terrorism

[Astronuc]

(AP) -- American Muslim scholars who interpret religious law for their community issued an edict Thursday condemning terrorism against civilians in response to the wave of deadly attacks in Britain and other countries.

In the statement, called a fatwa, the 18-member Fiqh Council of North America wrote that people who commit terrorism in the name of Islam were "criminals, not `martyrs."'

"There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism," the scholars wrote. "Targeting civilians' life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram -- or forbidden."

Many Muslim leaders overseas have issued similar condemnations in recent weeks, but some have left an opening for violence to be used. British Muslim leaders who denounced the July 7 attacks in London said suicide bombings could still be justified against an occupying power.

The U.S. fatwa did not specifically address suicide bombings in a war, but the scholars barred Muslims from helping anyone "involved in any act of terrorism or violence." The council also declared that Muslims were obligated to help law enforcement officials protect civilians.

more at CNN - http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/07/28/american.muslims.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

But then they have been saying this all along and the mainstream media has pretty much ignored it.

Fatwa excerpt

There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism ... All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are haram (forbidden) in Islam. It is haram for a Muslim to cooperate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence. It is the civic and religious duty of Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians ... We pray for the defeat of extremism and terrorism. We pray for the safety and security of our country, the United States, and its people. We pray for the safety and security of all inhabitants of our planet.

from JournalNews.com - http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050729/NEWS03/507290311/1017

British Islamic clerics have also issue fatwas against suicide bombing and attacks on innocent civilians, as have Islamic clerics in other countries.

 

[arildno]

You could also add that just about every secular academic in the Muslim world have said this all along, but their voices have been studiously ignored..

 

[sid_galt]

This link is saying that the Chairman of the Fiqh Council and several CAIR officials have links to terrorism

http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/07/the_american_is.html

Some extracts

Officials of both groups have been linked to various terrorist organizations:

The Chairman of the Fiqh Council, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Sami al-Arian, the alleged North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose trial began in June 2005 in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Alwani has been named in court documents as an official of several entities in northern Virginia suspected of being connected to terrorist financing. Documents released in the Al Arian trial show that Alwani funded the Islamic Jihad front groups in Tampa...

In the past 4 years, several CAIR officials have been convicted of or charged with various terrorism-related offenses.

CAIR has championed and defended officials of Islamic terrorist groups including Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook, Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian, Palestinian Islamic Jihad fundraiser Fawaz Damra, and the radical Egyptian cleric Wagdy Ghoneim.

CAIR has repeatedly attacked the prosecutions of Islamic terrorists arrested and/or convicted since 9-11 and has attacked the government’s freezing of Islamic terrorist fronts as part of a “war against Islam” by the United States...

If this is true, then the condemnation is essentially bogus.

 

[russ_watters]

Its nice to see, but its a bit of a tautology, Astronuc: since America is enemy #1 of Islamic terrorists, for an American Muslim to say he's against terrorism/extremism is redundant: if he wasn't against terrorism/extremism, he'd have never come to the US in the first place.

What I'm more interested in seeing is people in muslim countries denouncing terrorism, in the same way that a KKK rally in the US gets ten times as many people marching against it than for it.

 

[arildno]

What I'm more interested in seeing is people in muslim countries denouncing terrorism, in the same way that a KKK rally in the US gets ten times as many people marching against it than for it.

Try secular intellectuals like that Iranian woman who won the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago.

Unfortunately, secularism is regarded with extreme suspicion in many muslim countries, and this is, I believe one of the major reason why unhealthy forms of religious fundamentalism thrive in many Moslemic countries, apart from other societal/economic reasons.

I.e, the fact that the West went through a secular Enlightenment period also limited the possible degenerate outgrowths of Christianity.

 

[sid_galt]

If this is true, then the condemnation is essentially bogus.

To add to this. One of the signers of the fatwa is Fawaz Damra (Scroll to the bottom of the list of signers or simply search for his name)

http://www.cair-net.org/downloads/fatwa.htm

In 1989 he declared

Terrorism and terrorism alone is the path to liberation

http://news.tbo.com/news/MGB5AT9XMBE.html

He may have changed but I highly doubt it.

 

[Anttech]

since America is enemy #1 of Islamic terrorists, for an American Muslim to say he's against terrorism/extremism is redundant: if he wasn't against terrorism/extremism, he'd have never come to the US in the first place.

Russ how did you come to that conclusion? It is possible that Muslims come to America to spread Propoganda for Al-queda

 

[Antiphon]

I'm still waiting for the Million Muslim March- but I'm only hearing crickets chirp...

 

[GENIERE]

...British Islamic clerics have also issue fatwas against suicide bombing and attacks on innocent civilians, as have Islamic clerics in other countries.

A fatwa is not acceptable in the US. Every citizen of the US is bound to the laws of the US. A fatwa is not an answer to a problem it is the problem.


...

 

[Anttech]

I'm laughing at you Anttech, not with you. At you.

Why are you laughing at my statement? Do you honestly think that NO Al-queda would ever come to America to spead propoganda?
And yeh I am serious... Surf if you believe my statement as sooo funny, tell em why? Dont just be a pr*k... I can give my reasons why I think otherwise:

Why the hell are the borders in America so massively policed?? Job security? No Becuase Extremest terrorist coming into USA via normal channels is a threat, these people could very much spread propganda...

Its Sheer Arogance to think that America is above this, How on Earth do you think the 11/7 attacks happened? --- By Extreemests, knocking on the white house/home land security with al-queda ID's saying "hey sorry I didnt tell your customs but I am actually here to terrorise you, and train others to terrorise you?"

Also may I add, why do you think the "Homeland security agency was set up?

since America is enemy #1 of Islamic terrorists, for an American Muslim to say he's against terrorism/extremism is redundant: if he wasn't against terrorism/extremism, he'd have never come to the US in the first place.

This statement is redundant, its like saying that EVERYONE who comes to America is there for a good reason, and is Definetly not there to perform atrocities against America.

Well the proof is in the Fact that the Twin Towers were Attacked internally by people living in America!

edit: Well I must say if that isn't a personal attack from smut towards me, then I don't know what is, I was only asking for the reason behind Russ's staement, am I not allowed to without being chastised by surf?

 

[russ_watters]

Why are you laughing at my statement? Do you honestly think that NO Al-queda would ever come to America to spead propoganda?

No. Few, if any al Qaeda would come to the US to spread propaganda. To hijack airplanes, yes, spread propaganda, no. But this is besides the point - the number of Islamic radicals in the US probably numbers in the low thousands - the number of ordinary citizens who are muslim numbers in the millions. The radicals are a relatively insignificant fraction (and of those, more are American radicals than Middle-Eastern -ie, "The Nation of Islam").

Anttech is right, though Smurf - that was uncalled for.

 

[russ_watters]

Try secular intellectuals like that Iranian woman who won the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago.

Same tautology as above: women are oppressed in the Middle East. It is unsurprising for an oppressed person to oppose her oppressor.

 

[Smurf]

Not to mention that if they're 'secular' they're not going to be religious fanatics are they.

 

[arildno]

So, russ, what you find missing, are condemnations of terrorism from people who defend terrorism?
And, don't use concepts you obviously don't know what means, in this case "tautology".

 

[Lisa!]

Same tautology as above: women are oppressed in the Middle East. It is unsurprising for an oppressed person to oppose her oppressor.

And how isn't she afraid of her oppressor? And how can she get the nobel prize when she's oppressed all her life?
And do you know where she's living now and what she's doing now? Imean is she still alive?

 

[The Smoking Man]

And how isn't she afraid of her oppressor? And how can she get the nobel prize when she's oppressed all her life?
And do you know where she's living now and what she's doing now? Imean is she still alive?

She's in Tehran. As of 2004, she lives with her husband, an electrical engineer, and has two daughters who are university students.:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/10/10/nobel.peace/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi

 

[Lisa!]

She's in Tehran. As of 2004, she lives with her husband, an electrical engineer, and has two daughters who are university students.:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/10/10/nobel.peace/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi

Thanks for your informaion. But you know base on what others think about muslems, she would have been killed.

 

[russ_watters]

So, russ, what you find missing, are condemnations of terrorism from people who defend terrorism?

No, what I find missing is condemnations of terrorism from non-terrorist Muslims who live in the middle-east. Where are the anti al Qaeda protests in Saudia Arabia? Where are the anti Hamas protests in Syria?

What I find missing is condemnation of terrorism from people whom the terrorists are supposedly fighting for: the people of the middle east. Ie, the KKK is an organization of white christian Americans. The people who you find protesting against the KKK are white christian Americans.

And, don't use concepts you obviously don't know what means, in this case "tautology".

Tautology: uselessly redundant. It is uselessly redundant to say someone who is against terrorism is against terrorism.

 

[russ_watters]

And how isn't she afraid of her oppressor? And how can she get the nobel prize when she's oppressed all her life?
And do you know where she's living now and what she's doing now? Imean is she still alive?

I didn't say anything about whether she was afraid of her oppressor, nor did I say anything about her Nobel Prize. That has nothing to do with this conversation.

 

[Lisa!]

I didn't say anything about whether she was afraid of her oppressor, nor did I say anything about her Nobel Prize. That has nothing to do with this conversation.

For sure you didn't. But you always say Muslems are terrorist. And when arildno brings her as an exapmle of a muslems who doesn't live in US but she's condemned terrorism. You say it's not surprising if she opposes her oppressor.
So I say "why isn't she afraid of other Muslems and say whatever she wants freely?".Then you say women are oppressed in middle-east! It's a bit surprising that a woman who has been oppressed all her life, could get a Noble Prize. What you're saying is confusing!
Ok Let's forget about that. Suppose you're right about Muslems in Middle-east countries, now what shoul have been done about them?

 

[marlon]

more at CNN - http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/07/28/american.muslims.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

But then they have been saying this all along and the mainstream media has pretty much ignored it.

This is great. One of the best ways to eradicate terror is to make sure that respectable muslims condemn these kinds of actions. I am glad to see this

marlon

 

[russ_watters]

But you always say Muslems are terrorist.

And some are. So, what, you made the jump to thinking I meant all Muslms?

Perhaps you are misunderstanding me because you are making assumptions about my beliefs that are not true.

And when arildno brings her as an exapmle of a muslems who doesn't live in US but she's condemned terrorism. You say it's not surprising if she opposes her oppressor.
So I say "why isn't she afraid of other Muslems and say whatever she wants freely?".

You're really not making any sense. I said nothing about whether or not she was personally oppressed or is afraid - I don't know her personal history. But what does whether or not she is afraid have to do with the fact that there is no widespread condemnation of terrorism from muslims in the middle east?

Then you say women are oppressed in middle-east!

And they are. Why is that a revalation? Again, you're not making any sense.

It's a bit surprising that a woman who has been oppressed all her life, could get a Noble Prize.

On the contrary - that is precisely why she got the prize! She was oppressed and overcame/fought back and was recognized for her accomplishments. But again, that has nothing at all to do with the point of this thread.

Ok Let's forget about that. Suppose you're right about Muslems in Middle-east countries, now what shoul have been done about them?

I said there is no widespread condemnation of terrorism in the middle east and that is an easily verifiable fact. Quite the contrary: polls show there is a high fraction of people in several countries that actually support terrorism.

The point - and the solution - is that there is a serious cultural problem in such countries that needs to be fixed. People talk about the US having a violent culture (with all our gun crime...) - that's a problem. The problem in many middle-eastern countries is much, much worse.

edit: So the reason that I don't get excited by American Muslims condmening terrorism is that that condemnation has little influence on terrorism. A condmenation of terrorism from a prominent muslim group in Syria would be something worth noticing because it would have an impact on terrorism.

 

[Lisa!]

And some are.

And what about people who believe in other religions? You mean it's impossible to find a terrorist btw them?

The point - and the solution - is that there is a serious cultural problem in such countries that needs to be fixed. People talk about the US having a violent culture (with all our gun crime...) - that's a problem. The problem in many middle-eastern countries is much, much worse.

How do you want to fix the problem? Perhaps you mean the problem should be fixed by another war in middle-east? But do you think that they(US,England...) were successful in Iraq? And don't forget that it's US and other powerful countries who sell lots of weapons to middle east countries!

edit: So the reason that I don't get excited by American Muslims condmening terrorism is that that condemnation has little influence on terrorism. A condmenation of terrorism from a prominent muslim group in Syria would be something worth noticing because it would have an impact on terrorism.

Anyway, why didn't media care about their condemnation? Don't you think that it could make the situation better?

 

[vanesch]

The point - and the solution - is that there is a serious cultural problem in such countries that needs to be fixed.

You are one hell of a funny guy

 

[Lisa!]

You are one hell of a funny guy

His ideas frightens me sometimes!

 

[Emieno]

...
The point - and the solution - is that there is a serious cultural problem in such countries that needs to be fixed. People talk about the US having a violent culture (with all our gun crime...) - that's a problem. The problem in many middle-eastern countries is much, much worse.
...

I think different cultures give people different views about each other, not the problems brought about before each other, so there is or should be no "serious cultural problem", in my opinion, as what you say. Conflicts, as serious as terrorism people are discussing, I think are originally due to individuals' internal conflicts and get developed over time among communities, not mainly by cultural viewpoints that a certain population or community have about others. Inspite of that, I still, in my mind, have the idea that the US is violent in some of its part, especially in political issues...

 

[The_Professional]

No, what I find missing is condemnations of terrorism from non-terrorist Muslims who live in the middle-east. Where are the anti al Qaeda protests in Saudia Arabia? Where are the anti Hamas protests in Syria?

What I find missing is condemnation of terrorism from people whom the terrorists are supposedly fighting for: the people of the middle east.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[The Smoking Man]

I couldn't agree more.

Just a short question.

If you knew one of your neigbours was a terrorist but you didn't quite know which one, would you stand on your doorstep and shout to the world that you didn't agree with him?

Think before you answer because your wife and children are standing behind you.

Why are you so free to endanger the lives of people you don't know and condemn them when THEY are the true victims of the terror you rant about?

Yeah, you can sit there on your respective 'porches' knowing that the good ole' USofA is there fighting for you.

Would you be so free with your opinions in a mosque in Kabul?

Try putting oneself in the shoes of another before condemning the other.

 

[The_Professional]

Try thinking before you beat your rather emaciated chest backed by the intellect of a gnat.

You're able to string together a couple of english words Mr. Intellectual. You should be proud. The junior g-man badge award is in the mail

 

[Anttech]

Bang on Smoking Man! Perhaps a little to close to home for some people

 

[Archon]

You're able to string together a couple of english words Mr. Intellectual. You should be proud. The junior g-man badge award is in the mail

Rather you should say that he can string a point together. I have yet to see the same from you in this thread. Now, are you going to respond to his question (a valid one), or are you going to continue with only insults?

 

[The_Professional]

Rather you should say that he can string a point together. I have yet to see the same from you in this thread. Now, are you going to respond to his question (a valid one), or are you going to continue with only insults?

Did you read the original post I quoted. I see reading comprehension is not one of your strongest points.
Since when did a personal attack became a valid point.

And, I don't have to answer his question which was summed up into an ad hominem.

 

[Archon]

Did you read the original post I quoted. I see reading comprehension is not one of your strongest points.
Since when did a personal attack became a valid point.

And, I don't have to answer his question which was summed up into an ad hominem.

My point is that although his post did contain a personal attack, it also contained a valid question and a good point. Your post contained nothing but a reaction to his personal attack: no point, no response, nothing of substance. Why not just ignore the insult and answer the question?

Reading Comprehension: Math is my strongest point, but reading comprehension isn't that far behind. But since I only have one "strongest point," I must say that you are correct.

 

[The_Professional]

Hahahaa...and this is what I get for staying out of trouble.

I don't care about your point

 

[Archon]

Hahahaa...and this is what I get for staying out of trouble.

I don't care about your point

Fair enough. It is The Smoking Man's point, not mine, that is really important. As long as you care about his point, I'm satisfied.