Bekijk Volledige Versie : "Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ??? "
Sallahddin
07-05-11, 19:36
"Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ??? "
Source . Human Conscience :
Please do tell me what your own definition of "terrorism" is ???
No wonder that neither the west nor israel would accept to cooperate on an internationally recognized definition of "terrorism" :
simply because , they are both THE state's terrorists number 1 :
That so_called AL Qaeda was just responding to western & israeli state's terrorism, imperialism, deliberate targeting of civilians , war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocides ....
Do tell me about it : Thanks : appreciate !
Read the following while you are at it :
"How Terror Has Lost its meaning "
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/44889
Sallahddin
07-05-11, 20:04
is terrorism the deliberate targeting of civilians ???
The west & israel (like the nazis & others before) are THE champions in that ...
is terrorism the deliberate targeting of civilians ???
The west & israel (like the nazis & others before) are THE champions in that ...
En wat dacht je van Assad, Khadaffi en Ahmedinejad. Geef eens antwoord?
Sallahddin
07-05-11, 20:25
En wat dacht je van Assad, Khadaffi en Ahmedinejad. Geef eens antwoord?
Answer my question, draaikont !
Answer my question, draaikont !
Je weet het antwoord toch al, want het staat in je bericht. Dus nog eens mijn vraag, wat vind je in dit verband van de acties van Khadaffi, Assad en Ahmedinejad?
knuppeltje
08-05-11, 08:23
"Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ??? "
Met jouw manier van prikken is dat een open deur intrappen. :blowen:
"Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ??? "
Source . Human Conscience :
Please do tell me what your own definition of "terrorism" is ???
Dit heeft geen nut, want iedere uitleg die niet strookt met jouw gedachte is bij voorbaat verdoemd.
Jij probeert iedere definitie te weerleggen met jouw criteria die toch al anti-westers zijn.
Het heeft geen nut om met jouw te discuseren zolang jij net reageert als een spookrijder.
Een spookrijder veronderstelt dat hij de goede richting opgaat en al die andere automobiliste de foute richting opgaan.
Bij voorbaat, helaas is dit gedoemd te mislukken :zwaai::zwaai:
Dit heeft geen nut, want iedere uitleg die niet strookt met jouw gedachte is bij voorbaat verdoemd.
Jij probeert iedere definitie te weerleggen met jouw criteria die toch al anti-westers zijn.
Het heeft geen nut om met jouw te discuseren zolang jij net reageert als een spookrijder.
Een spookrijder veronderstelt dat hij de goede richting opgaat en al die andere automobiliste de foute richting opgaan.
Bij voorbaat, helaas is dit gedoemd te mislukken :zwaai::zwaai:
We kunnen zijn eigen definitie gebruiken: deliberate targeting of civilians.
Maar ook dan komt hij er niet uit voor wat betreft de huidige islamitische machthebbers.
Abu_Hurayrah
08-05-11, 10:47
Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abdil Wahhaab Al 'Aqeel (may Allah preserve him) said:
As mentioned in the introduction and in order to make it clear, Islam is free from terrorism and corruption. Islam is established upon mercy, justice, mutual love and concern with rectifying the earth and its people, Islam therefore forbids corrupting the earth and its people.
Then we mentioned the excellent interaction that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wassallam) had with the people, from the kuffaar (disbelievers), such as the people of the book such as Jews and Christians. The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wassallam) interacted with people with justice, mercy and loving good for the people. In all of the battles that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wassallam) participated in was in order to spread this goodness, mercy, justice and love amongst the people, therefore, Islam is free from this call to terrorism.
As for the term terrorism in the Arabic language 'irhaab' this is a new term which is not found within the classical Arabic dictionaries at all. Rather it has only surfaced in the modern era due to some people utilising it as a specific method yet with unlegislated means, such as violence, killing, breeding fear and its like. Some of these dictionaries mention that the 'terrorist' is: one who utilises violence and terrorism in order to establish his own rule.
Terrorism is the terror that is caused by those groups or individuals who resort to killing and wreaking havoc and destruction. Terrorism is therefore, according to the contemporary compilers of modern Arabic dictionaries, killing akin to the riotous killing that is mentioned within the texts of Shar'eeah. As the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wassallam) mentioned with regards to the signs of the end of time, the spread of 'al-Harj' (riotous killing).
The meaning of 'al-Harj' is killing and the increase of the spilling blood, which is all from the signs of the end of time. To the extent that the one killing will not know why he is killing and the one that was killed will not know why he/she was killed. Islam is free from this riotous killing, free from this terrorism and free from this kind of corruption.
Terrorism is established upon destruction of properties such as factories, farms, places of worship, train stations, airports and the likes; Islam is clearly free from such actions that are based upon corruption and not upon rectification.
Terrorists usually say that they are going against the state in which they are based within. This is like the mafia or other criminal organisations that are based on killing people, causing fear and taking their monies. Such criminal organisations have leaders, deputies and individuals that are responsible for establishing regulations for the organisation and individuals responsible for carrying out attacks, and all of them are terrorists causing corruption on the earth.
However the ugliest face of terrorism is that which is established in the name of religion, all of the religions from the Prophets (peace be upon them) are free from such terrorism, even if some of the followers of the Prophets participated in such terrorist activities, but the Prophets are free from such corruptions.
The terrorists are in need of doubtful proofs for their methodology especially those who attribute themselves to the Prophets (peace be upon them), they claim that the Prophets ordered them to commit terrorism. Many of those who commit acts of terrorism from those who attribute themselves to the religion of the Jews claim that Moosaa (Moses) commanded them to do terrorism or that the other Prophets from the children of Israa'eel ordered them to do terrorism yet this is a lie.[2] As Moosaa (peace be upon him) and all of the Prophets from the children of Israa'eel (peace be upon them) never ever ordered people to commit terrorism.
Likewise, those who commit acts of terrorism and attribute themselves to Eesaa (Jesus) claim that the gospels sanction terrorism and the use of it over the enemy.[3] I have some texts which I have gathered from other sources wherein such terrorists (in the name of Jesus and Christianity) claim that the gospel allows it, however the time does not allow for me to mention all of this here.
The important matter for us to mention is that Eesaa was send with mercy like all of the Prophets, peace be upon them, and it is not possible that they ordered people to commit acts of terrorism.
Likewise, those who attribute themselves in this era from the people of corruption, bombing and takfeer within the Muslim countries and the non-Muslim countries, need certain texts from the Qur'aan and sunnah for them to refer. They claim that such texts lead to terrorism but they are lying about this as the Prophet (sallallaallaahu alayhi wassallam) is totally free from terrorism. For that reason, the Muslim scholars have denounced all acts of terrorism that are committed by those who associate themselves with Islam.
The Muslim scholars denounced the attacks on the world trade buildings in New York and made clear that those who committed the act were criminals and that they had nothing to do with Islam and that they merely killed themselves, and whoever kills themselves intentionally will be in hellfire killing themselves, and Allaah's refuge is sought.
Similarly, the Muslim scholars denounced the terrorist attacks committed by those who associate themselves with Islam that took place in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The scholars also denounced the terrorist attacks committed by those who associate themselves with Islam that took place in Sharm ash-Sheikh in Egypt. The scholars also denounced the terrorist attacks that took place on the tube stations in London, they denounced this and made clear that Islam has nothing to do with such actions and that Islam is free of them.
The doubts of the terrorists, with regards to their twisting of the texts, are with the verse from Soorah al-Anfaal verse 60 wherein Allaah says:
{And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allaah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know (but) Allaah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allaah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.}, [Soorah al-Anfaal, Aayah 60]
The verse that comes after it explains it perfectly, wherein Allaah says:
{And if they incline towards peace, then incline to it also and rely upon Allaah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.}, [Soorah al-Anfaal, Aayah 61]
This verse explains the initial verse perfectly, as Allaah within this verse explains the condition of the Muslims with non-Muslims.
The first state is one of war, and war is usually not between individual Muslims and individual kuffaar, no! War is between the armies of the Muslim state and the armies of a disbelieving state and we should not be ashamed of this at all.
All of the Prophets (peace be upon them) fought and prepared armies, and people up until this day have armies and prepare military strength. All of the great states in every time and place have prepared armies and have obtained a variety of weapons in order to frighten people. Obtaining weapons is a defensive and preventative method not an offensive method, as if the enemy knows that you have a number of devastating weapons he will not even consider to go to war against you.
Rather the great states, past and present, have been concerned with forming armed groups in order to frighten their enemies such as the Warsaw pact,[4] NATO[5] and other large alliances that are formed by large states in order to gain power and secure itself from its enemies.
The Islamic state has the same concern as all states past and present, yet it is upon an Islamic state not on individuals to do this. The verse is directed to an Islamic state:
{And prepare against them whatever you are able of power}, [Soorah al-Anfaal, Aayah 60]
This is for an Islamic state. Is it permissible for any individual within a major state to store or possess mass weapons in his house? The answer is clearly no; it is not permissible according to the customary laws of that state rather it is for the state to possess such weapons. Likewise according to the contemporary regulations there are certain weapons that are prohibited for states to possess as such weapons cause indiscriminate destruction upon crops and vegetation.[6] This can be seen with the current prohibition of nuclear weapons which cause devastation and serve no benefit in armies possessing them.
Also the verse says to an Islamic state that it is incumbent upon yourselves to be ready and be strong so that the enemy will fear you and will not even think about going to war against you. As if you are weak the enemy will easily be able to gain power over you and if you are strong, the enemy will fear you. This verse is directed to an Islamic state not individuals as every state today possesses weapons and power and guides its borders and keeps its affairs from its enemies and manufactures weapons. In the same way, an Islamic state guides its borders and affairs. In terms of defining an enemy the first type are those who take its people and if kuffaar war against an Islamic state then it is incumbent, upon an Islamic state not individuals, to arm itself with necessary weapons.
As for the terrorist tribulations in the current era, then those people are not an Islamic state and they are also not those to whom the verse in the Qur'aan is directed to those who are the leaders of states, not individuals who live within a state. those individuals have to listen to the ruler of the Muslims and obey him and not fight anyone except with the rulers permission and authorisation... Lees helemaal (http://aa.trinimuslims.com/showthread.php?t=2876)
\"Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ??? \"
Simpel en kort;
Één of meerdere personen die terreur voert- tegen burgers in vredestijd en hierbij een levens bedreiging is direct of indirect voor deze burgers of staten in een situatie brengt die staatsveiligheid en vrede in gevaar brengt.
Simpel en kort;
Één of meerdere personen die terreur voert- tegen burgers in vredestijd en hierbij een levens bedreiging is direct of indirect voor deze burgers of staten in een situatie brengt die staatsveiligheid en vrede in gevaar brengt.
Wat is terreur?
Staten kunnen niet terroriseren?
Wat is terreur?
Staten kunnen niet terroriseren?
Alleen mensen kunnen iets doen, staten niet.
Alleen mensen kunnen iets doen, staten niet.
Staten kunnen prima wat doen. Wat mankeert je? Speciaal voor jou dan: overheidsfunctionarissen in de uitoefening van hun functie.
Staten kunnen prima wat doen. Wat mankeert je? Speciaal voor jou dan: overheidsfunctionarissen in de uitoefening van hun functie.
Terreur is het aanjagen van angst door middel van het gebruik van geweld om een (politiek) doel te bereiken.
Wat is terreur?
Staten kunnen niet terroriseren?
Georganiseerd geweld, om een bepaald (politiek) doel te bereiken en ook staten kunnen terroriseren, kijk naar Libië, kijk naar Iran, kijk naar Ivoorkust.
Maar ok, ik wil tch wel een gooi geven wat in mijn opinie een terrorist is.
Terroristen zijn vaak gehersenspoelde personen die in opdracht van vaak een gek, probeert dmv van het maken van veel slachtoffers door hem zelf op te offeren om zo een staat/overheid/of iets dergelijks op hun knieeen te krijgen om voor hun idealen te zwichten.
Vooral het maken van vele schade is een pre, een zelfmoord terrorist is vaak gehersenspoeld dat ie denk dat er vele maagden in het pardijs aanwezig zijn ( om zijn geneugten te voldoen). Terroristen handelen vaak uit naam van iets of ee persoon en niet in opdracht van een regering. Daarom zijn de leiders van de terroristen moelijk te tracen. Leiders laten vaak andere personen "de kolen uit het vuur halen". Het zijn voor mij dan ook heel zielige figuren die zich laten hersenspoelen door anderen. Ja als de gehele dag maar tegen je gezegd dat de kleur groen eigenlijk rood is, ja dan ga je het op den duur geloven.
Vaak richten de terroristen schade aan onschuldige personen terwijl ze de persoon in kwestie niet kunnen bereiken.
Terreur is het aanjagen van angst door middel van het gebruik van geweld om een (politiek) doel te bereiken.
Dr zijn dus zat staten die daar ook aan doen. Maar gek genoeg willen staten daar nooit aan, zo'n definitie die henzelf insluit. :cheefbek:
Dr zijn dus zat staten die daar ook aan doen. Maar gek genoeg willen staten daar nooit aan, zo'n definitie die henzelf insluit. :cheefbek:
Natuurlijk, in totalitaire staten wordt aan terreur gedaan, al was het alleen maar om de eigen bevolking onder de duim te houden. Vaak zijn het speciale organisaties in zo'n staat, soms formeel in dienst van de enig toegestane partij.
Dr zijn dus zat staten die daar ook aan doen. Maar gek genoeg willen staten daar nooit aan, zo'n definitie die henzelf insluit. :cheefbek:
Waar denk je dat het woord origineel als eerst werd gebruikt :)
Sallahddin
08-05-11, 19:05
Simpel en kort;
Één of meerdere personen die terreur voert- tegen burgers in vredestijd en hierbij een levens bedreiging is direct of indirect voor deze burgers of staten in een situatie brengt die staatsveiligheid en vrede in gevaar brengt.
I responded to that many times earlier & here too :
Delibarte targeting of civilians is a western & israeli national sport if u haven't noticed that !
there's still no internationally recognized definition of terrorism yet , thanks to the western & israeli veto ....for obvious reasons !
Sallahddin
08-05-11, 19:08
Simpel en kort;
Één of meerdere personen die terreur voert- tegen burgers in vredestijd en hierbij een levens bedreiging is direct of indirect voor deze burgers of staten in een situatie brengt die staatsveiligheid en vrede in gevaar brengt.
I responded to that many times earlier & here too :
Delibarte targeting of civilians is a western & israeli national sport if u haven't noticed that: makes no difference that that happens during war : Geneva Conventions forbidds the targeting of civilians in times of war = ethics of war , but the ewst & israel don't give a shit about that convention : see palestine,lebanon, Irak, afghanistan & elsewhere !
see how the US was /is still the one & only nation to drop atomic bombs on another nation = Japan ...
there's still no internationally recognized definition of terrorism yet , thanks to the western & israeli veto ....for obvious reasons !
Sallahddin
08-05-11, 19:11
We kunnen zijn eigen definitie gebruiken: deliberate targeting of civilians.
Maar ook dan komt hij er niet uit voor wat betreft de huidige islamitische machthebbers.
islam strictly forbidds the targeting of civilians ; women , children , old people , plants, tress, landscape, animals .....even in times of war :
but there are some other nuances in islam too on the matter , especially when the enemy would deliberately target muslim civilians as the west & israel have been doing ...
Sallahddin
08-05-11, 19:19
Wat is terreur?
Staten kunnen niet terroriseren?
come on :
Staats terreur ??? kijk naar israel : de Gaza war bijv : deliberate targeting & collective punishment of 1 & half million people like the nazis used to do : The Gaza siege , the targeted liquidation of the leaders of the resistance ...
see the israeli war on lebanon in 2006 : : israel terrorised the whole lebanese nation via extensive bombardements even against civilians, against civil infrastructure ....in order to make the local population hostile to Hizbollah : didn't work : psychological warfare like the nazis used to do in relation to the European resistances ...
see how the US used to target civilians deliberately in Irak , in Afghanistan ....'(collaterla damage , they say : Read Fisk's "collaterla damage is not much different from terrorism or from the deliberate targeting of civilians" ) : see falluja ....& how the US used nuclear material even in order to crush the resistance there ....see how the CIA , Mossad , the previous KGB liquidate people ....
de lijst is long ...
Harts intelligentie
08-05-11, 20:40
I see that nobody is able to give any serious definition of terrorism that would exclude western & israeli state's terrorism ,ironically enough , because there isn't any , no wonder ...
that's why neither the west nor israel wanna cooperate on an internationally recognized definition of terrorism for obvious reasons ...
islam strictly forbidds the targeting of civilians ; women , children , old people , plants, tress, landscape, animals .....even in times of war :
but there are some other nuances in islam too on the matter , especially when the enemy would deliberately target muslim civilians as the west & israel have been doing ...
Dat is in Iran, Syrië en Libye niet het geval.
Harts intelligentie
08-05-11, 20:47
Dat is in Iran, Syrië en Libye niet het geval.
"How Terror Has Lost its meaning "
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/44889
"How Terror Has Lost its meaning "
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/44889
Vertel me nu eens hoe jij denkt over dergelijke vormen van staatsterreur waarbij islamitische machthebbers moslims afslachten.
Harts intelligentie
08-05-11, 21:01
Vertel me nu eens hoe jij denkt over dergelijke vormen van staatsterreur waarbij islamitische machthebbers moslims afslachten.
Answer my question, draaikont !
islam as such doesn't exist nowadays, at the political, social, economic, moral ethical, shari3a ....levels :
those "muslim" rulers are just secular or semi_secular criminal dictators who misuse islam for their own political & for other down _to_earth purposes as u do know, dictators who were mostly installed & activelly supported by the "democratic " west against the very will & interests of the muslim peoples :
now , the time has come to trigger & manage those so_called Arab revolutions by the west , according to western interests again ...
The ones who do think that those Arab so_called revolutions were spontaneous don't really know those Arab societies , let alone that they would know the western & israeli scenario makers for this world behind the curtains f :
those "revolutions" were subtly triggered , directed & managed by the west & israel ...
after the fact that Bush 's troops in Irak were not received with flowers & joy , but with armed resistance , had experienced with their blood & tears how democracy cannot be imposed from abroad by force ; so , why not make the Arabs believe they want it themselves ...
even that slogan we hear everywhere in the Arabic world " The people want to overthrow the government was/is /has been prononced according to English grammar , even though it's not compatible with Arabic :
that slogan was a famous US song ...
so , islam will be back, don't worry !
http://www.maroc.nl/forums/het-nieuws-van-de-dag/329296-ik-trek-mijn-eerder-woorden-terug-met-betrekking-tot-bin-laden-al-qaeda.html#post4683106
dictators who were mostly installed & activelly supported by the "democratic " west against the very will & interests of the muslim peoples :
Dit is dus aantoonbaar onjuist. De islamitische dictators die het felst tekeer gaan tegen hun eigen burgers zijn juist diegenen die het minst door het westen worden gesteund.
Eric de Blois
08-05-11, 22:47
"Who Can Tell Me What Terrorism is ? "
Please do tell me what your own definition of "terrorism" is ?
That so_called AL Qaeda was just responding to western & israeli state's terrorism, imperialism, deliberate targeting of civilians , war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocides ....
Do tell me about it : Thanks : appreciate !
Je lijkt niet op zoek te zijn naar de vraag 'wat...', maar de vraag 'wie...'. Door alvast met de vinger te wijzen naar de dader(s) neem je een duidelijke stelling in. Mijn vraag is, wil je echt een antwoord van ons, of wil je gewoon een bevestiging van je eigen visie horen?
islam strictly forbidds the targeting of civilians ; women , children , old people , plants, tress, landscape, animals .....even in times of war :
but there are some other nuances in islam too on the matter , especially when the enemy would deliberately target muslim civilians as the west & israel have been doing ...
So waren de slachtoffers van de zelfopblazers in naam van Allah geen vrouwen,kinderen,oude mensen, enzenze die zich tegen de islam keerden
Of de Opblaaskommando's waren geen Moslim
Zo waren de slachtoffers in de 9/11 geen vrouwen,kinderen,oude mensen enz die zich tegen de Islam keerden
Of Opblaaskommando waren geen moslims,
Oops, stom van me, 9/11 was US zelf, ja je vermoordt je eigen volk om de moslims in een kwaad daglicht te stellen, ja, hoe kan ik dat vergeten. Sallah de Almithy
Je kan wel vanalles op Internet zetten en dan de ander laten geloven, dat is net zoiets als hersenspoelen.
Als je er maar veel overschrijft dan gaat de Anti-K4 dat geloven
Dit is dus aantoonbaar onjuist. De islamitische dictators die het felst tekeer gaan tegen hun eigen burgers zijn juist diegenen die het minst door het westen worden gesteund.
Ja, als je je macht,wellust,hebzucht , het gouden kalf obder je voeten zien verdwijnen dan wordt je boos.
Jaren lang is het volk dom gehouden en onderdrukt, maar dankzij de K4 technologie is er onder het domgehouden volk een goede communicatie ontstaan en door oa Internet kan zijn hun ogen opengegaan en men zien hoe het buiten hun dictoriaiale grenzen vergaat.
Islamitische Dicatators , laat me niet lachen, het zijn op wellust en macht beluste personen die hun geloof al lang afgeworpen hebben die de $$$$$$$$ aanbidden.
Je lijkt niet op zoek te zijn naar de vraag 'wat...', maar de vraag 'wie...'. Door alvast met de vinger te wijzen naar de dader(s) neem je een duidelijke stelling in. Mijn vraag is, wil je echt een antwoord van ons, of wil je gewoon een bevestiging van je eigen visie horen?
Jij hebt hem :D door !!!!!!