Beghairat pakistani ISI, army and govt released the murderer of two innocents

[graveyardofempires]

Plus, I don't understand what ISI and Pakistan Army had to do with it? !!

the only thing you understand is that you understand anything.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Shehbaz Pakistan's foreign policy is firmly in the hands of the army and ISI, so obviously any breakthrough in this raymond davis affair most likely (99%) means that the two have reached an agreement with their American masheraan...otherwise it is unlikely changes like this happen in Pakistan.

[afghan]

what the hell are you talking about?

what i meant was the davis was so importatnt to the US they would have done alot more for him, he was also supplying weapons to the the terrorists.

[graveyardofempires]

what i meant was the davis was so importatnt to the US they would have done alot more for him, he was also supplying weapons to the the terrorists.

dude
where do you get this news?
he wasnt important ,what is important is what he knew.

[faye]

graveyardofempires, davis was accused by the pakistani government of being in contact with known al qaeda operatives and was going to supply when with nuclear fusion or somesuch, so they could do a bombing to give a false flag reason for more us presence in pakistan. there were newspaper reports and apparently it was also on cnn.

[graveyardofempires]

graveyardofempires, davis was accused by the pakistani government of being in contact with known al qaeda operatives and was going to supply when with nuclear fusion or somesuch, so they could do a bombing to give a false flag reason for more us presence in pakistan. there were newspaper reports and apparently it was also on cnn.

the report itself is false
this is just to support the boogieman theory of existance of alkaida.

[Shehbaz Khan]

Shehbaz Pakistan's foreign policy is firmly in the hands of the army and ISI, so obviously any breakthrough in this raymond davis affair most likely (99%) means that the two have reached an agreement with their American masheraan...otherwise it is unlikely changes like this happen in Pakistan.

That is what you think !! Theories theories all over !! Did you hear a single word from the Armed forces about the issue plus when the families of the victims forgave him what's the big deal?

[graveyardofempires]

lol
shebaz only believes armed forces and their releases
what a joker.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

[/SIZE][/FONT]

This makes no sense.

If you can't relate to what I'm trying to get you to understand, just don't bother.



And where did I say that Sharia supposes guilt before innocence?

Read, try to understand: (my previous post)

"AFAIK, it was not possible to PROVE oj was guilty. There is the presupposition in secular law (and Islamic law) that people are innocent until proved to be guilty."

So, reading is not your strongpoint.



I'm not going to bother with this, if you can't be bothered, or aren't capable of understanding what I'm saying.

You rather foolishly and (perhaps willingly/arrogantly/deceptively?) cannot understand you are comparing apples and oranges. Its no different than your wishful and ahistorical thinking when it came to the veil and Afghan women, but Ill address that later.

Yours is a part of a wider agenda that I think even western atheist, secular or Christian minded folks alike would scoff at.

The issue is that you predefined the goals of secular law and theocratic law as meeting at a common endpoint which is merely establishing an equitable outcome in the here and now. However, they do not. This difference of destination and outcome goes for Judaic law, Islamic law, and perhaps other forms of theocratic law.

Your central idea that you are floating can be summarized in this supposed scenario:

Rich man X kills poor man Y. Rich man X decides he doesn't want to go to jail, so he decides to pay off poor man Y's family. This results in justice being subverted for Poor man Y based on a technicality in the law system. Moreover, Rich man X can go on doing this endlessly.

However, you fail to recognize a few facets of reality. First, the Quranic verse reads as follows:

"Second Surah O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder; the free for the free the slave for the slave the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, This is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. (178) In the law of Equality there is (saving of) life to you O ye men of understanding! that ye may restrain yourselves. (179)"

You see, the goals of theocratic law are clearly defined in this ayaah, and this verse points them out, even to blind Roadrunners (I always liked Wyle E Coyote better). That is right, the word is plural, GOALS:

To establish the weight of justice here, but also to establish the weight of justice in the hereafter. The shariah provides for multiple opportunities in which a community of Muslims is tested to enjoin the 2 way street of justice. As I mentioned before, regarding the laws of zina, the accused has the right to bow out and swear an oath of innocence. However, both the accusers and the accused are warned that they ought to understand the duality of the outcome: they may run free in this life, but their crimes shall not be evaded in front of the judgement throne of God, the almighty. Its like that quote Maximus has in Gladiator when he says to Commodus: "I shall have my vengeance, either in this life or the next."

That is exactly why the ayaah above does not indicate who is exactly is exceeding the limits as the family of the accused is expected to dispense justice on behalf of their loved one and the murderer/manslaughterer is expected to atone with a purity of heart. In case the latter individual is creating mischief, and using his wealth to conduct excesses, the Quran is prepared for him by addressing fasaad (mischief mongering) on the earth as a crime worthy of capital punishment.

Regarding the justice afforded individual Y: Who are you to speak for that individual regarding what outcome they would have preferred? Being dead, and closer to the judgement throne, I am sure that they understand that the ayaah above makes forgiveness and awarding life a noble and worthy deed that God smiles on. To summarize, individual Y will have his justice should he have had desires different than the family, but it will be in front of God himself.

This same principle is seen in the sin of ghiba (back biting). There is Godly forgiveness therein, but the whole of the act is not forgiven unless the one that was transgressed against also forgives his part.

For that matter, you still choose to ignore the major "loophole" that you brushed aside because you were made to look like an ignoramus. You raised the issue of innocence until guilt is proven, and that is the loophole compadre. Do you understand how many checks and balances are in place under qisaas versus what you are attempting to promote? You have not only the court, but also the family as an arbiter. Rather it is you that has to justify how a very rich man can exploit the aforementioned loophole (e.g. OJ Simpson versus Paul Bernard) and open it wide up on a 1:1 correlation basis between the power of his lawyer team and the ability to slip away. Rather it is you that has to answer why a system ought to be able to take away the rights of loved ones to have veto power so that degrees can be assigned to the murder and punishment meted out with various intra courtroom shananigans and antics.

1. You have only shown your ignorance of the complexities behind Islamic law. You willfully decided that a corrupt, non Islamic state, utilizing a backroom deal, in a non open court situation suddenly represented qisaas as it was meant to be practiced. The above ayaah disputes this and demands justice and the best of intentions from all sides in the matter, period. In the Raymond Davis case, where was the trial? An Islamic court has to declare the individual as murdered and Mr. Davis as a murderer. Who was the negotiator on behalf of the family? Was he of sound mind? Did he or she have the best interests of all parties in mind? Is Mr. Davis truly repentent and has he admitted guilt? The fact that we know next to nothing about the answers to these questions merely shows shariah justice was subverted, not implemented.

2. You still ignore the mental quagmire you created for yourself when you attempted to point out what you refer to as loopholes. This is primarily because it shows your woefully ignorant you are of how Islamic law is to be executed and because it shows how unfair you are when weighing the execution of such laws in entirely different enviroments.

3. Please continue to criticize qisaas, because it does a wonderful thing here on the forum. This ayaah above is neither derived from hadith literature nor is derived from seerah... it is, in the minds of those that ascribe to the creed of "La illaha ilullah", the verbatim word of the Almighty God. I prefer that you, Toramana, and Baygham continue to clarify how much you disown this ayaah. Why? Because then every Afghan on the fence here can see that your opinions, as well as theirs, stand directly in diametric opposition to Islam. You basically will make them choose between God and you. I think Afghans have shown consistently that God trumps the Roadrunner for every real Afghan. In fact, if you are not careful, Wyle E. Coyote may yet make a dinner of you.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

That is what you think !! Theories theories all over !! Did you hear a single word from the Armed forces about the issue plus when the families of the victims forgave him what's the big deal?

Shehbaz you live, study and even defend this state and you don't know this? Either you are in denial of the most basic fact of Pakistan or you are really that unaware.

[roadrunner]

Plus, I don't understand what ISI and Pakistan Army had to do with it? !!

Very true Shehbaz. One of the few people to understand that it was Sharia Law that allowed the murderer to get away.

For example if the law in Afghanistan is that you can avoid prison if convicted, by eating a tomato, then it is nothing to do with the Afghan Army or government. It is the law that frees the person.

[roadrunner]

Barakabdulzai, i'm not reading through some of the longwinded nonsense in there.

Justice is when a murderer gets punished, instead of being released into freedom.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakabdulzai, i'm not reading through some of the longwinded nonsense in there.

Justice is when a murderer gets punished, instead of being released into freedom.

Translates to you concede, and you lose. OJ was not punished and Paul Bernard was = loophole = money.

Its a rather simple formula for Afghans Roadkill. Do you challenge the one who wrote this? Come on, say it, I dare you. See who the Afghans pick, you or God:

"Second Surah O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder; the free for the free the slave for the slave the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, This is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. (178) In the law of Equality there is (saving of) life to you O ye men of understanding! that ye may restrain yourselves. (179)"

[roadrunner]

Translates to you concede, and you lose. OJ was not punished and Paul Bernard was = loophole = money.

Its a rather simple formula for Afghans Roadkill. Do you challenge the one who wrote this? Come on, say it, I dare you. See who the Afghans pick, you or God:

"Second Surah O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder; the free for the free the slave for the slave the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, This is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. (178) In the law of Equality there is (saving of) life to you O ye men of understanding! that ye may restrain yourselves. (179)"

This is the problem with people like you. When it comes to interpreting things of this nature then you're absolutely without a clue, as is virtually all Sharia Law in use.

Here is the main point. Pakistan has two systems of law. One is secular law, the other is Sharia Law. Secular law says he should be punished by prison. Sharia Law says he should be punished, but well, he can be let off and go scot free if he's got enough money. And that's exactly what happened.

There's no argument over the verse. You can interpret it how you like. I don't interpret it like you. But it is IRRELEVANT. The fact is that it is this interpretation of Sharia Law that let him get off free, and in fact Sharia Law in these countries that have let many murderers out of jail simply because they can afford to pay enough money to poor people. THAT is NOT justice.

If you cannot interpret, or apply something correctly or at least logically, then you are foolish to make a law out of it. The Secular Law needs no such intelligence. It is basic common sense. You commit a crime, you do the time. Money is not a get out of jail card for the rich.

[roadrunner]

Here's one interpretation

There used to be problems in Arabia where one tribe's slave (for example) might kill another tribe's slave. The law of equality said that instead of taking 2 slaves from the other tribe, take only one. That's more fair.

Since the taken slave would be innocent, the tribe may kill him as revenge (which is what they used to do), or if the relations deem it alright, just take some compensation.

Note that blood money applies to innocent people.

it doesn't apply to people caught with their knickers down murdering people.