There is no Islamism in Islam

[Khorosani]

Khorosani

An interview or even calling someone a hero not proof of wrong doing since we don't know whether they do so out of deliberate intention or just lack of awareness. You need to prove that everyone involved did wrong, Try again

It actually shows what agenda they are promoting, and its NOT the agenda of Islam. They say that if you look at what a man speaks about, you know what kind of person they are.

Besides the source quoted "Local Security Officials" they are surely munafiqeen for spying on the musims and working for the kuffar.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

No that's your accusation, maybe they think Massoud was a better Muslim; whether he was or not is another issue. But if they believe so, it wouldn't be wrong doing.

Your argument is bogus sir.


saying "local security officials, also does not prove "wrong doers". You make TOO many assumptions; You don't even meet the requirement of proof that you demand.

*face palm* lol

[hk1992]

@ revolutionthroughreason

Heres the proof:
O ye who believe! Take not for patrons (awliyaa) unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer God an open proof against yourselves? Surah 4:144

Those who believe shall not take misbelievers for their patrons, rather than believers, and he who does this has no part with God at all, unless, indeed, ye fear some danger from them. But God bids you beware of Himself, for unto Him your journey is.Surah 3:28

O ye who believe! take not the Jews and Christians for your patrons : they are patrons of each other; but whoso amongst you takes them for patrons, verily, he is of them, and, verily, God guides not an unjust people Surah 5:51

O ye who believe! take not to intimacy with others than yourselves; they will not fail to spoil you; they would fain ye came to trouble,- hatred is shown by their mouths; but what their breasts conceal is greater still. We have made manifest to you our signs, did ye but understand. Surah 3:118

Thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a sickness vieing with them; they say, 'We fear lest there befall us a reverse.' It may be God will give the victory, or an order from Himself, and they may awake repenting of what they thought in secret to themselves.
Surah 5:52

Thou wilt see many of them taking those who disbelieve for their patrons; evil is that which their souls have sent before them, for God's wrath is on them, and in the torment shall they dwell for aye. But had they believed in God and the prophet, and what was revealed to him, they had not taken these for their patrons; but many of them are evildoers. Surah 5:80-81

The Security forces are bankrolled by non muslims ie non muslims are there patrons therefore everything in the above verses 100% applies to the Afghan security forces, this makes them hypocrites and the prophet muhammad said to never trust the words of a known hypocrite.

Finally a few closing points:

There will be years of deceit, in which a truthful person will be disbelieved and a liar will be believed (Ibn Kathir)

The time will be years of confusion. People will believe a liar, and disbelieve one who tells the truth. People will distrust one who is trustworthy, and trust one who is treacherous. (Ahmad)


In these days it is a safe bet to believe the opposite of what the majority thinks as thats usually the right thing. if the majority believe the taliban are terrorists then Im pretty certain they arent particularly if the non-muslims are also claimin the above because why would i take there word over that of a muslim who sacrifices his life and family for allah and this religion. The two cannot be equal.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Muslim’s Alliance with the Christians of Abyssinia
In the fifth year after the birth of Islam, Prophet Muhammad proposed to his companions to migrate to Abyssinia in an attempt to deliver them from the persecution and the violence of Quraysh. In this regard the Prophet stated the following:

"I propose that you migrate to Abyssinia, where there is a Christian king, well known for his justice. He is said to have not wronged any one in his kingdom." Al Hafith, al Bidayah we al Nihayah, Volume 3, Page 58.

[hk1992]

yeah but that was him allying with christians against pagans not muslims, what you said in no way contradicts any of the quranic verses which prohibits taking sided with non muslims against muslims-which the prophet muhammad PBUH never did ie if he was alive today he would never have allied with america to rule afghanistan or to fight the taliban under any circumstances, but if he was living in say china and his followers were being persecuted by the Chinese government he would have had no problem sending them to America for protection ie a safe zone as america doesnt tend to openly persecute people in its country, so it would have been safer for them there than living in china, I hope this makes more sense now.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

The Qur'an's verses you cited make no stipulation of what you suggest. It simply suggests preferring Christians/Jews vs. believers. Also since the Taliban have committed crimes against Muslims, there maybe dubiety on whether they're consider "believers" or Fasiqeen.

Point being neither of you demonstrated Khorosani's objection as valid Also note, I didn't even have to post that narration. I could just say that you need to prove that those specific local security forces that were involved in the case were themselves doing wrong doing. Which itself would nullify your Khorosani''s objection

don't you love logic?

[Khorosani]

No that's your accusation, maybe they think Massoud was a better Muslim; whether he was or not is another issue. But if they believe so, it wouldn't be wrong doing.

Your argument is bogus sir.


saying "local security officials, also does not prove "wrong doers". You make TOO many assumptions; You don't even meet the requirement of proof that you demand.

*face palm* lol

LOL tell me which local security officials are not on the payroll of karzai i.e the payroll of America? That's fisq.

[Khorosani]

Muslim’s Alliance with the Christians of Abyssinia
In the fifth year after the birth of Islam, Prophet Muhammad proposed to his companions to migrate to Abyssinia in an attempt to deliver them from the persecution and the violence of Quraysh. In this regard the Prophet stated the following:

"I propose that you migrate to Abyssinia, where there is a Christian king, well known for his justice. He is said to have not wronged any one in his kingdom." Al Hafith, al Bidayah we al Nihayah, Volume 3, Page 58.

Subhan'Allah, you call us salafis when it seems your the one trained in salafi DIY ijtihad. That abyssinian nation was assisting the Muslims and aiding them not going into their lands and raping, killing, and imprisoning their people. Let alone occupation.

Imam Muhammad ibn ashaybani (RA), the sahib of Abu Hanifa (RA), implied in kitab as siyar that the muslims who assist the harbis are to be killed. This was said by 1000's of scholars after him.

Actually the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that the local securities are not taking their payroll from the kuffar and aren't assisting us against the muslims. I'm positive you wont find a thing. This is such a known fact that only an imbecile would make stupid excuses like you are just to prove a point.

If anybody is incapable to see the deviance of Ahmad Shah Massoud than they aren't qualified to speak in the first place. No one takes shahada from a fool. Such people are considered juhal and possibly bidatis. And i'm not even claiming this from a salafi point of view but through orthodoxy. I don't ascribe to the salafi ideology at all, i'm a hanafi and i stick close to the text of the ahnaf. However i accept other methodologies as well and i'm tolerant to anyone who stays close to the the Quran, sunnah and ulema.

[hk1992]

This is the crux of the matter "muslim" citizens living in and supporting an non-Muslim occupation of an muslim country are they really classified as crimes against muslims in this situation as the taliban attacking such people who are allied with non-muslims is not considered atrocities against muslims. Muslims are those who never look to nonmuslims for assistance against muslims. The West would have you think those killed by the taliban in the defense of islam are "innocent muslims" but there is no such thing you either exist on one side of the divide or the other.

Answer this: If the western media protrays the taliban as the most evilest of there enemies then why are the taliban also you're main enemy, as a muslim why do you take the word of the disbelievers and those who support them among the muslims as the greatest truth but those who tried there best to establish shariah on this earth were liars even though they made mistakes in the start, all young governments make mistakes but those ie the americans whose political agenda is to spread secularism not islam tell you those who spread shariah are bad you immediately believe them does that not make you a proponent of secularism and against islam.

Yes the taliban made mistakes, they are human and are not perfect but they brought order to a country racked by civil war, they brought great security of life and property to the vast majority of Afghanistans population. If the americans did not topple there government, impose sanctions on them to stunt development and fund as many warlords in the countries as they could against them the taliban would not have been as brutal as they were but people forget they were also fighting for the survival of a system and became overzealous, which is why allah trained them through this 11 year ordeal. it also helped to separate those who were true muslims among the pashtuns, tajiks, uzbeks, hazaras etc and those who werent.

Also to answer your question the taliban are to me the very definition of a true muslim, whereas to you they are not that is why what is logical to me, that is the aforementioned verses from the quran is illogical to you as from my perspective the taliban had an agenda to establish shariah the americans when they invaded had no such agenda and those they supported in toppling the taliban ie the ANA,ANP are similar to each other all non-muslims except those who repent and turn away from this american coalition and strive for the establishment of an islamic state governed by true shariah. Therefore by default the local security forces are hypocrites and they have engaged in gross injustice against islam by allying with the disbelievers for any reason, this is there crime, there wrong doing which exceeds all the crimes of the taliban combined. The prophet himself said to never trust the word of the hypocrite as it would only spread strife among the believers and the non-muslims dont wage a 11 year war against hypocrites so dont give me arguments about the taliban possibly being fasiqun for there resistance against the nonmuslims and atrocities against the hypocrites.

I dont mind if you are secular and dont want islam to be a political force, which has an aggressive expansionist policy(just like the europeans have) but I do mind people who pretend to be moderate muslims but are closet atheists, just pick a side for or against and end this debate, the last 11 years have simplified thing throughout the muslim world, it has made the true muslims appear less attractive and the hypocrites appear extremely attractive, I dont care if there are only 100000 muslims left who share my opinion but I dont want muslims who are sitting on the fence hedging there bets or those who are downright anti-islam in all but name being included among the muslims.

As an aside i Am not the most holiest of men, I'm probably no more righteous than most on this forum but Islam isnt a matter of rituals everyone can do the rituals it has today become a matter of faith do you really believe in it or do you not find it attractive anymore, as I said I wont judge anyone for there genuine opinion if you hate islam for its "terrorist attacks", "Islamism", "Jihadi Ideology", then just admit to it dont go beating around the bush as we can never have a real discussion when something which means one thing to me means another to you, as some people no longer like or consider certain aspects of islam to be proper islam anymore. This is what we need to discuss what does islam mean to each and every muslim ie what is there own personal belief in Islam, up to what degree are they willing to follow islam.

I think Ive been pretty thorough

None of the above is meant to offend anyone, neither is it an attack on anyone, but more of a rhetorical statement, as I genuinely want to ask the hard questions about islam no one wants to deal with anymore

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Subhan'Allah, you call us salafis when it seems your the one trained in salafi DIY ijtihad. That abyssinian nation was assisting the Muslims and aiding them not going into their lands and raping, killing, and imprisoning their people. Let alone occupation.

The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one's who make the claim; YOU made the claim regarding the Fasada of these security officials who published that report.I did my part in fulfillinmg MY claim (Taliban mixing Pashtunwali rules and claiming them to be apart of Islam)The Taliban were raping, killing and all that stuff you mentioned yet you want us to trust them. Face Palm yourself again please.

The Abyssinians are CHRISTIANS and Muhammad made alliances with CHRISTIANS, there was no distinction in these verses about any of the other things you suggest. OF COURSE it is contextual. But that is my point, since it is contextual, merely throwing out a verse or hadith is not itself proof without context and furthermore WITHOUT hard evidence that the individuals in question and I stress INDIVIDUALS because if you're going by guilt by association then this would end up implying every Afghan citizen by default. The Point being your logic is shoddy and does not demonstrate your claim.

So keep face palming yourself, maybe one of those hits will help you realize why your attempt at trying to deny the fasadat of the Taliban is nonsensical.

Logic ALWAYS wins

[hk1992]

Every afghan citizen by default who doesnt support the taliban is included-that is islams ruling there is no such thing as being a half muslim, you still havent answered the most critical point which is how are the ana any better than the taliban since they are on americas payroll
also you didnt answer my previous question either
lastly some parts of the quran are contextual but when there are a horde of verses saying the exact same thing ie never take the disbelievers as allies agaisnt disbelievers that is not contextual its like saying the hijab is contextual in the quran or the ban on alcohol is contectual etc you argument is illogical from the perspective of one who believes in the quran, also if you deny the quran again i wont use it as a reference as you obviously dont believe in it and you arent a muslim who is unsure of whats happening but a "muslim" who is aware and is happy with inviting non-muslims into muslim lands and wiping the shariah of allah off the earth.

I say to you what the quran thought me:
“And the servants of Most Gracious God are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant people address them, they say: ‘Peace’. (Qur’an; 25:63).


ipray that one day allah leads those of our muslim brothers but particularly our pashtun brothers as they are closest to us in kinship to the straight way and the correct understanding of our religion

[RevolutionThroughReason]

HK do you live in a Western country by any chance?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Also to answer your question the taliban are to me the very definition of a true muslim, whereas to you they are not that is why what is logical to me,

And This sentence alone is what the rest of your post rests upon; You have your own personal biases and those personal biases and those biases you IMPOSE on the Holy Verses of the Qur'an. The attempt at trying to rescue the Taliban from criticism backfires on every angle even if we accept these red herrings and irrelevant pleas regarding the Taliban history. If the Taliban started as good guys, they certainly did not end that way and if they make m mistakes where they do not apply Shari'ah, then they have demonstrated that they are prone to wrong-doing and are not competent to represent Shari'ah.

Also note I never said the verses of the Qur'an are illogical but your USE of those verses and their Applicability to the context at hand demonstrates POOR logic. It means you did not correctly understand the stipulations of the verses and where/when they apply. Or their contexts. So much like Khorosani your attempt at cherry picking

[RevolutionThroughReason]

The thing is HK, you have to prove that your claim IS in fact the case, you state too many variables as givens, So unless you can establish your claims first, the questions would hold no relevance because they're built on certain assumptions we don't know are factual for absolute certain.

For you to suggest your biases are Islam's rulings, that your assumptions are correct to associate with those rulings is in fact alleging you have the Knowledge of God. This is Shirk. which is IN FACT one of the highest forms of wrong doing.

Both you and Khorosani are demonstrating guilt of this.

[Khorosani]

The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one's who make the claim; YOU made the claim regarding the Fasada of these security officials who published that report.I did my part in fulfillinmg MY claim (Taliban mixing Pashtunwali rules and claiming them to be apart of Islam)The Taliban were raping, killing and all that stuff you mentioned yet you want us to trust them. Face Palm yourself again please.

The Abyssinians are CHRISTIANS and Muhammad made alliances with CHRISTIANS, there was no distinction in these verses about any of the other things you suggest. OF COURSE it is contextual. But that is my point, since it is contextual, merely throwing out a verse or hadith is not itself proof without context and furthermore WITHOUT hard evidence that the individuals in question and I stress INDIVIDUALS because if you're going by guilt by association then this would end up implying every Afghan citizen by default. The Point being your logic is shoddy and does not demonstrate your claim.

So keep face palming yourself, maybe one of those hits will help you realize why your attempt at trying to deny the fasadat of the Taliban is nonsensical.

Logic ALWAYS wins

Security forces all around the country take their money from Karzai who upholds non-islamic laws and who ultimately get their pay roll from America. This is a known fact and there is absolutely no exception to this. asking about proof for the fisq of these traitors of the ummah is like asking for the proof for america's war on islam. It's far to clear cut and the burden of proof is on you in such clear cut situations. Or better yet the proof for America's kufr. in such clear cut issues there is no need to get proof that the Kunduz security officials are taking their money from karzai (fisq) which is ultimately getting it from the kuffar (double fisq possibly even kufr)

You gave one story from one commander that comes from an extremely dubious source (first the actual news company who promotes nationalist criminals like Ahmad shah masood and bollywood entertainment which is double fisq and than their actual sources are also unreliable) and than you claim that ALL of the Taliban rule in accordance with the pashtun wali. The Taliban always produce sharia articles and you can't bring me ONE instance when they go against the sharia with actual text.

Than you go on and say they rape and do all sorts of other acts, what a load of garbage. I know its the "cool" thing among western afghans to want to say that their people are backward and the Taliban are barbarians ect but your a muslim and knowledgeable, be just.

If you're trying to use the incident of sending your people to nijashi as a proof that you can have alliances with the kuffar against Muslims than you are extremely misguided.

I'm glad we had this conversation, you've shown your true colors.