Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Yesterday at 11:30 PM

Female role models
Yesterday at 09:58 PM

Kashmir endgame
Yesterday at 07:04 PM

Scientists and .............
August 22, 2019, 07:27 PM

Zakir Naik..Islamic Hero ...
August 22, 2019, 07:04 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
August 21, 2019, 07:01 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
August 18, 2019, 09:34 PM

The Battle for British Is...
August 18, 2019, 10:04 AM

hindus in India beat A M...
August 17, 2019, 01:23 PM

What music are you listen...
August 15, 2019, 09:05 PM

Human Rights and Wrongs
August 14, 2019, 04:47 PM

New PM incoming
August 13, 2019, 07:27 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: When Pakistanis look within

 (Read 5856 times)
  • Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #30 - October 16, 2012, 04:20 PM

    I truly love the don't blame the Taliban article.
    ................................

    It's such a good read, I sent it to a whole lot of people.


    There is hope yet with such brave people taking on the moderates.

    off course, there is hope scamper_22.. without hope there is no life..

    any way my point is., whenever I e-mail such articles to people that are believers I will also add you tube links  such as..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtIyx687ytk

    if they are women  and this type..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo


    for  men.. and please read other articles of kunwar shahid


    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #31 - October 20, 2012, 05:06 AM

    From the author of "Don't Blame the Taliban"



    OCTOBER 19TH, 2012 11:16
    Don’t blame the Taliban II
    By kkshahid
    Note: This is the sequel to the article titled ‘Don’t blame the Taliban’ published on 12/10/2012: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/10/12/comment/columns/dont-blame-the-taliban/.

    Let’s finally address the elephant in the room

    Which ideology can possibly justify killing a 14-year-old school going kid? That is the question being asked by the ‘moderates’. The Taliban claim that their ideology does. The apologists of that ideology claim that the ‘monsters’ have got it all wrong, and continue to castigate the ‘beasts’, while ensuring that no fingers point towards the ideology. It’s about time we finally addressed the elephant in the room, instead of pointlessly condemning violent acts without discussing their roots.

    The Taliban have defended the attack on Malala Yousafzai according to their scriptures and history. Of course if you’re looking for a command that orders the killing of every 14-year-old school going girl who is inspired by the leader of Dar-ul-Harb, you won’t find one, but what you will find are quite a few historical precedents. Like for instance the case of Asma bint Marwan, a poetess whose murder was sanctioned in 2 AH after she conspired against Islam and the Holy Prophet, as narrated by Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Sa’d. And then there are Ibn Khatal’s two slave girls Fartana and Qaribah, who used to sing songs against the Holy Prophet and were among the ten shortlisted to be executed at the Conquest of Makkah in 8 AH – one of them was killed, the second managed to escape (Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat- Vol 2). Women were ordered to be killed for conspiring against the religion by their ideological predecessors, and so is it entirely the Taliban’s fault for taking cue and attempting to kill a girl who criticised their fundamentals; the fundamentals emanating from their ‘authentic’ religious scriptures?

    Now to the question of Malala being a ‘kid’. According to Islamic teachings you’re an adult and responsible for your actions when you reach puberty – if a 9-year-old is considered old enough to get married, a 14-year-old should be old enough for being condemned for ‘conspiracy’. A plethora of Malalas under the pretext of threat to the religion bit the dust when the religion was expanding and therefore, if you’re defending Islam as the ultimate truth you can’t blame the Taliban for adopting violence as a means to assault the sceptics, unless you denounce the violence in 7th century as well and question the ideology.

    I know what the apologists are saying at this very moment. When it comes to the off-putting facets of their ideology, everything:

    1. Has a weak chain of narration
    2. Is being taken out of context and is misinterpreted
    3. Was the accepted norm of the time

    Let’s address the first point.

    Don’t you think it is rather hypocritical to claim that a particular verse from a particular compilation has a weak narration chain (even the two “most authentic” compilations Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are marred by this allegation) and then go on to quote other verses from those same books because you find them “acceptable”? Do you not realise that strictly from a historian’s point of view once there is a consensus that any part of any book or compilation is not ‘authentic’ that basically throws the authenticity of the entire scripture out of the window? And if we’re playing the authenticity game, how many of the apologists realise that the first ‘authentic’ biography of the Holy Prophet was written in 828 AD by Abd-al-Malik bin Hisham – a good 196 years after his death? Again, strictly from a neutral historian’s viewpoint if you’re allowing for a gap of two centuries between the events actually taking place and their first reliable narration, that slashes a question mark over the accuracy of pretty much anything you care to conjure up from Islamic history – violent or otherwise.

    Now to the second point.

    Let’s take the “out of context” bit into context strictly from the point of view of the concept of a divine deity. Religion – any religion – is supposed to govern mankind till the end of time. Its holy scripture is supposed to be the word of the creator; an unalterable, preset text that is supposed to be the guideline, till the deity decides to call it a day. Does it seem reasonable that something that was supposed to guide man till the afterlife is left to human interpretation – especially when it deals with something as brutally sensitive as killing another human being – and is left so ambiguous such that one can’t even find five of its followers who would agree on every single one of its aspects? You have a gazillion interpretations originating from a scripture that is supposed to guide the average man, with an average mind who will not delve into 1500 years of history or go through infinite volumes of literature before interpreting when killing another human being is justified and when it isn’t.

    If the propagators really wanted to ensure that everything remains contextual, how hard was it to drop a line saying it? (There is no command declaring that: hang on, you can kill the ‘non-believers’ now but make sure you don’t do so in 2012 – when humanity would be aware of the repugnance of the act) If the propagators really wanted to make sure that the peaceful verses – most from the time at Makkah – last forever, why would they introduce the ‘Al-Nasikh-Wal-Mansukh’ doctrine of abrogation and then ensure that the commands preaching violence chronologically followed the commands of peace? If the propagators really wanted to promote harmony, why would they use provocative language asking the ‘true believers’ to cut off the finger tips of non-believers for instance or claiming how they can never be friends with the Jews and Christians or else they would be one of them?

    Moving on to the third point.

    Don’t you think the propagators of the religion – those that were ostensibly fighting against the norms with the new ideology anyway– should have risen up against the repulsive practices? If you’re discouraging the possession of slaves and slave girls, why would you own any of them yourself? If you’re discouraging violence, why would you use it to propagate your ideology? And if you’re carving out a code for all the future generations to come why would you bow down to the norms of the time – any norm –at all?

    Condemning violence but remaining shushed about its roots is not only hypocritical but pointless if you actually want to uproot the cause. 810 million people have been killed in the name of religion throughout human history, and lives are being taken every single day in our neck of the woods in the name of the ‘religion of peace’. Considering the response to last week’s piece there are many who are categorically against this ignorance – how long do all of you plan on remaining silent about it?


    Email: khulduneshahid@gmail.com
    Twitter: @khuldune


    SOURCE

    "Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves, for they shall never cease to be amused."
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #32 - October 20, 2012, 01:17 PM

    Bloody hell.

    That guy has cojones.

    I have never seen an article like that in the mainstream press in the UK, let alone in Pakistan.

    He absolutely tells it like it is. Asma bint Marwan. The slavegirls that Muhammad ordered killed. Wow. Wow. Wow. Righteous truth telling.

    I hope he stays safe. I hope he has a visa to another country if he needs to get out of there fast!


    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #33 - October 20, 2012, 01:23 PM

    That is a slam dunk. That is hitting six sixes off one over. That is a Messi wondergoal going past six players from the half way line. That is truth.

    Whoa wait, I just clicked on the link and saw it is published on the Daily Telegraph blog - so it is in a British newspaper site.

    Same thing goes though. I hope he remains safe.


    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #34 - October 20, 2012, 01:30 PM

     
    Bloody hell.

    That guy has cojones.

    I have never seen an article like that in the mainstream press in the UK, let alone in Pakistan.

    He absolutely tells it like it is. Asma bint Marwan. The slavegirls that Muhammad ordered killed. Wow. Wow. Wow. Righteous truth telling.

    I hope he stays safe. I hope he has a visa to another country if he needs to get out of there fast!



     well I am no fan of Islam/Hadith and those brutal rogues of Islam the Taliban.. but Islam through out its history, one side it created such rogues and other side it created FEUDAL Criminals to rule over such rogues.. Classic example is Land of pure .  in fact you can see that in every country that is dominated by Islam/ the political Islam.  To day's news says

    We unconditionally accept SC ruling on Asghar Khan case: Punjab CM Shahbaz the brother of other Shariff who ruled the country by rigging elections in 90s



    Quote
    ISLAMABAD: Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif on Saturday said he accepted the apex court’s judgment on the Asghar Khan case without reservations, DawnNews reported on Saturday.

    Speaking at a sports day event held at the Cadet College, Kalar Kahar, he added that President Asif Ali Zardari had also taken Rs 500 million from the Intelligence Bureau (IB) which must be accounted for.

    The chief minister said Pakistan was facing numerous challenges, including an energy crisis.

    He added that the system of education in Punjab had reached an international standard.

    Chief Minister Shahbaz also announced that a Danish school would be established for girls and added that 200,000 laptops would be distributed in December in Punjab and other provinces

    Hmm, using tax payer's money and from his tax evading for the past 20 years,  he seem to be doing some laptop business  now adays..


    They stole and we stole we are all CROOKS ruling the country since the Official hanging/ Murder of that Bhutto .. That is how Islam worked  and  it worked exactly same way since the day Alleged Prophet of Islam is dead.........it is quite clear from its early history...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY5leOAUpDU

    that is Asghar Khan case.  ...

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #35 - October 20, 2012, 02:20 PM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frFyo14M23E

    interesting discussion from 16.35mts  from Land of pure., ...this is about that Indians famous actress Kapoor marrying that Muslim guy.. son of Patuadi .. Well that is  the discussion about Human Zebras in India..  It is rare or impossible to find Human Zebras in Land of Pure..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #36 - October 20, 2012, 02:46 PM

    At first I also worried if he'd be safe.
    Then I thought about again.

    Who is he really 'attacking' in the article. He is attacking the moderates. The wine sipping, gender mixing Muslims. Not exactly the dangerous type.
    He basically admits, that the extremists have the closer following of Islam in line with the Sunnah. Depends on how they read it of course.


    So I'm not sure if his life is in as much danger I initially thought.
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #37 - October 23, 2012, 03:56 AM

    So in the comments in his second article I read this post. Basically saying the prophet never killed women and the hadith about the killing of Asma Bint Marwan is fake. What do you guys think of all this? Lets just say that hadith is a fake one... then why the fuck do they even have it in their books? Isnt that part of the problem? Whats the status of the hadith on the 2 slave girls that were ordered to be killed by Mo?

    Anyway here is what this guy wrote:

    Quote
    wabzishill
    Yesterday 08:13 PM
    Did you give any evidence from the Quran or Sunnah that education is banned for girls? No, so your argument collapses because if there is nothing that brings proof that a girl can't be educated, Malala couldn't have been criticizing the Taliban's religious fundamentals but their tribal values. In fact, seeking knowledge is an obligation on every Muslim, male or female. The greatest scholar of Islam was a female and the oldest university in the world (in Morocco) was founded by a Muslim woman. So I would say that Islam encourages education for girls but the Taliban's backwards tribal values, which was present in that region even before Islam was introduced doesn't. Do you forget that Malala is also a Muslim? So she wouldn't be criticizing aspects of her own faith, would she? And she wouldn't be a role model in a Muslim country if what she preached was against Islamic fundamentals. And what you said about Asma bint Marwan being killed over poetry is false and I can easily refute it:

    The story of the killing of Asma' bint Marwan is mentioned by Ibn Sa'd in Kitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir[3] and by the author of Kinz-ul-'Ummal under number 44131 who attributes it to Ibn Sa'd, Ibn 'Adiyy and Ibn 'Asaker. What is interesting is that Ibn 'Adiyy mentions it in his book Al-Kamel on the authority of Ja'far Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn As-Sabah on authority of Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ash-Shami on authority of Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Lakhmi on authority of Mujalid on authority of Ash-Shu'abi on authority of Ibn 'Abbas, and added that

    ...this isnâd (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid but by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj and they all (other reporters in the chain) accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it Ibn 'Adiyy, Al-Kamel, Vol. 6, p. 145

    Muhammad (PBUH) was sent poisoned food by a Jewish woman and he forbade his companions from killing her so that makes it even more unauthentic that he would kill a woman over poetry

    Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewish woman brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No." I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of God’s Apostle. Sahih al-Bukhârî, Vol. 3, Bk. 47, No. 786

    The attack on Malala was despicable, yes but had she been one of those children being killed every day by drones, no one would care. What kind of ideology condones killing those children, might I ask? Or do their deaths only matter if those who pulled the trigger claim to be Muslim?


    -------------------
    Believe in yourself
    -------------------
    Strike me down and I'll just become another nail in your coffin
    -------------------
    There's such a thing as sheep in wolfs clothing... religious fanatics
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #38 - October 23, 2012, 04:09 AM

    How very convenient. Does anyone else think that moderate religionists are the more cynical ones? I mean, you either accept that the religion you claim to follow is divinely inspired, which means you don't get to change it around to suit modern day norms. Or you "re-interpret" it to mean anything YOU want it to mean, in which case, you don't actually believe in the religion.

    "Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves, for they shall never cease to be amused."
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #39 - October 23, 2012, 11:43 AM

    Weasel words, sophistry.


    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #40 - October 23, 2012, 12:36 PM

     
    So in the comments in his second article I read this post. Basically saying the prophet never killed women and the hadith about the killing of Asma Bint Marwan is fake. What do you guys think of all this? Lets just say that hadith is a fake one... then why the fuck do they even have it in their books? Isnt that part of the problem? Whats the status of the hadith on the 2 slave girls that were ordered to be killed by Mo?

    Anyway here is what this guy wrote:
    Quote
    ....................Muhammad (PBUH) was sent poisoned food by a Jewish woman and he forbade his companions from killing her so that makes it even more unauthentic that he would kill a woman over poetry

    Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewish woman brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No." I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of God’s Apostle. Sahih al-Bukhârî, Vol. 3, Bk. 47, No. 786..................


     
    Faith heads write all sorts of nonsense in support of their faith.. They clearly take the words from hadith and expand/modify /make noise to score the point.. But proof of Muhammad's death as well as birth from Islamic early history books is messy .. WHatever these guys get that must have come from early Muslim Historians  from this list ., Let me put those  hadith statements on that issue here but before that let me add this tube here from a Shiat  preacher..

    Who killed the prophet Mohammad?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HiMgW9yd7w


    Now let us read that story from its sources
    Quote
    Bukhari's Hadith 3.786: Narrated Anas bin Malik:  A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No."  I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allah's Apostle.

    Bukhari's Hadith 4.394:  Narrated Abu Huraira:  When Khaibar was conquered, a roasted poisoned sheep was presented to the Prophet as a gift (by the Jews).  The Prophet ordered, "Let all the Jews who have been here, be assembled before me."  The Jews were collected and the Prophet said (to them), "I am going to ask you a question.  Will you tell the truth?"  They said, "Yes." The Prophet asked, "Who is your father?"  They replied, "So-and-so."  He said, "You have told a lie; your father is so-and-so."  They said,  "You are right." He said, "Will you now tell me the truth, if I ask you about something?"  They replied, "Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim; and if we should tell a lie, you can realize our lie as you have done regarding our father."  On that he asked, "Who are the people of the (Hell) Fire?"  They said, "We shall remain in the (Hell) Fire for a short period, and after that you will replace us."  The Prophet said, "You may be cursed and humiliated in it!  By Allah, we shall never replace you in it."  Then he asked, "Will you now tell me the truth if I ask you a question?"  They said, "Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim."  He asked, "Have you poisoned this sheep?"  They said, "Yes."  He asked, "What made you do so?"  They said, "We wanted to know if you were a liar in which case we would get rid of you, and if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you."


      
    Quote
     From the book of Ibn Sa'd al-Baghdadi  page 249::  Verily a Jewish woman presented poisoned (meat of) a she goat to the apostle of Allah.  He took a piece form it, put it into his mouth, chewed it and threw it away.  Then he said to the Companions:  "Halt!  Verily, its leg tells me that it is poisoned."  Then he sent for the Jewish woman and asked her;  "What induced you to do what you have done?"  She replied, "I wanted to know if you are true; in that case Allah will surely inform you, and if you are a liar I shall relieve the people of you."

     
    From Ibn Sa'd page 249:  [different narrator] "  The apostle of Allah and his companions ate from it.  It (goat) said:  "I am poisoned."  He [Muhammad] said to his Companions, "Hold you hands!  because it has informed me that it is poisoned!"  They withdrew their hands, but Bishr Ibn al-Bara expired.  The apostle of Allah sent for her (Jewess) and asked her, "What induced you to do what you have done?"  She replied, "I wanted to know if you are a prophet, in that case it will not harm you and if you are a king, I shall relieve the people of you.  He gave orders and she was put to death.  

    From Ibn Sa'd page 250:  [different narrator]:   Verily a woman of the Jews of Khaibar presented poisoned (meat of) goat to the apostle of Allah.  The he recognized that it was poisoned, so he sent for her and asked her, "What induced you to do what you have done?"  She replied, "I thought if you are a prophet, Allah will inform you, and if you are a pretender, I shall relieve people of you.  When the apostle of Allah felt sick, he got himself "cupped".  

     
    From Ibn Sa'd pages 251, 252:  [different narrator]:    ....When the apostle of Allah conquered Khaibar and he had peace of mind, Zaynab Bint al-Harith the brother of Marhab, who was the spouse of Sallam Ibn Mishkam, inquired, "Which part of the goat is liked by Muhammad?"  They said, "The foreleg."  Then she slaughtered one from her goats and roasted it (the meat).  Then she wanted a poison which could not fail. ....  The apostle of Allah took the foreleg, a piece of which he put into his mouth.  Bishr took another bone and put it into his mouth.  When the apostle of Allah ate one morsel of it Bishr ate his and other people also ate from it.  Then the apostle of Allah said, "Hold back your hands! because this foreleg; ...informed me that it is poisoned.  Thereupon Bishr said, "By Him who has made you great!  I discovered it from the morsel I took.  Nothing prevented me from emitting it out, but the idea that I did not like to make your food unrelishing.  When you had eaten what was in your mouth I did not like to save my life after yours, and I also thought you would not have eaten it if there was something wrong.

                Bishr did not rise form his seat but his color changed to that of "taylsan" (a green cloth)..........The apostle of Allah sent for Zaynab and said to her, "What induced you to do what you have done?"  She replied, "You have done to my people what you have done.  You have killed my father, my uncle and my husband, so I said to myself, "If you are a prophet, the foreleg will inform you; and others have said, "If you are a king we will get rid of you.""......

                The apostle of Allah lived after this three years till in consequence of his pain he passed away.  During his illness he used to say, "I did not cease to find the effect of the (poisoned) morsel, I took at Khaibar and I suffered several times (from its effect) but now I feel the hour has come of the cutting of my jugular vein.
    "


    Quote
    From Tabari Volume 8, page 123, 124::   When the messenger of God rested from his labor, Zaynab bt. al-Harith, the wife of Sallam b. Mishkam, served him a roast sheep.  She had asked what part of the sheep the messenger of God liked best and was told that it was the foreleg.  So she loaded that part with poison, and she poisoned the rest of the sheep too.  Then she brought it.  When she set it before the messenger of God, he took the foreleg and chewed a bit of it, but he did not swallow it.  With him was Bishr b. al-Bara b. Marur, who, like the messenger of God, took some of it; Bishr, however, swallowed it, while the messenger of God spat it out saying, "This bone informs me that it has been poisoned."  He asked, "What led you to do this?"  She said:  "How you have afflicted my people is not hidden from you.  So I said, "If he is a prophet, he will be informed; but if he is a king, I shall be rid of him"".  The prophet forgave her.  Bishr died of the food he had eaten.


    From Tabari Volume 8, page 124:  [different narrator]:  The messenger of God said during the illness from which he died - the mother of Bishr had come in to visit him - "Umm Bishr, at this very moment I feel my aorta being severed because of the food I ate with your son at Khaybar."

    Now from the above hadith/ translated  sahab literature.....   Muslim Bums SPECIALLY FROM PAKISTAN can write anything to fool people .. The least trusted source of  Islamic history comes  from Pakistan in Urdu press specially from the days of Afghanistan  war with Russians  and American  Reagan Government  funding  for Islamic propaganda  though Pak/Afghan Islamic scholars.  Russians were fools to attack Afghanistan.. No  we have all sorts stories on Islam from Land of pure..
     

     

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #41 - October 23, 2012, 08:52 PM

     
    Faith heads write all sorts of nonsense in support of their faith.. They clearly take the words from hadith and expand/modify /make noise to score the point.. But proof of Muhammad's death as well as birth from Islamic early history books is messy .. WHatever these guys get that must have come from early Muslim Historians  from this list ., Let me put those  hadith statements on that issue here but before that let me add this tube here from a Shiat  preacher..

    Who killed the prophet Mohammad?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HiMgW9yd7w

    death or alleged  Prophet of Islam(whoever that may be)  that is depicted in hadith seems to have different stories.. In fact in one of those verse in Quran chapter 69 Surah Al-Haaqqa  some one(allah) threatens Prophet of Islam..

    Quote
    69: verses 40 to 48:

    That it is indeed the speech of an illustrious messenger. (40) It is not poet's speech - little is it that ye believe! (41) Nor diviner's speech - little is it that ye remember! (42) It is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds. (43) And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us, (44) We assuredly had taken him by the right hand (45) And then severed his life-artery, (46) And not one of you could have held Us off from him. (47) And lo! it is a warrant unto those who ward off (evil). (48)


    what those highlighted words saying is interesting w.r.t. his death.. We also have to realize  that the present book   Quran and surahs are Jumbled up and its order of revelation is made upside down by these Quran writers.... In other words the order of alleged revelation is different from the order we see today in Quran..  This chapter 69 is more confusing this has verses from Mecca and Madina..

    As far as killing or pardoning of that Jewish lady who poisoned leg of lamb .. again there are different stories.. Some pardoned .. some say put her to death.. we will get more information on that  but let me add a link on the death of Prophet of Islam from Shia side and sunni side


    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #42 - October 26, 2013, 11:33 AM

    I bump this thread to point to this article.

    Quote
    How much a Pakistani hates someone depends on how easy it is to hate them. And few individuals are easier to hate than Malala Yousafzai.

    Here’s a girl, not old enough to have an ID card, taking on Pakistan’s biggest enemy without an iota of fear. She takes a bullet to her head not fighting for a jingoistic agenda, but for something as universally celebrated as education. For her commendable bravery she gets global acclaim, speaks in front of a global audience at the UN, meets the American president and is pretty much the only positive coming out of this country in recent times.

    It seems to be more a tale of inspiration than a recipe for hatred. So, let’s flip the coin.

    Here’s a girl, not old enough to have an ID card, siding with Pakistan’s biggest enemy to defame the nation without an iota of shame. She pretends to take a bullet to her head helping the West propagate their jingoistic agenda under the garb of something as universally celebrated as education. For her commendable theatrics she gets global acclaim, gets the chance to speak in front of a global audience at the UN, meets the American president and gets to act like the only positive thing coming out of this country in recent times.

    Which side of the coin is easier to believe? Easier, not in terms of being more logical or making more sense, which argument out of the two is easier to digest for an average Pakistani like me?

    Do you think it’s easy for me to accept flag bearers of my religion as my enemy? Do you believe that it’s easy for me to accept the fact that a 16-year-old girl fearlessly took a stand against the biggest threat facing this country while men like me were busy being apologetic on the behalf of the “freedom fighters”? Do you honestly believe that it’s easy for me to accept that a young girl from our neck of the woods, with all the societal handicaps that one can think of, can singlehandedly orchestrate a global rude awakening? The thought rips the bigoted, discriminatory and misogynistic ideals that I’ve grown up with, into tiny little shreds.

    How can I accept Malala to be a hero, when her speeches do not have any Islamic or nationalistic agenda? How can I consider her to be my future leader when nothing she says or does imbues a false sense of superiority in me as a Muslim or a Pakistani? How can I accept that a young girl was able to highlight who our actual enemies are, when grown up men in our parliaments are still hell bent on befriending them? How can I rejoice at Malala’s global achievement when I’ve been taught all my life that a girl’s place is in the kitchen? I just can’t.
    The religion I follow is inherently misogynistic. The society I live in is quintessentially patriarchal. And I’m supposed to manifest ideals of gender equality and women empowerment out of the blue?

    Why do you think we consider it a million times easier to call Aafia Siddiqui the daughter of Pakistan than Malala Yousafzai? With Aafia there’s a sense of victimhood, with jihad as the cherry on top. That’s what we’d like in our daughters: fragility, vulnerability and the perpetual dependence on one of the male guardians in her life.

    And so please answer this: who is easier for me to consider this nation’s daughter, one who I can ostensibly protect from the conspiring agenda of nonbelievers or one that is seen hobnobbing with the nonbelievers?
    Give me the name of one female who we have taken seriously as our global representative? Benazir Bhutto? But she was always Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s daughter, wasn’t she? How do we trace the illustrious male DNA to justify Malala’s accomplishments?

    Do you still not see why instead of going through the hassle of an ideological metamorphosis and purging myself of the ideals I’ve spent all my life with, it’s a million times more convenient to just buy the conspiracy theories? I hate Malala because it’s by far the most convenient choice.


  • When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #43 - October 26, 2013, 12:00 PM

    Great stuff. Especially liked this...

    'How can I accept Malala to be a hero, when her speeches do not have any Islamic or nationalistic agenda? How can I consider her to be my future leader when nothing she says or does imbues a false sense of superiority in me as a Muslim or a Pakistani?'

    Doesn't just go for Islam and Pakistan either.
  • When Pakistanis look within
     Reply #44 - October 26, 2013, 01:30 PM

    "Why do you think we consider it a million times easier to call Aafia Siddiqui the daughter of Pakistan than Malala Yousafzai? With Aafia there’s a sense of victimhood, with jihad as the cherry on top. That’s what we’d like in our daughters: fragility, vulnerability and the perpetual dependence on one of the male guardians in her life. "

    Awesome articles, thanks for sharing. Afro
  • Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »