Tarek Mehanna

[nasman]

after reading his statement, do you think his views are balanced or radicalised?

a snippet from the frontpage

"And I learned what America itself was doing to Muslims. I learned about the Gulf War and the depleted uranium bombs that killed thousands and caused cancer rates to skyrocket across Iraq. I learned about the American-led sanctions that prevented food, medicine, and medical equipment from entering Iraq, and how – according to the United Nations – over half a million children perished as a result. I remember a clip from a ‘60 Minutes’ interview of Madeline Albright where she expressed her view that these dead children were “worth it.” I watched on September 11th as a group of people felt driven to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings from their outrage at the deaths of these children."

Read more: http://www.mpacuk.org/story/160412/t...#ixzz1sEfmQUjl

[jamie]

everything is balanced the way i read it.

dont agree with the last sentence tho
killing other children and innocent ppl dosent justify it

[Seperatist]

everything is balanced the way i read it.

dont agree with the last sentence tho
killing other children and innocent ppl dosent justify it

Well balanced imo.

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, burning for burning.

[jamie]

Well balanced imo.

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, burning for burning.

isnt that the quote from the bible,
i thought the quran had better

Imam Ibn Hajar Al Asaqalani says in Fath AlSaheeh Muslim

Book 019, Hadith Number 4321.

Chapter : Permissibility of killing women and children in the night raids, provided it is not deliberate.

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.



There are many possible meanings for these Hadith. I was kind of surprised when I read it at first. But we don’t know the EXACT situation or what the Prophet truly meant. Maybe, maybe THOSE particular women and children were planning to fight against the Muslims with the enemy.

Maybe the Muslim army just could not have blown this chance to attack the enemy that they still had to attack them no matter at what cost in order to stop the risk of more blood shed (do a little bad for the greater good).

The very fact that the companions of the Prophet asked the Prophet's permission shows that the Prophet used to be strict regarding his prohibition on the killing of women and children. However, when a situation arises and there is no choice, things could get ugly. The Prophet even forbade the cutting down of palm trees in war, however during the siege of Banu Nadir the Prophet had to make an exception. So exceptions do arise unfortunately.- Baari that the point is not to target the women and children intentionally but if there is absolutely no other way to kill the enemy than by injuring the women and children because they are mixed with the men then there is no other choice. (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/D...Doc=0&Rec=4747)

Another possibility is that the hadith has been abrogated and that even if women and children accompany the enemy during war then they still should not be killed. (See http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/D...Doc=0&Rec=4747 for the evidence)

Imam Nawawi says in his tafseer of Saheeh Muslim that women and children are only killed only if they cannot be distinguished. But because it was so dark and they could not be distinguished, the Muslims had not choice. (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/D...Doc=1&Rec=4215)

i knew id read stuff that shows u cant just indiscrimantly kill innocent children,

i think this is why i shudnt just accept wot muslims say and find the proof myself,

[Seperatist]

isnt that the quote from the bible,
i thought the quran had better

'Tis part of the trilogy.

You are of course, right when it comes to the killing of innocents....I have my dark moments.

[NotAPrayer]

Is it either/or?