What's new

Possible new terror attack in London unfolding.

With the level of knowledge I have, I dont make copy paste statements of zionists(you probably should learn by noe that Mossad is the intellegence arm of the zionist state of Israel, no need to repeat the same thing twice even in a copy paste instinct in your mind) or cia or raw. Just a whitewash of trying to hide from the truth.

I suppose your level of knowledge blames Christians in Pakistan for being blasphemous and then getting killed by "innocent" mobs??

There is a problem, a problem in muslims all over the world. It isn't Islam because Islam at the end is a collection of scriptures that people who call themselves Muslims choose to believe and express as a function of their own character. This problem isnt confined to Islam nor will be over time or in past years- but at the end Muslims are people we connect with and frankly the ones that bother us.

So Ill continue to use whatever knowledge and information I have to call them out where it is clear that there is malignancy within the body
More like what Corbyn said, our foreign policy is floored. We invade their land, kill their families and rape their women but still are sitting bewildered that how on earth is this happening in our backyard. We (Nato and the Americans) started all this mess. And don't you dare point fingers at Muslims. These low lives don't represent Islam or it's followers. The word Islam means peace, and that is how the majority live.
 
Last edited:
More like what Corbyn said, our foreign policy is floored. We invade their land, kill their families and rape their women but still are sitting bewildered that how on earth is this happening in our backyard. We (Nato and the Americans started all this mess).
Dont bother man. 3-4 dead in uk is international news, a hundred dead in pakistan is just a 1 min clip shoved somewhere at the end of evening news to them...that is what i was saying, people of the west need to rally behind good people like corbyn ...
 
My problem with your comment is that the same people who are using the west as refuge for economic or safety reasons are indulging in these acts on civilians.
War is supposed to be between armies not killing innocents.
Ofcourse i have no idea what islam advices regarding infidels .
Killing of one innocent person is like killing all of humanity.

However, the extremists distort the text to their own benefit.
 
My problem with your comment is that the same people who are using the west as refuge for economic or safety reasons are indulging in these acts on civilians.
War is supposed to be between armies not killing innocents.
Ofcourse i have no idea what islam advices regarding infidels .
Strict Islamic principles of jihad laid down by the prophet(pbuh) himself :
Killing women is forbidden
Killing children is forbidden
Killing the eldery is forbidden
Killing all those who dont come to fight u( civilians) is forbidden
Needless destruction and looting of enemy property is forbidden
Cutting of trees is forbidden
Mistreatment of prisoners is strictly forbidden.

These are the islamic principles of war, so all this begs a question, who are these that are defying all the above rules and than claiming to be muslims?
 
Killing of one innocent person is like killing all of humanity.

However, the extremists distort the text to their own benefit.
Islamic text is clear and concrete, it cant be distorted.....animals are bieng animals and very carefully hiding behind islam to brand 1.5 billion people.
 
Strict Islamic principles of jihad laid down by the prophet(pbuh) himself :
Killing women is forbidden
Killing children is forbidden
Killing the eldery is forbidden
Killing all those who dont come to fight u( civilians) is forbidden
Needless destruction and looting of enemy property is forbidden
Cutting of trees is forbidden
Mistreatment of prisoners is strictly forbidden.

These are the islamic principles of war, so all this begs a question, who are these that are defying all the above rules and than claiming to be muslims?
Agreed with you here
 
Killing of one innocent person is like killing all of humanity.

However, the extremists distort the text to their own benefit.
according to salafi muslims, there is no deed greater than jihad/killing kuffars and being martyred in the holy month.
 
War is supposed to be between armies not killing innocents.
Ofcourse i have no idea what islam advices regarding infidels .
A 'war' is mostly a philosophical construct or 'state of mind'. It means a state of hostility between parties.

The word 'combat' is when there is physical contact between hostile parties.

A 'state of hostility' or 'state of war' exists between North and South Korea, but no real combat.

From this understanding, who is a 'combatant' depends on one's personal philosophy on what is a 'war' or when a 'state of hostility' exists between parties. The current formality is that my country is at war, but unless I join the army, I cannot be a combatant. The corollary is that unless you join your army, I cannot see you as a combatant for your country. So as civilians, we cannot kill each other. We can stare angrily at each other all day long, but we cannot take up arms against each other.

Ideological terrorism is when the formality of war is discarded.

If side A believes there is a separation between a 'soldier' and a 'civilian' and that there is a sanctity on the 'civilian', any combat actions against civilians constitutes 'terrorism'. It is violence against that which is-not-allowed-to-fight in order to effect policy changes.

If side A responds by changing its own philosophical construct of what is a 'war' and who is a 'combatant', then there will be unrestrained warfare. Literally everyone is a combatant and therefore a legitimate target. The word 'legitimate' here is not to mean measured against an extraordinary standard, like a law book that you have to consult before you do anything. The word 'legitimate' under unrestrained warfare is to mean to be measured against one's own standards.

Unrestrained warfare is what we had in WW II and in many lesser conflicts today. The horrors of WW II when states rallied national assets to kill is when we formalized the separation between the 'soldier' and the 'civilian' and placed sanctity on the latter.

This is why what is happening is extremely dangerous. The government does not have to print out a declaration to the effect of: " Citizens of A, from now on, all of us are official combatants. And same for Citizens of B of which we are hostile against. " Collectively, citizens of A can change their minds regardless of anything the government may or may not say about their status.

If this continues, it will be inevitable that there will be combat in the streets of European cities where Muslims and non-Muslims will not see each other as 'civilians' but as hostile agents supporting diametrically opposing ideas.
 
already justifying the murders with the normal deflection line...
1. They are not muslims but intelligence agents of raw cia kgb etc.
2. They are not true muslims.

When proven to be muslims , then justifications ...
yep, see this cycle of a jihadi attack followed by that kind of commentary on social media every other week now, sad.
 
silver lining, hopefully this scuttles Corbyn's chances.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom