SC acquits Shahrukh Jatoi and others.

[I.R.A]

remember yazid?? he was also liberal and secular and took his liberties and freedoms too far. and then look where these liberties took him. he was not a kafir or mushrik. he was a muslim and son of a prominent Sahabi. but he took the liberty/freedom of drinking, he took the liberty/freedom of not performing obligatory prayers/fasting/zakat etc. he took the liberty/freedom of performing zina, he took the liberty/freedom of abusing government authority. and ended up martyring the Ahl-e-Bait.

I am not sure what you understand by being liberal, not everything is liberal even if people want to call it liberalism.

I will limit this discussion to example given by you about what I think of being liberal.

Now what you said about Yazid is all slanders, I don't find any evidence of what you said about him, I took the liberty and exercised my freedom of thought and research and dug further into this whole made up story ................ I don't believe a single word based on circumstances and the evidence it points to. Yazid was ameer ul momineen and I as a Muslim won't try maligning his character or indulge in slander attacking his character.

This discussion is derailing this thread, if you wish to discuss further please take it to some appropriate thread. Thanks

 

[AZMwi]

I am not sure what you understand by being liberal, not everything is liberal even if people want to call it liberalism.

I will limit this discussion to example given by you about what I think of being liberal.

why dont u enlighten me what liberalism is?????

 

[I.R.A]

why dont u enlighten me what liberalism is?????

Islam.

 

[AZMwi]

Now what you said about Yazid is all slanders, I don't find any evidence of what you said about him, I took the liberty and exercised my freedom of thought and research and dug further into this whole made up story ................ I don't believe a single word based on circumstances and the evidence it points to. Yazid was ameer ul momineen and I as a Muslim won't try maligning his character or indulge in slander attacking his character.

you see, you used your freedom of thought and liberty and decided to throw away centuries of research and authentic history by thousands of scholars of all sects of Islam, into rubbish by calling it made up story and made yazid ameer ul momineen acquitting him of his heinous crimes on a post which was literally about SC acquitting a murderer. the irony lol. if this is the type of liberalism you believe in than ALLAH help us all.

Islam.

how???? I am all ears

 

[Zhukov]

So thread on Shahrukh Jatoi Case verdict and arguments on Islam vs secularism.

What is wrong with this country in a nutshell.

Anyways this is a routine matter in every city of Pakistan. Some powerfull kills a weak.
Most of the time the case will be rejected on technical bases. FIR wording is wrong, One of the person named in FIR cannot be proven guilty hence FIR is completely wrong Bla Bla Bla.
If case is indeed processed, The killers will threaten the so called "Wariseen" or pay them and they will say "We forgive". And even a Murder in mid day on the busiest highway of the city is forgiven.
Thats routine. The "Mudai and deet" laws of Pakistan allow thousands of murderers to escape Justice every year. This case came to public so it got traction.

And look at our public. Arguing on Laws.
This nation is so easy to manuver. All these elites should do is pay some millions to some thousands of Molanas and get a fatwa or something that corruption is Allowed in Islam. And they will surely pull something out as they are masters of Manuvering Sharia in there benefit.
Put some media propagands behind it.
The next 100 years whole nation will argue to death that how corruption should be allowed bacause it is Islamic.

 

[I.R.A]

you see, you used your freedom of thought and liberty and decided to throw away centuries of research and authentic history by thousands of scholars of all sects of Islam, into rubbish by calling it made up story and made yazid ameer ul momineen acquitting him of his heinous crimes on a post which was literally about SC

The centuries of authentic research cannot some answer some very basic simple questions surrounding this event which makes it very dubious, man made and written.

how???? I am all ears

How not?

Don't you wish to question why Islam? Just because you were born into it?

 

[muhammadhafeezmalik]

Sara evidence mita ker bury he hona tha. Welcome to Banana republic of Bawaistan.

No evidence was removed, he become free on will of the court. Even after payment of Deyat, court could have sentence him 14 to 25 years in jail. Read PPC-308 subsection

308. Punishment in qatl-i-amd not liable to qisas, etc.--(1) Where an offender guilty of qatl-i-amd is not liable to qisas under Section 306 or the qisas is not enforceable under clause (c) of Section 307, he shall be liable to diyat:

Provided that, where the offender is minor or insane, diyat shall be payable either from his property or, by such person as may be determined by the Court:

Provided further that, where at the time of committing qatl-i-amd the offender being a minor, had attianed sufficient maturity, or being insane had a lucid interval, so as to be able to realise the consequences of his act, he may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty-five] years as ta'zir;

Provided further that, where the qisas is not enforceable under clause (c) of Section 307, the offender shall be liable to diyat only if there is any wali other than offender and if there is no wali other than the offender, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty five] years as ta'zir.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case in addition to the punishment of diyat, may punish the offender with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty five] years, as ta'zir.

 

[newb3e]

No evidence was removed, he become free on will of the court. Even after payment of Deyat, court could have sentence him 14 to 25 years in jail. Read PPC-308 subsection

308. Punishment in qatl-i-amd not liable to qisas, etc.--(1) Where an offender guilty of qatl-i-amd is not liable to qisas under Section 306 or the qisas is not enforceable under clause (c) of Section 307, he shall be liable to diyat:

Provided that, where the offender is minor or insane, diyat shall be payable either from his property or, by such person as may be determined by the Court:

Provided further that, where at the time of committing qatl-i-amd the offender being a minor, had attianed sufficient maturity, or being insane had a lucid interval, so as to be able to realise the consequences of his act, he may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty-five] years as ta'zir;

Provided further that, where the qisas is not enforceable under clause (c) of Section 307, the offender shall be liable to diyat only if there is any wali other than offender and if there is no wali other than the offender, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty five] years as ta'zir.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case in addition to the punishment of diyat, may punish the offender with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to [twenty five] years, as ta'zir.

nawaz keh uthanay keh chakkar may patwarion ko zardari keh kuttun keh bhi uthana puur rahay hain!!!

koi haal nai tum logon ka!!!

tum jesay chotyun ki wajha say Shareef Zardari aur wardi wallay hamai loot rahay hain!

 

[muhammadhafeezmalik]

nawaz keh uthanay keh chakkar may patwarion ko zardari keh kuttun keh bhi uthana puur rahay hain!!!

koi haal nai tum logon ka!!!

tum jesay chotyun ki wajha say Shareef Zardari aur wardi wallay hamai loot rahay hain!

New evidence can not be presented in SC, SC has to rely on evidences provided in Session Court and High Court, lower courts awarded death SC overturned the decision of lower courts on plea that both parties have come to an agreement of Diyat, I am not defending prosecution, but saying SC can award sentence also.

Imran keh uthanay keh chakkar may insafiyun ko adlia keh kuttun keh bhi uthana puur rahay hain!!!

 

[newb3e]

New evidence can not be presented in SC, SC has to rely on evidences provided in Session Court and High Court, lower courts awarded death SC overturned the decision of lower courts on plea that both parties have come to an agreement of Diyat, I am not defending prosecution, but saying SC can award sentence also.

Imran keh uthanay keh chakkar may insafiyun ko adlia keh kuttun keh bhi uthana puur rahay hain!!!

hahaha wuur gaya IK wuur gaye ya manhoos adalat!!!

agg laga do in sab ko lakin shareefun aur zardariun aur wardi mafia say zyada manhoos tum jesay uthao hain!

 

[AZMwi]

How not?

Don't you wish to question why Islam? Just because you were born into it?

listen mate you said islam is liberal and secular. i need to know how???? don't derail. just answer the question.

The centuries of authentic research cannot some answer some very basic simple questions surrounding this event which makes it very dubious, man made and written.

entire history is man made. even your family history is man made. and what basic questions are you talking about??? please enlighten me

 

[I.R.A]

listen mate you said islam is liberal and secular. i need to know how???? don't derail. just answer the question.

Didn't Islam convert pagans into a revolutionary people who from the deserts of Arabia went on to establish Caliphate ruling a 2.2 million square miles? If that is not enough of an example for liberty than nothing else can be.

There is enough proof that people of other faiths have not only lived but prospered in Muslim ruled areas and regions. If that is not secular enough than nothing else can be.

Your problem I guess is traditional understanding of secular / secularism, I told you they borrowed this idea and changed it to fit their needs. Secularism is all about letting people profess their faith and practice their beliefs without any interference. Muslims did that. As far as the question of sovereignty goes, a Muslim should be very clear to whom it belongs.

what basic questions are you talking about???

Where is Kufa on the map and where is Karbala on the map (Keep in mind the center of Caliphate at that time)? Why did Hazrat Hussain leave on 8th Zil Hajj and not waited two more days? Why the Shaba e kabar who were still alive didn't join and support him? Why the Hashmite women chose to remain married to Umayads after this? How can Hussain fight under the command of Yazid when and if it was all already known to him? Who takes young children with him to a fight / war?

 

[AZMwi]

Didn't Islam convert pagans into a revolutionary people who from the deserts of Arabia went on to establish Caliphate ruling a 2.2 million square miles? If that is not enough of an example for liberty than nothing else can be.

There is enough proof that people of other faiths have not only lived but prospered in Muslim ruled areas and regions. If that is not secular enough than nothing else can be.

Your problem I guess is traditional understanding of secular / secularism, I told you they borrowed this idea and changed it to fit their needs. Secularism is all about letting people profess their faith and practice their beliefs without any interference. Muslims did that. As far as the question of sovereignty goes, a Muslim should be very clear to whom it belongs.

You are contradicting your own statement. In your previous comments you claimed that a Muslim by faith is a secular and liberal. but here you say totally opposite thing. Islam converts pagans into Muslims but Islam does not adopts their way of ideology in fact forces the pagans to leave their pagan ways behind and strictly follow Islamic way now. and if someone backtracks from Islam after accepting it than he/she will be branded as a Murtad.

 

[AZMwi]

Where is Kufa on the map and where is Karbala on the map (Keep in mind the center of Caliphate at that time)? Why did Hazrat Hussain leave on 8th Zil Hajj and not waited two more days? Why the Shaba e kabar who were still alive didn't join and support him? Why the Hashmite women chose to remain married to Umayads after this? How can Hussain fight under the command of Yazid when and if it was all already known to him? Who takes young children with him to a fight / war?

Imam HUSSAIN R.A never wanted a wa/fight in the first place. he never wanted to rule. he was the grandson of our beloved Prophet S.A.W. he never ever intended to rule. he wanted to go to Kufa on the invitation of the people of Kufa. That's why he took women and children with him to show the yazidi forces that his intentions are not confrontational. "it was the custom of arabs at that time that if someone is bringing children and women instead of fighting men with him than he is not coming to fight". but Yazid still saw him biggest threat and sent several of his generals to stop Imam Hussain from reaching Kufah at any cost but all those generals didn't wanted to have the blood of Ahl-e-Bait on their hands. even one of his general HURR left yazid and joined Imam Hussain R.A. eventually yazid sent ibn-e-ziyad who had a very bad reputation and he was able to stopped this caravan in kufah.
and as far as the marriage was concerned not all the Umayyads supported yazid in this matter.
At that time majority of Sahaba e Kabar had already left this world or living in remote places far from Madinah/Makkah to spread Islam.
The sons of Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Abu Bakar and some other sahaba tried to stop or accompany Imam Hussain R.A but he refused and clearly told them that his intentions are not to fight with yazid as he did not wanted to spill Muslim blood.