Bali bombers want to be beheaded, not shot

[PeterRJG]

THE three convicted Bali bombers filed a petition against firing squads in Indonesia's constitutional court today in a last-ditch bid to stave off their executions, lawyers said.

The members of the Islamist Jemaah Islamiyah network - Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Ali Ghufron - are awaiting execution over the 2002 bombings on the resort island that killed more than 200 people, including 88 Australians.

After exhausting their last appeals, they have now asked the constitutional court to rule on whether firing squads were a form of torture, their lawyers said.

Lawyer Wirawan Adnan said the men wanted to be decapitated instead.

"Execution by shooting won't kill the convicts instantly. The law states that if the first shot on the heart doesn't work, they must be shot again to the head,'' he said.

"The three have requested execution by decapitation.''

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24138342-952,00.html

Sure...behead them with a blunt hacksaw. It takes longer, but I'm sure they'll get time to reflect on what evil fvckers they were...

[helomech]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24138342-952,00.html

Sure...behead them with a blunt hacksaw. It takes longer, but I'm sure they'll get time to reflect on what evil fvckers they were...

Don't give them what they want because their followers will see it as a victory against the infidels;,shoot 'em,then shoot 'em again

[a_very_ex_STAB]

A very slow beheading over a few days might be amusing - perhaps starting with some gradual surface peeling before moving on to gradual removal of ears, eyes, nose, tongue etc etc etc?

[Moriarti]

HeloMech Said: "shoot 'em,then shoot 'em again"

Heh - Can I help?

[The Dane]

I'll do it.
Some hand me a butterknife.....

[Eztyga]

Q: How do you kill an Indon terrorist?

A: Shoot him.

Seriously though, these pricks have been getting a lot their own way. I hope the court refuses their lawyer's request.

Ezy

[ltrowley]

4 of my mates where upstairs at Paddy's bar when the attack happened. Lucky they're all still with us. I'm sure they'd be glad to help.

[Createdeemcee]

Shootem dead!

[Eztyga]

Whatever they do, I would like to see them put a 'crocodile in it, and make it snappy'. This process is taking too long, hard on both the surviving victims and the families of the dead.

Ezy

[tluassa]

http://www.roland-harder.de/relikte_drittes_reich/ploetzensee/HR.jpg

Whip-Gallow, used by the Nazis to hang people really, really slow ... that would be an alternative to shooting them ...

[PeterRJG]

You guys see the picture of the three of them, big sh!t-eating grins and all. I bet the day they see the guillotine getting oiled up, is the day the smiles and the bluster make way for bowel movements.

[Atlantic Friend]

The Indonesians will add the ultimate insult to the bastards' injured pride and give them exactly what the Indonesian Penal Code has in store for them, up to a visit by a consoling Imam and a last meal and cigarette if that's how things are done by the book.

Behead them :roll: ! Of course they want to be beheaded ! This way no vital part would be touched !

[Adux]

I suggest we keep'em alive and do a ****** re-orientation surgey and put'em in the women's jail!!!!!!

[rwak9]

I think all islamic terrorists should be shot, and buried in an unknown and umarked grave with pig remains. That will deter them.

[Meatwad]

I think its time we bring back Vlad's impalement, probably the best execution method ever, that or streching dismemberment.

[indigo_prime]

Maybe they should just plant PE on them and blow them to **** the same way they did their victims!

[Euroamerican]

then, let the relatives of the victims know where these guys are camping.

[Ordie]

Keep them alive and put them to work in a pig farm.

Making them martyrs only advances their cause.

[Kaplanr]

Borrow from the Sepoy Mutiny, shoot 'em with lard greased bullets.

[socom6]

No beheading... damn thing is barbaric. They should do what Kaplanr said.. shoot em with lard dipped bullets and make them see the bullets dipped in pig's lard first before doing them the honour.

[toki]

My idea would be: Do NOT execute them, but let them ...
edit: holy SH... i didn't read the posts above. Exactly the same idea.

[pacifist]

Send them to african savanna to play with the lions.

[Dercius]

During the Crusades, the hands of those to be executed were cut and a bunch of pigs were fed with them in front of their owners, son technically they were touching the pigs (actually, there were inside their stomachs). After seeing that they were killed, and the rest of their bodies were fed to the pigs. But I suppose we shouldnt go that lower, after all, we left XIII century long ago, its a shame they are still living with that mindset.

They dont want to be shoot, the problem is that there is a law, and you cannot express your preferences about your punishment. If they wanted their heads to be chopped instead, they should have gone with a bombing attack aimed at the goats of the neighbouring tribe.

[filochard]

That's not the first time we hear of this guy right ? he want this, he want that, he think he is a diva or what ? Stick with the plan, the man is worth nothing already, he is a virtual cadaver.

[Laworkerbee]

Let them go out the same way as Saddam, but instead of back ground chanting of "Moqtada" "Moqtada", chant 'Bush' 'Bush' 'Bush' instead.

That would be a nice send off to hell.

[loganinkosovo]

The Black Jack Pershing method would suffice.

A nice regulation NFL coffin.

http://bp3.blogger.com/_YI44i-cR4GI/RlBt3BERs8I/AAAAAAAAAE8/tuQo1n-uoRk/s1600/Black_Jack_Pershing.jpg

Just a thought.......

[Calanen]

The Black Jack Pershing method would suffice.
......

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.asp

The closest they have come to verification is someone under his command doing it.

I doubt that it would make most Al Quada flinch today.

[Ordie]

The Black Jack Pershing method would suffice......

But he failed to capture Pancho Villa in Mexico.

[LEB101]

i say sow there ass holes cloased and feed them alot of food

[AmericanAirman]

Why don't they just shoot them in the head? Double tap these ****s.

[chino65]

Remember in Silence of the Lambs (and also in the serial Deadwood), where pigs that were starved for several days would eat a human alive?

I'd do that.

[wigon]

Wow! Are you guys listening to yourselves talk? You sound more savage then Al-Qaeda. That's pretty sad. I'm sure most of you would not have the balls to do what you all claim you would do if you had a chance. If you did, you'all would be some really twisted and sick mofos just like Al-Qaeda terrorists.

My opinion is that the Indonesian courts should stick to their penal codes and execute them as it is written in their legal codes. To do otherwise undermines the jurisdiction of the their courts and sets precedence for the most brutal froms of Shariat law to become implemented. THAT is why they wish to be beheaded.
Under shariat law it also is not done with a knife... it is done with a swift swipe of a VERY sharp sword. I know because I have witnessed the public executions at the clock tower in central Riyadh, Saudi Arabia near the Souks back in the 80's.

Shariat law done properly is suppsed to err in the favor of mercy. But these guys are clearly unrepentent and proud of their savagery. They have broken some of the major tenants of Islamic law (killing innocent civilians) and thus are going to hell for daring to say that such attacks are "Islamic". They indeed should be shot and treated as non-believers with absolutely no special treatment.
However ultimately it is up to Indonesia to decide as a democracy.

Wigon

[PeterRJG]

Yep, it only took 31 posts for the advocatus diaboli/voice of ponce-ass reason to make an entrance...

[wigon]

Yep, it only took 31 posts for the advocatus diaboli/voice of ponce-ass reason to make an entrance...


If you were referring to me I wasn't playing devil's advocate. If you have a problem with my sense of reason please elaborate in a logical manner rather then using big words to sound intellectual. If you are a man of letters then surely you can articulate your meaning in such a manner so that others may partake of your knowledge.

If you weren't referring to me or were not trying to sound condescending then I apologize for my misunderstanding.

Wigon

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Wow! Are you guys listening to yourselves talk? You sound more savage then Al-Qaeda. That's pretty sad. I'm sure most of you would not have the balls to do what you all claim you would do if you had a chance. If you did, you'all would be some really twisted and sick mofos just like Al-Qaeda terrorists.

Au contraire.

One of my friends was murdered by Jihadists in Kashmir. If the person responsible for placing the bomb could be found I would quite happily slice him up. That's not because I am islamophobic because my murdered friend was also a muslim it's because I'm extremely vindictive and I like to get even.

[Moriarti]

I am not really all about the brutality - but I have zero problem with dispatching jihadists. I have had too many bros lost (many were Iraqi Muslims) to have *any* place in my heart for mercy. To paraphrase the famous exchange:

Reporter to US Soldier/Marine:
"What do you FEEL when you shoot a terrorist?"

US Soldier/Marine, after a moment of thought:
"Recoil"

'nuff said.

[Bushranger]

My mates brother was killed in the first bombing & he would have no probs in taking out these blokes what ever way he could & id have no problem holding them for him.

[LazerLordz]

Why pander to their needs/wishes for martyrdom.

Sentence them to solitary for life.

[PeterRJG]

If you were referring to me I wasn't playing devil's advocate. If you have a problem with my sense of reason please elaborate in a logical manner rather then using big words to sound intellectual.


That a fact? Guess what you're doing? Using big words to sound intellectual. I'm sure they sound big to your ears anyway, and that's probably all that counts.



If you are a man of letters then surely you can articulate your meaning in such a manner so that others may partake of your knowledge.


Find that in a book somewhere, did you? 1-800 KNOW-ALL?



If you weren't referring to me or were not trying to sound condescending then I apologize for my misunderstanding.
Wigon

No misunderstanding. There's no need for a voice of reason here - these three men killed willingly, without compunction and have no remorse for their actions.

If you want to discuss "big words", feel free to PM me and I'll help you out.

[Atlantic Friend]

These three men killed willingly, without compunction and have no remorse ?

Absolutely. Most criminals kill, rape, beat up willingly, without compunction and show no remorse. And they are judged by the book, punished by the book, treated by the book. It's the worst thing that can be done to the scum : to tell them "guess what, you're not martyrs. You're not political prisoners. You're ordinary criminals, no more than ordinary murderers or rapists. Get off you imaginary white horse, you're nothing special actually, and we'll deal with you accordingly".

If they have a right to a hearty last meal, then by all means give them. If it's death by lethal injection then by all means inject them. If they can have an imam visit them for last prayers and so forth then let us have them. That may not satisfy the darkest half of our soul, but it sure will satisfy the part where THEY are the murderous bastards and WE are civilization. If our laws are good enough for rapuists and murderers, they're good enough for that scum - let's not grant them the power to change our laws as if they were something more than lowlife criminals.

[PeterRJG]

These three men killed willingly, without compunction and have no remorse ?

Absolutely. Most criminals kill, rape, beat up willingly, without compunction and show no remorse. And they are judged by the book, punished by the book, treated by the book. It's the worst thing that can be done to the scum : to tell them "guess what, you're not martyrs. You're not political prisoners. You're ordinary criminals, no more than ordinary murderers or rapists. Get off you imaginary white horse, you're nothing special actually, and we'll deal with you accordingly".


They don't want to be "treated by the book". That's the thing. They want to go out *their* way. So, the Indonesian Govt. needs to say screw you, if they say anything at all, and just put them up against a wall to be shot.

[Bushranger]

the Indonesian Govt. needs to say screw you, if they say anything at all, and just put them up against a wall to be shot.

The Indo Govt have given them enough time & let them carry on like there running the show. Exactly time to start shooting. :)

[Atlantic Friend]

They don't want to be "treated by the book". That's the thing. They want to go out *their* way. So, the Indonesian Govt. needs to say screw you, if they say anything at all, and just put them up against a wall to be shot.

My point precisely. THEY don't want to be treated as criminal, THEY want to die something special, THEY want to be remembered as martyrs. Why should anyone give them what they want ? They're not martyrs, they're murderers, just as if they had stabbed a woman to rape her or steal her purse.

I say "screw you, bastards, you are ordinary criminal, your crime was not sanctioned by God or anything, it was as despicable as a common murder would be, so you'll get not what you want, but what the book says common murderers get".

What is achieved by caving in to their demands, exactly ?

[Koyunbaba]

They have broken some of the major tenants of Islamic law (killing innocent civilians) and thus are going to hell for daring to say that such attacks are "Islamic". They indeed should be shot and treated as non-believers with absolutely no special treatment.
However ultimately it is up to Indonesia to decide as a democracy.

Wigon

As they consider that they are at war against infidels (westerners) they haven't broken any tenant of islamic law, on the contrary, they have just done what the warmonger book called "koran" commanded them to do...

[wigon]

That a fact? Guess what you're doing? Using big words to sound intellectual. I'm sure they sound big to your ears anyway, and that's probably all that counts.



Find that in a book somewhere, did you? 1-800 KNOW-ALL?



No misunderstanding. There's no need for a voice of reason here - these three men killed willingly, without compunction and have no remorse for their actions.

If you want to discuss "big words", feel free to PM me and I'll help you out.


Again just insults and no real arguement as I said the same thing you just said. That they should be executed, but by whatever means the laws of Indonesia say they are to be executed by.
So I'm not sure what your problem is other then that most of you here sound just like the very people you hate by describing all the most brutal and horrific ways you can torture and kill them.
As for big words... I read a dictionary so I be edumacated! YAY!

Wigon

[wigon]

As they consider that they are at war against infidels (westerners) they haven't broken any tenant of islamic law, on the contrary, they have just done what the warmonger book called "koran" commanded them to do...


Really? Then please tell me where it says in the Qur'an that you can kill innocent women and children.
On the contrary, what they did was absolutely against Islam as it is very cleary in the Hadiths of Sahih Muslim: Book 19, that women and children can not be killed nor the elderly or "people of the cloth" (clergy). The only time they are forgiven is if it is accidental such as during night raids that they launched with calvary during early Isalmic jihads However in the case of modern terrorists, the killing of civilians (including womena and children) was done purposefully and in the name of Islam. That is extreme blasphemy is "bidah" (inovation) in the worst sense within traditional Islamic theology. There is nothing in the Qur'an or hadiths that defends their actions.
You are free to research this issue yourself if you don't believe me. This means actually reading the Islamic texts rather then cutting and pasting stuff from "Jihad Watch" that does not give you a full picture. If you are really hardcore, start studying the writings of the earliest scholars along the Hanafi madhhab (school of Islamic thought) who usually tend to be the most moderate (along with Maliki). There are often major deviations in interpretations of the Qur'an and Hadiths between different madhhabs as well.

Now there are other things that their religion says that I do not agree with, but I believe that the Salafi doctrine preached today has distorted many issues to the extreme. This then sadly is echoed by the Western media and by ordinary people like yourself who are unknowingly giving Salafists and Al-Qaeda legitimacy by essentially saying that they represent the "true" Islam.

Wigon

[Koyunbaba]

Really? Then please tell me where it says in the Qur'an that you can kill innocent women and children. represent the "true" Islam.



Thats too easy:

"And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter"

Koran 2:191

"Against them make ready your strenght to the utmost of your power, including steeds to war, to strike terror into the hearths of the enemies, of allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom allah doth know"

Koran 8:60

--------
They have commited no sins against "the religion of peace" they did exactly what they tought was right...

[Atlantic Friend]

Thats too easy:

"And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter"

Koran 2:191

"Against them make ready your strenght to the utmost of your power, including steeds to war, to strike terror into the hearths of the enemies, of allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom allah doth know"

Koran 8:60

--------
They have commited no sins against "the religion of peace" they did exactly what they tought was right...

You could find equally worrisome passages from the Bible, and most probably every other Holy Book or Scriptures. I love the part where unruly kids have to be stoned to death by the city's elders, or where a man who sees his woman whe she is "impure" must be shunned from the community until he "purifies" himself.

What these guys did had long ceased to be a religious act.

[muck]

Let them rot in prisons then I'd say. Those who want to die are best to be punished by forcing them to keep on living.

[The Dane]

Those monster flesheating hogs from "Hannibal" comes to mind.

[bthest86]

Let them rot in prisons then I'd say. Those who want to die are best to be punished by forcing them to keep on living.

Maybe they're just saying that so they won't be killed.:)

[wigon]

Thats too easy:

"And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter"

Koran 2:191


Congratulations, you are using the same verses as Al-Qaeda to defend Jihad. Well lets take a closer look. These are verses that I've repeatedly explained in other threads and forums. So no surprises.
This particular verse from the Qur'an is from the Medina period and is speaking about the Meccans who they are at war with.

The verse before it (2:190) also says:
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors."

This means don't kill women, children, and elderly or mutilate bodies.




"Against them make ready your strenght to the utmost of your power, including steeds to war, to strike terror into the hearths of the enemies, of allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom allah doth know"

Koran 8:60




Same deal as the previous post. Again reveiled in Medina and they're at war with the polytheists of Mecca who tried to destroy them.

You can find tons more quotes like that and I don't have time to sit here and give the context for each and every one. I recommend that you go and do your own research, again outside of just reading neocon books and websites (like jihad watch). Try looking at Sunnipath.com and places like that with real scholars trained under a long line of traditional moderate Islamic scholars. See what moderate Muslim scholars have to say about these verses and you will find that indeed there are very different interpretations of those verses.

Salafi (wahhabis) however take every single one of those verses literally and then cherry pick traditional scholars who used those verses during times of war later on to rally troops. Was it right of them? No because they ignore excellent scholars who were very moderate in their views during peaceful periods. But when mongol hordes have just sacked Baghdad (as was the case during the lifetime of Ibn Tammiyah, the most important scholar used by Salafis), then things are in a different context.

Wigon

[Koyunbaba]

You could find equally worrisome passages from the Bible, and most probably every other Holy Book or Scriptures. I love the part where unruly kids have to be stoned to death by the city's elders, or where a man who sees his woman whe she is "impure" must be shunned from the community until he "purifies" himself.

What these guys did had long ceased to be a religious act.

I knew this would come, but tell me, how many christians and jews have been following some commands from God you read in the Old Testament lately? And how many violent acts by muslims have been done in the name of allah lately?

The Bali bombers justified their acts as a religious duty as they, like the Atta-gang consider that they are at war with the western goverments that "opress and attack" muslims.

[Koyunbaba]

Congratulations, you are using the same verses as Al-Qaeda to defend Jihad.Wigon

Thanks! But the Bali bombers considered that they are at war against the "opressors" and they just did what they thought Muhammed would do. I just wonder why we didn't saw much muslim rallies and demonstrations against the Madrid, Bali, New York and London bombings. If those acts where the utmost offence against islam we would have seen scenes worse than those we did after Salman Rushdies "Satnic Verses" and the cartoon incidents don't you think?

A true muslim is one that follows the koran and an even better muslim is the one that follows the prophet in life and deeds. As the prophet was a warlord, caravan robber and a killer that took the lives of woman, children, and elders (ex. Bani Quraizah) as an act of war, the true followers of Muhammed would do the same.

I don't believe that the aforementioned bombers cared for those "interpretations" you putted forward but strictly read the koran as it is written. As i said earlier the victims was considered as legitimate targets as a revenge and also represents taxpayers that funds the western armies that in their view opresses and kills muslims.

[deagle]

i don't think such garbage should have a say on their executions.

[Moriarti]

Congratulations, you are using the same verses as Al-Qaeda to defend Jihad. Well lets take a closer look.

Isn't that the point?!?!?


Salafi (wahhabis) however take every single one of those verses literally and then cherry pick traditional scholars who used those verses during times of war later on to rally troops.

Again - What we are saying is that Wahabbis suck based on the fact that they interpret the Koran literally - where you read it thru rose colored glasses. So aren't you making our point?


Was it right of them? No because they ignore excellent scholars who were very moderate in their views during peaceful periods.

When they weren't at war with infidels.

But when mongol hordes have just sacked Baghdad (as was the case during the lifetime of Ibn Tammiyah, the most important scholar used by Salafis), then things are in a different context.

Ibn Tammiyah, Ibn Baz, Mohammed bin Abdullah al Wahab, Bin Laden - all sh*tbirds - agreed. And the sooner the Global islamic community comes right out and stands firm and in public against them the sooner ppl will slow down on grouping you with the Wahabbis.

Wigon

Have a GREAT freedom of speech and religon day!

[Johnny_H02]

Keep them alive and put them to work in a pig farm.


X2

Some of you guys need to lay off the "SAW" films rofl.
The shooting them with being buried with pigs, that is kind of neat. It would never be tolerated here in the West though, not necessarily because people are being killed, but the animal rights people would have a field day in the media.

[wigon]

Thanks! But the Bali bombers considered that they are at war against the "opressors" and they just did what they thought Muhammed would do. I just wonder why we didn't saw much muslim rallies and demonstrations against the Madrid, Bali, New York and London bombings. If those acts where the utmost offence against islam we would have seen scenes worse than those we did after Salman Rushdies "Satnic Verses" and the cartoon incidents don't you think?

A true muslim is one that follows the koran and an even better muslim is the one that follows the prophet in life and deeds. As the prophet was a warlord, caravan robber and a killer that took the lives of woman, children, and elders (ex. Bani Quraizah) as an act of war, the true followers of Muhammed would do the same.

I don't believe that the aforementioned bombers cared for those "interpretations" you putted forward but strictly read the koran as it is written. As i said earlier the victims was considered as legitimate targets as a revenge and also represents taxpayers that funds the western armies that in their view opresses and kills muslims.


And that is the issue... and long faught over in Islamic history amongst scholars...what is taken literally and what is not. Hence, the reason why you have many different interpretatons of the Qur'an and what is considered Sunnah and what actions were taken because of the political context of that period in history.

In truth, I don't even care who is right or who is wrong. I am interested in advocating for moderate Islamic scholars who delegitimize Salafi forms of interpretation with less violent and more tolerant interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunah. So to argue in favor of Salafis is to support them period regardless of whether they are right or wrong. Again, I am not Muslim.
It is up to you who's version of Islam you wish to support and whether you wish the Islamic world to make that shift into modernity.
Demanding that all Muslims change overnight and threatening them and casting them all as liars and terrorists does not help that cause.

Wigon

[wigon]

Again - What we are saying is that Wahabbis suck based on the fact that they interpret the Koran literally - where you read it thru rose colored glasses. So aren't you making our point?



No that is not what I am saying. You are distorting my words. What I am trying very hard to point out is that there are differening interpretations of the Qur'an that do not take everything literally. You guys are all saying (well aside from the athiests here) that Islam needs to become like Christianity. Well what is modern Christian teaching? Is it not looking at the bible through "rose colored lenses" as you put it? Do you ignore the Old Testament and only follow what Jesus taught? How do you sort out the inconsistencies between old and new testaments?
Christians still from time to time take the Bible literally, but they are considered "fundamentalists" and are not mainstream Christians.
So over the centuries Christianity has evolved from a literalist religion focusing more on the Old Testament into a more symbolic form of religion looking more at the philosophy of the religion and its spiritual "feel good" aspects.

These moderates have begun that process and its a long, hard road. You can not simply expect an entire religion to change overnight. It just doesn't work that way. Attaturk tried it in Turkey...couldn't stamp out Islam. The Russians tried stamping out all religion (including Islam)...but couldn't do it. Chinese tried it as well...again... religions still hang on there and are now growing. What is more successful in the long term is working to transform those religions into something peaceful with whom we can coexist with.
THAT is what I am advocating not whether one side is THE TRUTH and another is not.
I am telling you all this in order for you to understand the basis of my arguementation and what motivates me.


Wigon

[Atlantic Friend]

I knew this would come, but tell me, how many christians and jews have been following some commands from God you read in the Old Testament lately? And how many violent acts by muslims have been done in the name of allah lately?

Do you mean the Holy Books' commandments only count if someone has acted upon them lately ? That would mean one's religion is only a good one if the blood on the altar has dried up long ago, or if the number of crimes committed in its name is acceptably low.

According to that logic, Satanic worshipping must sound very acceptable - Satanists haven't sacrificed many people lately, and even if there are groups who till do it somewhere, they have been many more violent acts committed by Muslims and Christian and Jews in the name of their respective religion than by Satanists in the name of Lucifer.



The Bali bombers justified their acts as a religious duty as they, like the Atta-gang consider that they are at war with the western goverments that "opress and attack" muslims.

That's like saying that whoever kills in the name of one God becomes the master of that God, no matter what the millions of other, non-killing worshippers do/say.

Consider this : these assassins and their ilk, who claim they kill in the name of Allah so it's all right have killed many, many more Muslims than Christians. They are about to judge in a Muslim country, where they have killed indiscriminately, by Muslim judges and jurors, who'll think they're doing their duty as Indonesian citizens of good Muslim upbringing.

Who dies by the thousands in Taliban Afghanistan ? Who's dying by the thousands in today's Iraq or Afghanistan, Jews ? Christians ? Animists ? Buddhists ? No - ordinary Afghanis, ordinary Iraqis, who are, well, Muslims as well. Claiming "my religion is better than yours" or "your religion is a murderous one" doesn't insult the killers who have long ceased to be part of the flock - Hell, they're killing the flock ! - but it sure is a fine way of insulting the victims.

[Moriarti]

No that is not what I am saying. You are distorting my words.
WE meaning those of us speaking against you - not WE as in YOU and I. It seems that you are the distorter of words...I am sure by accident though:)

What I am trying very hard to point out is that there are differening interpretations of the Qur'an that do not take everything literally.
I agree with you on that point.

You guys are all saying (well aside from the athiests here) that Islam needs to become like Christianity.
Ummm...no - I am not Christian or Jew - I am a *proper* heathen/infidel. My kind would not be allowed Dhimmitude under Sharia.

Well what is modern Christian teaching?
From what I can see - Defence of itself and Israel against radical Islam - No Abortions, No *** before marriage...etc...those seem to be the big issues that the Christians here in the states are concerned with.

Is it not looking at the bible through "rose colored lenses" as you put it?
I think so yes - But don't "moderate" muslims do the same - whereas the "grace" of Jesus supposedly abrogates the harshess of the Torah, everything Mohammed says abrogates anything he said before - turn about is fair play..no?

Do you ignore the Old Testament and only follow what Jesus taught?
I do not follow the Torah or the Gosphels - although both are interesting reads.

How do you sort out the inconsistencies between old and new testaments?
See abrogation. Just as The Salafis state that what Mohammad said at first about being peaceful with the peoples of the book was later abrogated by his insistance that all be converted, die, or live as Dhimmi. That is Islamic doctric as explained in the hadiths....no?

Christians still from time to time take the Bible literally, but they are considered "fundamentalists" and are not mainstream Christians.
Agreed. And most "moderate" Christians and Jews marginalize them istead of protecting them, allowing them to run nearly ALL of the religious schools and provide BILLIONS in funding through front agencies. i.e. CAIR.

So over the centuries Christianity has evolved from a literalist religion focusing more on the Old Testament into a more symbolic form of religion looking more at the philosophy of the religion and its spiritual "feel good" aspects.
Mostly true - yes. Although the evangelicals are almost as scary as Wahabbis - only I haven't seen any of them attempting to overthrow ALL Constitutional governments and behead anyone who disagrees with them.

These moderates have begun that process and its a long, hard road. You can not simply expect an entire religion to change overnight.
Agreed - However I REFUSE to let my way of life be threatened by Wahabbi scum - LEM ESTESLIM! - I will NOT Submit! If they attack me - or encroach upon my rights, the rights of others or the future of my children, rest assured - I will do *every thing* in my power to defeat them.

It just doesn't work that way. Attaturk tried it in Turkey...couldn't stamp out Islam. The Russians tried stamping out all religion (including Islam)...but couldn't do it. Chinese tried it as well...again... religions still hang on there and are now growing.
Agreed - organized religion is the opiate of the ignorant masses. hence, especially in repressive circumstances religion flourishes.

What is more successful in the long term is working to transform those religions into something peaceful with whom we can coexist with.
THAT is what I am advocating not whether one side is THE TRUTH and another is not.
I am on your team there - I just wish you would acknowledge that a VAST sea of muslims out there respond well to the Wahabbi (and also extremist Shia - ie Mookie Sadr) rhetoric, and that *right now* moderates *must* make a stand - because as we look around at all of the muslims that they show on the news in the west - they are burning flags - holding up banners esposing Sharia law and destruction of Constitutional Secular governments, commiting honor killings, etc...all the while demanding special kid glove treatment putting everyone else at risk at best of being politically incorrect, or at worse being charged with hate crimes for denouncing Wahabbis and Sharia law (see Canada)

I am telling you all this in order for you to understand the basis of my arguementation and what motivates me.
And I am rebutting because I want you to see that we are not "hating on" Muslims - we are hating on what modern Islam has become, how it is supported and how the "moderates" seem to do little or nothing to change the situation (except here in IZ where they kill the sh*t out of Wahabbis!)


Wigon

Seriously - Have a great Constitutionaly protected Freedom of Speach day - as under Sharia this confab would be one sided or I would be put to death...right?

[PeterRJG]

Again just insults and no real arguement as I said the same thing you just said. That they should be executed, but by whatever means the laws of Indonesia say they are to be executed by.
So I'm not sure what your problem is other then that most of you here sound just like the very people you hate by describing all the most brutal and horrific ways you can torture and kill them.
As for big words... I read a dictionary so I be edumacated! YAY!

Wigon

Hey! I'm the one saying Indonesia should do things its way. So are you apparently...so why are you arguing with me? Don't get enough aggravation in your life or something?

Again: these guys need to get the deep six by whatever method Indonesia proscribes for it.

[Moriarti]

PS - the reason many of us find it difficult to trust "moderate" muslims is summed up in one word - Takkiya. Islamic doctrine of deception when dealing with infidels. DOCTRINE. Hence, the lack of faith in the whole "oh...you are reading it wrong" line.

Takkiya literally means “cover up,” and this doctrine sanctions the lying to or deceiving others in order to advance the cause of Islam. Under this doctrine, an Islamist is allowed to totally deny his faith if such denial will advance the cause of Islam or preserve it's good name. This doctrine is based on Sura 16:106, and allows the Islamist to deny his faith if he fears threats, injury, or compulsion of any kind.

Interesting peice of work (http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/762571/more-madness-in-londonistan.thtml):

For any Muslim to be truly moderate, he or she would need to subscribe to the principles set out by the Islam expert Sam Solomon in his Charter of Muslim Understanding, including the following:
· promoting the validity and the viability of the national domestic law to be fully adhered to and taking precedence over the Shari’ah...
· there will be no recriminations against any Muslim or non-Muslim who chooses to change, discard, or adopt another faith be it within the House of Islam, from any Islamic faction, or to a non-Islamic religion or faith.
· To discard all texts that discriminate with impunity against Christians and Jews by describing them as Kaffirs, apostates, polytheists, the children of apes, and swine, and prohibit any inciting, insulting, and all discriminatory references based on their religion
· To abandon the practice of takffir (infidel) against anybody, be that a Muslim or a non-Muslim. (Once a Muslim leader declares anyone as such, it is for the faithful ones to see that person eliminated.)
· To prohibit and abolish the practice of Takkiya (Islamic doctrine of legitimate lying and deception of others) to advance the cause of Muslims and Islam...
· Request all officially constituted Islamic bodies and institutions to revise and issue new interpretations of those Qur’anic verses that call for Jihad and violence against non-Muslims.

Can we agree on that?

[wigon]

Well, I think we are at least in partial agreement on the latter stuff you mentioned. I do not deny that Wahhabis have a massive influence, however moderates do speak out. I've worked with many different Islamic organizatons that have been actively speaking out against Terrorism. The problem is that they are immediately ****ounced as "Stealth Jihadists" when they refuse to say that Jihad is not a part of Islam. Even in liberal Islamic interpretations, all Muslims have the right to self-defense. The difference between them and Wahhabis is the manner in which that self-defense is carried out. In the Hadiths (Sahih Muslim, Book 19) the rules are fairly clear (although a few hadiths contradict themselves). I do alot of debating with radical Muslims based on this volume of hadiths. However what is more complex (and requires a true scholar) is whether they are weak or strong hadiths (weak being those with breaks in the chain of narration).
In addition, within abrogation theory, often newer hadiths do not always correspond with a chronologically based abrogation forms that Salafis like to champion. I'll be honest....its a big confusing mess that you can form a million different interpretations. Thats why I don't care what is true..but rather what is compatible with modern world and still retains some linkage and legitimacy to traditional Islam.
I see supporting such interpretations as our own version of "stealth jihad" that is, in my opinion, ethical and do-able.
What I preach has already been put into action in Iraq and it works thanks to brave and intelligent US Army soldiers (and Marines) in our Psy-Ops and Civil Affairs units who risk their lives day in and day out to make these programs happen. They understand how the locals understand Islam and they use it to their advantage against Al-Qaeda style "FOLLOW US OR DIE" style of Islam.

The fact of the matter is that Muslims have a serious inferiority compelex...and when you combine that with an understanding of Middle Eastern concepts of "Shame" and "Honor" you begin to understand why they do what they do. Ever watch the TV series, "ROME"? If so then you will have an understanding that such a sense of honor never left the Middle East. Its just hard for us to understand it here in the West as we've forgotten that such concepts in the past were normative behavior for us. That is why such depictions of honor in the "Wild West" and in ancient Rome seem so romantic to us. The same beliefs put into Islamic cultures however suddenly become a threat to us.

You just gotta take a step back and look at these people as human beings with a VERY different historical trajectory and a VERY different culture in wich they grew up in. Western education does not take that basic culture from them.

Once we fully understand all of these factors, we can begin helping them (in a non-threatening manner) to move towards modernity as an equal rather then trying to act like "big brother". To them it reeks of colonialism...something all too familiar with the people of the Middle East who have been crushed over and over and over again by Western nations in the most humiliating fashion.

When it comes down to it...Muslims yearn for a hero. We need to help them find one that is a peaceful hero who leads Islam into this new millenium with tolerance for others and with a peaceful spiritual focus.
Yes I know you may believe that their religion is bull****. That's fine. But the reality is that they do not. So we have to deal with it and make the best of it. As time goes on, they too may decide that atheism or theism which is what I follow) is a better option.

From experience being around Sufis, I can sincerely say that Islam has much to offer as far as spiritualality goes.
But yes.... religion is the opiate of the masses as Karl Marx said. Just don't say that too often or people will thnk you are a commie. LOL! ....seriously.

Wigon

[wigon]

Hey! I'm the one saying Indonesia should do things its way. So are you apparently...so why are you arguing with me? Don't get enough aggravation in your life or something?

Again: these guys need to get the deep six by whatever method Indonesia proscribes for it.

I was just responding to what you said in response to what I said. LOL! Ok then we agree. LOL!

Wigon

[wigon]

PS - the reason many of us find it difficult to trust "moderate" muslims is summed up in one word - Takkiya. Islamic doctrine of deception when dealing with infidels. DOCTRINE. Hence, the lack of faith in the whole "oh...you are reading it wrong" line.

Takkiya literally means “cover up,” and this doctrine sanctions the lying to or deceiving others in order to advance the cause of Islam. Under this doctrine, an Islamist is allowed to totally deny his faith if such denial will advance the cause of Islam or preserve it's good name. This doctrine is based on Sura 16:106, and allows the Islamist to deny his faith if he fears threats, injury, or compulsion of any kind.

Interesting peice of work (http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/762571/more-madness-in-londonistan.thtml):

For any Muslim to be truly moderate, he or she would need to subscribe to the principles set out by the Islam expert Sam Solomon in his Charter of Muslim Understanding, including the following:
· promoting the validity and the viability of the national domestic law to be fully adhered to and taking precedence over the Shari’ah...
· there will be no recriminations against any Muslim or non-Muslim who chooses to change, discard, or adopt another faith be it within the House of Islam, from any Islamic faction, or to a non-Islamic religion or faith.
· To discard all texts that discriminate with impunity against Christians and Jews by describing them as Kaffirs, apostates, polytheists, the children of apes, and swine, and prohibit any inciting, insulting, and all discriminatory references based on their religion
· To abandon the practice of takffir (infidel) against anybody, be that a Muslim or a non-Muslim. (Once a Muslim leader declares anyone as such, it is for the faithful ones to see that person eliminated.)
· To prohibit and abolish the practice of Takkiya (Islamic doctrine of legitimate lying and deception of others) to advance the cause of Muslims and Islam...
· Request all officially constituted Islamic bodies and institutions to revise and issue new interpretations of those Qur’anic verses that call for Jihad and violence against non-Muslims.

Can we agree on that?



No, not really. If you read your own definition of Taqqiyah (or however ya wanna spell it) this does not apply to how some extremists (both Shi'a and Sunni) use the concept.
If you believe all Muslims are liars (despite long documented efforts on the part of certain moderates to encourage tolerance and peace in their religion) then there is no hope of getting Muslims to change. That is because we are politiically castrating tose who are trying to make this change.

Furthermore I only agree with what Mr. Solomon says in terms of LONG TERM goals. In the short term, realistically all his demands won't happen due to the current political climate surrounding the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan along with the long-running war between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Its just not realistic and forcing Muslims at gunpoint to accept that is going to do nothing but push them into extremist views as they will feel "oppressed".
Its just basic human psychology especially concerning the modern history of the Middle East and colonialist influences (and reprecussions) in the region.

Let me give you an example. This morning I talked to a very moderate Palestinian living in Gaza who is a devout Muslim. Yet he hates both Hamas and Fatah because he sees the horrific thuggery they both do and their links to organized crime and price gouging.
However, this morning he was EXTREMELY upset at seeing on his Arab News video of a 9 yr old boy forced to pull down his pants and remove his shirt at a checkpoint manned by Israeli soldiers.

When you get normal moderate Muslims watching that kind of stuff, its really hard to convince them that they need to be more like us. Seriously.
Thats like believing the Russians during the Cold War that we needed to be more like them after reading a book about Siberian prison camps.
Who do you believe is telling the truth? Your people or their people?
Human nature shows that you side with your own in such disputes of "truth" and "validity".

For this reason, thats why I believe a thorough understanding of the cultures of Islamic extremists is extremely important. If you dont know exactly who your enemy is (from their world view) then you will be at a loss of how to stop them permanently. Killing them is like stomping on roaches... We have to fight smarter then that.

Wigon

[hughdotoh]

24 hours of Teletubbies and Dora the Explorer. After that, drug 'em, hang 'em Singapore-style, with a sandbag tied to the feet. Quick, painless, and very much says "dead criminal"

[chino65]

Indonesia handed a top JI terrorist called Mas Selamat to us (Singapore) and we let him escaped! And we couldn't find him afterwards on our tiny little island. And Mas Selamat walks with a limp.:cantbeli:

Singapore is no longer the efficient security system we used to be. And the minister Wong Kan Seng responsible tried to crack jokes during his public stratement to "lighten" the mood. (We are being led by idiots.)

Mas wanted to crash a 747 into our beloved airport.

Feeding Mas to hungry pigs is what I'd recommend. Of course, he must not die so that he lives with this traumatic experience for the rest of his life.

[Wally1967]

Throw them into a big pit full of Funnel webs!

[sp2c]

shoot them in the feet and lock the door

if it doesn't work, try again later

[sp2c]

that said, I should really mention that I'm against all forms of torture and also against the death penalty

but yeah shoot them and let them bleed to death

[quinsen]

Just hang them slowly, like what they are - common criminals.

[Atlantic Friend]

Can we agree on that?
[/I]

We can. But last time I checked Christians did lie and deceive and cheat and committed crime with the best of them, without even having to have a special word in the Bible for it. When Orangists and Catholics clash in Northern Ireland, they both claim it's for God, the same one even, and they both have priests to applaud them. Where I live there are churches that have been burnt down twice or thrice by righteous Christians, only a 400 years ago. Not that long a time, and who's to say these times won't come back ? Not even 100 years ago, Christians thought it was their sacred duty to colonize and convert peoples whose wished mattered little, because it was all done for God, King and Country after all. Can we agree on that too ?

From what precedes, I conclude that moral standing is more a personal than a religious question. Church membership, throughout History, has never meant anything when it came to distinguish between criminals. You rape kids, you're a child rapist, not a Christian child rapist or a Muslim child rapist or a jew child rapist. You blow people up, you are a murderer.

Regarding the future demise of these assassins, what point does it serve to debate what they want or what we want ? Indonesia has laws. From what I gather they face the death penalty, so it's not as if we could suspect Jakarta to let them have it easy. They'll die after due legal process (oh, the ignominy), and according to the penal code of the country whose laws they broke. Suits me fine, and there's no need to invent special treatments so their ilk could say they died as martyrs. They'll die as common murderers, as they fit the bill. I do not need Indonesian policemen to turn into homicidal maniacs and satisfy perverse fantasies about torture just so I can feel better.

They want special treatment. Why give them ?