anything that has form is unislamic.....so, muslims praying at graves at dargah's and praying rockstone called "kaba" at meccah constitutes idol worship and hence unislamic....surfing internet, seeing films, dancing,photography are also unsilamic.....muslims should eat, sleep and live like prophet mohammed who live in 6th century....anything other than is unislamic....
RE:idolatory
by today on Jun 15, 2008 06:07 PM Permalink
A muslim who prayes at the grave or dargah is doing so because of his lack of islamic knowledge. Muslims pray FACING the KABAA which is the House of Lord Almighty but it still remains a house made of brick and mud and stone and will be destroyed like anyother object on the day of judgement. This is a belief of a muslim. The only remaining thing will be The presence of Almighty and HE alone is worthy of worship.
It is really strange you find it ackward the way of a prophet but still your fellow co-faithist are fighting on rubble of fallen mosques and decaying bridges somewhere in the ocean. You first ask them to get out of ignorance before commenting on the most influential personality humanity has ever known.
RE:idolatory
by kalyan ram on Jun 15, 2008 06:11 PM Permalink
muslims surfing internet is unsilamic....prophet mohammed dosent have unislamic.....if prophet mohammed lived today, he would defintely issue an fatwa calling all muslims to prohibit internet surfing.....
RE:RE:idolatory
by today on Jun 15, 2008 06:16 PM Permalink
Who told you prophet Muhammad is not living with us....he is there in every muslims heart, in his mind and in his soul .... I am talking about 1 billion hearts,heads and souls.
RE:idolatory
by kalyan ram on Jun 15, 2008 05:59 PM Permalink
hence muslims using all modern advances in today's world is unislamic.....they should live in 6th century.....not in 21st century....all muslims should confine burkha's....
RE:RE:idolatory
by kalyan ram on Jun 15, 2008 06:01 PM Permalink
that dooesnt mean that creator gave license to muslims to destroy all creations .....why dont you give respect to creator's creations?
RE:idolatory
by Gladiator on Jun 15, 2008 06:13 PM Permalink
No Kalyan Ram Holy Koran says that "Killing an Innocent is like killing the whole Humanity". There is no room for Mischievers in Islam
RE:RE:RE:idolatory
by today on Jun 15, 2008 06:12 PM Permalink
How can a muslim destroy all the creations. When he himself is offering his faith and asking YOU not to worship worldy things and turn to one true creator.Is this what you call destroying creations?
RE:idolatory
by balaord on Jun 15, 2008 05:58 PM Permalink
If you are serious about not using anything which has a islamic connection,then probably you should be rethining about using internet commerce,because some of the bed rock concepts of internet commerce is cryptoanalysis and it is the invention of muslims that too a invention fueled through religios research
Probably the whole internet business it self wouldnt be here if it is not for cryptograpgy and cryptoanalysis.Internationally Known Author and Cryptoanalyst Simon Singh in his latest Newyork Times best seller - The Code Book - explains this in detail
It says the following ....However, in addition to employing ciphers, the Arab scholars were also capable of destroying ciphers. They in fact invented cryptanalysis....
RE:idolatory
by balaord on Jun 15, 2008 06:00 PM Permalink
correct Link (there was a space previously) query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E02E7DA1138F934A35752C1A96F958260
The terrorist bomb/bullet does not discriminate between religions, caste and creed.it is the innocent people who get killed. it is an act of war against the state. The perpetuator or the persons involved in such acts should be caught and given the most stringent punishment without any plea for mercy. Then only it will act as a deterrent for future acts. Places of religious worship should be guarded round the clock by heavily armed and trained police and paramilitary forces to prevent such violent acts against the state. For this the state and central intelligence agencies should exchange the information for rapid action. Eternal vigilance is the price for liberty and safety of indian citizens against acts of terror. S. Ravindran
RE:Acts of terrorism
by venkat on Jun 15, 2008 05:51 PM Permalink
it is an act of war true. But it is done for sake of allah. All islamic terrorist manifesto have it as their manifesto and agenda. Let not forget that.
RE:Acts of terrorism
by today on Jun 15, 2008 06:19 PM Permalink
It depends on whom you lable as terroists. Every and anybody who fights for his rights,self respect and protection of his/her honor if a terrorist than we are a nation full of such terrorist.
It is time to start this debate. Now that Gujarat is slowly getting back to normalcy. Today many are clueless why the Indian media is obsessively anti-majority _ that is, anti-Hindu. But here is the clue. ``It is no wrong'' says the editor of a popular English magazine, ``to jettison the parameters of objective journalism and being partisan on the side of the victims.'' It does sound noble.
But its implications are far-reaching. It is not just a clue, far more. An admission. This came when the `secular' establishment had to rationalise its totally one-sided reporting on the Godhra massacre and on the Gujarat riots.
Did the secular establishment apply this rule _ of being partisan on the side of the victims _ to the roasting of Ramsevaks, women and children included, at Godhra, and take their side. No. It was the other way round. Nearly the entire secular establishment, the media included, virtually rationalised the mass roasting of the Ramsevaks.
The seculars' voice is the loudest, the shrillest in the country. What the seculars did in millions of words in thousands of journals and newspapers is difficult to capture in a few hundred words here. So the next best proof is the testimony of one of the approvers from the secular ranks as to what the seculars did. The Editor of one of the largest English newspapers _ -a paper, which did as much damage as any other, in reporting on Godhra _ and a secularist himself had an open introspection in the front page of the paper
RE:Promoting secularism by lies admissions and confessions
by birju on Jun 15, 2008 05:47 PM Permalink
There is something profoundly worrying,in the response of what might be called the secular establishment to the massacre in Godhra.''
On how the secular establishment reacted to the Godhra massacre, he said ``every non-BJP leader on TV and almost all of the media treated the massacre as a response to the Ayodhya movement.'' That is, the victims, Karsevaks, themselves, had provoked the Muslims to burn them.
``If a trainload of VHP volunteers had been attacked,'' like in Godhra, after the demolition of the Babri masjid in December 1992, he argued, ``that would still have been wrong, but, at least one could have understood the provocation.''
But, at Godhra, ``there has been no real provocation at all,'' he said. ``And yet,'' he wrote, ``the sub-text to all secular commentary is the same: the karsevaks had it coming to them.'' ``Basically,'' he continued, ``the secular establishment condemns the crime; but blames the victims.''
That the victims were Hindus is enough to change the conduct of the secular establishment. It establishes that the secular rule of standing by the victims will not apply if the victims were Hindus. A different test will apply to them - that is, whether the Hindu victims perished by their own wrongs.
The editor asked whether we said that ``the US had it coming when the Twin Towers were attacked last year?'' The secular India never attributed the attack to the Muslims' resentment of US policies. He said ``we didn't even consider whether t
RE:Promoting secularism by lies admissions and confessions
by Albert Adibadla on Jun 15, 2008 05:55 PM Permalink
WHAT WERE THE HINDU JIHADI'S DOING IN THE TRAIN?? FULLY DRUNK AND SHOUTING ABUSES AND GOING TO AYODHAYA FOR BJP TERRORISM???
IF THEY WERE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THEY SHOULD HAVE STAYED HOME..
WHAT WERE THE MUSLIM JIHADI'S DOING? SHOUTING ABUSES AND FIGHTING WITH HINDU JIHADI'S AND BURNING THEM?? BOTH OF THE LAW BREAKERS DO NOT DESERVE TO LIVE...
RE:RE:Promoting secularism by lies admissions and confessions
by birju on Jun 15, 2008 05:49 PM Permalink
Another question. ``When Graham Staines and his children were burnt alive,'' he asked, ``did we say that Christian missionaries had made themselves unpopular by engaging in conversion, and so, they had it coming? `No', he said, 'of course, we didn't.''
He then put the most poignant question. ``Why then are these poor karsevaks an exception? Why have we de-humanised them to the extent that we don't even see the incident as the human tragedy that it undoubtedly was and treat it as just another consequence of the VHP's fundamentalist policies?'
So, for Hindus, not the rule of standing by the victim, but the rule of who is at fault will apply. Secular India will not see the why of it, when it condemns the Word Trade Center attack or the Stains murder. But for Godhra, it will seek, even invent, reasons as to why it was inevitable for the victims to die. Why do they do it? Simple. The victims are Hindus.
Why this double standard in Godhra? ``The answer, I suspect,'' said the editor, ``is that we are programmed to see Hindu-Muslim relations in simplistic terms: Hindus provoke, Muslims suffer.''
Being a trained journalist, the editor uses a very sophisticated word, ``programmed.'' What it really means is this: being disposed to lie, to prevaricate, by premeditation. This programming always blames the Hindus as provocateurs and defends the Muslims as victims. This formula is the standard norm of secular India.
One cannot dismiss the secular pack as just another ver
RE:Promoting secularism by lies admissions and confessions
by kraft on Jun 15, 2008 05:53 PM Permalink
In India "Secularism" is the most Commercialised Word. For 60 Years the Congress Party and it's various Avtars [like VP.Singh and other sundry Leaders] and the Socialists/Communists had understood that Using the word "Secularism" they can do good Political Busines next only to the Dynasty! So they have "Doctored" versions of "Secularism", distorted History to suit their cause, Lies,etc. TRUTH has been the biggest casualty. The day the major communities start seeing things in the proper perspective these "Seculars" will have to close their Political Shops and run for cover! It is needless for me to add that "Seculaism" is the last resort of Scoundrels.
IN 1989 BJP'S ADVANI, VAJPAYEE (BOTH IN CABINET) AND IDIOTIC VP SINGH THE MAD MAN PM -- RELEASED RUBIYA SAID AND LED TO KASHMIR FLARE US. -- RESULT 100,000 KILLED...
IN 1992. BJP DEMOLISHED BABARI MASJID - NET RESULT A OLD BUILDING DEMOLISHED - NO TEMPLE- NO NOTHING EXPECT FOR 25,000 KILLINGS
IN 1990 BJPS' JAGMOHAN ASKED KASHMIRI PANDITS TO LEAVE KASHMIR VALLYE SO THAT HE CAN CLEAN UP THE VALLEY... NET RESULT THOUSANDS DISLACED NEVER TO COME BACK..
BJP PM WENT TO PAKISTAN CLAIMING HINDI-PAKI BHAI BHAI - NET RESULT KARGIL WAR WHEN BJP WAS COMPLETELY UNPREPARED - 2500 KILLED AND CRORES LOST
BJP FAILIURE ON IA HIGHJACKING - FAILED TO STOP THE PLANE TO TAKE OFF FROM AMRITSAR AND RELEASED HARD CORE TERRORISTS TO TALIBAN WITH FOREIGN MINISTER ESCORTING THE TERRORISTS WITH FULL HONORS.. NET RESULT -- 1000S KILLED BY THESE TERRORISTS AND THIER GANGS
BJP'S FAILURE ON RESPONDING TO BANGALADESHI ATTACK ON BSF KILLING 24 JAWANS -- NATIONAL SHAME
BJP'S FAILURE TO RESPOND TO ATTACK ON INDIAN PARLIAMENT; MOVED THE ARMY ALL THE WAY TO BORDER AND RETREATED WITHOUT FIRING THE SHOT- NATIONAL SHAME
BJP'S FAILURE TO RESPOND TO ATTACK ON RED FORT;
BJP'S FAILURE ON STOPPING ULFA...
BJP'S FAILURE ON STOPPING NAGA REBELS -- ISSAC MOVIAH GROUP..
OTHER THAN RIOTING AND KILLING INNOCENT hindus, MUSLIMS, SIKHS AND CHRISTIANS WHAT IS BJP'S TRACK RECORD ON NATIONAL SECURITY??? TAKING BRIBES FOR BUYING THE COFFINS FOR JAWANS?? IS THAT THE QUALIFICATION??
RE:Why Muslims are surfing Internet ?
by Albert Adibadla on Jun 15, 2008 05:44 PM Permalink
IS MULLAH DAVID THE SON OF MULLAH NAREDNRA MODI OR LALKISHEN BIN LADEN... BJP AND BIN LADEN GROUPS ARE BOTH JIHADIS.. ONE HINDU JIHADI AND OTHER MUSLIM JIHADI..
RE:Why Muslims are surfing Internet ?
by balaord on Jun 15, 2008 05:52 PM Permalink
see this College of Optical Sciences,University of Arizona by Prof. Charles M. Falco Chair of Condensed Matter Physics Ibn Al-Haytham And The Origins Of Modern Image Analysis
RE:Why Muslims are surfing Internet ?
by balaord on Jun 15, 2008 05:48 PM Permalink
image representation and image seeing is prohibited??? which islamic instruction you are rfering to? Images as objects of worship is prohibited in Islam not images in general. In fact Muslims pioneered Image analaysis,Optics before the world learnt from them. Many non imagerial patterns which today the bedrock of mathematics also came from Muslims.
Check The Institution of Engineering and Technology which is one of the worlds leading professional societies for the engineering and technology community and see why Abul Hassan (AlHazen) is called Father of optics
RE:Why Muslims are surfing Internet ?
by balaord on Jun 15, 2008 05:52 PM Permalink
Images as objects of worship is prohibited in Islam not images in general. In fact Muslims pioneered Image analaysis,Optics before the world learnt from them. Many non imagerial patterns which today the bedrock of mathematics also came from Muslims.
Check The Institution of Engineering and Technology which is one of the worlds leading professional societies for the engineering and technology community and see why Abul Hassan (AlHazen) is called Father of optics
see this College of Optical Sciences,University of Arizona by Prof. Charles M. Falco Chair of Condensed Matter Physics Ibn Al-Haytham And The Origins Of Modern Image Analysis
Every Muslim should be a terrorist. A terrorist is a person who causes terror. The moment a robber sees a policeman he is terrified. A policeman is a terrorist for the robber. Similarly every Muslim should be a terrorist for the antisocial elements of society, such as thieves, dacoits and rapists. Whenever such an anti-social element sees a Muslim, he should be terrified. It is true that the word ‘terrorist’ is generally used for a person who causes terror among the common people. But a true Muslim should only be a terrorist to selective people i.e. anti-social elements, and not to the common innocent people. In fact a Muslim should be a source of peace for innocent people. Before India achieved independence from British rule, some freedom fighters of India who did not subscribe to non-violence were labeled as terrorists by the British government. The same individuals have been lauded by Indians for the same activities and hailed as ‘patriots’. Thus two different labels have been given to the same people for the same set of actions. One is calling him a terrorist while the other is calling him a patriot. Those who believed that Britain had a right to rule over India called these people terrorists, while those who were of the view that Britain had no right to rule India called them patriots and freedom fighters.
It is therefore important that before a person is judged, he is given a fair hearing. Both sides of the argument should be heard, the situation should be analyzed,
RE:Every Muslim should be a terrorist
by Jasad Dusty on Jun 15, 2008 05:36 PM Permalink
Mr. Wajid Ali is glued to watching PEACE TV and listening Dr. Zakir Naik, it seems. As a Muslim, I would suggest to him to be careful. Dr. Zakir Naik is just a propagandist or a pamphleteer of a particuler thinking within Islam and no religious scholar.
RE:Every Muslim should be a terrorist
by JGN on Jun 15, 2008 10:32 PM Permalink
Mr.wajid ali, pl write something on your own and think with your brain rather than copying & pasting from Dr. Zakir Naik's web site. Btw pl ask the learned Aalim whether he would like the "right-wing hindu parties" also be "fundamentalists and terrorists" like the muslims!!!!!!!!!!!!
RE:Every Muslim should be a terrorist
by Albert Adibadla on Jun 15, 2008 05:46 PM Permalink
WAJID ALI PHILOSPHY, BJP PHILOSPHY AND SAUDI MULLAH PHILOSPHY ARE THE THE SAME... ALL WILL BE DESTROYED...
