Killing innocent people is a crime in Islam.

[FearGod]

Whats going on,why people are skeptical.

its amazing that a huge explosion in a crowded close area and the dead were 3.
and it was 2 Bombs in 2 positions ???

[youtube]glM0uzg2Hhw[/youtube]
Boston False Flag - FULLY EXPOSED - YouTube

 

[InformedIgnorance]

False flag? are you serious?

The fact that these two morons could not manage to make a half way decent explosive device does not mean it is a conspiracy.

 

[Riverwolf]

Leave the conspiracy theories for the investigators and people who were actually there, and not based on hazy videos that can have all kinds of distortions that can be misinterpreted.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Whats going on,why people are skeptical.

its amazing that a huge explosion in a crowded close area and the dead were 3.
and it was 2 Bombs in 2 positions ???

[youtube]glM0uzg2Hhw[/youtube]
Boston False Flag - FULLY EXPOSED - YouTube

My most best friend on earth is a military contractor and we discuss events like this all the time. Last that i remember this was not military explosives being used also. But i have not been keeping up with current events also.
Military usage of thermobaric bombs have proven to have inconsistencies despite their payload. Bombs are not a sure weapon and men have left unscathed from the usage of them before.

 

[Aquitaine]

Whats going on,why people are skeptical.

its amazing that a huge explosion in a crowded close area and the dead were 3.
and it was 2 Bombs in 2 positions ???

[youtube]glM0uzg2Hhw[/youtube]
Boston False Flag - FULLY EXPOSED - YouTube

Right, it must have been an inside job, because no Muslim would ever kill innocent people (as evidenced by this thread title).

 

[FearGod]

Right, it must have been an inside job, because no Muslim would ever kill innocent people (as evidenced by this thread title).

Please note that the ones who are saying its inside job is the american themselves and not muslims.

Who said to you that muslims care about what do you think about them ?
Show me which muslim country claimed it to be an inside job even for 9/11 the american themselves have proved it to be so.

So do you want even to blame muslims for such reports.

[youtube]xEU61Cw7VCo[/youtube]
9/11 was an Inside Job - TOTAL PROOF (part 1) - YouTube

[youtube]6LFwWXkvUOw[/youtube]
9/11 was an Inside Job - TOTAL PROOF (part 2) - YouTube

 

[painted wolf]

So do you think ABC News distort the original video,how do you explain it while they are saying it is the original video.

How do you know that's the original video?

Plus, I know how video works. And how peoples imaginations work.

This is no different than all the people who claimed to have seen "spooky brown people" in photos and videos of the incident.

I don't put any more stock in the people who claimed that they saw a bunch of generic "middle easterners" planting the bombs than I do the people who claim they can see the government do it in crappy youtube videos.

wa:do

And once again let me point out.... I know people who were there. There was no need for fake blood.

 

[FearGod]

How do you know that's the original video?

Plus, I know how video works. And how peoples imaginations work.

This is no different than all the people who claimed to have seen "spooky brown people" in photos and videos of the incident.

I don't put any more stock in the people who claimed that they saw a bunch of generic "middle easterners" planting the bombs than I do the people who claim they can see the government do it in crappy youtube videos.

wa:do

And once again let me point out.... I know people who were there. There was no need for fake blood.

If the story about the 2 brothers and their bags which exploded in 2 positions in the marathon,then what about the other bombs which were found in other positions too.

Following Boston’s horrific bombings on April 15, new devices are currently being dismantled after they were found inside Boston’s Mandarin and Lenox hotels. It’s unclear what these devices may be, but they’re believed to be explosives.

Reference : Boston Marathon Bombs Found — New Explosive Devices Uncovered In Hotels - Hollywood Life

 

[Aquitaine]

Please note that the ones who are saying its inside job is the american themselves and not muslims.

Who said to you that muslims care about what do you think about them ?
Show me which muslim country claimed it to be an inside job even for 9/11 the american themselves have proved it to be so.

So do you want even to blame muslims for such reports.

[youtube]xEU61Cw7VCo[/youtube]
9/11 was an Inside Job - TOTAL PROOF (part 1) - YouTube

[youtube]6LFwWXkvUOw[/youtube]
9/11 was an Inside Job - TOTAL PROOF (part 2) - YouTube

Whilst it's true that the video's authors probably aren't Muslims, it was the fact that you posted these links specifically in this thread, which lead me to believe that you were trying to downplay the impact of radical Islam in relation to some of these acts of terrorism.

 

[painted wolf]

If the story about the 2 brothers and their bags which exploded in 2 positions in the marathon,then what about the other bombs which were found in other positions too.

Following Boston’s horrific bombings on April 15, new devices are currently being dismantled after they were found inside Boston’s Mandarin and Lenox hotels. It’s unclear what these devices may be, but they’re believed to be explosives.

Reference : Boston Marathon Bombs Found — New Explosive Devices Uncovered In Hotels - Hollywood Life

That's your big source.... a trashy internet tabloid?

Look, I don't know the details of why those two did what they did... I'm pretty sure it wasn't simply religious zealotry. Hell, it could have as pointless as Sandy Hook or Columbine.

But trying to peddle ridiculous conspiracy tales does nothing to help. If anything it harms both your reputation and that of Islam. If you're that desperate to deny what happened in Boston after all.

wa:do

 

[noh950]

One should not write to try to satisfy all readers. It's impossible.

 

[crocusj]

One should not write to try to satisfy all readers. It's impossible.

So, should you aim low? Preach to only the converted? Write for only those that will believe you? Offer only ideas that seek agreement rather than challenge? I can see why this might be attractive but I cannot see why this should be an aspiration.

 

[gnostic]

To FearGod:

You had quoted this verse:

Therefore We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain, nor for corruption done in the land, shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoso gives life to a soul, shall be as if he ha given life to mankind altogether. Our Messengers have already come to them with the clear signs; then many of them thereafter commit excesses in the earth. (5:32)

And then you wrote this to explain the verse 5:32:

The verse says that it was said for the children of Israel as not to slay a soul,so it isn't a matter of a believer soul or a disbeliever soul,but any soul,so killing a human being is an evil act and a crime regardless of religion.

The problem is that the meaning of part of the verse is not clear, even when you included your view on that verse.

What does "whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain" mean?

The meaning is not so clear.

The way it seemed to be worded, it seem to be talking about revenge because of "to retaliate for a soul slain"?

If so, then is it saying it is okay to kill someone in retaliation?

Or if not so, then what does it really means if it is something else? Is it murder? Manslaughter? Or accidental death?

 

[FearGod]

To FearGod:

You had quoted this verse:


And then you wrote this to explain the verse 5:32:



The problem is that the meaning of part of the verse is not clear, even when you included your view on that verse.

What does "whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain" mean?

The meaning is not so clear.

The way it seemed to be worded, it seem to be talking about revenge because of "to retaliate for a soul slain"?

If so, then is it saying it is okay to kill someone in retaliation?

Or if not so, then what does it really means if it is something else? Is it murder? Manslaughter? Or accidental death?

The verse is very clear as god permits retaliation against only the one soul that committed the crime,it is also made clear in verse (2:178)

O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom. (2:178)

 

[gnostic]

The verse is very clear as god permits retaliation against only the one soul that committed the crime,it is also made clear in verse (2:178)

So with retaliation, your god is talking about vengeance or revenge, not justice.

O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.

Yes. The verse 2:178 is clearer than 5:32.

My understanding of 2:178 is that a person may either accept retribution (or retaliation) or blood money from the murderer, for a murdered victim, but cannot have both.

5:32, on the other hand doesn't necessarily mean murder, so I wanted a bit of clarification as to what kind of death. Because some people believed they have the rights to revenge for even "accidental death" of love ones, a death for a death.

Let's say that if someone (let's call this person A) cause the death of another one's child (person B's child). If you go by eye-for-eye type of revenge, then person B would avenge his child's death, by taking away the life of child of person A.

That to me is pretty much senseless and perverted type of justice, for how can taking another life of innocent (child of person A) be used to satisfy person B.

 

[sunni56]

So with retaliation, your god is talking about vengeance or revenge, not justice.



Yes. The verse 2:178 is clearer than 5:32.

My understanding of 2:178 is that a person may either accept retribution (or retaliation) or blood money from the murderer, for a murdered victim, but cannot have both.

5:32, on the other hand doesn't necessarily mean murder, so I wanted a bit of clarification as to what kind of death. Because some people believed they have the rights to revenge for even "accidental death" of love ones, a death for a death.

Let's say that if someone (let's call this person A) cause the death of another one's child (person B's child). If you go by eye-for-eye type of revenge, then person B would avenge his child's death, by taking away the life of child of person A.

That to me is pretty much senseless and perverted type of justice, for how can taking another life of innocent (child of person A) be used to satisfy person B.

You seem a bit confused. Firstly, it is not permissible to execute somebody on manslaughter charges, the punishment for accidental death is blood money, not execution. Secondly, if person A kills person B's child intentionally, then an "eye for an eye" means person A is executed, NOT person A's child. To execute the child would be an unlawful killing and would violate the Qur'anic law 35:18 no bearer of burdens shall bear another's burden

 

[FearGod]

So with retaliation, your god is talking about vengeance or revenge, not justice.



Yes. The verse 2:178 is clearer than 5:32.

My understanding of 2:178 is that a person may either accept retribution (or retaliation) or blood money from the murderer, for a murdered victim, but cannot have both.

5:32, on the other hand doesn't necessarily mean murder, so I wanted a bit of clarification as to what kind of death. Because some people believed they have the rights to revenge for even "accidental death" of love ones, a death for a death.

Let's say that if someone (let's call this person A) cause the death of another one's child (person B's child). If you go by eye-for-eye type of revenge, then person B would avenge his child's death, by taking away the life of child of person A.

That to me is pretty much senseless and perverted type of justice, for how can taking another life of innocent (child of person A) be used to satisfy person B.

i'm not surprized that there are some stupid terrorists that interpret the verses the same way as you did.

Now to our main topic.

What did the innocent people at the marathon commit to legalize the retaliation against them and how is that related to your understanding of the quranic verses.

 

[gnostic]

i'm not surprized that there are some stupid terrorists that interpret the verses the same way as you did.

Now to our main topic.

What did the innocent people at the marathon commit to legalize the retaliation against them and how is that related to your understanding of the quranic verses.

Waitasec, how in the hell did my post become about terrorism?

I make no mention of terrorists, especially the recent Boston marathon bombing.

You're either putting words in my mouth or over-thinking what I'm saying.

My 2 recent posts only ask for clarification to verse 5:32, and wanted more specifics of what type of death warranted revenge-retaliation?

My last post have only a generic example, which I don't understand become that of terrorism. How do you mix my example with terrorism?

I just think that some people confuse justice with vengeance. They tried to justify their action through something as vague as 5:32 verse, to get back what they have lost.

How far can one take retaliation or retribution?

I understand if someone steal from you (not "you" personally, "you" as in general) - there are several alternatives: a) you get your stolen goods back, b) you get monetary compensation that equal (or possibly more than) the value(s) of the stolen goods (like from fines or sue for the loss), c) the thief or robber receive jail time (or do community works as an alternative), d) severe his or her hand.

With a life (could be that of parent, spouse or child) taken away from you (again, "you" as in general, not "you" personally), there are likewise a number of actions be taken, like prison time, money compensation, or life for life, etc. The other thing is that not all killings are murders.

The probably with life-for-a-life are - whose life are we talking about?

The person who cause the death? The person's parent, spouse or child? What would satisfy you? (Again, I'm speaking of the generic "you"; do not take it so literally.)

My above example is again, generic, so I am not necessarily speaking of terrorism. Personally, I'd prefer that you leave out terrorism altogether, should you reply to this post. Can you do that?

 

[Aamer]

i'm not surprized that there are some stupid terrorists that interpret the verses the same way as you did.

Now to our main topic.

What did the innocent people at the marathon commit to legalize the retaliation against them and how is that related to your understanding of the quranic verses.

Are you implying that gnostic is stupid? Haha. Sorry. Couldn't resist. In all seriousness though, you can only punish the criminal. Not his kids, family, random people at a marathon, etc. The extremists (don't call them Islamists) do not understand or do not WANT to understand Quran.