http://rt.com/news/adra-syria-massacre-witnesses-355/

Quote:"The decapitators" is how the Adra residents, who managed to flee the violence there, now call the people who currently have the town under their control. Adra, a town with a population of 20,000, was captured by Islamist rebels from the Al-Nusra front and the Army of Islam last week, following fierce fighting with the government forces. The town’s seizure was accompanied by mass executions of civilians.

(December 17, 2013 at 11:15 am)pocaracas Wrote: http://rt.com/news/adra-syria-massacre-witnesses-355/

Quote:"The decapitators" is how the Adra residents, who managed to flee the violence there, now call the people who currently have the town under their control. Adra, a town with a population of 20,000, was captured by Islamist rebels from the Al-Nusra front and the Army of Islam last week, following fierce fighting with the government forces. The town’s seizure was accompanied by mass executions of civilians.

It is mentioned in the Qur'an in Surat Al-Mā'idah 5:32 that:

"whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. "

The problem is that anyone who is not Muslim is guilty, brings corruption in the land and according to them, take lives. The verse should have sounded like:

"Whoever kills a human being is as though he killed the entire human kind"

If you start adding adjectives to human being in that particular sentence, you're killing people. If you say "innocent human being" then the guilty ones are ok to kill. Then you can interpolate on what being guilty means. If you say "harry potter watching human being" then those who don't watch harry potter die. Here the adjectives are:

- unless for a soul
- for corruption [done] in the land

In other words you can kill everybody. If you think someone spreads corruption in the land and goes against the Qur'an, chop his head off, like cattle. It's for your own good. This is what they follow literally.

It's important to note this is a terrorist organisation carrying out a politically motivated attack, rather than a religious one. Not that it's any better because of it.

(December 17, 2013 at 12:13 pm)Napoléon Wrote: It's important to note this is a terrorist organisation carrying out a politically motivated attack, rather than a religious one. Not that it's any better because of it.

Do you know that Nelson Mandela, when they imprisoned him, he was called Terrorist #1 by the people who imprisoned him?

Terrorist to whom? To the western interests. Terrorist is a meaningless word unless you mention who is being TERRORIZED. The Russians don't feel the same about it. They are friends with Iran.

You know, there are organizations right now who scream and cheer that Nelson Mandela died. They still call him a Terrorist. IS HE?

Since I live in Canada, I also agree that these are terrorist organizations, because they terrorize my own interests but I'm just bringing up the ambiguity of the term. If you watch V for Vendetta you see how the term Terrorist is being employed. It means the RESISTANCE to whatever major government is in place. Nowhere is it mentioned that the government in place is right, the terrorists might be right like Nelson Mandela was.

We know however that it's not the case with Islam. Islam is wrong. Why? Because their RELIGIOUS motivations are wrong, not because they're called terrorists by CNN. CNN can call anyone a terrorist. It can call you also! Or me!

(December 17, 2013 at 12:13 pm)Napoléon Wrote: It's important to note this is a terrorist organisation carrying out a politically motivated attack, rather than a religious one. Not that it's any better because of it.

Yes, but religion provides the "cover."

(December 17, 2013 at 12:52 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(December 17, 2013 at 12:13 pm)Napoléon Wrote: It's important to note this is a terrorist organisation carrying out a politically motivated attack, rather than a religious one. Not that it's any better because of it.

Yes, but religion provides the "cover."

In this case, it seems the cover is working both ways...

Allah likes bouncing heads?

(December 17, 2013 at 1:07 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Allah likes bouncing heads?

Ask them... not me!
But be sure to do it at a safe distance.

I saw a video once of some Syria war scene. A guy got shot in the head and fell on the concrete. Then, the Muslim who shot him went to him with a steel bar and started pushing it inside his head through the exit wound screaming "la ilaha ilallah, Muhammed Wa' razul Allah! Muhammed Wa' Razul". I can only imagine that the victim did not convert to Islam and the Muslim was trying to fit the Shahada by force in his head with a steel bar.

Someone else could give the context of that, in case I got it all wrong xD

(December 17, 2013 at 12:52 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(December 17, 2013 at 12:13 pm)Napoléon Wrote: It's important to note this is a terrorist organisation carrying out a politically motivated attack, rather than a religious one. Not that it's any better because of it.

Yes, but religion provides the "cover."

It is a nice way to make a living to the smarter ones.