نقاش:رسوم كاركتورية مسيئة للنبي محمد في صحيفة يولاندس بوستن الدانماركية/English

 Muslims' Viewpoint

Many Muslims were offended by the publication of the Muhammad cartoons. This anger has been expressed in public protests in Arabic and Islamic countries. Muslims claim [[MUSLIMS AS A WHOLE DO NOT CLAIM ANYTHING; NO GROUP SPEAKS IN ONE VOICE] that this anger isn't directed against freedom of speech [WHO CLAIMS THIS?] - as the western media represent the issue [THE WESTERN MEDIA DOES NOT SPEAK IN ONE VOICE EITHER, AND DIFFERENT MEDIA OUTLETS HAVE REPRESENTED THE CONFLICT IN DIFFERENT WAYS] - but rather against an insult to all Muslims, since the cartoons represent their Prophet [DO NOT CAPITALIZE PROPHET, AS PER NPOV] as terrorist and criminal [THE ARTISTS DENY THEY WERE REPRESENTING MUHAMMAD IN SUCH A WAY; CITE SOMEONE WHO HAS ASSERTED OTHERWISE, YOU CANNOY SIMPLY ASSERT THAT THEY HAVE REPRESENTED HIM AS "A TERRORIST AND A CRIMINAL"]. According to Muslim opinion [AGAIN, NO SUCH THING AS A MONOLITHIC "MUSLIM OPINION"], the drawing of Prophet Muhammad [[CALL HIM MUHAMMAD IN A SECULAR ENCYCLOPEDIA, NOT "THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD", JUST AS WE DO NOT CALL THE MORMONS' PROPHET "PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH", EVEN THOUGH THEY DO] is not acceptable (actually, pictures of all prophets including Jesus and Moses are forbidden in Islam) [APPARENTLY SOME SHI'ITES BELIVE DIFFERENTLY; ISLAM IS DIVERSE]. Additionally they object the way in which Prophet Muhammad has been represented as a terrorist [AGAIN, ARTISTS CLAIM OTHERWISE], which means in their opinion that all Muslims are terrorists [ATTRIBUTE THIS OPINION TO SOMEONE]. For Muslims a message of Hate is sent by those cartoons, and they frankly express the modern Islamophobia spreading in the western world [YOU CANNOT ASSERT THAT THERE IS "ISLAMOPHOBIA SPREADING IN THE WESTERD WORLD". HERE YOU ATTRIBUTE IT TO CLINTON, BUT CITE HIM AS AFFIRMING THE TRUTH OF THE NOTION, RATHER THAN JUST STATING THAT HE SAID IT. STILL, A STEP IN RIGHT DIRECTION], as President Clinton said .

Many Muslims think that the Jyllands Posten should be punished by the Danish Government, and make comparisons to the charges that have been made against writers descriped as anti-semitic in Europe [WHAT GOVERNMENT CHARGES? THE DANISH GOVERNMENT HAS NOT PUNISHED ANYONE FOR "ANTI-SEMITISM". WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY?]

Most European and American media supports the newspaper and considers the issue to be one of Freedom of Speech, which is one of the most important traditions in the Western, secular world. For them Muhammad should dealt with as any other religious figure - even in satirical cartoons, just like Jesus and Buddha. They believe that Muslims have no right to enforce censorship of the media. Most European and American media supports the newspaper and considers the issue to be one of Freedom of Speech, which is one of the most important traditions in the Western, secular world. For them Muhammad should dealt with as any other religious figure - even in satirical cartoons, just like Jesus and Buddha. They believe that Muslims have no right to enforce censorship of the media. Line 1344: Line 1350: For some Muslims, the publication of these pictures is seen as racist. For Many muslims there is no problem with criticism of Islamic belief, rules or behaviour, and there is no prolem either with making fun of religious people, but presenting the prophet Muhammed - who is an ideal for all Muslims - as a terrorist, suggests that all Muslims are fundamentalists and extremeists. They believe that this is a message of hate and intolerance and therefore that goverments shouldn't accepted such behaviour from the media . For some Muslims, the publication of these pictures is seen as racist. For Many muslims there is no problem with criticism of Islamic belief, rules or behaviour, and there is no prolem either with making fun of religious people, but presenting the prophet Muhammed - who is an ideal for all Muslims - as a terrorist, suggests that all Muslims are fundamentalists and extremeists. They believe that this is a message of hate and intolerance and therefore that goverments shouldn't accepted such behaviour from the media .

يوجد ضمن النص بعض الملاحظات من قبل إداريين في الموسوعة الانجليزية ... أعتقد هذا هو مشروعنا الهم الآن ... كتابة نص متماسك مدقق من قبل خبراء الانجليزية لدينا ... نحتاج لدعم مصادر ... الجزيرة العربية و أفضل الانجليزية ... إذا كان هناك مقالات في صحف اجنبية تشرح وجهة النظر العربية و الإسلامية ... أي مقال أو استطلاع آراء ... سيكون مفيدا .

--Chaos 19:51, 2 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

من الملاحظ وجود تناقضات كبيرة ففي بداية النص ينتقد الكاتب أن المسلمين (وهو لا يعترف بوجود رأي موحد لهم ...لا أعرف هل يجب أن نعين ناطق رسمي باسم المسلمين حتى يصبح للمسلمين رأي!!) يدعون بأنه لا يهاجمون حرية الراي و التعبير كما تحاول وسائل الإعلام الغربية تصويره... ثم يعود في قسم آخر من النص لييقول بأن معظم وسائل الإعلام في اوروبا و امريكا يدعمون الجريدة و يعتبرون القضية مسألة حرية راي و تعبير!!!

آسف على الالتباس .... النص الأساسي من تأليفي أما ما تجده بين قوسين بخط كبير فهي اعتراضات إداري من ويكيبديا الانكليزية , هكذا يزول التناقض لديك --Chaos 00:52, 3 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

يتكلم الكاتب عن أنه لا يجوز استخدام النبي محمد في موسوعة علمانية و يجب الاكتفاء بمحمد !!!

1. على حد علمي الموسوعة ليست موسوعة علمانية!!! بل هي حيادية و هنالك فرق بين العلمانية و الحيادية!!!
2. تستخدم الموسوعة الإنكليزية العديد من الألقاب الملكية و ماشابهها فلماذا لا يعتبر ذلك خرق للحيادية بينما كلمة نبي تعتبر تعتبر كذلك
3. بغض النظر عن قدسية الرسول بالنسبة للمسلمين و من وجهة نظر مدنية محمد اسم علم يحمله الملايين في العالم وذكره مجردا لا يدل على الشخص المذكور لذا استخدام النبي محمد ضروري لتميز من المقصود

عدم وجود قانون يعاقب السارق لا يعني ان السرقة مقبولة !! وبالتالي عدم وجود قانون يمنع الشتم و الإساءة للرموز الدينية لا يعني بأن هذا التصرف مقبول.

يجب التأكد من الإدعاء حول عدم معاقبة الحكومة الدنماركية لأي أحد بتهمة معادة السامية!! لأني اشك في ذلك!!

أخيرا أوكد على ضرورة عدم إدراج النقد تحت عنوان وجهة نظر المسلمين أو وجهة النظر الإسلامية لأن هذا الرأي يشترك به أغلب المؤمنين بالديانات و العديد من اللادينين و الملحدين!!

هذا بعض ماخطر لي وأشكر Chaos على جهوده و متابعته للموضوع في ويكيبيديا الانكليزية. --حكيم دمشق 00:49, 3 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

سافرت في رحلة لبضعة أيام و أعود لأجد الدنيا قد قامت و لم تقعد بعد, الموضوع مشتعل بغرابة شديدة في الموسوعة الانجليزية و تحول إلى حرب بين المسلمين و الغرب بأكمله و الاضافات تم على مدار الساعة في المقال و صفحة النقاش هناك, بالمناسبة التصويت مع حذف الصورة من المقال غير منطقي بالمرة, انا مع رامي في موقفه و وجهة نظره رائعة في هذا الصدد, لكي تتكلم عن شئ يجب أن أراه في بداية المقال, يجب أن نثبت لهم اننا مع حساسية الموقف لنا فأننا محايدون و كل همنا هو اظهار الحقيقة و هذا ما يجب ان يحدث لأننا على حق بالفعل يجب أن نضع الامر في نصابه الصحيح فلا نكبره و لا ان نعطيه أقل مما يستحق, هي إهانة و لكن نحن من أعطيناها أكبر من حجمها, اعتبر ان من فعل هذا قد رسمها على الحائط ثم ذهب, ماذا كنت ستفعل؟ تمحوها و لكن هنا لا ينفع هذا الحل, منذ البداية اعتقد أن اعتذار في نفس الجريدة الحقيرة سيكون كافي و لكن رد العرب كان اولا بطيئا للغاية, ثانيا جاء مبالغا فيه من وجهة نظري و هذا ما يراه الغرب الأن, الجريدة نشرت منذ أربعة أشهلر لماذا الضجة الأن فقط, أين كان العرب؟؟, بالنسبة للموسوعة و هو ما اعتقد أننا هنا من اجله, أقترح نقل الصفحة إلى عنوان اخر معبر أكثر من هذا (مثلا كلمة إساءة تعطي حكم مسبق مما يخالف قواعد الحيادية, أعتقد حذفها سيكون انسب لموسوعة مفترض بها الحياد), تحياتي لمجهودكم جميعا في تتبع هذه المشكلة و أرجو أن نتمكن من تصحيح صورة الاسلام و إدانة الصور كما تستحق --Mido 01:37, 3 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

Islamic text books state that Muslims can't be real Muslims unless they love their prophet Mohammed more than their parents, more than their children and more than anybody else (لا يؤمن أحدكم حتى أكون أحب إليه من والده وولده والناس أجمعين, No one will have faith until he loves me more than his father, his sun, and the hole world). For most Muslims, things get more than personal when it comes to their prophet.

The majority of Muslims were offended and angered by the action of the publication of what they considered an offensive images. Their understanding of the cartoons was some kind of manipulated representation of the Muslim prophet. This anger has been expressed in public protests, newspaper articles, emails, and SMS in Arabic and Islamic countries. The Muslim reaction was misunderstood as being directed against freedom of speech, when it was about the insult felt by most Muslims; Most Muslims sees these figures as a way of accusing there prophet as being a terrorist and criminal. Although the artists deny that they are representing Mohammed in such a way, the broad rang of Muslims can't consent on "a bomb in a turban, with a lit fuse and the Islamic creed written on the bomb" is not an icon of terrorism. By Islamic faith such representation is refused for all prophets, including Jesus and Moses. The offended Muslims, taking in account the 9-11 aftershocks, believe that there exists a hidden agenda behind these images; an agenda that works toward marking all Muslims as terrorists. For those Muslims a message of hate is seen in the cartoons, and a clear signal of Islamophobia. [1]

Most European and American media reactions that reached the Muslims, especially in the Middle East, supported the Danish newspaper position, and as most of the angered Muslims expected, considered the issue to be one of Freedom of Speech. They judged the Muslim reaction as some kind of censorship on the media. But, by not understanding the real feelings of Muslims and by republishing the images again and again, the media helped in fusing the situation.

Believing that actions should have taken by Danish Government, the Muslims pushing for the Boycotts, found the Boycotts to be one of the answers that should force the Danish Government to act on what the Muslims interpret as hate and intolerance. They also call for their governments not to accept such behavior from the western media.

هذه إعادة صياغة لمقالة صهيب. حاولت تجنب نقاط الخلاف. الرجاء إبداء الملاحظات و توفير المصدر للحديث باللغة الإنجليزية. --Tarawneh 05:38, 3 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

ألم نتفاهم على أن تعليلاتنا لا تكون من منطلق ديني حيث أنهم لن يتفهموا هذه التعليلات ??? رجاء آخر لقد عملت بعض الصفحات بهدف التنسيق و التحرك في هذا السياق الرجاء الإطلاع على ما طرحته من أفكار و المشاركة و تفعيل المبادرة (حتى يكون الأمر منظم بعض الشيء). أنظر صفحة العريضة المشتركة التي سنحررها مع بعض و نوقع عليها و صفحة إقتراح الصفحة الرئيسية و صفحة أرشيف مداخلاتنا في الويكيباديات بالغات الأخرى (قمت بمداخلات في الويكيباديا الإنجليزية و واحدة في ويكيباديا الفرنسية) مبتدئ 05:51, 3 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 New Text

The majority of Muslims were offended and angered by the action of the publication of what they considered an offensive images. Their understanding of the cartoons was some kind of manipulated representation of the Muslim prophet. This anger has been expressed in public protests, newspaper articles, emails, and SMS in Arabic and Islamic countries. The Muslim reaction was misunderstood as being directed against freedom of speech, when it was about the insult felt by most Muslims; Most Muslims see these figures as a way of accusing there prophet as being a terrorist and criminal. Although the artists deny that they are representing Mohammed in such a way, the broad range of Muslims can't consent on "a bomb in a turban, with a lit fuse and the Islamic creed written on the bomb" is not an icon of terrorism.That is asserted by some European Experts like Tyge Trier, a lawyer at Eversheds Copenhagen specializing in international human rights law

By Islamic faith such representation is refused for all prophets, including Jesus and Moses. The offended Muslims, taking in account the 9-11 aftershocks, believe that there exists a hidden agenda behind these images; an agenda that works toward marking all Muslims as terrorists. For those Muslims a message of hate is seen in the cartoons, and a clear signal of Islamophobia. [2]

The Public Anger has accompanied with Condemnation from Arabic and Islamic goverments , Muslim World League (MWL) called on the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to activate international laws against insolence of religions.

Other Islamic and Arabic charicters has expressed their condemnation for the Cartoons : "In (the West) it is considered freedom of speech if they insult Islam and Muslims," Mohammed al-Shaibani, a columnist, wrote in Kuwait's Al-Qabas daily Monday. "But such freedom becomes racism and a breach of human rights and anti-Semitism if Arabs and Muslims criticize their religion and religious laws."

Emirates Justice and Islamic Affairs Minister Mohammed Al Dhaheri called it "cultural terrorism, not freedom of expression," according to the official WAM news agency. "The repercussions of such irresponsible acts will have adverse impact on international relations." In Tunisia, the head of the Islamic world's counterpart to UNESCO called the drawings "a form of racism and discrimination that one must counter by all available means." "It's regrettable to state today, as we are calling for dialogue, that other parties feed animosity and hate and attack sacred symbols of Muslims and of their prophet," said Abdulaziz Othman Altwaijri, president of the Islamic Organization for Education, Science and Culture, also Jordan's largest circulation daily, government-run Al-Rai, said the Danish government must apologize. crisscross

The Condemnations have comen also from Iran by Iran-The General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Conference saying : It is evident that the intention of Jylland Posten was motivated to incite hatred and violence against Muslims. By exposing the level of understanding of Islamic religion and its symbols the dailies have seriously damaged their credibility in the eyes of Muslim world and harmed democracy, freedom of the press, violated decency and civilized norms. Iran-The General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC)

Many European media reactions that reached the Muslims, especially in the Middle East, supported the Danish newspaper position, and as most of the angered Muslims expected, considered the issue to be one of Freedom of Speech. They judged the Muslim reaction as some kind of censorship on the media. But, by not understanding the real feelings of Muslims and by republishing the images again and again, the media helped in fusing the situation.

Believing that actions should have taken by Danish Government,and the initial refuse of the Journal to apolojize : ``An apology would imply we regret what we've done, which we don't, Rose said in a telephone interview on Jan. 23. ``We do satires of Jesus, the royal family and politicians; not to do satires of Muslims would show prejudice as we would be treating them differently from all other groups. bloomberg the Muslims pushing for the Boycotts, found the Boycotts to be one of the answers that should force the Danish Government to act on what the Muslims interpret as hate and intolerance. They also call for their governments not to accept such behavior from the western media.

 A French point of view

I'm sorry to speak here in English on Wikipedia (how do you pronounce this in arabic?). I'm French and i don't understand the needless radicalism of some people i saw on TV.

France-soir is a very bad paper ! This paper is really worst, they search money and celebrity with idiot provocation... I didn't forget that they were near the bankruptcy two months ago !

France-soir is a paper writed by bastards for bastards, but this DOESNT'T MEAN that French people are bastards too !

So, if someone can tell me - if possible in English, i don't understand arabic (yet - i hope) - what is is sense of these French flags' conflagrations (i have never seen this in my life!) ?

(Systran automatic translator)

([سسترن] مترجمة آليّة)

أنا آسفة أن يتكلّم هنا في إنجليزيّة على [ويكيبديا] (كيف أنت تنطق هذا في العربية ؟). أنا فرنسيّة ولا يفهم أنا الراديكاليّة غير ضروريّ من بعض الناس أنا منشار على تلفزيون. ''' [فرنس-سير] ورقة سيّئة جدّا! ''' هذا ورقة حقّا مريضة ، يبحث هم مال وشهرة مع أحمق تحريض… أنا لم أنسى أنّ كان هم قرب الإفلاس اثنان شهور [أغو]! [فرنس-سير] ورقة [وريتد] ب [بسترد] ل [بسترد] ، غير أنّ يتمّ هذا لا ' [ت] يعني أنّ الناس فرنسيّة [بسترد] أيضا! يرى هكذا ، إن أحد ما يستطيع قلتني - إن يمكن في إنجليزيّة ، أنا لا يفهم العربية (مع ذلك - أنا أمل) - ماذا [إيس.يس] إحساس من هذا الفرنسيّون [فلغس'] احتراق (أنا يتلقّى أبدا هذا في حياتي!) ؟

([سسترن] مترجمة آليّة)

Sorry Lady ... I think this Issue has too many sides and sticking to one or two factors is hard to explain it , firstly i wanna assert that every muslim felt insulted and attacked by these pics which are obviously racist and islamophobic . the problem in the pictures are two-sided : firstly they depicts the person of Person Muhammad (PBUH ) which is forbidden in islam to avoid Idolatory and making persons holy by depicting then giving them a holy nature , so it is opposite to what some europeans say , muhammad isn,t God of muslims and he is not with holy nature , he is totally human but preferred by god and so he was chosen as Prophet .

for this reason islam try to limit the depiction of any living thing which is called as aniconism , but still some shiite parties have another understanding and they depict muhammad rarely and commonly Ali .

so the major factor was the insulting nature of the pics for the muslims which all moderate and extremists felt angry and upset >

apart from that feeling of anger , the Expression of anger as street protests hasn,t happened untill the noewegian journal re-publish teh pics again and many trials to take condemnations of the danish journal has failed and the danish goverment declared that it has no right to limit freedom of speech , some muslims say that contradicting with some events happened in Europe when some ppl is charged because anti-semitism or anti-racism .

the Protests happen anyway with approvment from arabic goverments and islamic goverments which don,t represent the ppl's will already to keep away from this anger and to use this anger against international pressure as what happened in syria today .

The anger fromf Westeren Goverments' bias in Israeli-palestenian conflict and iraq invasion and also war against terrosism has been all expressed in these protests by butning flags , and u know when u r in such protest and with such anger u cannot recognize between danish or norwegian or french flag .

The Boycott was also a puplic choice to express their condemnation .

i think the globalization could bring more serious events if we don,t learn how we respect the special cultural and religional differences and if we couldn,t define kind of international rules and law to control such cases .

--Chaos 00:08, 5 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 Important note

Unfortunately won't I understand the written text in the article without extensive dictionary-work over many hours. However, it should be noted, that at least one of the twelve cartoons in Jyllands-Posten was a hidden message against their campaign. Talking about this one: http://www.stop-terrorkrigen.dk/images/satire/lars_ravn_mohammed.jpg Can you read Farsi? It means "The editors of Jyllands-Posten are a gang of reactionary provocateurs". I just spoke with the artist selv. He says, his hidden message was absolutely against the campaign startet by the newspaper, and in full respect of his muslim friends. It must be statet, that this man showed in a very best way, how an artist should act, even, when we talk about free speech. He knew, what was going on, and gave the muslim world a solidarity adress. Maybe it is already pointed in the article. If not, it should be mentioned as a true (!) humanly action Arne List 18:38, 1 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 It's time to talk

First of all, sorry to write in english, besides my mother-tongue german it is the only language I can speak.

Different civilizations are facing each other, violence and insaulting are increasing step by step. After the publishing of the muhammad cartoons in several newspapers and after torching embassies and General Consulates in Damaskus and Beirut it is time to stop and to start thinking.

Many people have to learn a lot more about different religions and about different societies and their values. If we understand more of each other and if we start talking seriously to each other we can reach a peaceful living whith each other. Maybe that's the only way.

Let's find a platform where we can talk to each other, where we can learn more about each other and find a way to live together satisfied and in peace on this small planet.

Because I don't think this is the right place for a very general discussion about the whole issue, I have created a new yahoo group "It's time to talk". Everybody is invited to join and to help understanding each other a little bit better. If we start talking to each other instead of insaulting and fighting we will be all the winner. If not, we are all lost.

Please join the group and start spreading the information, start other groups, and other efforts to stop any kind of violence and insaulting.

Thank you very much. Nils Belde [3] I

---

ملاحظة أخرى: إذا إستهجن علي عمل صفحات تنسيق لمدة أسبوعين أو 3 فماذا عن هذه الصفحات (هناك أيضا شبيهاتها) ????? أليست هذه الإزدواجية التي نمقتها ??? مبتدئ 19:40, 7 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

هذا نوع من الدعاية لموقع شخصي يجب إزالتها بغض النظر عن نية الاخ NilsB لذا أرجو من أحد الإداريين أن يقوم بمراسلته و توضيح ذلك له مع دعوته للتسجيل في الموسوعة و إمكانية نشر دعوته على صفحته الشخصية. --حكيم دمشق 22:34, 7 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 Fact-check request

Hi. This is Kizor from the English Wikipedia. There has been some controversy there over claims that an Egyptian newspaper published the cartoons in October without any great outcry. We haven't been able to prove this true or false, and if there's something you can do to help I'd like to ask for your help. Thanks

The source of these claims is here (note that the cartoons are shown there), and details of the newspaper are here. Answering on this page will be fine
130.232.134.69 10:00, 9 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 El Fagr's Publication of Images of Muhammed

Wouldn't it be fair to add this image somewhere on the Arabic entry about El Fagr's publication of 6 of the images? El Fagr's front page Oct. 17th

Netscott 08:22, 11 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Chaos for adding this image to ar.wikipedia also thank for reverting it...I realize that there are many people who are offended by it but in publications (like El Fagr) that are explaining what has happened and what is happening it is very important to see how this all got started! So thank you again!! a Netscott 01:03, 18 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

Image was voted for del.--Tarawneh 04:37, 23 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

Where is this vote? thank you, Scott Netscott 08:51, 23 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

The image was voted for del. Please disucss it first before having it back. --Tarawneh 00:19, 26 فبراير 2006 (UTC)

 Other voices from Denmark

Despite having spent several months in the Arab world I regret not to be able to contribute in Arabic. I just want to attract your attention to the following web site where Danish people and other express their disgust of the paper and the Danish government, as well as expressing solidarity and friendship with Muslims:

[4] [5] [6]

Peace upon all of you! BertilVidet

 Agendas?

Greetings, I am curious to know what the Arabic article on this controversy has to say about the supposed agendas involved with the publication and republications of the cartoons. Does it say much about the agendas of governmental elements and agendas relative to Islamism? Thanks. Netscott 16:24, 6 يوليو 2006 (UTC)

 no analysis

Actually the Arabic article about that event is purely documentary, it has a section talking about past depiction of Mohamed’s pictures from middle ages up to the cartoon controversy, also it document the official responses from some government, the are no analysis what so ever about explicit or implicit agenda of any party. Classic 971 16:36, 6 يوليو 2006 (UTC)

Ok,thanks for the rapid response Classic 971. :-) Netscott 17:10, 6 يوليو 2006 (UTC)

Not totaly true, Günter Grass Ideas [7] are clear about that. his ideas are included in the artcile. I just thought that if it takes Netscott four month to reply , then it sould not bother him if I take the same time--Tarawneh 17:21, 6 يوليو 2006 (UTC)

Well from what Classic 971 and you are saying here Tarawneh I guess it didn't really matter as there's not much about supposed "agendas" here. Thanks again Classic 971 for the courtesy to respond promptly.. ;-) Netscott 17:42, 6 يوليو 2006 (UTC)

 الاسلام ضد الارهاب

And do good as God has been good to you. And do not seek to cause corruption in the earth. God does not love corrupters. (Qura’an, 28:77)(سوره القصص - 77) المرجع: http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/

God commands justice and doing good and giving to relatives. And He forbids indecency and doing wrong and tyranny. He warns you so that hopefully you will pay heed. (سوره النحل - 90)(Qura’an, 16:90) As Muslims, we strongly condemn the terrorist attacks on two major cities of the United States of America on September 11, 2001, which caused the death and injury of thousands of innocent people, and we offer our condolences to the American nation. These attacks propelled the important issue of the true source of terrorism to the top of the world agenda. Thus, it has been announced to the entire world that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance that summons individuals to compassion and justice. Many world leaders, leading media organizations, television and radio stations said that true Islam forbids violence, and encourages peace between people and between nations. The Western circles that have come to a full grasp of the religion of Islam and are well-informed about Islam as commanded by God in the Qura’an noted clearly that the words "Islam" and "terror" cannot stand side by side, and that no divine religion permits violence. The source of the terror that we condemn is definitely not from a divine religion, and there is no room for terrorism in Islam. This is made clear in the Qura’an, the main source of Islam, and in the practices of all true Muslim rulers, the Prophet Muhammad . Islam forbids terrorism and aims to bring peace and security to the world.

There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment. (Qura’an, 42:42) (سوره الشورى - 42) Terror, in its broadest sense, is violence committed against non-military targets for political purposes. To put it another way, targets of terror are entirely innocent civilians. For this reason, terror means subjecting innocent people to violence, which is an act of no moral justification, and is a crime committed against mankind. Religion commands love, mercy and peace. Terror, on the other hand, is the opposite of religion; it is cruel, merciless and demands bloodshed and misery. This being the case, the origins of a terrorist act should be sought in disbelief rather than in religion. People with a fascist, communist, racist or materialist outlook on life should be suspected as potential perpetrators. The name or the identity of the triggerman is not important. If he can kill innocent people without blinking an eye, then he is a nonbeliever, not a believer. He is a murderer with no fear of God, whose main ambition is to shed blood and to cause harm. For this reason, "Islamic terror" is an erroneous concept which contradicts the message of Islam. On the contrary, terror (i.e. murder of innocent people) in Islam is a great sin. In Sura Maida, verse 32, God says that if anyone kills someone unjustly, it is as if he had murdered all mankind. To murder even one person is totally opposed to the moral teaching of the Qura’an. All these reveal that organizing acts of terror against innocent people is utterly against Islam and it is unlikely that any Muslim could ever commit such crimes. On the contrary, Muslims are responsible for stopping these people, removing "mischief on earth" and bringing peace and security to all people all over the world. Islam cannot be reconciled with terror. Just the contrary, it should be the solution to and the path to the prevention of terror.

A society in which Islamic moral values are truly honored is a Society characterized by peace, forgiveness, love, compassion and mutual support and joy The Qura’an is a Book revealed to people as a guide to the true path and in this Book, God commands man to adopt good morals. This morality is based upon concepts such as love, compassion, tolerance and mercy. The word "Islam" is derived from the word meaning "peace" in Arabic. Islam is a religion revealed to mankind with the intention of presenting a peaceful life through which the infinite compassion and mercy of God manifest on earth. God calls all people to Islamic morals through which compassion, mercy, peace and tolerance can be experienced all over the world. In Sura Baqara verse 208 God addresses believers as follows: O You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace (Islam). Do not follow in the footsteps of Satan. He is an outright enemy to you.(سوره البقرة - 208) As the verse makes clear, security can only be ensured by "entering into Islam", that is, living by the values of the Qura’an. The values of the Qura’an hold a Muslim responsible for treating all people, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, kindly and justly, protecting the needy and the innocent and "preventing the dissemination of mischief". Mischief comprises all forms of anarchy and terror that remove security, comfort and peace. As God says in a verse, "God does not love corruption". (Qura’an, 2:205) (سورة البقرة - 205) Murdering a person for no reason is one of the most obvious examples of mischief. God repeats in the Qura’an a command He formerly revealed to Jews in the Old Testament thus: ...if someone kills another person - unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth - it is as if he had murdered all mankind. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all mankind... (Qura’an, 5:32) (المائدة - 32) As the verse suggests, a person who kills even a single man, "unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth", commits a crime as if he had murdered all mankind.

In the Glorious Qura’an, Allah, Most High, says, “It is He Who sent down Tranquility into the hearts of the Believers, that they may add Faith to their Faith; for to Allah belong the Forces of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom; that He may admit the men and women who believe, to Gardens beneath which rivers flow, to dwell therein for aye, and remove their ills from them; and that is - in the sight of Allah - the highest achievement (for man). (سورة الفتح - 4) We need inner peace and the whole humanity needs it. Inner peace is always important but it is most needed now. It is the peace of heart and mind. Inner peace makes people steadfast, strong and capable to face the problems. If there is no inner peace people lose courage and strength to face the difficulties. People become sick and develop many other physical, emotional or psychological problems. They would certainly have spiritual problems. Those who do not have inner peace become irritable, angry, have difficulty to maintain their daily work, good family relations or other commitments and responsibilities. Inner peace on the other hand makes people optimistic, friendly and productive. Inner peace makes people strong to deal with their personal, family, local as well as national and international problems.

Islam is the religion of peace. Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, used to say and write in his letters to the chiefs of tribes in his time: Aslim Taslam (Accept Islam and find peace)

Islam places great emphasis on inner peace. In the Qura’an, it is called Sakinah (inner calm and tranquility), Tuma’ninah (comfort of the heart, satisfaction and contentment) Sharh As-Sadr (understanding, openness of the chest, restfulness). Believers receive these gifts from Allah Almighty. In the most difficult situations, Allah mentions that He bestowed inner peace on the believers.

A Muslim is someone who abides by the commands of God, tries scrupulously to live by Qura’anic morality, peace and harmony, which make the world a more beautiful place and lead it to progress. His aim is to lead people to beauty, goodness and well-being. The Qura’an says: ... Someone who adopts the Islamic faith wishes to earn God's pleasure and compassion and to enter heaven. He has to make strenuous efforts to do this, and to adopt a morality acceptable to God while he is in this world. The clearest manifestations of this morality are compassion, pity, justice, honesty, forgiveness, humility, sacrifice and patience. The believer will behave well towards people, try to perform good deeds and spread goodness. In His verses, God commands: We did not create the heavens and earth and everything between them, except with truth. The Hour is certainly coming, so forgive [men's failings] with fair forbearance. (Qura’an, 15:85)(سورة الحجر - 85) ... Be good to your parents and relatives and to orphans and the very poor, and to neighbors who are related to you and neighbors who are not related to you, and to companions and travelers and your slaves. God does not love anyone vain or boastful. (Qura’an, 4:36)(سورة النساء – 36) ... Help one another in benevolence and piety. Do not help each other to wrongdoing and enmity. And fear God. God is severe in retribution. (Qura’an, 5:2) (سورة المائده – 2)

As the verses have made clear, God wishes those who believe in Him to behave well towards people, to cooperate with each other when it comes to goodness, and to avoid wickedness. In Sura Anaam, verse 160, God promises that "anyone who comes with a fine deed will have ten more like it. But those who produce a bad action will only be repaid with its equivalent and they will not be wronged." (سورة الانعام – 160) In His book, God describes Himself as He who knows "the secrets of men's hearts", and warns people to "avoid all kinds of evil." A Muslim therefore, which means "one who surrenders himself to God" must evidently be someone who does his best to fight terrorism. A Muslim does not remain indifferent to what goes on around him, and never adopts the mentality that nothing matters as long as it does not harm him. That is because he has surrendered himself to God. He is His representative, and an ambassador of good. He cannot, therefore, remain indifferent in the face of cruelty and terrorism. In fact, the Muslim is the greatest enemy of terrorism, which kills people who have done no wrong. Islam is against all forms of terrorism, and tries to prevent it

 Islam demands peace between people and for justice to prevail, and commands people to avoid discord, conflict and wickedness.

---

RAGAB99