[Ruiceara]

This is too much. I wonder how so many people cant see whats wrong with this picture. We are a people deluded by shaytaan:


NOUAKCHOTT, Mauritania — Hundreds of refugees fleeing an Islamist takeover of northern Mali continue to arrive in this desert nation every day, but exiled officials in the nomadic rebel group pushed out by Islamist fighters linked to Al Qaeda said here over the weekend that, for the moment, they were not the ones to take on the Islamists.

Connect With Us on Twitter
Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
Western nations, notably France, the former colonial power in Mali, continue to suggest that any military resolution to Mali’s crisis must come from Africans themselves. But African nations meeting over the weekend in Ethiopia appeared no closer to resolving it, and the Islamists themselves appeared to be tightening their grip of northern Mali, with reports of citizens being whipped and demonstrators repressed in the north.

Some of the leaders of the rebel group — the Tuareg, desert nomads who in April declared independence for northern Mali, which they call Azawad, but were subsequently dislodged by the Islamists — have taken refuge here Nouakchott, the Mauritanian capital. In interviews over the weekend several said that despite considerable military assets and deep knowledge of the tricky desert terrain, the Tuareg would not take up arms against the Islamists unless they received assistance, diplomatic recognition and unspecified guarantees from outside powers.

That position would be a disappointment to Western powers banking on an internal resolution to what is increasingly regarded as an Islamist menace of regional proportions emanating from northern Mali. Some African politicians now refer to the region as “Africanistan.” Leading figures in Al Qaeda’s regional branch appear openly in northern Mali’s towns.

Algeria, regarded by Western diplomats as by far the most competent military power in the region and a country that has seen its share of attacks from Islamist groups, is extremely reluctant to get involved in Mali. The French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, was expected in the Algerian capital on Sunday for discussions on Mali. Last week, Mr. Fabius told reporters in Paris that the use of force in northern Mali was likely “sooner or later,” though French officials have backed away from any suggestion that France would intervene.

The Tuareg rebel movement — the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad, known as the M.N.L.A. — has been pushed into the background by the fierce ascendancy of the Islamist groups, openly allied with Al Qaeda. In recent armed clashes, the Tuareg fighters have been bested by the Islamists, who are trying to institute a strict version of Islamic law across northern Mali. The Islamists now control the principal towns of Timbuktu, Gao and Kidal, despite what the M.N.L.A. says is its superior manpower, with some rebel officials claiming as many as 10,000 men.

A fleeting alliance between some elements of the M.N.L.A. and the Islamists, proclaimed in May, dissolved almost as soon as it was announced. Now leading rebel officials here, resentful that their April independence proclamation was roundly ignored, say that they are not prepared to confront the Islamists without the West’s assistance.

“We are not the ones to fight the terrorists all alone,” said Hamma Ag Mahmoud, a rebel official residing here. “Today, it is important that the outside powers help us, to even up the balance of power.”

M.N.L.A. officials here deny that they have been completely pushed out of northern Mali, saying they still hold rural areas and some smaller towns. Mr. Mahmoud even asserted that the larger towns, now in the hands of the Islamists, were a strategic liability.

Another rebel official, Habaye Ag Ansari, said the rebels would take on the Islamists when “the international community accords a minimum of legitimacy to us.” He angrily dismissed the outpouring of international outrage over the Islamists’ destruction of religious monuments in Timbuktu recently.

“Nobody has said anything for years about the massacres of Tuaregs, but now the world is shocked that they are destroying a few mud walls that might be sheltering a goat,” Mr. Ansari said.

Mr. Ansari, who recently returned from a trip to Islamist-held Gao, said the situation was becoming increasingly difficult for residents there.

“If one accepts to submit oneself, there is no danger,” he said. “But, there is deep unease. The young can’t play football. There is little health care. Schools are closed. There is nothing. It’s not viable.”

[heilyprollecyspor]

IF and ONLY IF the news is 'considered' true, there is a serious issue with the way they are implementing Shariah and they are defaming AQ too

[cauddyVab]

IF and ONLY IF the news is 'considered' true, there is a serious issue with the way they are implementing Shariah and they are defaming AQ too

Defaming AQ? Al-Qaida is a terrorist organisation which primarily kills muslim civilians. i do not think it is possible to be defamed more than that.

[Speareerfug]

Defaming AQ? Al-Qaida is a terrorist organisation which primarily kills muslim civilians. i do not think it is possible to be defamed more than that.

Any evidences for your claim?

[Infellgedq]

Do you live in an ivory tower or something? Why do you not go to these countries and see for yourself - there is a reason why AQ are hated so deeply across the Muslim World and that only nutjobs support them.

Did I say that I support AQ?
Do you have any substantial evidence that I can accept to justify your claims?
Did you meet anyone from them?

[PersonalLoansBank]

And while we're at it:

Deoband ulema term all Taliban actions as un-Islamic:
http://archives.dawn.com/archives/41418

Re-capturing Islam from Terrorists - by Shaykh Abdul Hakim Murad:
http://masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/recapturing.htm

So a reference from Dawn news can be relied? Is there any first hand evidence?

Is Shaykh Abdul Hakim Muraad 'Masoom' (nauzubillah)?

[TeftyJokip]

DAWN is trust-worthy in my experience - much better than the hypocrisy-driven right-wing media and the hopelessly naive so called ''liberal'' news outlets. Its centrist in its outlook.

And I choose to get my deen from individuals like Shaykh Abdul Hakim Murad - not Taliban supporting blood-thirsty mullahs - alhamdullilah....

Have you thought for a moment before writing that the words trust-worthy are entirely out of context here. Islamically you trust someone whom you know with conformity that
he/she won't speak a lie. Do you think Dawn does not speak a lie?
What about the ayah of Quran in which Allah commands us to verify the information which is stated/told by Fasiq people?
But still do you think Sh. Abdul Hakim Murad can not make a mistake on this matter?

p.s i do not mean to get into an argument, i just mean that you research the matter completely yourself without bias views.

[Mjypksun]

Do you deny that many prominent ulema have denounced the tactics and strategies of the Taliban and AQ?
Do you deny that given the chance - in the Arab World at least many people chose Ikhwani-style movements?

The Taliban and AQ are finished - they have no vision, no knowledge, no education, no skills - they have nothing - they only destroy. They are an unfortunate episode of Islamic history that quickly needs to be forgotten so Muslims can start building their own countries like Erdogan and the AKP try to do.

Have a read of the book here in the link. It is written by a Pakistani Journalist on the tactics of AQ.
As for the Ulema, that is a big claim that you make. I can name many who support AQ and Taliban.
I should just leave the thread on this note and leave you to research on the matter with the book otherwise this would turn into a heated debate.

[Olympicdreams]

this is one of their weak points. the strictness. it creates unnecessary enemies.

however,

i would not think any news from western media is 100% correct. a recent example was the bbc claim that a taliban 'commander' was saying the taliban are willing to sign a truce as they are 'losing'. while the taliban denied any such statement was made. western think tanks admit the taliban control 80% of the country. yet the media will never admit it. they have even stopped reporting the daily assault on the enemy soldiers while before they used to report even a small incident.
so you see the media wars have been ignited.


also it is useless to argue over alq@eda and taliban.
the best one can do is convey literature that has deeply researched all aspects of j!had, the current war theater and the backgrounds. i have three excellent books with me that i request anyone wishing to delve deep into this to read and it is another request that one forms their opinion only after their reading. these are all requests. you should also note when you open the link the authors who wrote those books and where they were published.


please read them. you will notice some people quoting after this post they won't read it. you will know why you should not trust their opinion in future.

[Filmania]

brotehrs, Im no favour of klashnikov wielding tribal islamic movements either, i far prefer the islamic movements like ikhwan taht have real prospects at developing the muslim lands into something better inshAllah

but this article is not about that. Its about teh hypocracy of the west. they rush to mali just because they are trying to enforce shariah. they try to get africans to invade for them. Yet where is the same efforts in syria over a year later? africans are falling over themselves trying to get legitimacy from the west and weapons and such like and are all too scraed to fight the mali rebels.

just look at the whole situaion. what a flippin joke. Allahu musta'aan

As the secularist rebel said, the tuaregs have been getting killed by the mali government for years and noone cares. then some mud huts are destroyed with a goat inside and the internation community is angry. whilst i dont have much love for the seculairsts, he spoke the truth here. the "international community" is just another term for imperialists

[zlopikanikanza]

Lol, even Hamza Yusuf praised Taliban so stop listening to him. Stop listening to pretty much all Deobandi Ulema. And all jihadi ulema across the world, people like Yusuf al Qaradawi, etc.

As for your claim they kill mostly civilians, they actually kill mostly soldiers such as Afghan National Army, Pak Army, Yemeni Army, US, etc.

As for your claim that they are unislamic, I want you to give us a few actions that Taliban have done (and that they have not denied in one of their statements) and show how it is not Islamic (cue all the claims they kill women or don't let them go to school, blah blah blah even though they categorically deny all these things)

[imporrilk]

And any Ulema that you cite in support of the Taliban and AQ please name them so I can make sure never to listen to them again and to advise others not to listen to them. These so-called ''Ulema'' should be ashamed of themselves are most likely to be Mullahs who gain from the suffering from others - I have absolutely no respect for them and alhamdullilah most of the Ummah does not either. There should be a black-list of Ulema that support the Taliban - please pass me on the names so I can advise those around me not to listen to such rubbish.

kindly watch your language. in your hatred you become exactly what you accuse the taliban of : a mindless beast.

nor do you ahve any respect for anyone who does not agree to your modernist viewpoint. such filthy language you use.

you are a modernist therefore your opinions on 'who is destroying islam' and who is 'moderate' simply cannot be taken seriously.

[raspirator]

Lol, even Hamza Yusuf praised Taliban so stop listening to him. Stop listening to pretty much all Deobandi Ulema. And all jihadi ulema across the world, people like Yusuf al Qaradawi, etc.

As for your claim they kill mostly civilians, they actually kill mostly soldiers such as Afghan National Army, Pak Army, Yemeni Army, US, etc.

As for your claim that they are unislamic, I want you to give us a few actions that Taliban have done (and that they have not denied in one of their statements) and show how it is not Islamic (cue all the claims they kill women or don't let them go to school, blah blah blah even though they categorically deny all these things)

dont bother brother.

[Uhmavano]

taliban started off as a small group of villagers in retaliation against the oppressive murderous warlords that had arisen after the fall of the russians.

more and more people joined the taliban to fight against the warlords.

taliban started implementing islamic shariah against huge odds in a country that had been devastated by decades of war and never had a chance to rebuild.

as taliban took over more and more territory many people joined them not for islam but for their own benefits.

as the war went on those that joined for their own motives corrupted the taliban from within and 2 factions formed in the taliban. those who were there for Allah and those who were there for their own gains.

as all this was going on america and the rest of the world did not interfere. america was only concerned about building a pipe line through afghanistan. when the talban refused the pipe line, america then got involved.

yes the taliban made mistakes, but considering the huge task they had ahead of them, coupled with very scarce resources, i very much doubt that those who criticise them would have been able to do even a fraction of what the taliban did.

the mistakes that taliban made, and the crimes committed by those who called themselves taliban by name, are nothing compared to the daily oppression and murders carried out by the kuffar alliance with america at its head. they have taken over and devastated whole countries under the pretence of terrorism which they fabricated in order to steal the resources of the muslim lands and build military bases in strategic places all over the world. they have murdered thousands upon thousands of innocent people. they manipulate the world economy and resources for their benefit and leave other countries in poverty. they use their ribah based currency system to control the world.
YET THEY CALL OTHER PEOPLE TERRORISTS! THEY ARE THE BIGGEST TERRORISTS OF THE WORLD! WITHOUT EXAGGERATION!!! SOME PEOPLE ARE JUST TOO BLINDED AND TOO STUPID TO SEE THIS.

as for al-qaeda. who the hell the is al-qaeda? who here has even heard of al-qaeda before the kuffar news agencies started talking about them? yes there may be some deluded muslims in this world who feel they are justifed in carrying out terrorist acts, but what is their percentage in comparison to the 2 billion muslims of the world? are there really that many terrorist muslims as made out to be?


http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not...s-are-muslims/

Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database

piechart2-1024x1024.jpg


so why do they keep banging on about muslims being terrorists? maybe its because muslims are not the terrorists. maybe its because muslims are the frontline against the oppression of these evil dajjalic people. maybe its because muslims are the only ones who have been somewhat safeguarded against the propaganda of these people. maybe the muslims are the ones left who can save the world from these people. maybe its not maybe at all. maybe its definitely.

no. definitely its definitely.

[envenonearo]

but this article is not about that. Its about teh hypocracy of the west. they rush to mali just because they are trying to enforce shariah. they try to get africans to invade for them. Yet where is the same efforts in syria over a year later? africans are falling over themselves trying to get legitimacy from the west and weapons and such like and are all too scraed to fight the mali rebels.

just look at the whole situaion. what a flippin joke. Allahu musta'aan

As the secularist rebel said, the tuaregs have been getting killed by the mali government for years and noone cares. then some mud huts are destroyed with a goat inside and the internation community is angry. whilst i dont have much love for the seculairsts, he spoke the truth here. the "international community" is just another term for imperialists

[FourEsters]

Its a good book - have read it - but it doesn't confirm your thesis about Taliban being ''Islamic saviours'' - they are still little better than mindless beasts. I agree with the book by the way - the mindless descriptions about AQ and the Taliban in the Western media of them being ''against freedom'' - and the whole ''Why do they hate us'' rhetoric of the likes of Bernard Lewis was absolute tosh. A good book to read is ''Why do People Hate America?''.

The book you cite is great but it does not in any way shape or form confirm your thesis. See this review of the book: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/beta/t...0110617&page=2

I don't see how you can cite this book in support of your thesis - it perhaps indicates to me you have not read the book closely enough.

Let me put it to you like this - most of the Ummah agree US foreign policy is bad - from Ikhwanis, to liberals, to reformists and to Deobandis - there is actually a rare consensus amongst the Muslims that US foreign policy is harmful, bad and counterproductive. What there is disagreement on is how to counter this? I take the view of the Ikhwan, AKP and other moderate movements, ulema, thinkers and intellectuals who say we must make Muslim countries strong, by working hard. The Taliban and AQ believe in a dangerous and foolish strategy - their methods are simply barbaric because in the process they are destroying Islam.


And any Ulema that you cite in support of the Taliban and AQ please name them so I can make sure never to listen to them again and to advise others not to listen to them. These so-called ''Ulema'' should be ashamed of themselves are most likely to be Mullahs who gain from the suffering from others - I have absolutely no respect for them and alhamdullilah most of the Ummah does not either. There should be a black-list of Ulema that support the Taliban - please pass me on the names so I can advise those around me not to listen to such rubbish.

What is wrong with you? Weren't you all for supporting "minority opinions"? Now you have the audacity to call the ulama who support the Taliban as mere "mullahs" and "so-called" ulama?

No wonder the Salafis are so thickheaded when it comes to traditionalists because people like you claim to be representative of traditionalism.

The Taliban have done more than any of the armchair laypeople and even scholars can even hope to achieve. They are defending their land and country and dying in the path of Allah , while we sit back and attack them.

Then, you think comparing Afghanistan to the Arab states is a valid comparison when an Afghan will laugh at you. Arabs have the luxury and comfort of having an infrastructure and an economy boosted by oil, tourism, manufacturing, etc. Afghanistan has an economy supported by opium and foreign aid. The Arabs have a functioning civil system. Afghanistan has warlords, bribery, and corruption. The Arabs had 'revolutions' against their governments that ended up ousting the incumbents. The Afghans in general did not deem it necessary to have a revolution - despite the fact that the actual number of Taliban was extremely low.

The Taliban themselves are composed of scholars and ulama who studied in traditional madaris - people who dedicated their lives to learning and implementing the deen. On the other hand, we listen to a few talks and avoid alcohol and all of a sudden, we're better than them?

Even the issue of suicide bombing to target civilians is not something accepted by the Taliban. The Taliban are also not the same as AQ, since AQ is composed mostly of Salafis, whereas the Taliban are Sufi Hanafis. Their goals are also different, with the Taliban only seeking to reclaim their country, whereas AQ wants a global jihad. Ulama who know the situation in Afghanistan support the Taliban. They may not support them 100% in everything, but they support them nonetheless. In fact, during their reign before 9/11, an 'alim from South Africa visited them and said that they had become too compromising and lenient!

[YTmWSOA5]

Most people who support the Taliban are mostly hypocrites. When you ask them would you want your kids to grow up under Taliban rule they look offended - but if you ask them what they think of Taliban rule they praise it unashamedly. What type of hypocrisy is this?

If people want to live under Taliban rule then go live there - but don't you dare try and force others to live under such a beastly rule.

By the way I've read most if not all of the literature and can safely say Taliban are little more than beasts who have dragged their societies back to the Stone-Age.

Brothers - the proof is in the pudding - if you all simply love the Taliban then please go live under them, ask your children to live under them and ask your wives to come along. Until then I do not take Taliban apologists seriously. At the very least the Taliban are vigilantes that are well and truly lost.

What is wrong with Taliban rule? Give us a list and we'll tell you what's wrong with your list.

[LeslieMoran]

brotehrs, Im no favour of klashnikov wielding tribal islamic movements either, i far prefer the islamic movements like ikhwan taht have real prospects at developing the muslim lands into something better inshAllah

but this article is not about that. Its about teh hypocracy of the west. they rush to mali just because they are trying to enforce shariah. they try to get africans to invade for them. Yet where is the same efforts in syria over a year later? africans are falling over themselves trying to get legitimacy from the west and weapons and such like and are all too scraed to fight the mali rebels.

just look at the whole situaion. what a flippin joke. Allahu musta'aan

As the secularist rebel said, the tuaregs have been getting killed by the mali government for years and noone cares. then some mud huts are destroyed with a goat inside and the internation community is angry. whilst i dont have much love for the seculairsts, he spoke the truth here. the "international community" is just another term for imperialists

I just watched this video on youtube and supposedly it shows a different picture with people supporting the 'extremists' there.
Here's the link.

[Jerwittdergut]

First of all:

The Egyptians and the Ikhwan faced a far worse situation - they suffered nearly 8 decades or more of living under brutal Army rule - countless Ikhwanis were tortured, beaten or killed. They lived in a society that systematically decimated any attempts for opposition - their Revolutions are a true testament to the spirit of Islam not these beastly Taliban.

Brother if you love the Taliban then move - go.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/08/religion.uk

Enough of your hypocrisy - to all pro-Taliban supporters who believe they rule by ''Sharia'' - go live under them.

What a completely idiotic statement. That's what the rednecks tell the liberals - "If you hate America, then leave".

And if you really believe that the Ikhwan faced a worse situation, you are sadly deluded. The majority of the members of the Ikhwan lived their lives in their homes, enjoying all the comforts therein and being allowed to practice their religion, whereas warlords were terrorizing Afghanistan and the entire country was stuck in an economic pit, with poverty and ignorance running rampant. People were ignorant about the world, about the deen, indulging in drug trafficking, rape, homosexuality, etc. There was no police to maintain order, no army. The Ikhwan also live in societies where victory could be achieved by using the government system. Afghanistan had no such system. Even the current system is propped up by foreign invader. Look at how the ulama in Pakistan are doing: there is a system in place so you see some ulama who are also involved in politics. In Afghanistan, there was no such route.

[id2008]

Brother - if you like them then go live under them. No one is stopping you.

The whole vision of a Taliban society is rotten - put it this way. I would not raise a family in their hell-hole of a State. Would you? If so, then please go otherwise enough of hypocrisy.

Here's the problem with your ridiculous conclusion: you're equating what the Taliban did with how Afghanistan is.

I would not want to live in Afghanistan since it is not economically feasible, nor is it feasible to myself or my family to be targeted by American forces just for being there nor am I an Afghan culturally. On the other hand, if something similar to the Shari'ah came into practice in Pakistan, I would gladly live there. The safest country to live in where Shari'ah is practiced is Saudia and a lot of us here would gladly move there. that is also my plan.

Again, list what you think the Taliban did which was against the shari'ah.

And also, once again, you have always touted "difference of opinion" to justify your ridiculous minority opinions in almost every thread you've posted in. Aren't you being extremely contradictory here, especially when many ulama have supported the Taliban, from South Asia to the Middle East to the West?