What would happened if we were doing our best like those Christians missionaries & preachers?? ...reminded me what once a kuffar I know said, which was 'if muslims around world were to have an amir (Khaleefah), he said, I would suggest that everyone in this world run/hide for their life'. He reads, and tries to analyse the events, and made a simple calculation of two plus two, and realised the potential of united Islam. The story is interesting. It shows that Allah's hidaayah knows no boundary, creed or color. I know that Islam is a beautiful thing, but only when one tastes it. May Allah bless us with real Islam.

This article is published on JUS jihadunspun.com, which is an independent news website, run and owned by muslims. I found this article thought-provoking and in line with my thought of how the so-called hostages are treated by the resistant fighters. Finally, let us all know what your line of thinking is, when you read this interesting article. ======================= In times of war, Islamic law permits the taking of hostages from the enemy camp and they can be: released, ransomed or punished appropriately. Ideally, the choice exercised should be taken in the interest of Islam and the concerns of the immediate community. However, the Muslims will be constrained and influenced by two external factors. First of all, the behavior of the enemies with regards to how they are treating the Muslim prisoners and conducting the war in general; secondly, the military capability of the Muslims in comparison to their enemies. The first two options of releasing the prisoners or ransoming them for a price are not disputed. But the latter category of punishing the prisoners has caused some level of controversy due to the recent abduction of foreigners by the Iraqi resistance. Many of the Muslims, in particular the moderate brigades and unfortunately even some of the so-called radical groups, have capitulated to the media-generated pressure around them and started to issue erroneous verdicts on the matter that not only contradicts Islam but common sense. They have adopted the language of the belligerent aggressors, exclusively condemning the abduction of a small number of foreigners by the Iraqi resistance while remaining mute on the thousands of innocent civilians taken as hostage from their homes and subsequently tortured, abused, and in some cases murdered. The abductions of the foreign and Iraqi hostages are certainly related like married couples, even though the media pretends, that, they are divorced! Just to digress a little, it is worthwhile noting the use of the word ‘foreign’ with respect to the Iraqi resistance. Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi from Jordan, across the artificial colonial installed border, sharing the same blood, culture, language and religion, is a foreigner according to the occupying forces! So, who are the Australians and the Americans that have come from thousands of miles way across the ocean? Do they hold the Iraqi Green-Card issued by the former CIA operative Iyad Allawi? We certainly do not hear the Iraqis referring to the small number of Arabs/Muslims who have come across the border to aid the Iraqi resistance as foreigners: to the contrary how could they operate without the approval of the indigenous Iraqis? Let us first examine the evidences pertaining to the permissibility to punish and execute prisoners of war. One should bear in mind that in Islamic law, there are mandatory obligations and prohibitions. And what lies in between these two rigid points is a matter of choice, to be selected as the best option on what should be done. Islamic Evidences Muslims are generally encouraged to treat the prisoners well; there are sayings (Hadiths) of the Prophet (SAW) on this matter. And he said, treat the prisoners well. The companions (Sahabas) of the Prophet (SAW) used to feed the prisoners with better food before feeding themselves. There are numerous incidences of where Muslims have released captives unharmed or for a very small price. No torture or humiliation was exercised over them. Indeed, the Taliban treated the prisoners far better than the US forces reciprocated. They mass murdered the prisoners with their hands tied behind their backs, as was reported by Robert Fisk of the Independent along with pictures. Similarly, prior to the gruesome revelations of Abu-Ghraib, the Muslims did not behead the hostages; they treated their prisoners far better, given that the Iraqis are the real victims in defending their lands. Recently even the two Italian women released from captivity also confirmed the good treatment by their open support for the Iraqi resistance in media interviews. However, the issue of treating the prisoners well is not an absolute decisive command but an advice. Furthermore there are other evidences that show the permissibility to execute prisoners of war they are elaborated below. a) Battle Of Badr After the battle of Badr, the Muslims acquired prisoners of war. Some of the companions of the Prophet (Sahabas) were inclined to ransom them for money whilst others took the more stern view, that, they should be executed. The Prophet (SAW) opted for the lenient option. However, it was the latter point of view that was upheld by the revelation, meaning that, execution was not only permitted but in this instance the preferred thing to do. “It is not fitting for an Apostle (Muhammad) that he should have prisoners of war, until he has thoroughly subdued the land. You look on the temporal goods of this world but Allah (SWT) looks to the hereafter†Holy Qu’ran 8:67 Another incidence after Badr was the capture of the notorious Umayah ibn Khalaf and his son who were the owners and torturers of Bilal (RA). When Bilal (RA) spotted them as prisoners of Abdul Rahman bin Auf (RA), he with the help of the residents of Medina (Ansars) cut the two prisoners to pieces for their earlier belligerent hostility. Similar punishment was given to the tortures of Abu-Ghraib in Fallujah for their heinous crime! The Prophet (SAW) did not rebuke the action of Bilal and therefore consented to the execution of these prisoners of war. The Prophet also ordered the execution of three prisoners of Badr by the name of Ruqba bin Abi Muwayed, Nadr bin Harith, Tuima bin Adiee, another clear evidence of the permissibility to execute the Prisoners of war. b) The Incident With The Jewish Tribe Of Banu-Quraiza The tribe of Banu-Quraiza committed treachery against the Muslims; they were taken as captives and all the adult men were put to death, around 600 men. Note, all of the adult male captives were slain not just those committed the breach. Why? Because, they were engaged with the Muslims as a nation hence punished as a nation. c) The Quran Apart from the abovementioned verse (8:67), the chapter of Muhammad (47:4) also alludes to the permissibility or in this case recommendation to execute prisoners of war. It states: “Therefore, when you meet (battlefields) the unbelievers smite their necks; At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them bind (the captives) firmly: therefore either Generosity or ransom: until the war lays down its burden.†Holy Qur’an 47:4 Here, the verse clearly recommending the execution of prisoners until the Muslims has the upper hand. When they are encouraged to either set them free or ransom them. The use of the word “smite their necks†(Darab ar-Riqab) refers to execution as oppose to the general killing in the battlefields mentioned in the other verse where it uses the word “Qatil†There are other evidences but the abovementioned evidences should suffice to prove the point that the Muslims have the three options in dealing with the prisoners of war. In general advice is that they should treat the prisoners well but at certain times, harsh measures may be more suitable and necessary. These situations arise primarily due to the circumstances imposed upon the Muslims, as stated earlier the treatment of prisoners will be influenced by the behavior of the enemy and the huge disparity in the military capability between the Muslims and non-Muslims. Hence let us briefly examine these external factors. External Factors Moazzam Begg, the British captive held at Guantanamo Bay, who was originally kidnapped from Pakistan by the US, has clearly stated in his letter about the use of torture, abuse, and other forms of violations. He has even witnessed the torturing of prisoners to death by the US authority. The Iraqis and the world have already witnessed the inhuman brutality of the US soldiers in Abu-Ghraib, where even young boys and girls were subjected to rape, sodomy, torture and other forms of sexual perversion that is definitely ‘foreign’ to the Arab/Islamic culture. It certainly does not come from ‘foreigners’ like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi! Seymour Hersh revealed that young Iraqi boys were sodomized and shrieking while they were being filmed as souvenirs for the friends and relatives back at home. This speaks volumes about these subhumans, exhibiting a behavior that is worse than animals! When the Pentagon showed the pictures and videos, implicit references were made to executions and Necrophilia committed by the US soldiers. If this were not an American phenomenon, why else did Arnold Schwarzenegger recently abolish Necrophilia in California? The abuse is not confined to Abu-Ghraib. Recent investigations by American legal investigators [1] have once again showed that torture and rape is rampant throughout the U.S.-run prison system in Iraq. Such incidences are still occurring. Proving the point that Abu-Ghraib was only a sample of what was caught on camera; the real horror is much greater. Therefore, the Iraqis are entitled to inflict equivalent punishment on their prisoners in retaliation and as a means to deter the enemy from abusing their prisoners. Here too, the Muslims have excelled. Beheading a handful of captives is far less painful than being tortured to death as acknowledged by Nick Berg’s father. Even the degrading sexual torture can be worse than beheading. However, that only applies to those who have some degree of self-respect and honor. Sexual abuse inflicted on Lyndie England is unlikely to constitute punishment but rather a kind of titillation. Indeed, such examples highlight that Islam is indeed very different from the secular fanaticism of ‘freedom’! The US forces have also used heavy weapons in civilian populated areas without any regards for their life. If the US truly wanted to minimize civilian casualties why could their ‘brave’ and well-equipped soldiers not engage in hand-to-hand combat? Incineration and beheading by the use of high-tech weapons entitles the Iraqi resistance to behead and dismember the captives who are party to the conflict, directly or indirectly. Even if the US forces treated the Muslim prisoners well, the Iraqi resistance would be entitled to execute their prisoners or resort to other harsh measures as they have been invaded. Hence, it could be used as a form of deterrence and retribution. Furthermore, given the huge disparity between the US firepower and the Iraqi resistance, they are naturally entitled to use other means to defend themselves. In addition to common sense, there is general permission in Islamic law to widen the scope of permissibility in order to survive, providing it is a legitimate action of self-defense which is not disputed in the case of Iraq. Many have argued that politically and militarily, it is better to restrict the target to the combatants. Of course, nobody disputes this but due to the vast disparity between the Iraqi resistance and the US forces, their options are very limited. Status Of Non-Combatants This brings us to the final argument about who is a non-combatant. Some people have argued civilian contractors and charity workers are not legitimate target. Many of these people have entered Iraq under the flag of the US, who is an illegal occupier. Even the UN Secretary has endorsed this point as he admitted that the war was a violation of the UN Charter. Thus, the non-combatants have entered without any covenant with the Iraqi people, as there is no legitimate Iraqi authority. If they have come under the US flag, they have come as part of the aggressor party. "In any case, most of these non-combatants are mercenaries not on charitable missions. Like vultures, they are making a quick profit in exchange for the stolen (‘mismanaged’) Iraqi oil, Iraqi lives and their blood. They are helping the US forces directly or indirectly and are therefore part of them. The Prophet (SAW) took hostage a man from the tribe of Uqail because of his alliance with the belligerent tribe of Thaqeef. Even though Uqail was not a combatant. This is a clear evidence to show that allied nations or those assisting the combatants, even if it is indirectly are treated the same way. Finally, why should Muslims distinguish in taking only combatants when the Americans are clearly not doing this! The US has incarcerated many innocent civilians, including old men and children. Some were subsequently released as evidence of their innocence. Since, one is held without charge, it must be presumed that the detainee is innocent - that is if you believe another one of the masks of democracy “innocent until proven guiltyâ€, which is a mask that is pealing off rapidly. At present, many Muslims and non-Muslims are exhibiting double standards, fostered by the mass media. So, they can’t stomach the beheadings of a few hostages done in retaliation but they are ready to tolerate the beheadings, incineration and much more of thousands of Iraqis using high-tech equipments. Even the deliberate torturing to death of prisoners in US custody is somehow appears to be more palatable than beheadings! Footnote: (1)http://www.antiwar.com/orig/croke.php?articleid=3645 Copyright © 2004 by Yamin Zakaria. Published exclusively by Jihad Unspun. All rights are reserved. P.S. despite the rumours on the net, JUS is a genuine site, as far as I can believe. Read their response to the allegations.

That is the nature of sick, individualistic western society. In Islam, we have a clear guidelines as to how to act in a situation of this kind. It has three stages: 1. if you can, act. 2. If you can not act, use verbal warning. 3. if you can not speak, hate it from the heart. That is a common code of conduct for social responsibility. Coincidentally, recently, i was on a bus, where two ladies started to fight. Everyone on that bus, and there were few of us, was watching. Even the guy that accompanied one of the ladies was watching. Moi, being a Maali and a Muslim, I jumped to stop more unnecessary harm, before I got there, the guy re-acted to my concern, and stopped the fight. Some were laughing and enjoying the fight, whilst others were in the mindset of 'if it aint me, it aint my biz'. So, the short answer is, yes, you should shout to stop the person getting hurt. If as a result, he/she decides to sue you then he/she is simply sick. And this goes deep into the structure of the society - may be they should consider putting some limit into their liability laws. How far are they gonna take responsibility? To the point where an individual can not act in good heart? P.S. I'm so tired and worn out, I hope it makes sense, if not sorry for rubbishing your thread, lady.

^^Me? Worked up!!? When did stating the fact is labeled as 'worked up'? Then again, it is wild, wild world! I'm out.

Actually, it was 7,000 words for ladies and 2,000 words for the men per day. It has nothing to do with men not understanding women. You've distorted the facts to suit your own conclusion. macsalaama.

I like the course codes. they seem like real ones. Remember, english lang has its own heritage, and until recently women were the property of men, so no wonder that their problems start with MEN and GUY and HIS....lol.Good analysis. I am still laughing! More western than Maali, tho.

I would say 'they are better be left the way they are'. Remember, the Rasool's (SCW) hadeeth, "....if you try to straighten, they will be broken...". Verdict, LIVE and let live. Personally, i think we are both humans, but inside our thought processes are completely different. That is why we don't seem to understand each other at times. In addition, women are good somethings, and men are good on others, and we need each other for the sake of humanity. So, stop complaining and face the challenge, that is women. P.S. No offense.

Azz/All By the end of this century, 90% of the world's languages could become extinct. That is a huge number. What they have also found is that the knowledge, customs and cultures embedded in these languages will also die with them.So are the valuable info handed down over generations in world of mouth. What is going to replace these lost languages, customs and cultures etc., are the languages and the cutoms of the colonial masters, i.e., European ones. In view of the above, can't you already see that in our own society the transformation that we have gone through in 15 years. This very site is a very good example that the above conclusion is somewhat right. I think, it is never too late to turn the tide. Let's reverse the course and go against the wave.

Azz All Wr Wb to you all. I thought i should share this article with you. The least benefit of it, i think, would be a very interesting read. You may ask why do i say that? Look at the title of the article. "intellectual proof of islam". it is only fair that you ask yourself, why do i need 'proof of islam', i am a muslim, and i know that Islam is Xaq. Correct, but it philosophises the argument in anyone's point of view. be it muslim or non-muslim. Just read....walaalayaal. Intellectual proof of Islam I apologise for non-sense foreword.

There was this brother who was praying for the first time at the mosque. He understood the arabic language, thus he understood the meaning of the words when recited in Arabic. But we all understand that there is more background knowledge to the Qur'an, then the surface meaning of the arabic words it is written. The brother went into the mosque, and lined up in the first line of the Salaat-Jamaaca. The Imam usually starts to recite the glorious Qur'an...until it has come to this Ayat....ALLAM NUHLIKIL AWALEEN (which means literally 'We've punished those in the front, in his case meaning those in the first line). So he hears the Ayat and moves back to join the last row. After he joined the last row, the second line of the verse goes: THUMA NUTBICU HUMUL AAKHARIIN (which means and those after will join them, in his case the back row). So the brother quits the prayer thinking that no place is safe from wrath of Allah. Hope that you get the punch line in the joke, if not, leave a comment. P.S. No jokes on the Ayatu-Laah intended.

Soomaalidu waxay tiraa: "Hadalow ninnna si kuu yiri, ninna sii kuu qaaday" This geezer was communicating to his wife back in wherever, and this lady got the wrong message. Life ain't nothing, but a bi*ch. Which reminds me of a another funny story, which I will post in a minute. Ramadan kareem.

Asalaama Calaykum all and Ramadan Kareem. What is with the Kacaan? I see, and keep my mouth shut....Cos this man doesn't wanna be the first victim of the Kacaan...hahah! Hey, Mutakallim, what does this mean? "summum bonum of life." Understood the "of life" bit, but never got the hang of "summum bonum". Sounds an insult....I'm already getting angry. Ramadan kareem all. P.S. I stand up and take my hat off for Nuune, J11, etc for keeping this place alive, entertaining and intellectual. Good job, boys/girls.

I think you have all been giving a generic explanation of what ladies fall for. Some true, some fantasy-like. But the fact of life is, there is no a textbook answer to this. Every lady is an individual, and thus has her own particular tastes in the opp sex. So, commonsense tells me that the ingredients that make two people to finally tie the knot are: (listen carefully, i'm about to share a secret with you!...lol) 1. Destiny....If it was to be it will be, no matter what (Guess, none of us can do nothing about this). 2. Follow the common etiquetes, i.e., showing respect, love, honesty, care, trust, sense-of-belonging, sense-of-humour, sharing of your accounts etc. oh, I forgot this, PATIENCE! Show patience with the ladies, guys, it is important. I am sure that if it is in your destiny and you show the above and few others qualities out there, you will definitely get somewhere, with Allah's blessing. Important note. The two people must be willing participants in the relationship before anything else. If that aint the case, only destiny can turn the course. How many times have you heard a lady say; 'I never thought i would end up with X for a second, and now there you go'. Destiny has taken its course. Too much talking. sorry if i bore you. P.S. Kheyr, of all people, i wasn't expecting those remarks from you ( Guys that are in demand ). I admired you for your comments and religious views. Guess, you have been human. I'll forget that.

Salaam all. It was about time that someone dropped that question and i am happy that it did happen. I am not going to respond to the questions posed by J11, but I am gonna say one thing, and that is, this place needs some sort of standard, and we, the users (young or old) need to uphold that or else it going to go down the same route as Somalinet forums. We dont have to necessarily create threads of insult and vulgar language for this forum to turn into Somalinet-like, as it won't happen (thanks to the people who run the place), but if we dont think about our responses and threads we create, it will become worthless and boring. I, for one, come to this place to share ideas and read others'. It is the best place to stay in touch with your folks all over the planet. I see it as a social meeting point. Final words, let's not ruin it, walaalayaal. J11, thanks for bringing this up.

Salaam y'all. This reminds me of a guy who witnessed the birth of his first child. It has been quoted that his only words to the lady during the process was....IF I KNEW THIS WAS GONNA BE THE CASE, I WOULDN'T HAVE BOTHERED........ Btw, Islam comes before everything else. What does Islam say about this. Is it permissible for the husband to be there or not? If Islam allows me to, I would, if not, unless it is really necessary, I wouldn't. Full stop.

Salaam all. Well said, Liban, Dawaco & co. What amazed me was when he tried to interview the Paki boys at Birmingham and couldn't even conduct a proper convo with hostile youths and left effing and angry, alot about their attitude towards life. Even more amazing was his weak alibis for the laziness of the Afro-Carribean community (not all tho), saying that Asians end up having heart attacks because of hard work! what a laughable excuse. The sikh Asian guy prides his success thru hardwork, and here is a black Afro-Carribean looking for sympathy. What was also evident in that programme was the lack of representation of a somali voice. Dont know whether he didnt bother to search, even tho, he said he did. But we're so bad in representing ourselves 'cos of our social divisions. Wallaahi, I can say I'm proud to be somali, even tho, we have our own weaknesses, mainly our failure to get our home back on its feet again, but we're hardworkers and we will get where the Asians have and beyond! IT'S ONLY BEEN A DECADE! The only people that are failing our society are the wanna-be youth, but I hope in time they will turn true somalis and get their acts together. All in all, that programme was crap and I'm on my way to C4's site to have my word. Please do show your disgust and discomfort of how they talked about us.

Salaam, Good to see you, fella. Got your point. Don't you worry about the somali biz tho. They will get there. There are businesses trying very hard to improve the image and the service, even tho, they're very few.

Salaam, correction! Nin isfaansha ayaa layiri, waa ri is nuugtay.. lately, i been into nomad literature!! but this mah maah doesnot hold water!! its oxymoranic!! a ri cant do that, we know!! so...! Count yourself corrected, matie. Ri' (that's the correct somali writing, apostrophe after the 'i') CAN do that. To explain it further, haven't ever seen a ri' with a top-cut metal or plastic can on its neck? that is to prevent it from sucking her boobs. Got it? Good. Now what next!

Salaam to all, Baahsi,a correction. Macawis iyo 'siping your tea/coffee at sturbacks' don't go together. Simple of western capitalism and somali tradition....sharka-cawdi-billah. Should have been more like siping your tea/coffee at the local somali cafeteria and having a friendly and loud convo with your fellas. as graphic as that!lol. Btw, i'm really glad someone brought up this topic. Why? I will tell you. We're living in a very strange times, to say the least and we, as muslims, are living within a society that knows no boundaries. Having said that, the dress code during the summer is really MAD. And these days, girls/women are blurring the borders of decency by dressing increadibly tasteless ways, at least to me (most of the times!). What i'm aiming at is the craze of showing your thong/knickers on your back, and sometimes your a*se crack. You would say that aint for somalis or muslim girls a way to dress, but I witnessed and funnily enuff, i wasn't taken aback. I looked once (i assure you!) and away. Just the thought of that girl being a fellow somali passed thru my mind for a few seconds. Nothing else. My question is....Has this way of dressing become acceptable or are we experiencing a change, subconciously? What I need to add here is that I saw a gent, a middle-aged somali man, whom the young lady was speaking to dressed in such a way. I thought to myself, could that be her father, a close relative? And why wouldn't he want to do something about the situation? Why is he blissfully speaking to her dressed in such a manner? And the thought went away. May be because we have changed beyond Somali-ness! Guess it is LIFE IN THE QURBE-ha.

Damn, the man is talking to his community frankly and without holding back his feelings. It is true that the black community, whether they are in US or here in UK they're living in illusory life of bling bling, when they're claiming gov't benefit. So what is wrong with saying 'you are all crap, get off your ar$es and do something about it?' I say nothing. I also hear that he once said, the Klu Klan Klux (the white supremist group) dont have to do anything, the blacks are doing it for them thru drugs and daily killings. To support Cosby's point, there has recently been a research conducted in the US into the black youth and their behaviours. Unsurprisingly, they found out that the average black boy in the ghettos see Hip Hop and RnB singers as his role model, but not anyone who is into schooling or doing business. That is how bad it is. I think it is something that should have been brought to light by the black people a long time ago. P.S. I feel sorry for the Faraxs who trapped in this scenario with the baggy trousers and these days wearing earings. They've come from Gaajo and now look at them! I'm afraid these don't have a Cosby.

i dont know what the fuss is all about! This guy's visit captured the whole of London Media, TV and Radio. As far as I hear, this guy is a moderate, whatever that means, and his only thing the jews are on about that he sees the suicide as a means of fighting against an enemy and not a mass murdering. Damn it, what if it was one those radical 'proper' muslim Sheikhs, what would the jews do? I wonder. I also hear that he is involved in some EU fatwa and research council! How ridiculous! And they're complaining about him. I hate Sheikhs that don't tell Islam as it is, but I am in no position to cast my view on this one, but I still doubt him...Allaahu Aclam.

Michael Moore is an honest guys, or at least he seems honest. He represents a diff picture of America and is doing his bit to get rid off Dubya. i've read his book ****** White Men and currently reading his second 'Dude, where's my country'. I dont entirely support all of his views, but he tells as it is. He seems to see things in black and white, and that is why many like him. I hope that he gets more money to expose the US Admin whenever they're up to no good. I am also hearing that his documentary (F/9/11) is the first to be released in China. Good money, eh? Good luck to Moore. Simple man, yet so effective that they prevent his doc to a nationwide exposure! An example to all people, ONE MAN CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

A$$alama Allaikum. Why dont we put it as it is. Somalis talk a lot and they spread the bad of their fellow somalis when they see them behaving bad. These girls do not need to be blamed the ills of our society. After all, we'are secret society. Society whose ill-pride got them to the low of the lowest. It is a blow-back sort of scenario, with the Farax's. A somali guy talks to a sister, as she is female, she falls for him, and the next day whenever he does whatever he did, he is out there posting about it, so tell me, don't these girls deserve to behave the way they're doing and say NO to these sort of fellas? I think that this problem is as much as they geezers doing as it is girls'. P.S. Somali girls are friendly and sisterly, but all you need is smile and show a face she can trust when you approaching, otherwise she won't respond to you. Just a little advice.

@NGONGE That is really good...A true gent's style. I liked the bit about the 'Eesh calaa dhirbaaxo!'. It's psychology....the old somali saying goes.."Cadowgaa waa la isu kala daadshaa yuusan kaa didine!".....Shukaansi is WAR! Salaam.

Salaam to you all. I've been trying to get to this site for the past donkey days and everytime I typed www.somaliaonline.com, i get a blank page with the message: Sorry, we're moving to new servers, please bear with us. However, today, i visited the Satanic site, that is Somalinet, and came across someone asking what the heck is up with Somaliaonline.com, and a brother gave this address, mentioning that they're moving servers. this is the address: http://www.somaliaonline.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php, when i tried this i got through. My point is: did they do that deliberately to minimise the number of visitors to the site whilst they're doing the job of moving servers, or are really surfing a virtual site of Somaliaonline.com with a different URL? I'm one unhappy customer, and I deserve an apology, guys! A/a.